MVSC Thesis of Veterinary Extension Education

INFORMATION NEED ASSESSMENT OF BUFFALO
FARMERS IN JAMMU DISTRICT
By
Anna Singh
(J-19-MV-580)
Thesis submitted to Faculty of Veterinary Sciences and Animal Husbandry

in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF VETERINARY SCIENCE

IN
VETERINARY AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY EXTENSION
EDUCATION
Division of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension Education

Sher-e-Kashmir University of AgriculturalSciences& Technology of Jammu
Main Campus, Chatha, Jammu-180009
2021
CERTIFICATE-I
This is to certify that the thesis entitled Information Need Assessment of

Buffalo Farmers in Jammu District submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree Master of Veterinary

Science in Veterinary and Animal Husbandry
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and
Extension Education,
is work and has similarities with published work not
Technology of Jammu, original
more than minor similarities as per UGC norms of 2018 adopted by the University
after checking the manuscript
Further the level of minor similarities has been declared
with URKUND software provided by the University.
under my supervision and

The work has been carried out by Ms. Anna Singh
degree diploma. It is
No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other
or
guidance.
of thesis investigation
help and assistance received during the
course
further certified that
have been duly acknowledged.
(Major Advisor)
Place: R.Sput
Date: 3t. 09. o2)
Head of the Division
Dean
CERTIFICATE-II
No.
committee of Ms. Anna Singh, Registration
We, the members of Advisory
in
candidate for the degree
of Master of Veterinary Science
J-19-MV-580, a
the
Extension Education, have gone through
and Animal Husbandry
Veterinary
"Information Need Assessment of
Buffalo Farmers in
the thesis entitled
manuscript of
be submitted by the student in partial
Jammu District" recommend that it may
for the degree.

fulfillment of the requirements
Chairman
Major Advisor &
Advisory Committee
Place: R.S.Pura, Jammu
Date: 3 0. 01. 2o21
Advisory Committee Members:
Dr. Pranav Kumar

(Member from Major Subject)
Assistant Professor
Division of Veterinary and
Animal Husbandry Extension Education
Dr. A. K. Pathak
(Member from Minor subject)
Assistant Professor
Division of Animal Nutrition
Dr. M.A. Malik

(Dean PGS nominee)
Professor and Head 209 e
Division of Veterinary Public health
and Epidemiology
CERTIFICATE-III
This is to certify that the thesis entitled "Information need assessment of buffalo
farmers in Jammu distriet", submitted by Ms. Anna Singh. Registration
No. J-19-MV-580, to the faculty of Post Graduate Studies. Sher-e-Kashmir University of

Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Jammu, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree of Master of Veterinary Science in Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension
Education, was examined and approved by the advisory committee and extemal examiner(s) on
O8-20
Msho
Dr. Abdl Hai
Professor and Head
Div of Vety. & A.H Extension Education
SKUAST-K. Shuhama. Srinagar
External Examiner
Dr. S.A. Khandi

Assistant Professor,
Div. of Vety. & A.H Extension Education
Major Advisor
Dr. Kamal Sarma

Professor and Head
Division of Veterinary and Animal
Husbandry Extension Education
Dr. M.S. Bhadwal

Dean, F V Sc& A.H, RS. Pura
SKUAST- Jammu
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First ofall. let me thank Almighty God for gifting this precious life and keeping
me in good health throughout my study period. I was so providential to undergo my
at SKUAST-Jammu. The academics emvironment and freedom in this

masters studies
institute led me to the precise path of research.
T consider it my privilege to express an immense sense of gratitude to my major
advisor Dr. S. A. Khandi, Assistant Professor, Division of Veterinary and Animal

Husbandry Extension Education, F.V.Sc & A.H. SKUAST-J, who by virtue of profound
rendered
knowledge, sustained interest. prudent professional advice and unreserved help
a meticulous guidance during the make-up of this piece of research. I consider myself
have worked under his supervision and guidance
fortunate and greatly privileged to
which will act as guiding force for my whole life
and Head, Division of

I owe a debt of gratitude to Dr. Kamal Sharma. Professor
Education. F V.Se & A. H. SKUAST-J and
Extension
Veterinary and Animal Husbandry
Committee Dr. Pranav Kumar, Assistant Professor
the members of my Advisory
Dr. M.A.
(AHEE), Dr. A.K. Pathak.
Assistant Professor. Division of Animal Nutrition,
Malik. Professor and Head. Division of l'eterinary Public health and Epidemiology for
their valuable suggestions and inspiration

throughout my studies.

I am thankful to the supporting statf of the
Charan Das (FCLA), Mr. Chain Singh
Husbandry Extension Education. especially Mr.
OCC). Mr Vyas Dev (OCC)
Sharma, Dr. Rahul Bajroliya. Dr.

of thanks towards Dr. Jagriti
A special note
for their wholehearted

aninder Singh. Dr. Savleen Kour and Dr. Abhishek Mahajan
and affection during tough times

was valuable to me
SuPport. Their moral support
Paul Singh and Neelam

admire my parents Raj
trom the inner core of my heart, I
offered. I was so
ngh for their motivation. thoughts and moral support

positive
thank
critical needs and
suggestions in my
u a t e lo receive their crucial help and
them for always being there to guide me in the right direction and share my problems.
My elder brother. Abhey Singh needs special mention who always stood by me and
inspired me.
I am thankful to Dean, F.V.Sc. & A.H for his technical and timely academic
support. I am highly thankful to Hon ble Vice Chancellor of SKUAST-Jammu for
allowing me to undertake the study and for providing necessary facilities to carry out my
research work. I owe my gratitude towards Director Education for being kind enough to
provide all the necessary facilities and guidance.
Finally once again and above all I express my gratitude to Almighty giving me
God for
this lifë for his obedience and to serve other mankind. It is his name which will last
forever.
Every time we remember to say thank you, we experience nothing less than heaven on
earth.
Place: R.S. Pura
Dated: 3o 09 do U (Anna Singh)

ABSTRACT
Title of the thesis Information Need Assessment of Buffalo Farmers in
Jammu District
Name of the student & Anna Singh
Registration No. (J-19-MV-580)
Major Subject Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension Education
Name and designation Dr. S.A. Khandi
of Major Advisor Assistant Professor, Division of Veterinary & A.H.
Extension Education. SKUAST-J
to be awarded M.V.Sc. Veterinary &Animal Husbandry Extension
Degree
Education)
Year of award of Degree 2021
Sciences &&
Name of the University Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural
Technology of Jammu (J&K)
Abstract
and Kashmir. The
Buffalorearing is an important economic activity in Jammu district of Jammu
estimated buffalo population of Jammu and Kashmir is 7.89 lakh (19th
Livestock Census) which
It is reported that not more than 5% of
approximately counts 8.03 per cent of UT's livestock population.
about animal husbandry leading to a huge
the farm households in India are able to access information
reason primarily being. lack of
efficient
information gap amongst the buffalo rearing farmers. the
varies from person to person, so relevant andd
livestock extension system in place. The information need
the individual farmers in a way preferred by them. In view
meaningful information must be delivered to
Kashmir entitled "Information Need Assessment of Buffalo
of this, a study was conducted in Jammu and
the information needs of buffalo farmers. The data was
Farmers in Jammu District" in order to assess
Jammu district using a pre tested and well structured

collected from 120 buffalo rearing farmers of
variables. Majority of buffalo farmers were
interview schedule containing dependent and independent
above. belonged to nuclear family with medium family size
middle aged, educated up to high school and and
land holding with medium herd size of 5-8 animals. Agriculture
(5-8 members) and had marginal of majority of buffalo farmers respectively.
animal husbandry were the main and subsidiary occupation
practices was Rs 50,000-Rs 3,30,000 and total
The average annual income earned from animal husbandry
most of the buffalo
5.50,255. Considering the social participation,
annual income was Rs 1,85.505- Rs had medium level
or more than one organization. They
farmers were either member of one organization of the buffalo
contact and cosmopoliteness-localitness. Majority
of mass media exposure, extension had high
of information need and 10.83 per cent respondents
farmers (80.00%) had medium level to the
buffalo farmers had low information need. With respect
information need. However, 8.33 per cent information (36.75 WMS) was
farmers, farm credit and marketing
overall information needs of buffalo information was found out to be
needed
most preferred by them. The study
further revealed that the most
zoonotic diseases (90.80%). venereal diseases (84.20%). dung
about subsidies (92.50%). c o m m o n buffalo
and feeding ofthe new born (31.70%). Majority of the
disposal and manure utilization (32.50%) whereas 86.70
and relatives as their information
source,
famers (96.70%) *always' considered friends However, 98.30 per
information source.
considered VAS as their
per cent respondents 'occasionally Most of the buffalo farmers (78.30%)
cent butfalo farmers rarely contacted co-operative
personnel.
utilized veterinary hospital and none
used mobile phone, whereas 83.30 per cent 'occasionally
"always information channels. Farm credit
of them utilized folk media, documentary
and demonstrations as their and
considered as the most serious, however, feeding
and marketing constraints (81.37 MPS) were serious constraint
were perceived the
least serious. Overall most
(55.49 MPS)
(MPS 99.722) whereas, language
nutrition constraints
"absence of FPOs in village'
Derceived bythe buffalo farmers was the buffalo farmers.
overall least serious
constraint by
(MPS 36.111) was perceived as the
DarTier assessment. sources and channels.
information need
heywords: Buffalo farmers, information need.
constraints.
Sigmaturé of Student
Signature of Major Advisor

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PARTICULARS PAGE NO.
1. INTRODUCTION 1-7
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 8-21
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 22-40
4. RESULTS 41-90
5. DISCUSSION 91-105
6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 106-112
REFERENCES 113-126
APPENDIX
VITA
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Particulars
No. No.
3.1 Selection of villages and respondents within the locale of study. 26
3.4.1 Variables and their empirical measurement 28
4.1 Distribution of respondents according to age 42
4.2 Distribution of respondents according to education 43
4.3 Distribution of respondents according to family type 44
4.4 Distribution of respondents according to family size 45
4.5 Distribution of respondents according to land holding size 46
4.6 Distribution of respondents according to herd size 47
4.7 Types of animals in herd (n=671) 48
4.8 Distribution of respondents according to occupation 49
4.9 Distribution of respondents according to income from animal 50
husbandry practices
4.10 Distribution of respondents according to total annual income 51
4.11 Distribution of respondents according to social participation 52
4.12 Distribution of respondents according to mass media exposure 53
4.13 Distribution of respondents according to usage of different mass 54
media tools
4.14 Distribution of respondents according to extension contact 55
4.15 Distribution of respondents according to different extension contacts 56
used
4.16 Distribution of respondents according to cosmopoliteness-localiteness 58
4.17 Distribution of respondents according to the use of different sources 59-60
of cosmopoliteness-localiteness
4.18 Distribution of buffalo farmers on the basis of overall information 62
needs
4.19 Distribution of respondents on the basis of level of information needs 63
Table Page
Particulars
No. No.
4.20 Distribution of respondents on the basis of Information needs related 64
to housing and management practices
to feeding and nutrition practices
to breeding and reproduction
to health care practices
to farm credit and marketing
4.25 Relationship between independent variables and information need of 73
buffalo farmers
4.26 Distribution of respondents on the basis of sources of information 75
4.27 Relationship between independent variables and sources of 76
information of buffalo farmers
4.28 Distribution of respondents on the basis of channels of information 78
4.29 Relationship between independent variables and channels of 79
4.30 Overall constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the 81
information about buffalo rearing practices.
4.31 Item wise scores of constraints perceived by farmers in accessing the 84-87
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. Page
Particulars
No. No.
1 Livestock Population of India 2019 (20th Livestock census) - Share of 1
major species
2 Comparison of buffalo population of India in 2012 and 2019 2
th
3 Livestock Population of Jammu and Kashmir 2012 (19 Livestock 2
census) - Share of major species
4 District map of Jammu and Kashmir 24
5 Map of Jammu division showing various districts 24
6 Map of Jammu District showing various Blocks, Jammu 25
7 Flow diagram of sampling plan of the study 27
8 Distribution of respondents according to age 42
9 Distribution of respondents according to education 43
10 Distribution of respondents according to family type 44
11 Distribution of respondents according to family size 45
12 Distribution of respondents according to land holding 46
13 Distribution of respondents according to herd size 47
14 Type of animals in herd (n=671) 48
15 Distribution of respondents according to occupation 50
16 Distribution of respondents according to income from animal husbandry 51
practices
17 Distribution of respondents according to total annual income 52
18 Distribution of respondents according to social participation 53
19 Distribution of respondents according to mass media exposure 54
20 Distribution of respondents according to usage of different mass media 55
tools.
21 Distribution of respondents according to extension contact 56
22 Distribution of respondents according to different extension contacts 57
used
23 Distribution of respondents according to cosmopoliteness-localiteness 58
24 Distribution of respondents according to Personal localite 61
Fig. Page
Particulars
No. No.
25 Distribution of respondents according Personal cosmopolite 61
26 Distribution of buffalo farmers on the basis of overall information needs 62
27 Distribution of respondents on the basis of level of information needs 63
28 Distribution of respondents on the basis of Information needs related to 65
housing and management practices
feeding and nutrition practices
breeding and reproduction
health care practices
farm credit and marketing
33 Distribution of respondents on the basis of sources of information 75
34 Distribution of respondents on the basis of channels of information 78
35 Constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the information 82
about different areas of buffalo rearing practices
36 General constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the 87
information
37 Constraints faced by buffalo farmers in accessing the information about 88
housing and management
feeding and nutrition
ABBREVIATIONS
A.I. Artificial Insemination
A.O Agriculture Officer
et al. and others
Fig. Figure
GoI Government of India
i.e. that is
viz. it is permitted to see
No. Number
& And
% Percent
= Is equal to
MPS Mean Percent Score
e.g. For example
GDP Gross Domestic Products
NSSO National Sample Survey Office
SHG Self Help Group
KVK Krishi Vigyan Kendra
VLDA Veterinary and Livestock Development Assistant
SE Standard Error
SD Standard Deviation
UT Union Territory
` Rupees
Introduction
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
Livestock rearing is one of the most important economic activities in the rural
areas of our country therefore, contributing significantly to the national economy.
According to the 20th Livestock Census 2019, the total livestock population is 536.76
million in the country, with an increase of 4.8 per cent. The total livestock population in
rural and urban area is 514.11 million and 22.65 million respectively. The total buffalo
population in the country is 109.85 million (showing an increase of 1.1 per cent from
previous census) which accounts for 20.47 per cent of the total livestock population. The
count of total female buffalos out of the total number is 100.57 million whereas total
male buffalos account for 9.28 million. Out of 51.17 million milching buffalos 38.16
million are lactating buffalos whereas 13.01 million are dry buffalos. The estimated
buffalo population of Jammu and Kashmir is 6.91 lakh (20th Livestock Census) which
approximately counts to 8.30 per cent of UT’s livestock population. Out of all the
domesticated animals in the world, buffalos are becoming most interesting animals and
considerable efforts have been made to improve their production and reproduction
(Siddiki et al., 2016).
Fig. 1: Livestock Population of India 2019 (20th Livestock census) - Share of major
species
2
Fig. 2: Comparison of buffalo population of India in 2012 and 2019
Fig. 3: Livestock Population of Jammu and Kashmir 2012 (19th Livestock census) -
Share of major species
To boost the growth of agricultural sector over the coming decade, livestock
sector is expected to play a major role. Today there has been sustainable growth, however
low knowledge level of the owners owes to the low productivity of animals which
remains unresolved and challenge for the future. The basic criterions for increased
productivity and development are, knowledge and information related to agriculture and
3
allied services, as majority of the population is involved in agriculture (Das, 2012). For
the development of the individual, society and whole country the most necessary factor is
information and for this development to be continuous new and latest information is
needed (Phand et al., 2009). Due to increasing demand for livestock and its products, to
enhance and strengthen livestock production and management, the delivery of
agricultural allied sector extension services, especially animal husbandry services is an
important emerging area (Kareem et al., 2017). The demands of development in any
sector are better and improved setup and approach for information delivery (Phand et al.,
2009). State Department of Animal Husbandry has been indicated as major service
provider for livestock farmers in plethora of studies, apart from other private agencies
which function at the regional level (Ravikumar et al., 2007; CALPI, 2008; Shweta,
2014; Kareem et al., 2017).
In the whole array of agricultural system, the most powerful restriction to the
farmers is the lack of livestock information. Nowadays, livestock rearing is becoming
more information oriented, and access to accurate and adequate information is very
essential for increasing the overall production and productivity. The process of
recognizing the basic difference between an ideal state of knowledge and the actual state
of knowledge is what information need stands for (Wijngaert, 1999; Kumar et al., 2020).
Livestock information refers to all published and unpublished knowledge, on general
aspects of livestock and consists of innovations, ideas and technological practices
(Madhavan, 2017). It is reported that not more than 5% of the farm households in India
are able to access information about animal husbandry, the reason of which is primarily,
lack of efficient livestock extension system in place (Singh et al., 2016). A systematic
process for determining the needs or gaps between the current information and desired
information (wants) is called Information needs assessment. An approach developed by
the Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE), Bangladesh, called as Farmer
information needs assessment (FINA) is followed in which needs are identified by the
farmers and assessed by the extension workers and they recommend support. FINA is a
principle of the revised extension approach. In this approach, the key problems and
opportunities that farmers face and types of information that they require to get
responsive extension services are determined by the FINA program (Meagy et al., 2013).
4
The farmers require various types of information for their day-to-day livestock
activities but the rural areas of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir lack proper
information infrastructure and service centres. Farmers are not getting the right
information at the right time, leading to slow development of farmers in sustainable
agricultural developmental activities (Meitei and Devi, 2009). Therefore, there lies the
need to assess the information needs of the farmers. A survey revealed that less
information is accessed by small and marginal farmers in comparison with medium and
large-scale farmers who use more sources to access more information in India (NSSO,
2005; Adhiguru et al., 2009; Kumar et al., 2020). The efforts made for information
dissemination are mainly supply driven rather than demand driven. Based upon the
limited exposure to real problems faced by farmers, the scientists decide their agenda.
Limited and passive involvement of the extension personnel and farmers is seen. On
contrary, the information need varies from person to person. For example, information
need of crossbred cattle rearing dairy owners may be totally different from the dairy
owners, who rear buffalo, so there is need to fulfil the individual information needs
(Phand et al., 2009). Relevant and meaningful information must be provided packaged
and delivered to the individual farmers in a way preferred by them (Diekman et al., 2009;
Babu et al., 2012). Greater impact of context-specific information can be witnessed on
the adoption of technologies and farm productivity for marginal and small agricultural
landholders (Sammadar, 2006; Babu et al., 2012). However, to make information
context-specific requires in-depth research. Generating localized content takes additional
cost and time but it might be more relevant and useful in meeting farmers information
needs (Cecchini and Scott, 2003; Babu et al., 2012).
As agriculture system becomes more complex, farmers’ access to reliable, timely

and relevant information sources become more critical. Researchers have stated that the
main sources of information about animal health are the veterinarian and para
veterinarians, and that livestock owners lack basic knowledge of common livestock
diseases and husbandry practices (Ramkumar, 2003). The State Departments of Animal
Husbandry are the main source of information on livestock production, but in many
states, there is inadequacy of these staff and have huge workload. In India, major scarcity
of extension officers at various levels is witnessed (Gulati et al., 2018). This gap means
5
that on an average, extension services reach 6.8% of farmers only (Nandi and
Nedumaran, 2019; Sumanth et al., 2020). Further, the recommended ratio of extension
workers to operational holding is 1:750, but at the national level, the current ratio stands
low at 1:1162 (Nandi and Nedumaran, 2019). It has been repeatedly observed by the
researchers that, the extension component in animal husbandry is generally found weak
therefore, it is important to explore the reasons of weakness of the extension component
in allied sector. In such situation it is very difficult to fulfil the information needs of
every farmer effectively. The limitation of time and resources also restricts the quantum
of knowledge to be transferred. One way to overcome all these problems is assessment of
information needs of end users before dissemination. Once the information needs are
identified, then it can be delivered through appropriate modes and medium.
Better understanding of farmer’s information needs and information search

behaviour; help guide extension and other agricultural program workers to better target
specific groups of farmers. Continuous flow of innovations is maintained by the scientists
to serve numerous farm families involved in the crop and animal husbandry sectors. But
innovations generated by scientists and utilized by target farmers still have a wide gap
between them. The actual benefit of such innovations is witnessed when it is efficiently
utilized by individual and target farmers in their local situations. For dissemination of
these innovations to the farmers, effective communication methods become important
sources to obtain information (Chauhan and Kansal, 2014). To adopt scientific
technologies and receive information about animal husbandry practices by dairy farmers,
effective information sources play an important role and reduce the gap between
technologies produced and adopted by farmers. These communication technologies serve
as both direct as well as indirect information channels for the farmers by improving
extension agents’, agribusinesses’ and other intermediaries’ access to information
resources (Khan et al., 2010).
The main purpose of animal husbandry information sources is educating the

farmers and to provide them the help in the dissemination of information. To reach the
masses in the shortest possible time is the main objective of animal husbandry
information sources. For information delivery different communication tools like audio-
6
visual aids, field trips, on-farm demonstrations, guest speakers, group discussions,
workshop, printed matter and interactive telecommunications have been advocated by
extension practitioners in this sector. The number of the target audience, their location
and time available for communication are various factors on which information sources
generally depends. It will be very helpful for extension agencies and persons engaged in
transfer of technology programmes, if prior identification of preferred information
sources and channels is done by the dairy farmers (Sharma et al., 2008; Chauhan and
Kansal, 2014). Selectivity of information sources among the farmer is affected by several
conditions such as sources of availability, credibility of source, richness/poverty,
liking/disliking and cosmopolitan/local (Balasubramanian and Charles 1996; Chauhan
and Kansal, 2014). So, in order to develop a suitable communication strategy, it is of
utmost importance to identify and locate different sources and channels of animal
husbandry information available and utilized by the dairy farmers.
One of the critical inputs in transfer of technology is efficient dissemination of

technological information from the research system to farmers and reporting of farmers’
feedback (Senthilkumar et al., 2020). An important prerequisite for development of ICT
tools and strong information delivery system is identification of needs. It is done for
receiving and sharing scientific information and the knowledge for smoother and faster
access of information for farmers at their doorstep. To enhance livestock productivity and
product quality most of the livestock owners in India lack required information on
practices which increase production (Thakur, 2016). To strengthen the bridge between
research system and farming system mobile app is one of the ICT means. Hence, the
present study has focused to identify and prioritize the information needs of buffalo
farmers to develop mobile based application.
Majority of buffalo farmers approach non-formal sources for information on

scientific buffalo farming, sometimes mis-information leads huge loses to farmers as well
as to animals also. Providing right information from credible source will boost the
individual farmers herd productivity. Therefore, the present study has been taken up to
explore and prioritize the various informational needs of farmers based on their weighted
mean score in each related subject area of buffalo rearing. The outcome of the study
7
would help to develop a focussed advisory system and an alternative extension service
delivery for solving problems of those living in remote areas by enhancing the
production, productivity and income and minimizing the transaction cost.
Therefore, a study was planned to assess the access the information need of the
buffalo farmers in Jammu district with following objectives.
Objectives
1. To identify the information needs of the buffalo farmers living in Jammu district.
2. To examine the channels of information communication and sources of

information dependence used by the buffalo farmers.
3. To develop a Mobile Application for better and fast information dissemination

and to promote better rearing of buffaloes.
4. To analyze the constraints of assessing the information needs of the buffalo

farmers.
Review of Literature
CHAPTER-2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A review of literature is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It is an

important aspect of all the researches as it provides an overview of current knowledge
and allows the researcher to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing
research. To gain an insight into the research problem under the study, it is very essential
to scrutinize the available literature. It keeps the work going in proper and precise
direction. Results are interpreted correctly by reviewing the literature. Hence the relevant
literature is reviewed and presented in the following sub headings:
2.1 Socio-economic profile of the buffalo farmers
2.2 Information needs of the buffalo farmers
2.3 Channels of information communication and sources of information dependence

used by the buffalo farmers.
2.4 Mobile Application developed for better and fast information dissemination and
to promote better rearing of buffaloes.
2.5 Constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the information.
Sabapara et al. (2014) observed that most of the dairy farmers (43.67%) were
middle aged, 63 per cent were literate having nuclear type (58.33%) of family. Most of
them (36.00%) were marginal farmers with small herd size and medium level of
extension contacts (70.37%) and mass media exposure (82.33%).
Kumari et al. (2015) reported that majority of the respondents were middle aged,
illiterate, belonged to joint family with medium family size. 84 per cent respondents had
no social participation. Most of the respondents had medium land holding and small herd
size. Majority of the farmers were engaged in agriculture as occupation and had medium
level of annual income.
9
Siddiki et al. (2015) in their study revealed that maximum number of the buffalo
farmers were young. Fifty five per cent farmers were educated and 40.00 per cent reared
livestock. More than 80.00 per cent of the farmer had 2 to 5 acres of land and majority of
farmers belonged to medium income categories.
Prajapati (2016) observed that most (56.33%) of the respondents were middle
aged, 50.67 per cent were educated up to secondary level, 59.33 per cent had small
family size, 79.33 per cent had nuclear family, 31.33 per cent of them were marginal
farmers, 66 per cent of respondents followed mixed farming system and majority
(49.67%) of them had small herd size of less than 5 animals.
Vekariya et al. (2016) indicated that maximum (70.83 %) number of the farmers
belonged to middle age group, educated up to secondary level, had medium annual
income, large size of family and belonged to joint family, had small herd size and
practiced animal husbandry plus agriculture as main occupation.
Chandrasekar et al. (2017) in their study revealed that majority (58.00%) of the
informants were middle aged, with 87.50 per cent of them being literates. 77 per cent
lived in nuclear family with medium size family. Ninety three per cent practiced animal
husbandry and agriculture as their occupation whereas, 89 per cent were marginal land
holders with medium livestock possession. Majority (71.00%) of the respondents had
medium information seeking behaviour.
Deshetti and Teggi, M.Y (2017) revealed that majority (50.00%) of farmers
belonged to large families, 46.15 per cent of farmers of Vijayapur and 50.00 per cent of
farmers of Bagalakote belonged to low income group.
Gopi et al. (2017) revealed that majority (76.67%) of the respondents belonged to
old and middle aged categories, 45.00 per cent were illiterate, 78.33 per cent of the
respondents had agriculture as their primary occupation. Majority (70.83%) of the
respondents belonged to nuclear family and 73.30 per cent had medium livestock
possession.
10
Hannure and Balsare (2018) studied the socio-economic status of dairy

demonstration farmers in Anand district and revealed that majority (66.00%) of the
informants were middle aged, had large sized (more than 4 members) family with
average family size of 6.33 members and all informants having some land holding.
Ram et al. (2018) in their study revealed that that the majority (62.5%) of the
farmers were middle aged, educated up to primary level, had nuclear type of families,
practiced agriculture and animal husbandry as their major occupation, had medium size
land holding, low level of income and 65.50 per cent of the farmers.
Singh et al. (2018) in their study reported that more than half of respondents were
middle aged marginal farmers, had small herd size, practiced cattle rearing as their main
occupation, had low mass media exposure and 70.37 per cent farmers had medium level
of extension contact.
Nilkanth et al. (2019) studied the socio-personal and economic profile of ITK
practicing dairy farmers in Palghar district of Maharashtra and revealed that majority
(70.00%) of the farmers were old aged with medium family size (61.67%) having 7 to 11
members in the family. Agriculture with dairying as their main occupation was practiced
by 97.50 per cent respondents. Majority (65.83%) of them were small farmers (1–2 ha
land holding) with low annual income of majority (80.00%) of the respondents (up to Rs
31, 000). Majority (87.50 and 76.67%) of the farmers had medium level of mass media
exposure and extension contact respectively with 65.83 per cent having low social
participation.
Gopi et al. (2020) studied the socio- economic profile and constraints of dairy
farmers of Tamil Nadu and indicated that 46.67 per cent of the farmers belonged to old
age group, 36.70 per cent were illiterate. Dairying and agriculture was primary
occupation of 51.70 per cent respondents, majority (85.00 %) of them had medium level
of cosmopoliteness and 68.33 per cent had medium livestock possession.
Haque et al. (2020) in their study revealed that buffalo rearing was practiced by
majority (51.70%) of middle aged farmers, almost three fourth of them being illiterate.
11
Forty per cent farmers had medium sized family and majority of the farmers had medium
herd size of 4-10 buffaloes.
Mahesh et al. (2020) in their study revealed that majority (63.00%) of the farmers
belonged to middle age group. Fifty five per cent were educated up to middle and high
school. Majority of the respondents (87.00%) had animal husbandry and agriculture as
their main occupation, 66.00 per cent had nuclear family and majority had small to
medium herd size. While, 60.00 per cent of the farmers had medium mass media
participation, 54.00 per cent had medium extension contact.
Meshram et al. (2020) in their study revealed that majority of the respondents
were middle-aged, had education up to higher secondary school, medium family size,
integrated farming system as their main occupation, had small and marginal land holding
category, medium family income, animal possession and credit seeking behaviour.
Tripathi et al. (2021) in their study assessment and prioritization of information

needs in buffalo production system revealed that majority (53.00%) of the farmers
belonged to young age group, mostly educated and practiced agriculture as main family
occupation. Most of the respondents belonged to nuclear family system, had family size
of 2-5 members and had marginal land holding.
Phand et al. (2009) analyzed the information need of dairy farmers in

Maharashtra and concluded that, an important aspect on which they needed information
was ‘animal health management’ and some of the prime concerns were diseases and
disorders like mastitis, hemorrhagic septicemia, anthrax, anestrous, repeat breeding etc.
Kumar and Chander (2011) reported that for maximum number of the dairy
farmers, most appropriate perceived information was regarding feeding, breeding,
management and health of animals, weather forecasting and e-governance whereas, least
appropriate was regarding fodder production and agricultural aspects.
Bachhav (2012) in his study reported that maximum number of farmers (77.72%)
needed market information followed by information about government scheme such as
12
subsidies, import and export policy (65.72%). Further, 47.83 per cent farmers needed
information about bank credit facilities.
Devaki and Senthilkumar (2013) in their study about relationship between

different characteristics of livestock farm women on information need perception
reported that majority (51.00 %) of the respondents had low perception of information
need followed by high (37.00%) and medium (12.00%) levels. Farm women respondents
perceived more information requirement about farm credit, breeding, disease control,
marketing, feeding and management in order.
Naveed and Anwar (2013) in their study reported that majority (97.30%) of the
respondents required information on feeding, 82.20 per cent on vaccinations against viral
and bacterial diseases and their time intervals, 71.20 per cent on treatment of sick
animals, and 57.50 per cent on disease control whereas, 35.60 per cent, 16.40 per cent
and 4.10 per cent also needed information on pricing of animals, housing environment,
and market information respectively.
Kavithaa et al. (2014) in their study reported that the majority (52.86%) of the
dairy farmers belonged to medium category followed by high (31.43%) and low
(15.71%) with respect to their level of information seeking behaviour.
Singh et al. (2015) in their study revealed that 70.58 per cent farmers needed
information on different subsidy schemes of the government, followed by 70 per cent on
feed and fodder and 64.70 per cent on animal breeding.
Subash et al. (2015) affirmed that on the basis of weighted mean score of selected
area, most wanted information was regarding, nutrition and feeding, breeding and
reproduction, general management, health care management and fodder production
respectively.
Sharma and Singh (2016) reported that treatment of animals, controlling external
parasites, controlling internal parasites and animal breeding were areas of most needed
information followed by nutrition and low cost diet, clean milk production, preparing
13
ration and reproduction. However, information on concentrate producing and saving

nutritious material were least needed by the respondents.
Adhikari et al. (2018) revealed that most of the dairy farmers (60.83%) had
moderate overall information needs. It was observed that 81.70 per cent farmers needed
information about fodder production, breeds (75.83%) and input supplies and record
keeping (66.67%). None of the respondents needed information regarding preparation of
milk products.
Thuo and Njoroge (2018) in their study about information needs and seeking
behaviour of young small-scale dairy farmers in Kenya revealed that half of the
respondents needed information on dairy farming methods, breeding of dairy cows,
diseases control, rearing of dairy cows, nutrition, dairy products processing, markets for
dairy products, milk storage systems, dairy animal feeds, biogas production, calves
mortality rates and finally mixed farming practices
Gangil et al. (2019) in their study observed that, out of all selected areas, most
priority area was health care related practices (INI=78.33) followed by breeding
(INI=74.67), feeding (INI=71.00), management (INI=68.00) and marketing (INI=66.33)
practices.
Jadeja et al. (2019) reported that, predominantly 73.34 per cent farm women had
medium level of information needs followed by 15.83 percent and 10.83 percent having
low and high level of information needs about animal husbandry practices respectively.
According to the results, health practices (17.767 WMS) followed by farm credit (13.958
WMS), marketing practices (12.358 WMS), breeding practices (5.267 WMS),
management practices (3.242 WMS), feeding practices (2.175 WMS), profit utilization
(2.150 WMS), housing facilities (1.733 WMS), fodder production (1.583 WMS), daily
practices (1.100 WMS) and milk products making (0.667 WMS) were overall preferred
information needs of farm women on improved animal husbandry practices.
Mishra et al. (2019) in their study perceived information needs of dairy farmers
from Nagpur district of Maharashtra reported breeding management (61.68%) as the
major area for information needs followed by care and management (53.33%), health
14
management (50.00%), feeding management (43.34%) and distribution and marketing

(25.00%).
Kumar et al. (2020) conducted a study on buffalo farmers of Haryana, with the
aim to identify their information needs. Their information needs were centred on feeding,
breeding, healthcare, market, farm credit and management. The study revealed that more
than half (56.70%) of the respondents had medium level of information needs while
22.50 per cent had low and 20.80 per cent had high level of information needs. Ranking
on the basis of most perceived information needs was given to each parameter selected.
2.3 Channels of information communication and sources of information

dependence used by the buffalo farmers.
Prasad et al. (2006) revealed that milk producer's cooperatives,

panchayat, newspapers, farmers association and radio were used as channels of
information by significant number of dairy farmers. Positive and significant correlation of
occupation, education, extension contact, mass media exposure, risk orientation and
cosmopoliteness-localiteness with channels of information was observed.
Khan et al. (2011) studied the sources and channels of information and revealed
that the neighbours were the most preferred source (2.61 MS), followed by private
agencies (2.35 MS) and agriculture supervisor (2.03 MS). However, agriculture graduates
(0.48 MS), Agriculture officers (0.35 MS) and the NGOs (0.26 MS) were least important
source considered by the farmers.
Bachhav (2012) studied about different sources and channels of information used
by the farmers and observed that majority of the farmers (78.84%) used mobile phone as
communication channel. Colleague as information source were considered by 66.86 per
cent farmers while newspaper (62.29%) followed by government office (57.15%) were
other information sources utilized by farmers.
Garai et al. (2012) revealed that mass media like television (Rank I), radio (Rank
II) and exhibition (Rank III) were most frequently used formal sources whereas, informal
15
sources of information used were local leaders (Rank I) and neighbours (Rank II). It was
also reported that least utilized information sources were bank and NGOs (Rank VII).
Ansari and Sunetha (2014) observed that most of the farm women (88.33%)
considered friends and family whereas, 82.50 per cent considered elderly persons as
important source of information. None of them contacted progressive farmers or local
leaders for any information.
Kavithaa et al. (2014) in their study revealed that keeping the farmer’s
information needs in mind, effective extension service should be designed. They also
stated that number of sources of information the farmer needed to access will be reducing
the time and effort the farmer had to spend on information seeking behaviour, and
potentially accelerating the adoption decision.
Chauhan and Kansal (2016) conducted a study in Punjab on different animal

husbandry information sources and channel used among dairy farmers and observed that
dairy farmers were aware about radio, television, dairy co-operatives and Pashu palan
mela as animal husbandry information source. Therefore majority of large farmers were
aware about dairy co-operatives and Pashu palan mela. Dairy farmers considered
newspapers, dairy co-operatives, family members and Pashu palan mela as most
preferred animal husbandry information sources.
Prasad and Ponraj (2016) studied the various sources and extent of use of these
sources of information by the livestock owners for obtaining scientific livestock farming
information. They reported that most of the dairy farmers obtained information from
veterinary surgeon (93.75%), VLDA (90.88%), progressive farmers (83.75%), and
experts from agricultural university (71.43%) regarding various aspects of breeding,
feeding, health care and management practices. Sources of information have both
positive and negative correlation. Positive and significant correlation was observed with
socio-economic status (SES), occupation, education of respondent, extension contact,
mass media exposure, risk orientation and cosmopoliteness-localiteness. Social
participation, family education status and annual income were found to be positively but
16
non-significantly correlated with the sources of information used by livestock farmers.

Whereas, negative correlation was observed with age.
Singh et al. (2016) concluded that media, government extension services,

consultants and farm service firms, traders, input dealers, other farmers and relatives
were some of the probable sources of information used by the farmers.
Bankapur and Naik (2018) in their study revealed that among the channels of
information most preferred in the study area were newspaper (32.47%) and radio
(21.36%) followed by mobile phone (19.58%), television (12.82), magazines (9.40%) and
internet (4.27%).
Gupta et al. (2019) in their study reported that extension contact of maximum
number of farmers (92.70%) was village panchayat sarpanch followed by input dealer
(72.00%), animal husbandry officials (70.00%), veterinary hospitals (67.30), KVK
officials (62.00%) , whereas least contacted were veterinary college (39.30%), SHGs
(4.00%)and NGOs (02.70%).
Susan et al. (2019) in their study revealed that the main communication channel
frequently used by dairy farmers was radio (54.00%), followed by peer farmers (16.00%),
television (15.00%) and veterinary doctors (6.00%).
Malik and Rathi (2020) studied the farmers’ information seeking behavior and
reported that for maximum number of them, commonly used sources of information were
fellow farmers (3.428 WMS), friends/relatives (3.370 WMS), shopkeepers of agricultural
inputs (2.937 WMS) and officers/extension functionaries of the department of agriculture
(2.642 WMS) whereas, the least used information sources were Kisan Call Centre (1.868
WMS), newspapers (1.852 WMS), internet (1.778 WMS), scientists of agricultural
research station (1.752 WMS) and representatives of NGOs (1.655 WMS).
Tripathi et al. (2021) revealed that 98 per cent respondents considered family and
friends as their major informal source to receive information on scientific buffalo farming
followed by veterinary medical shops (57.00%) progressive farmers (54.00%) and
livestock feed shops (42.00%). However, 67 per cent respondents considered para vets
17
followed by 57 per cent considered veterinary officer as their formal sources of

information on scientific buffalo farming. Study also revealed that the milk co-operatives
were rarely contacted for information by the farmers
2.4 Mobile Application developed for better and fast information dissemination
Jain and Kour (2015) in their study reported that to disseminate the latest
information from the research organization to the end users like farmers, using social
media mobile applications can prove to be one of the best and optimal tools.
Rathod et al. (2016) in their study concluded that farmers must be made more
aware about the use of mobiles to disseminate information and improve productivity in
the dairy sector by the researchers and extension experts. Further, for effective generation
and transfer of dairy innovations, scientists have to generate and transfer field relevant,
profitable and sustainable tools and techniques with the involvement of farmers as the
partners of research and extension.
Belakari et al. (2017) in their study concluded that economy of livestock,

agriculture and rural artisans in India can be changed to better by using Information and
Communication Technology (ICT) tools. Particularly, mobiles are used to disseminate
information on time to the farmers regarding information about vaccination, insurance
alerts, livestock diseases, exotic and indigenous breeds, feeding management, livestock
rearing and government schemes on animal husbandry.
Sreeram and Gupta (2017) revealed that for providing supplementation to the
extension efforts to reach the farmers, mobile applications have a larger role to play.
Some novel and sustainable solutions are offered through the mobile applications to
disseminate the information. It is expected that farming could be made more profitable
and remunerative in the coming days by using the smart phones as well as mobile
applications for agriculture.
Barh and Balakrishnan (2018) in their study revealed that one of those effective
innovations which benefited a large number of people in the developing world are smart
18
phones. Mobile applications are transforming agriculture in India. To make agriculture

and allied services productive and smooth, they must be linked to recent technologies
which are smarter, faster and cheaper to use. One such technology being mobile
application can be used directly by the farmers. Smart phones have proved beneficial in
overcoming adversity of connecting the rural digital divide, providing pecuniary
advantages and acting as catalyst for social mobilization through improved
communication.
Singh et al. (2019) developed a need-based Web Module for Scientific Dairy
Practices (WMSDP) and reported that ICT tools like WMSDP can be an excellent
medium for dissemination of required information to the farmers. The information needs
of the farmers were prioritized and assessed. Information on healthcare management,
fodder production and management, general management, nutrition and feeding and
breeding and reproduction were prioritized. Latest Microsoft dot (.) net technology was
used to develop an interactive IT-enabled web module.
Anand et al. (2020) studied the constraints faced by farmers in access and use of
information and communication technologies and reported that majority of the farmer
faced issue of insufficient power supply, followed by poor or slow internet connection,
lack of knowledge, lack of confidence in using ICT tools and lack of training programme.
Balkrishna et al. (2020) reported that information can be conveniently generated,

stored and used by farmers with the help of Information and Communication
Technologies. It helps improving agricultural production and productivity. They also
revealed that timely information dissemination regarding best cultivation practices,
cropping pattern, seed availability, fertilizer usage, weather forecasts, market
information, insurance alerts, organic practices and government schemes are easily done
with help of mobile apps.
Sentilkumar et al. (2020) in their study developed a mobile app for sheep and goat
farming. In the study they identified needs of farmers on breed & breeding, feeding,
management, disease control and marketing. In order to impart the scientific knowledge
19
of small ruminant farming system, mobile based application software was developed in
android platform in local language for the end users.
Fouad et al. (2021) in their study, the mobile application is an effective tool for
data collection of performance in agriculture revealed that, economical and
straightforward application was developed to monitor small dairy herd performance with
the flexibility to collect data remotely for small and geographically scattered farms.
Gupta et al. (2021) in their study mentioned about the recent ICT and m-
applications used in farming today. They reported that large quantities of information in
the form of data are easily facilitated by using smart phone-enabled mobile applications.
Tripathi et al. (2021) conducted a study on assessment and prioritization of

information needs in buffalo production system perceived by farmers to develop mobile
apps as an extension service delivery tool which revealed that age at puberty and maturity
was the most needed information in reproduction, information on infertility was most
needed in reproductive problems, whereas information on characteristics of good dairy
animals followed by best buffaloes suited for local conditions were areas identified
under breeding head.
2.5 Constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the information
Meganathan et al. (2010) observed some of the major constraints perceived by the
tribal farmers and revealed that most serious constraints in cattle farming were delay in
the disbursement of loan (76.96 MS), lack of sufficient pasture land (52.55 MS), lack of
marketing facilities (48.90 MS) and the least serious constraint perceived was high cost
of animal care and treatment (30.14 MS).
Babu et al. (2012) studied the major constraints perceived by the farmers to
access the information. They revealed that common to all search groups were poor
availability and unreliability of information, lack of awareness of information sources
available and untimely provision of the information, lack of credit, low risk taking
capacity, high costs of inputs, labour availability and access to markets were also the
major bottlenecks in improving farm incomes.
20
Naveed and Anwar (2013) conducted a study on 84 Pakistani farmers with the
aims to identify their information needs. Lack of timely access, low level of education
and language barrier were the main problems that these farmers faced while getting the
required information.
Patel et al. (2013) observed some of the constraints of dairying and revealed that
for most of the farmers (90.00%) high cost of feed was the major constraint, followed by
non-remunerative price for milk (87.50%), lack of capital for animal shelter (77.50 %),
unavailability of green fodder throughout the year (73.75%), repeat breeding in cows
(70.00%), inadequate knowledge about diseases and disease control systems (57.00%)
and high cost of treatment (52.50%).
Chakravarthi et al. (2017) reported that serious constraints perceived by majority

of the farmers (72.77%) were in feeding practices followed by housing practices
(62.66%) whereas, least serious constraint perceived was about breeding practices
(50.95%). They also reported that some serious constraints like inadequate disease
knowledge (95.00%), less information about balanced ration (93.33 %), non remunerative
price of milk (87.50%) and lack of knowledge of repeat breeding (85.00%).
Pata et al. (2018) revealed that majority of buffalo owners (95.39%) faced
economic constraint followed by the breeding constraints (48.92%) and feeding
constraints (47.52%) whereas, least serious were managerial practices constraints
(13.00%). Overall major constraint perceived by the buffalo owners under different areas
were unavailability of loan for long duration (98.33%), Poor irrigation facilities for
cultivation of fodder (81.33%), difficulty to store milk in summer season (70.00%),
unavailability of timely A.I. facility at village (59.00%) and unavailability of on time
veterinary services for treatment at door step (36.67%).
Rajpoot et al. (2018) reported some of the most serious constraints in different
areas of dairy practices. Most serious constraint for majority of dairy farmers (83.00 %)
was low price of milk and milk products followed by lack of technical knowledge to
manage the dairy (78.00%), lack of storage facility of milk (75.00%), high cost of
construction (74.00%), and lack of knowledge to prepare project proposal (67.50%).
21
Minhaj et al. (2019) reported that some of the major constraints faced by the dairy
farmers were lack for finance to perform animal husbandry practices, high cost of feeding
supplement or mineral mixture in feeding practices, excessive price of treatment, repeat
breeding and inadequate knowledge to detect heat signs.
Adhikari et al. (2020) in their study listed down the constraints perceived by the
respondents in dairy farming of which, three major constraints were unavailability of
green fodder round the year(100.00%) , low productivity of animal (70.00%), non
remunerative prices of milk (55.00%) followed by high cost of concentrate mixture
(50.00%), unavailability of resource person especially veterinary doctor in nearby area
(50.00%), lack information about government schemes (45.00%), unavailability of
concentrate mixture (36.67%), improper disposal animal waste (35.83%), occurrence of
diseases among animal (34.17%), unavailability of drinking water (30.00%) and poor
conception rate in artificial insemination (15.00%).
Gamit et al. (2021) studied constraints faced by farmers of dairy sector in

different states of India. The results revealed that farmers all over the country face some
of the most serious constraints like lack of knowledge about scientific management of
dairy animals, balanced feeding, lack in availability of good quality feed and fodder, non
availability of high quality indigenous bulls, poor conception rate through AI and lack of
sufficient veterinary services.
Materials and Methods
CHAPTER-3
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present study was conducted in Jammu district of Jammu and Kashmir, to
study the socio-economic profile, information needs, sources and channels of information
and the constraints faced by the buffalo farmers in accessing the information need. This
chapter deals with the steps followed for selection of locale, selection of respondents,
collection of data, variables and their measurement, tabulation and analysis of data.
The methodological steps followed in the present study are described under
following headings:
3.1 Research design

3.2 Locale of the study
3.3 Sampling plan and procedure
3.4 Selection of variables and their measurement
3.5 Development of interview schedule
3.6 Data analysis and interpretation
3.1 Research design
Keeping in view the objectives of this study an ex post facto and exploratory
research design was used since the variables chosen have already been occurred.
3.2 Locale of the study
Jammu and Kashmir was the universe of this study. The current study was
conducted in the Jammu district of Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir (Fig. 4). The
UT comprises of two divisions, namely Jammu and Kashmir division, and is further
divided into 20 districts, each division having 10 districts (Fig. 5). Located at 32.73°N
74.87°E coordinates, Jammu is surrounded by the Himalayas in the north and the
northern plains in the south. On the banks of Tawi river, at the uneven ridges of low
heights at the Shivalik hills lies the district of Jammu. It is surrounded by the Shivalik
23
range to the north, east, and southeast while the Trikuta Range surrounds it in the
northwest. Jammu district of UT Jammu and Kashmir has a geographical area of 2342
square km, population of 15.30 lakhs (Census, 2011) and population density of 653
persons/square km. Out of the total population; 7.64 lakh population resides in rural area
where as 7.65 lakh population resides in urban areas of the district.
Jammu borders Kashmir valley to the north, Ladakh to the east, and Punjab and
Himachal Pradesh to the south. In the west, the Line of Control separates Jammu
from Pakistani-administered Kashmir. In between Kashmir valley to the north and the
Daman Koh plains to the south, the Shivalik range comprises most of the region of
Jammu. The Pir Panjal range, the Trikuta hills and the low-lying Tawi river basin add
diversity to the terrain of Jammu. The Pir Panjal range separates Jammu from the
Kashmir valley. Jammu region has geographically 8 sub regions Ravi-Tawi, Kandi
plains, Shiwaliks, Pir Panjal belt, Chenab Valley, Bhaderwah Valley, Gandoh Valley,
Paddar Valley and Warwan-Marwah Valley. Jammu has humid subtropical climate,
ranging between 4 °C to 46 °C.
An important sector of the UT’s economy constitutes agriculture as around 70 per

cent of the population of J&K derive greater part of their income directly or indirectly
from this sector. As 49 per cent of the total working force with 42 per cent as cultivators
and 7 per cent as agriculture labourers depend directly on agriculture for their livelihood,
the economy of J&K continues to be predominantly agrarian. According to NITI Aayog’s
report, along with direct impact on agriculture growth, generation of rural employment
and incomes, agriculture has also significantly developed rural non-farm sectors too.
Livestock is an integral part of the agrarian economy and its share to Gross Domestic
Products is also increasing (contributes roughly 13% to the UT’s GDP). The economy of
Jammu and Kashmir is still agriculture dependent and is the main occupation of majority
of the rural people who earn their livelihood from it. About, 72.62% of the population
lives in rural areas and are associated with agriculture and allied sectors including
livestock rearing as main occupation as per 2011 census of India.
24
Fig. 4: District map of Jammu and Kashmir
Fig. 5: Map of Jammu division showing various districts

25
3.3 Sampling plan and procedure
Multistage sampling plan was used for the present study. For district selection,
purposive sampling was used whereas for block, village and respondent selection, simple
random sampling method was used.
3.3.1 Selection of Blocks
Jammu district comprises of 20 blocks. The population of buffalo farmers is more

or less equal in all the blocks of Jammu district, therefore 5 blocks, R.S. Pura,
Suchetgarh, Miran Sahib, Satwari and Marh were randomly selected following simple
random sampling method (Fig. 6).
Fig. 6: Map of Jammu District showing various Blocks, Jammu
3.3.2 Selection of villages

From each of the 5 selected blocks, list of villages was prepared. Two villages
were selected randomly from each selected block making a total of 10 villages for the
study.
26
3.3.3 Selection of respondents
The respondents were selected by simple random sampling method. Table 3.1
revealed that a list of farmers practicing buffalo farming was prepared. Twelve
respondents were selected from each of these 10 selected villages. Thus, a total of 120
respondents were selected for the study (Fig. 7).
Table 3.1: Selection of villages and respondents within the locale of study.
SELECTED NUMBER OF
S.NO. SELECTED VILLAGE
BLOCK RESPONDENTS
CHOHALA 12
1. RS PURA
SUNDERPUR 12
GHARANA 12
2. SUCHETGARH
SATOWALI 12
CHAK ASLAM 12
3. MIRAN SAHIB
KOTLI MIAN FATEH 12
SATWARI 12
4. SATWARI
HAKAL 12
GAJANSOO 12
5. MARH
GHO-MANHASAN 12
GRAND
5 BLOCKS 10 VILLAGES 120 RESPONDENTS
TOTAL
27
UT Jammu and Kashmir
DIVISION Jammu division
DISTRICT Jammu
BLOCK R.S PURA SUCHETGARH MIRAN SAHIB SATWARI MARH
VILLAGES CHOHALA GHARANA CHAK ASLAM SATWARI GAJANSOO

SUNDERPUR SATOWALI KOTLI MIAN FATEH HAKAL GHO MANHASAN
NO. OF 12, 12 12, 12 12, 12 12, 12 12, 12
RESPONDENTS
TOTAL 24 24 24 24 24
RESPONDENTS
120
Fig. 7: Flow diagram of sampling plan of the study

28
3.4 Selection of variables and their measurement

The relevant variables were selected after a thorough reviewing of literature and
consulting the experts by considering the theoretical background of different concepts.
They were taken in line with the objectives of the study and broadly categorized into
independent and dependent variables.
Table 3.4.1: Variables and their empirical measurement
S.No. Variables Measurements

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
Socio-economic profile
1. Age Chronological age in years
2. Education Scale developed by Pareek and Trivedi
(1964) was used
3. Family type Schedule was developed
4. Family size Schedule was developed
5. Land holding Criteria laid by GOI (2015-2016)
6. Herd size Schedule was developed
7. Occupation Schedule was developed
8. Income from animal husbandry Schedule was developed
practices
9. Total annual income Schedule was developed
10. Social participation Scale developed by Supe (1969)
11. Mass media exposure Scale developed by Singh (1972)
12. Extension contact Scale developed by Dana (1987)
13. Information Seeking behaviour Modified Bhairamkar (2009)
DEPENDENT VARIABLES
1. Information needs of buffalo farmers in Schedule was developed
Jammu district
2. Sources and channels of information Schedule was developed
available to the farmers about buffalo
rearing practices.
3. Constraints of assessing the information Schedule was developed
needs of the buffalo farmers.
29
3.4.1 Independent variables

3.4.1.1 Age
Age is a period of human life, measured by years from birth, usually marked by a
certain stage or degree of mental or physical development and involving legal
responsibility and capacity. In the present study, it refers to the chronological age (in
years) of the respondents expressed in whole number at the time of data collection. It was
measured by direct questioning and respondents were classified on the basis of mean ±
standard deviation.
AGE RANGE
Young (<39)
Middle (39-65)
Old (>65)
3.4.1.2 Education
In the present study it refers to the number of systemic and formal years spent on
formal education by the respondent till the date of inquiry. It was measured using the
scale developed by Parek and Trivedi (1964) with suitable modifications. Classification
of the respondents was done as under:
EDUCATION SCORE
Illiterate 0
Can read only 1
Can read and write 2
Primary 3
Middle school 4
High and above 5
Graduate and above 6
3.4.1.3 Family type

It refers to the type of family respondent belongs to. In Indian society two types of
family exist i.e. nuclear and joint family. Joint family refers to a family undivided and
30
consisting of more than two conjugal pairs and their offspring whereas nuclear family
refers to a person and his or her spouse as one conjugal pair and their children as a family
unit. On the basis of type of family, the respondents were classified as:
FAMILY TYPE SCORE

Joint 1
Nuclear 2
3.4.1.4 Family size
It refers to number of persons in a single family unit, living under the same roof
and sharing kitchen together in a household. It considers the total number of members
residing in a household at the time of investigation. The respondents were classified on
the basis of mean ± standard deviation into following three categories:
FAMILY SIZE RANGE

Small (≤ 4)
Medium (5-8)
Large (≥ 9)
3.4.1.5 Land holding
It refers to the operational size of the farm (in hectares) which the farmer
possesses at the time of interview. It was measured on the basis of categorisation of
Government of India (2015-2016).
LAND HOLDING SCORE

Landless 0
Marginal (< 1.00 hectare) 1
Small (1.00-2.00 hectare) 2
Semi medium (2.00-4.00 hectare) 3
Medium (4.00-10.00 hectare) 4
Large (10.00 hectare and above) 5
31
3.4.1.6 Herd size

Herd size refers to total number of animals of different age groups possessed by
the households. In the present study herd size was measured based on total buffalos and
other livestock animals possessed by the respondents. Schedule was developed to
measure it. This was achieved by direct questioning and classification of the respondents
was done on the basis of mean ± standard deviation into following three categories:
HERD SIZE RANGE

Small (≤ 2)
Medium (3-8)
Large (≥ 9)
3.4.1.7 Occupation
It refers to the work done to earn a livelihood. Information was gathered on both
main and subsidiary occupation of the respondent and a list of occupations was made. On
this basis, a schedule was developed categorizing occupation of respondents under
sectors mentioned below:
OCCUPATION SCORE
Agriculture 1
Animal Husbandry 2
Private Job 3
Retired/Pension 4
Business/Shop 5
Government Job 6
Casual Labour 7
MGNREGA 8
Others 9
3.4.1.8 Income from animal husbandry practices

It refers to the total earnings accumulated by the respondents from animal
husbandry practices (selling of animal products, sale of animals, value addition of
products of animal origin etc.) at the time of data collection. It was measured by direct
32
questioning, with the help of schedule and respondents were classified on the basis of
mean ± standard deviation into following three categories:
INCOME FROM ANIMAL RANGE

HUSBANDRY PRACTICES
Low (<Rs 50,000)
Medium (Rs 50,000-Rs 3,30,000)
High (>Rs 3,30,000)
3.4.1.9 Total annual income

It refers to the total annual income of the respondent from various occupational
sources. It was measured by direct questioning, with the help of schedule and
classification of the respondents was done on the basis of mean ± standard deviation into
following three categories:
TOTAL ANNUAL INCOME RANGE

Low (< Rs 1,85,505)
Medium (Rs 1,85,505- Rs 5,50,255)
High (> Rs 5,50,255)
3.4.1.10 Social participation

Social participation refers to the degree of participation of the respondents in
different formal or informal organizations as a member or office bearer like village
panchayat, religious committee, cooperatives, political organization, self-help group,
farmer producer organization etc. It was operationalized using scale developed by Supe
(1969):
SOCIAL PARTICIPATION SCORE

No membership 0
Member of one organisation 1
Member of more than one organisation 2
Office bearer 3
Distinctive leader 4
33
3.4.1.11 Mass media exposure

In the study, mass media exposure refers to the degree of exposure and utilization
of different mass media means viz., radio, television, mobile phone, newspaper,
documentary, short films etc. by the respondents. The scale developed by Singh (1972)
was used and the buffalo farmers were categorized based on three point continuum:
CATEGORIES SCORE
Frequently 2
Occasionally 1
Never 0
3.4.1.12 Extension contact

It refers to the frequency of contact made with the extension personnel in the
study area by the respondent. In the study, the extent of meeting with officers of
department of animal husbandry, officers of department of agriculture, scientists from
state/central universities, private input dealers, KVK personals, progressive dairy
farmers, milk union supervisors, and other extension workers for collecting information
regarding buffalo rearing was considered as extension contact of the respondent. The
scale developed by Dana (1987) was used and the responses were recorded on five point
continuum:
Categories Score
Never 0
Half yearly 1
Monthly 2
Fortnightly 3
Weekly 4
3.4.1.13 Cosmopoliteness-Localiteness
It is the frequency of contact or exposure of the respondent to different sources for
obtaining information. By taking into consideration all possible sources available to the
34
respondent, the extent of use of information sources was measured i.e., personal localite
and personal cosmopolite, as suggested by Bhairamkar (2009), with appropriate
modifications. The responses were obtained based on the sources used on three point
continuum:
COSMOPOLITENESS - LOCALITENESS SCORE
Always 2
Occasional 1
Never 0
3.4.2 Dependent variables

3.4.2.1 Information needs of buffalo farmers in Jammu district
The term information need is often understood as an individual or group's desire

to locate and obtain information to satisfy a conscious or unconscious need. Information
need for the present study was operationalized as the information required in the area of
different buffalo rearing practices by the farmers to fulfil their needs and problems.
A schedule to measure respondent’s information need was developed. It consisted

of five areas i.e. housing and management, feeding and nutrition, breeding and
reproduction, health care practices and farm credit and marketing. On the basis of expert
consensus from the members of Faculty of Veterinary Sciences and Animal Husbandry,
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Jammu and
review of different literature, the final schedule consisted of 13, 15, 17, 10 and 15 items
on the areas of housing and management, feeding and nutrition, breeding and
reproduction, health care practices and farm credit and marketing respectively. The
responses were taken on three point continuum with their respective scores as 3 for ‘most
needed’, 2 for ‘needed’ and 1 for ‘least needed’. Different aspects of buffalo rearing
practices were identified by the farmers and indicated any of the three alternative
responses against each selected practice.
35
3.4.2.2 Level of information needs of the buffalo farmers:
Depending upon the level of information needs the respondents were categorized
on the basis of mean ± standard deviation into following three categories:
LEVEL OF INFORMATION NEED RANGE

LOW <127
MEDIUM 127-149
HIGH > 149
3.4.2.3 Sources and channels of information available to the farmers about buffalo
rearing practices
Availability of various sources of information dependence and channels of

information communication to the farmers were considered as one of the dependent
variables in the study. The scores were on the basis of frequency of usage of the sources
and channels by buffalo rearing farmers to fulfil their information need. The scoring
procedure used was 3 for ‘always’, 2 for ‘sometimes’ and 1 for ‘rarely’.
3.4.2.4 Constraints of assessing the information needs of the buffalo farmer
Constraints limit the range of a person’s actions. They are considered as the
limitations which act as bottleneck in making full use of recommended technologies and
delay information delivery. In the present study, it was operationalized as certain
irresistible forces that acted as hindrance in delivery of information of buffalo rearing
practices, as perceived by the farmers. These were documented separately in the areas of
general constraints, housing and management, feeding and nutrition, breeding and
reproduction, health care practices and farm credit and marketing. The items in each of
these areas were 12, 10, 9, 10, 12 and 12 respectively. To measure the intensity of
constraints as perceived by the respondents, they were asked to express their perception
about the different anticipated constraints and score them using the three point continuum
viz. very serious (3), serious (2) and somewhat serious (1) based on the seriousness of the
36
perceived constraints. The constraints were then ranked based upon their mean percent
score (MPS).
3.5 Development of interview schedule

3.5.1 Pre-testing of the research schedule
Pretesting of interview schedule was done on 25 respondents in the non sampled

area. Considering the experience gained in pretesting, suitable modifications were made
to make the schedule more extensive and orderly before finalizing it.
3.5.2 Final interview schedule
Keeping in view the objectives and variables of the study an extensive and well-
structured schedule was developed which consisted of following four parts (Appendix)
Part I: It included the socio-economic profile of the respondent.
Part II: It included the schedule for information needs of the buffalo farmer.
Part III: It included the schedule to identify sources and channels of information used
by the buffalo farmer.
Part IV: It included the constraints of assessing information needs of buffalo farmer.
3.5.3 Method of data collection
The data was collected through personal interview method by visiting the areas of
study by the investigator. This enabled the investigator to get first hand information from
the respondents. The statements were asked to the respondents in form of questions in the
local language as suited to them.
3.6 Data analysis and interpretation
An important aspect of research work is statistical analysis of quantitative data as

it facilitates the condensation and interpretation of the collected data in simple form and
helps in establishing relationship between different variables. The data after collection
was transferred to coding sheets, tabulated and analysed in view of the objectives of the
37
study. The systemic data was used for statistical analysis. The data was analysed using
different software like Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and Microsoft
Office Excel. Different appropriate statistical tools were used such as mean, weighted
mean sore, standard error, standard deviation, frequency, percentage, co-efficient of
correlation and mean percent score (MPS). These were used in consultation with the
statistician for the purpose of analysis. Inferences were made in light of available
literature and knowledge.
3.6.1 Mean
The mean is the arithmetic average which is obtained when the sum of the values
of the individuals in the data is divided by the number of individuals in the data as given
below:
X 
x
N
Where,
X = Mean of the scores
∑x = Sum of individual scores
N = Number of observations
3.6.2 Weighted Mean Score

Weighted Mean Score is defined as a type of average in which, in order to
determine the relative importance of each observation, weights are assigned to individual
values. It calculates the average by multiplying the weights with its respective mean and
taking its sum.
W   i 1 n
n
(xi * wi)
 i1 wi
Where,
W = weighted mean score
n = number of terms to be averaged
wi = weights applied to x values
xi = data values to be averaged
38
3.6.3 Standard error
Standard error is calculated by taking the standard deviation and dividing it by the
square root of the sample size. It gives the accuracy by measuring the sample-to-sample
variability of the sample means.

SE 
n
Where,
SE = Standard error
σ = Standard deviation
n = Total number of samples
3.6.4 Standard deviation
Standard deviation is the square root of the arithmetic mean of the squares of all
deviations. It was calculated to categorize the respondents into various groups. The
standard deviation was computed by the following formula.
X  X
2

n
Where,
𝑋̅ = Arithmetic mean
X = Score of each respondents
n = Total number of respondents
Σ = Means ‘Sum of’
3.6.5 Frequency
The term frequency (n) is used to denote how frequently a response appears in a
class or category i.e., number of respondents in a particular cell.
39
3.6.6 Percentage
The term percentage (%) is used to denote the actual share of particular response
in respect of total considered as hundred. It is calculated to make simple comparisons.
n
P    100
 N
Where,
n = Frequency of a particular cell
N = Total number of respondents
P = Percentage
3.6.7 Correlation coefficient
It is the degree to which variables have been observed to go together more

specifically, when increase or decrease in one variable is accompanied by increase or
decrease in other variable, the two are said to be correlated and phenomenon is known as
correlation.
Correlation coefficient (r) is a measure of the relationship between independent

and dependent variables which are at the interval or ratio level of measurement and are
linearly related. The formula used to calculate correlation co-efficient is as follow:
r (x  x)(y  y)
i i
(x  x) (y  y)
i
2
i
2
Where,
r = Correlation coefficient
xi = Values of the x-variable in a sample
𝑥̅ = Mean of the values of the x-variable

yi = Values of the y-variable in a sample
y̅ = Mean of the values of the y-variable

40
3.6.8 Mean Percent Score (MPS)
It was obtained by multiplying total obtained score of the respondents by 100 and
hiding and dividing by the maximum obtainable score under each aspect.
Total score obtained by the respondents

M.P.S.  100
Maximum obtainable score
Results
CHAPTER-4
RESULTS
This chapter deals with the results of the present study that have been derived
after subjecting data to statistical analysis and interpretation in order to draw suitable
conclusions. The results of the study are presented under the following sub headings:

4.5 Constraints of assessing the information needs of the buffalo farmers..
The socio-economic profile of the buffalo farmers affect the way the animal is
reared at both quantitative and qualitative level. It is therefore, intended to study their
profile viz., age, education, family type, family size, land holding, herd size, occupation,
income from animal husbandry practices, total annual income, social participation, mass
media exposure, extension contact and cosmopoliteness-localiteness.
4.1.1 Age
Age of the farmer influences the functioning and working capacity. The selected
buffalo farmers in the present study ranged between 22 to 90 years of age and their
average age was 52.70 ± 1.17. For appropriate analysis, buffalo farmers were categorized
into three age groups on the basis of mean ± standard deviation i.e. young (less than 39
years), middle (39-65 years) and old (more than 65 years). Table 4.1 shows that majority
of buffalo farmers (75.00%) were middle aged followed by young (13.33%) and old aged
42
(11.67%). It might be due to the fact that labour involved in the buffalo farming was not
highly preferred by farmers belonging to young and old age groups (Fig. 8).
Table 4.1: Distribution of respondents according to age
S.NO. CATEGORY (IN YEARS) FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
1. YOUNG (<39 years) 16 13.33
2. MIDDLE (39-65 years) 90 75.00
3. OLD (>65 years) 14 11.67
Mean ± S.E= 52.70 ± 1.17

Mean ± S.D = 52.70 ±12.84
120
90
100 75
80
60
40 16 13.33 14 11.67
20
0
YOUNG (<39 years) MIDDLE (39-65 years) OLD (>65 years)
FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Fig. 8: Distribution of respondents according to age
4.1.2 Education
The process of producing desirable change in behavior i.e. knowledge, skill,
attitude and action of the people is education. It is evident from table 4.2 that most of the
buffalo farmers (33.33%) had completed education up to high school and above followed
by middle school education (30.83%). It was found that only 18.33 per cent farmers had
education up to primary school while 17.50 per cent farmers were illiterate. Education
level of the farmers was satisfactory and this might be due to various opportunities and
availability of family support for education (Fig.9).
43
Table 4.2: Distribution of respondents according to education
S.NO. CATEGORY FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
1. Illiterate 21 17.50
2. Up to Primary School 22 18.33
3. Middle School 37 30.83
4. High and above 40 33.33
120
100
80
60 40
37
30.83 33.33
40 21 22
17.50 18.33
20
0
Illiterate Upto Primary Middle School High and above
School
Fig. 9: Distribution of respondents according to education
4.1.3 Family type
It is evident from table 4.3 that majority of the buffalo farmers (82.50 %) were
from nuclear family whereas, 17.50 per cent respondents had joint family. It indicated that
nuclear family system is eventually replacing joint family system in urban as well as rural
areas. This might be due to changing socio-cultural structure in the area under study.
44
Table 4.3: Distribution of respondents according to family type
1. Joint 21 17.50
2. nuclear 99 82.50
120 99
100 82.5
80
60
40 21
17.5
20
0
Joint Nuclear
Fig. 10: Distribution of respondents according to family type
4.1.4 Family size
The average family size in the study area was 5.45 ± 0.22 indicating that most of
the buffalo farmers had medium sized family (Table 4.4). For appropriate analysis, buffalo
farmers were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± standard deviation i.e.
small (less than 5 members), medium (5-8 members) and large (more than 8 members). It
is evident from table 4.4 that most of the buffalo farmers (48.33%) had medium sized
family followed by small (42.50%) and large (9.17%) sized family. As discussed earlier
that most of the families were nuclear so the family size is less in accordance to it (Fig.
11).
45
Table 4.4: Distribution of respondents according to family size
1. Small (≤4) 51 42.50
2. Medium (5-8) 58 48.33
3. Large(≥9) 11 9.17
Mean ± S.E= 5.45 ± 0.22

Mean ± S.D = 5.45 ±1.48
120
100
80 58
51 48.33
60 42.5
40
11 9.17
20
0
Small (≤4) Medium (5-8) Large(≥9)
Fig. 11: Distribution of respondents according to family size
4.1.5 Land holding
On the basis of criteria laid by Government of India (2015-2016), respondents were

divided into six categories i.e. landless (no land), marginal (less than 1.00 hectare), small
(1.00-2.00 hectare), semi medium (2.00-4.00 hectare), medium (4.00-10.00 hectare) and
large (10.00 hectare and above). It is evident from the results that majority (67.50%) of the
buffalo farmers had marginal land holding followed by small (24.17%), semi-medium
(5.00%), and medium (0.83%) land holding (Table 4.5). It is also clear that landless
farmers constituted 2.50 per cent whereas, none of them had large size land holding (Fig.
12).
46
Table 4.5: Distribution of respondents according to land holding size
1. Landless (no land) 3 2.50
2. Marginal (< 1.00 hectare) 81 67.50
3. Small (1.00-2.00 hectare) 29 24.17
4. Semi medium (2.00-4.00 hectare) 6 5.00
5. Medium (4.00-10.00 hectare) 1 0.83
6. Large (10.00 hectare and above) 0 0.00
120
100
81
80 67.50
60
29
40 24.17
20 3 2.50 6 5.00 1 0.83 0 0.00

0
Landless Marginal Small Semi- Medium Large
Medium
Fig. 12: Distribution of respondents according to land holding
4.1.6 Herd size
Total number of animals of different age groups possessed by the household is the
herd size. The average herd size of the buffalo farmers was 5.61 ± 0.39 indicating that
most of the buffalo farmers had medium sized herd and range varied from 2-31 animals.
For appropriate analysis, buffalo farmers were categorized into three groups on the basis of
mean ± standard deviation i.e. small (less than 3 animals), medium (3-8 animals) and large
47
(more than 8 animals). Table 4.6 shows that majority of farmers (75.00%) had medium
herd size followed by large (15.00%) and small (10.00%) herd size.
Table 4.6: Distribution of respondents according to herd size
1. Small (≤2) 12 10.00
2. Medium (3-8) 90 75.00
3. Large (≥9) 18 15.00
Mean ± S.E= 5.61 ± 0.39

Mean ± S.D = 5.61 ± 3.33
120
90
100
75
80
60
40 18
12 15
10
20
0
Small (≤2) Medium (3-8) Large(≥9)
Fig. 13: Distribution of respondents according to herd size
Along with buffalos some other livestock animals like cattle, goat, sheep and
horses were also owned by the respondents of the sample area. Table 4.7 clearly indicates
that out of total herd size of 671 animals majority (66.76%) was constituted by buffalos
followed by cattle (28.91%) and others (goat, sheep and horses) constituting 4.32 per cent
of the herd (Fig. 14).
48
Table 4.7: Types of animals in herd (n=671)

BUFFALO
1. In lactation 226 33.68
2. Dry 77 11.47
3. Heifer 40 5.96
4. Female calves 99 14.75
5. Male calves 5 0.74
6. Bull/bullock 3 0.44
Total 448 66.76
CATTLE
7. In lactation 112 16.69
8. Dry 29 4.32
9. Heifer 14 2.08
10. Female calves 34 5.06
11. Male calves 5 0.75
12. Bull/bullock 2 0.29
Total 194 28.91
OTHERS (Goat, Sheep and Horses)
13. Total 29 4.32
GRAND TOTAL 671 100
100
80 66.76
60
33.68
40 28.91
16.69 14.75
20 11.47
5.96 5.06 0.74 4.32
4.32 2.08 0.75 0.44 0.29
0
BUFFALO CATTLE OTHERS (Goat, Sheep and Horses)
Fig. 14: Type of animals in herd (n=671)

4.1.7 Occupation
The work done to earn a livelihood is known as the occupation of a person. For
appropriate analysis, the respondents were divided into different categories according to
49
the work they perform. The data regarding the main occupation of the respondents (table
4.8) revealed that majority of buffalo farmers (54.17%) were engaged in agriculture while
17.50 per cent in animal husbandry. 10.00 per cent, 6.67 percent, 5.00 per cent of buffalo
farmers were engaged in business/shop, private job retired/pension respectively while only
5.00 per cent were casual labourers and 3.33% per cent had government job (Fig. 15).
Table 4.8 also revealed that subsidiary occupation of majority of buffalo farmers
(81.67%) was animal husbandry followed by agriculture (43.33%) whereas, 5.83 per cent
and 4.16 per cent of buffalo farmers were involved in MGNREGA and casual labour
respectively.
Table 4.8: Distribution of respondents according to occupation

MAIN
1. Agriculture 65 54.17
2. Animal Husbandry 21 17.50
3. Private Job 8 6.67
4. Retd./Pension 6 5.00
5. Business/Shop 12 10.00
6. Govt. Job 4 3.33
7. Student 1 0.83
8. Casual labor 6 5.00
9. MGNREGA 0 0.00
10. Others 0 0.00
SUBSIDARY
1. Agriculture 52 43.33
2. Animal Husbandry 98 81.67
3. Private Job 0 0.00
4. Retd./Pension 0 0.00
5. Business/Shop 0 0.00
6. Govt. Job 0 0.00
7. Student 0 0.00
8. Casual labor 5 4.16
9. MGNREGA 7 5.83
10. Others 0 0.00
50
100
81.67
80
54.17
60
43.33
40
17.5
20 10
6.67 5 5.83
5 3.33 4.16
0 0 0 0 0.83 0 0 0 0
0
MAIN SUBSIDARY
Fig. 15: Distribution of respondents according to occupation
4.1.8 Income from animal husbandry practices

The average annual income of buffalo farmers from animal husbandry practices
was 190,180 ± 13,009.74 (table 4.9). For appropriate analysis, buffalo farmers were
categorized into three income groups on the basis of mean ± standard deviation i.e. low
(less than `50,000/year), medium (`50,000- `3,30,00/year) and high (more than
3,30,000/year). The results revealed that majority of buffalo farmers (86.67%) earned
medium income from animal husbandry practices whereas, 12.50 per cent earned high and
0.83 per cent buffalo farmers earned low income from animal husbandry practice (Fig. 16).
Table 4.9: Distribution of respondents according to income from animal husbandry

practices
1. Low (< ` 50000) 1 0.83
2. Medium (` 50000- ` 330000) 104 86.67
3. High (> ` 330000) 15 12.50
Mean ± S.E= 190,180 ± 13,009.74

Mean ± S.D = 190,180 ± 140,180.51
51
0.83
12.50
86.67
LOW (<Rs 50000) MEDIUM (Rs 50000-Rs 330000) HIGH (>Rs 330000)
Fig. 16: Distribution of respondents according to income from animal husbandry

practices
4.1.9 Total annual income
The average annual income of buffalo farmers was 3,67,880 ± 16,648.53 (table
4.10). For appropriate analysis, buffalo farmers were categorized into three income groups
on the basis of mean ± standard deviation i.e. low (less than 1.85 lakh), medium (` 1.85
lakh- ` 5.50 lakh) and high (more than ` 5.50 lakh). The result revealed that most of the
buffalo farmers (70.83%) earned medium level of annual income, 15.83 per cent earned
high and 13.33 per cent buffalo farmers earned low level of annual income (Fig 4.10).
Table 4.10: Distribution of respondents according to total annual income
1. Low (<` 1,85,505) 16 13.33
2. Medium (` 1,85,505- ` 5,50,255) 85 70.83
3. High (> ` 5,50,255) 19 15.83
Mean ± S.E= 367,880± 16,648.53

Mean ± S.D = 367,880±182,375.56
52
16%
13%
71%
LOW (< Rs 1,85,505) MEDIUM (Rs 185505- Rs 550255) HIGH (> Rs 550255)
Fig. 17: Distribution of respondents according to total annual income
4.1.10 Social participation
The degree of participation of the respondents in different formal or informal

organizations is their social participation. In the study, table 4.11 revealed that 38.33 per
cent buffalo farmers each were either member of one organization or more than one
organization, 15.84 per cent had no membership and only 7.50 per cent buffalo farmers
were office bearers (Fig. 18).
Table 4.11: Distribution of respondents according to social participation
1. No membership 19 15.84
2. Member of one organization 46 38.33
3. Member of more than one organization 46 38.33
4. Office bearer 9 7.50
5. Distinctive leader 0 0.00

53
100
80
60 46 46
38.33 38.33
40
18
15.84
20 9 7.5
0
NO MEMBERSHIP MEMBER OF ONE MEMBER OF MORE OFFICE BEARER
ORGANISATION THAN ONE
ORGANISATION
Fig. 18: Distribution of respondents according to social participation
4.1.11 Mass media exposure

In the study, it is evident from table 4.12 that average mass media exposure of the
buffalo farmers was 4.34 ± 0.15 indicating medium level of mass media exposure. For
appropriate analysis, buffalo farmers were categorized into three groups on the basis of
mean ± standard deviation viz. low (less than 3), medium (3 to 6) and high (more than 6).
Results revealed that most of the buffalo farmers (80.83%) had medium mass media
exposure, 10.83 per cent had low and 8.33 per cent buffalo farmers had high level of mass
media exposure. The probable reason might be low income lack of knowledge to operate
mass media tools.
Table 4.12: Distribution of respondents according to mass media exposure
S.NO. MASS MEDIA EXPOSURE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
1. Low (<3) 13 10.83
2. Medium (3-6) 97 80.83
3. High (>6) 10 8.33
Mean ± S.E= 4.34±0.15

Mean ± S.D = 4.34±1.60
54
8%
82%
10%
LOW (<3) MEDIUM (3-6) HIGH (>6)
Fig. 19: Distribution of respondents according to mass media exposure
Table 4.13 revealed that most of the buffalo farmers (95.83%) viewed television,
used mobile phone (89.17%), internet (72.50%), radio (53.33%) whereas, none of them
used documentary, Kisan Call Centre or folk media as their mass media tool (Fig. 20).
Table 4.13: Distribution of respondents according to usage of different mass media

tools

MASS MEDIA
1. Radio 64 53.33
2. Television 115 95.83
3. Mobile phone 107 89.17
4. Internet 87 72.50
5. Newspaper/magazines/bulletins 54 45.00
6. Short film 1 0.83
7. Documentary 0 0.00
8. Kisan call centre 0 0.00
9. Farm publication 1 0.83
10 Veterinary camps 33 27.50
11. Kisan melas/cattle show 58 48.33
12. Exhibitions 1 0.83
13. Folk media 0 0.00
14. Others 0 0.00
55
115
120 107
95.83
100 89.17
87
80 72.5
64
58
60 53.33 54
48.33
45
40 33
27.5
20
1 0.83 1 0.83 1 0.83 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
Fig. 20: Distribution of respondents according to usage of different mass media tools
4.1.12 Extension contact

In the study, it is evident from table 4.14 that average extension contact of the
buffalo farmers was 4.01 ± 0.13 indicating medium level extension contacts. For
mean ± standard deviation viz. low (less than 3), medium (3 to 5) and high (more than 5).
Results revealed that most of the buffalo farmers (70.83%) had medium extension contact,
20.83 per cent had high and 16.67 per cent buffalo farmers had low extension contact.
Table 4.14: Distribution of respondents according to extension contact
S.NO. EXTENSION CONTACT FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
1. Low (<3) 20 16.67
2. Medium (3-5) 85 70.83
3. High (>5) 15 20.83
Mean ± S.E = 4.01 ± 0.13

Mean ± S.D = 4.01±1.47
56
13%
16%
71%
LOW (<3) MEDIUM (3-5) HIGH (>5)
Fig. 21: Distribution of respondents according to extension contact
Table 4.15 indicates that most preferred extension contact by the 98.33 per cent
buffalo farmers was VAS/Livestock assistant (Department of Animal husbandry), followed
by K.V.K personnel (75.00%) and A.O (Department of agriculture) (72.50%). Although,
only 4.17 per cent buffalo farmers considered milk union supervisors as their extension
contact (Fig. 22). The probable reason for this might be the absence of milk unions in the
sample area or unawareness about their existence amongst the farmers.
Table 4.15: Distribution of respondents according to different extension contacts

used

EXTENSION CONTACT
1. Department of Animal Husbandry 118 98.33
(VAS/Livestock Assistant)
2. Department of Agriculture (AO) 87 72.50
3. Scientists from State/Central Universities 19 15.83
4. Private input dealers 77 64.17
5. KVK personnel 90 75.00
6. Progressive dairy farmers 85 70.83
7. Milk union supervisors 5 4.17
8. Others 1 0.83
57
118
120
98.33
100 90
87 85
77
75
80 72.5 70.83
64.17
60
40
19
15.83
20
5 4.17 1 0.83
0
VAS AO Scientists Private input KVK Progressive Milk union Others
from dealers personnel dairy farmers supervisors
Universities
Fig. 22: Distribution of respondents according to different extension contacts used
4.1.13 Cosmopoliteness-Localitenss
Cosmopoliteness-Localitenss of the buffalo farmers was studied under two

headings i.e., personal localite and personal cosmopolite. Personal cosmopolite was further
categorized into four categories which included single window system, panchayat samiti,
university and bank.
The average cosmopoliteness-localiteness of the buffalo farmers in the study was

around 11.23 ± 0.25 indicating medium level of cosmopoliteness and localiteness. For
mean ± standard deviation viz. low (less than 9), medium (10-13) and high ( more than
14). Table 4.16 revealed that majority of the buffalo farmers (51.67%) had medium level
cosmopoliteness-localitenss, 32.50 per cent respondents had low and 15.83 per cent
buffalo farmers had high level of cosmopoliteness-localitenss (Fig. 23).
58
Table 4.16: Distribution of respondents according to cosmopoliteness-localiteness
COSMOPOLITENESS-
S.NO FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
LOCALITENESS
1. Low (≤ 9) 39 32.50
2. Medium (10-13) 62 51.67
3. High (≥14) 19 15.83
Mean ± S.E = 11.23 ± 0.25

Mean ± S.D = 11.23 ± 2.75
51.67% 15.83%
32.50%
LOW ( ≤9) MEDIUM (10-13) HIGH (≥14)
Fig. 23: Distribution of respondents according to cosmopoliteness-localiteness
(a) Personal localite
The results presented in table 4.17 revealed that all the buffalo farmers (100.00%)
‘Always’ sought information from family, friends and relatives and neighbours, 60.00 per
cent ‘occasionally’ sought information from the progressive farmers and 97.50 per cent
of the buffalo farmers ‘never’ sought information from religious head (Fig. 24).
59
(b) Personal cosmopolite
The data regarding single window is presented in table 4.17 which revealed that
most of the buffalo farmers (85.00 %) ‘occasionally’ visited veterinary doctor, 52.50 per
cent ‘occasionally’ sought information from agri-input dealers however, none of the
buffalo farmers sought information from personnel of voluntary organisation.
The results regarding Panchayat samiti revealed that most of the buffalo farmers
(39.17%) ‘occasionally’ sought information for Gram sevak while none of the them
sought information from the rural development officer about buffalo rearing practices
(Fig. 25).
The results in table 4.17 also revealed that under university (personal
cosmopolite), most of the buffalo farmers (95.00%) ‘never’ sought information from
scientists directly and 17.50 per cent respondents ‘occasionally’ sought information from
livestock assistant.
Information seeking from the bank by the farmers is reported in table 4.17.
Results revealed that 14.17 per cent buffalo farmers ‘occasionally’ sought information
from branch officer whereas none of them sought credit related information from a
veterinary officer of bank. This may be due to inadequate veterinary officers in
agricultural banks and lack of channels to reach the officers.
TABLE 4.17: Distribution of respondents according to the use of different sources

of cosmopoliteness-localiteness
S. COSMOPOLITENESS- ALWAYS OCCASIONAL NEVER

NO. LOCALITENESS FREQ % FREQ % FREQ %
Personal Localite
1. Family 120 100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
2. Friends and relatives 120 100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
3. Progressive farmers 39 32.50 72 60.00 9 7.50
4. Neighbors 120 100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
5. Technical persons 0 0.00 45 37.50 75 62.50
60
6. Village leader 0 0.00 64 53.33 56 46.67

7. Religious head 0 0.00 3 2.50 117 97.50
8. Veterinary/ agriculture 0 0.00 20 16.67 100 83.33
student
B. Personal Cosmopolite
1. Single Window System
a) Veterinary officer/doctor 0 0.00 102 85.00 18 15.00
b) Private medicine dealer 0 0.00 49 40.83 71 59.17
c) Milk cooperative society 0 0.00 3 2.50 117 97.50
d) Personnel of voluntary 0 0.00 0 0.00 120 100.00
organizations
e) Agri-Input dealers 1 0.83 63 52.50 56 46.67
2. Panchayat samiti
a) Gram sevak 0 0 47 39.17 73 60.83
b) Rural development 0 0.00 0 0.00 120 100.00
officer
c) Agriculture extension 0 0.00 8 6.67 112 93.33
officer
d) Block development 0 0.00 23 19.17 97 80.83
officer
3. University
a) Livestock assistant 0 0.00 21 17.50 99 82.50
b) Subject matter Specialist 0 0.00 12 10.00 108 90.00
c) Scientist 0 0.00 6 5.00 114 95.00
4. Bank
a) Agriculture officer 0 0.00 1 0.83 119 99.17
b) Veterinary officer 0 0.00 0 0 120 100.00
c) Branch officer 0 0.00 17 14.17 103 85.83
d) Branch manager 0 0.00 2 1.67 118 98.33
61
120 120 120 117

120 100
100
72 75
80 64
56
60 45
39
40 20
9
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
0
ALWAYS OCCASIONAL RARELY
Fig. 24: Distribution of respondents according to Personal localite
117 120 120 112 114 119 120 118

120 108
102 99 103
97
100
80 71 73
63
56
60 49 47
40
23 21
18 12 17
20 8 6 1 2
0 0 0 3 00 1 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0
0
ALWAYS OCCASIONAL RARELY
Fig. 25: Distribution of respondents according Personal cosmopolite
Information is a basic necessity of everyday life, required for anything and

everything. It can be obtained or retrieved from a variety of sources. Information needs
are the needs that are required to fill the gap existing in the knowledge and understanding
related to it. In this reference, an attempt was made to identify and assess the information
62
needs of the buffalo farmers. A schedule used for measuring the information needs of the
buffalo farmers was developed containing 13, 15, 17, 10 and 15 statements in housing
and management, feeding and nutrition, breeding and reproduction, health care practices
and farm credit and marketing respectively.
Results in the table 4.18 revealed the overall rank of information needs of buffalo
farmers in five major areas i.e. housing and management, feeding and nutrition, breeding
and reproduction, health care practices and farm credit and marketing. It is evident that
the most needed information was about farm credit and marketing (36.75 WMS)
followed by breeding and reproduction (34.07 WMS), whereas least needed information
by buffalo farmers was about health care practices (19.25 WMS) (Fig. 26).
Table 4.18: Distribution of buffalo farmers on the basis of overall information needs
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY TOTAL WEIGHTED

S.NO. RANK
PRACTICES SCORE MEAN SCORE
1. Housing and management 2542 28.18 III
2. Feeding and nutrition 3218 26.82 IV
3. Breeding and reproduction 4088 34.07 II
4. Health care practices 2310 19.25 V
5. Farm credit and marketing 4410 36.75 I
36.61
40
35
30 24.67
MEAN SCORE
25 19.42
15.34
20 13.94
15
10
5
0
Housing and Feeding and Breeding and Health care Farm credit
management nutrition reproduction practices and marketing
Fig. 26: Distribution of buffalo farmers on the basis of overall information needs
63
4.2.1 Level of information needs of the buffalo farmers
The average level of information needs of the buffalo farmers was found out to be
138.07 ± 1.07 which indicated that most of the buffalo farmers had medium level of
information need. For appropriate analysis, buffalo farmers were categorized into three
groups on the basis of mean ± standard deviation viz. low (less than 127), medium (127-
149) and high (more than 149). Table 4.19 revealed that most of the buffalo farmers
(80.00%) had medium level of information needs, 11.67 per cent had high and 8.33 per
cent buffalo farmers had low level of information need regarding buffalo rearing
practices (Fig. 27).
Table 4.19: Distribution of respondents on the basis of level of information needs
1. Low (<127) 10 8.33
2. Medium (127-149) 96 80.00
3. High (>149) 14 11.67
Mean± SE = 138.07±1.07
Mean± SD = 138.07±11.73
120
96
100 80
80
60
40
10 14 11.67
20 8.33
0
LOW (<127) MEDIUM (129-149) HIGH (>149)
Fig. 27: Distribution of respondents on the basis of level of information needs

64
4.2.2 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to housing and management
The information needs of buffalo farmers related to housing and management

were accessed by dividing them into thirteen different practices. The results in table 4.20
revealed that information regarding both dung disposal and manure utilization were ‘most
needed’ by majority of the buffalo farmers (32.50%) followed by care of new born calf
(16.70%). Information regarding milk testing techniques (normal and mastitic milk) was
‘needed’ by majority of the buffalo farmers (80.80 %) followed by care of buffalos
(before, during and after parturition) (63.30 %) whereas, ‘least needed’ information for
84.20 per cent buffalo farmers was regarding maintenance of farm records (Fig. 28).
Table 4.20: Distribution of respondents on the basis of Information needs related to

MOST LEAST
S. NEEDED(2)
INFORMATION ABOUT NEEDED(3) NEEDED(1)
NO.
FREQ % FREQ % FREQ %
1. Scientific and low cost animal 2 1.70 43 35.80 75 62.50
shed preparation
2. Aeration or ventilation in shed. 2 1.70 40 33.33 78 65.00
3. Summer and winter management 2 1.70 35 29.20 83 69.20
of buffalos.
4. Care of buffaloes (before, during 18 15.00 76 63.30 26 21.70
and after parturition).
5. Care of new born calf 20 16.70 68 56.70 32 26.70
(dehorning, weaning and
castration).
6. Clean milk production 0 0.00 54 45.00 66 55.00
7. Milking techniques (Best 0 0.00 35 29.20 85 70.80
Milking method and Best Time
of milking)
8. Milk testing techniques (Normal 20 16.70 97 80.80 3 2.50
and mastitic milk)
9. Preservation of milk 17 14.20 63 52.50 40 33.30
10. Dung disposal. 39 32.50 30 25.00 51 42.50
11. Manure utilization 39 32.50 29 24.20 52 43.30
12. Cleaning and sanitization of 4 3.30 67 55.80 49 40.80
shed.
13. Maintenance of farm records. 0 0.00 19 15.80 101 84.20
65
120
101
100 97
85
83
75 78 76
80 68 66 67
63
51 52
60 54
49
43 40 30 29
40 39 39
40 35 32 35
26
20 20 17
18 19
20
2 2 2 3 4
0 0 0
0
MOST NEEDED NEEDED LEAST NEEDED
Fig. 28: Distribution of respondents on the basis of Information needs related to

4.2.3 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to feeding and nutrition
The information needs of buffalo farmers related to feeding and nutrition were
accessed by dividing them into fifteen different practices. The results in table 4.21
revealed that information regarding feeding of new born calf was ‘most needed’ by
majority of buffalo farmers (31.70%) followed by feeding of sick buffalos (28.30%).
Information regarding nutrition management of breeding buffalos was ‘needed’ by 80.80
per cent buffalo farmers followed by feeding of urea molasses block (78.30%) whereas,
the ‘least needed’ information for majority of buffalo farmers (74.20%) was regarding
importance of clean feeding and watering (Fig. 29).
66

MOST LEAST
S. NEEDED (2)
INFORMATION ABOUT NEEDED (3) NEEDED (1)
NO.
1. Feeding according to age, sex, 11 9.20 51 42.50 58 48.30

weight
2. Concentrate feeding 2 1.70 59 49.20 59 49.20
3. Mineral mixture 15 12.50 69 57.50 36 30.00

supplementation
4. Enrichment of poor quality 29 24.20 73 60.80 18 15.00

roughage and its storage.
5. Preparation of economical and 8 6.70 59 49.20 53 44.20

balanced ration
6. Feeding of urea molasses block. 6 5.00 94 78.30 20 16.70
7. Importance of salt in feed 3 2.50 41 34.20 76 63.30
8. Importance of colostrum 15 12.50 75 62.50 30 25.00

feeding
9. Importance of clean feeding 10 8.30 21 17.50 89 74.20

and watering
10. Fodder production for buffalos 4 3.30 33 27.50 83 69.20
11. Nutrition management of 11 9.20 97 80.80 12 10.00

breeding buffalo.
12. Feeding of pregnant buffalo 26 21.70 77 64.20 17 14.20
13. Feeding of lactating buffalo 31 25.80 72 60.00 17 14.20
14. Feeding of new born calf. 38 31.70 43 35.80 39 32.50
15. Feeding of sick buffalo. 34 28.30 68 56.70 18 15.00

67
120
94 97
100 89
83
77
80 73 76 75
69 72
59 68
58 59 59
43
60 51 53
36 41 39
38
40 29 30
33
26 31 34
18 20 15 21 17 18
15 17
20 11 8 6 10 11 12
2 3 4
0

4.2.4 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to breeding and reproduction
The information needs of buffalo farmers related to breeding and reproduction

were accessed by dividing them into seventeen different practices. The results in table
4.22 revealed that information regarding venereal diseases was ‘most needed’ by majority
of buffalo farmers (84.20%) followed by silent heat (54.20%). Information regarding
practice of reducing chance of repeat breeding and anestrus was ‘needed’ by 80.00 per
cent of the buffalo farmers followed by peripartum care and management (74.20%),
whereas, ‘least needed’ information for majority of buffalo farmers (68.30%) was
regarding pregnancy diagnosis and service after calving (Fig. 30).
68

MOST LEAST
S. NEEDED(2)
NO.
1. Breed selection 15 12.50 68 56.70 37 30.80
2. Breeding age and weight 13 10.80 79 65.80 28 23.30
3. Selection of parent stock and 4 3.30 57 47.50 59 49.20

breeding strategy
4. Care of breeding bull. 2 1.70 41 34.20 77 64.20
5. Indigenous breeds of the 57 47.50 47 39.20 16 13.30

region.
6. Advantages of crossbred over 50 41.70 54 45.00 16 13.33

indigenous breed.
7. Heat detection and correct 0 0.00 46 38.30 74 61.70

time of mating.
8. Pregnancy diagnosis 2 1.70 36 30.00 82 68.30
9. Service after calving 1 0.80 37 30.80 82 68.30
10. Practice of reducing chance of 22 18.30 96 80.00 2 1.70

repeat breeding and anestrus.
11. Delayed puberty 58 48.30 52 13.30 10 8.30
12. Silent heat 65 54.20 53 44.20 2 1.70
13. Venereal diseases 101 84.20 18 15.00 1 0.80
14. Peripartum care and 15 12.50 89 74.20 16 13.30

management.
15. Artificial insemination in 65 54.20 35 29.20 20 16.70

buffalo with improved
germplasm.
16. Infertility problems 57 47.50 60 50.00 3 2.50
17. AI centers nearby 40 33.30 46 38.30 34 28.30

69
120
96 101
100 82 82 89
79
77 74
80 68
59 65 65
57 54 58 60
57 57
60 47 50 52 53 46
41 46
37 36 37 35 40
40 34
28
22 18 20
15 13 16 16 10 15 16
20 4 2 2 2 2 3
0 1 1
0

4.2.5 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to health care practices
The information needs of buffalo farmers related to health care practices were
accessed by dividing them into ten different practices. The results in table 4.23 revealed
that information regarding common zoonotic diseases was ‘most needed’ by majority of
buffalo farmers (90.80%) followed by deficiency diseases of animals and their symptoms
(90.00%). Information regarding isolation of diseased animals and reporting same to the
vet was ‘needed’ by 67.50 per cent of the buffalo farmers followed by first aid treatment
(42.50%) whereas, ‘least needed’ information for majority of buffalo farmers (78.30%)
was regarding signs of common diseases of buffalo (Fig 31).
70

MOST LEAST
S. NEEDED(2)
NO.
1. Signs of common diseases of 5 4.20 21 17.50 94 78.30
buffalo
2. Precautions when animal is 7 5.80 39 32.50 74 61.70
sick.
3. Information about the common 109 90.80 9 7.50 2 1.70
zoonotic diseases.
4. Deworming schedule 14 11.70 42 35.00 64 53.30
5. Vaccination schedule. 14 11.70 33 27.50 73 60.80
6. Diagnosis of contagious 88 73.30 31 25.80 1 0.80
diseases and their treatment
7. First aid treatment 11 9.20 51 42.50 58 48.30
8. Deficiency diseases of animals 108 90.00 11 9.20 1 0.80
and their symptoms.
9. Isolation of diseased animals 3 2.50 81 67.50 36 30.00
and reporting same to the vet
10. Proper disposal of dead carcass. 22 18.30 30 25.00 68 56.70
120 109 108

94
100 88
81
74 73
80 64 68
58
60 51
39 42 36
33 30
40 31
21 22
14 14 11 11
20 7 9
5 2 1 1 3
0

71
4.2.6 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to farm credit and marketing
The information needs of buffalo farmers related to farm credit and marketing
were accessed by dividing them into fifteen different practices. The results in table 4.24
revealed that information regarding subsidies was ‘most needed’ by majority of buffalo
farmers (92.50%) followed by government schemes (90.80%). Information about demand
and supply of the products in market was ‘needed’ by 72.50 per cent buffalo farmers
followed by marketing of milk and milk products (57.50%), whereas, ‘least needed’
information for majority of buffalo farmers (65.00%) was regarding value addition of
milk (Fig. 32).

MOST LEAST
S. NEEDED(2)
NO.
1. Information about credit 109 90.80 11 9.20 0 0.00
facilities.
2. Information about institutional 109 90.80 10 8.30 1 0.80
and non institutional loans.
3. Information about Farmer 73 60.80 40 33.30 7 5.80
producer organization (FPO)
and it’s benefits.
4. Mode of disbursement 98 81.70 21 17.50 1 0.80
5. Information about government 109 90.80 11 9.20 0 0.00
schemes
6. Information about subsidies. 111 92.50 9 7.50 0 0.00
7. Information about investments. 81 67.50 37 30.80 2 1.70
8. Information of local market. 19 15.80 47 39.20 54 45.00
9. Insurance of animal. 100 83.30 17 14.20 3 2.50
10. Information regarding Pashu 64 53.30 43 35.80 13 10.80
kisan credit card.
Information about demand and 22 18.30 87 72.50 11 9.20
11. supply of the products in
market.
12. Information about value 14 11.70 28 23.30 78 65.00
addition of milk.
13. Marketing of milk and milk 16 13.30 69 57.50 35 29.20
products.
14. Selling milk through 35 29.20 59 49.20 26 21.70
cooperatives
15. Purchasing animals from 85 70.80 31 25.80 4 3.30
reliable sources
72
120 109 109 109 111

98 100
100 87 85
81 78
73
80 69
64 59
54
60 47
40 37 43 35
40 28 35 31
21 26
19 22 14
11 11 17 16
20 10 7 9 13 11
0 1 1 0 0 2 3 4
0

The correlation estimates between the dependent (information need of the buffalo
farmer) and independent variables (socio-economic status) are presented in table 4.25.
The table revealed that age, education, family size, herd size, total income, social
participation, mass media and extension contact were negatively and non-significantly
correlated with overall information needs of the farmers. Furthermore, it was seen that
family type and cosmopoliteness-localiteness had positive but non-significant
relationship with information need of buffalo farmers. While land holding, occupation,
income from animal husbandry were negatively and significantly correlated with
information needs of buffalo farmers.
73
Table 4.25: Relationship between independent variables and information need of

buffalo farmers
CORRELATION
S.NO INDEPENDENT VARIABLE COEFFICIENT OF
INFORMATIONT NEED
1. Age -0.37
2. Education -0.100
3. Family Type 0.098
4. Family Size -0.039
5. Land Holding -0.270**
6. Herd Size -0.106
7. Occupation -0.184*
8. Income From Animal Husbandry -0.204*
9. Total Income -0.177
10. Social Participation -0.166
11. Mass Media -0.018
12. Extension Contact -0.117
13. Cosmopoliteness- Localiteness 0.004
*Significant at 0.05 level of probability

**Significant at 0.01 level of probability

dependence used by the buffalo farmers
Information dissemination about the buffalo rearing practices among the farmers
is a necessity, but to deliver information throughout the country is a huge task. Correct
information delivery at right time to the farmers lead to success of improved practices or
innovations. Although, there are many sources and channels of information through
which farmers become aware of the new innovations and technologies but in some cases
they are not accessible by the farmers which ultimately results in poor response towards
74
the new innovations by the farmers. Therefore, a need to identify different sources and
channels of information available to buffalo farmers was felt.
4.3.1 Sources of Information
Table 4.26 reported that majority of the buffalo farmer (96.70%) ‘Always’
considered friends and relatives as their source of information whereas, 3.30 per cent
contact them ‘sometimes’. So, it can be concluded that easy accessibility and trust
amongst them, made friends and relatives, one of the most important sources of
information for the buffalo farmers.
It was further seen that majority of buffalo farmers (91.70%) ‘Always’ considered
neighbors as their source of information whereas, 7.50 per cent contact them ‘sometimes’
for information. So, it can be concluded that neighbors were frequently contacted by the
farmers. In many cases it was seen that friends and relatives were neighbors itself (Fig.
33).
It was also reported that majority of buffalo farmers (86.70%) ‘sometimes’

considered veterinary assistant surgeon as their source of information while 13.30 per
cent ‘rarely’ visited them (table 4.26). So, it can be concluded that veterinary assistant
surgeons were an important and key source of information for buffalo farmers as they
have expertise in this field and provide first hand information to the farmers.
It was further reported that majority of buffalo farmers (98.30%) ‘rarely’

contacted co-operative personnel for information while 1.70 per cent contacted them
‘sometimes’. So it can be inferred that either there were no co-operatives in the sample
area or the respondents did not consider co-operative personnel as a reliable source of
information (Fig. 33).
75
Table 4.26: Distribution of respondents on the basis of sources of information
S. SOURCES OF ALWAYS(3) SOMETIMES(2) RARELY(1)

NO. INFORMATION FREQ % FREQ % FREQ %
1. Veterinary assistant 0 0.00 104 86.70 16 13.30
surgeon
2. Agriculture officer 0 0.00 51 42.50 69 57.50
3. Livestock assistant 0 0.00 26 21.70 94 78.30
4. Extension officer 0 0.00 15 12.50 105 87.50
5. Progressive livestock 13 10.80 64 53.33 43 35.80
owners
6. Local leader 0 0.00 99 82.50 21 17.50
7. Panchayat member 0 0.00 89 74.20 31 25.80
8. Co-operative personnel 0 0.00 2 1.70 118 98.30
9. Neighbors 110 91.70 9 7.50 1 0.80
10. Friends 116 96.70 4 3.30 0 0.00
11. Relatives 116 96.70 4 3.30 0 0.00
12. Subject Matter 0 0.00 12 10.00 108 90.00
Specialists/ Scientists
13. Others 0 0.00 1 0.80 119 99.20
118 110 116 116 119

120 104 105 108
99
94 89
100
80 69 64
51
60 43
40 26 31
16 15 21 12
13 9
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 1 4 4 0 01
0
ALWAYS(3) SOMETIMES(2) RARELY(1)
Fig. 33: Distribution of respondents on the basis of sources of information

76
The correlation estimates between the dependent (source of information) and

independent variables (socio-economic status) are presented in table 4.27. It revealed that
family size, land holding, herd size, total income and social participation were negatively
and non-significantly correlated with source of information of buffalo farmers. It was
also seen that age, education, family type, mass media, extension contact and
cosmopoliteness-localiteness had positive but non-significant relationship with source of
information. On the other hand, occupation was positively and significantly related
whereas, income from animal husbandry was negatively and significantly related with the
source of information.
Table 4.27: Relationship between independent variables and sources of information

of buffalo farmers
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
S.NO. INDEPENDENT VARIABLE OF SOURCES OF
INFORMATION
1. Age 0.045
2. Education 0.051
5. Land Holding -0.005
6. Herd Size -0.166
7. Occupation 0.187*
8. Income from Animal Husbandry -0.204*
11. Mass Media 0.043
12. Extension Contact 0.175

77
4.3.2 Channels of Information
Different channels of information were used by the farmers to acquire information

about buffalo rearing practices and new innovations to improve productivity of animals
and their profit. In the study it was reported that majority of the buffalo farmers (78.30%)
‘always’ used mobile phone, 13.30 per cent used it ‘rarely’ and was ‘sometimes’ used by
8.30 percent buffalo farmers. It was further reported that 69.20 per cent respondents
‘always’ watched television, 27.50 per cent watched it ‘sometimes’ and was ‘rarely’
watched by 3.30 per cent buffalo farmers (table 4.28). In the other words, it could be
concluded that mobile phones and television were preferably used as channels of
information by the buffalo farmers.
Table 4.28 also revealed that majority of the buffalo farmers (83.30%)
‘sometimes’ visited veterinary hospital while 16.70 per cent ‘rarely’ visited it. It was also
seen that 50.80 per cent buffalo farmers ‘sometimes’ visited ‘KVK’ whereas, 49.20 per
cent ‘rarely’ visited it for seeking information. So it could be inferred that, veterinary
hospitals and KVKs were ‘sometimes’ visited by the buffalo farmers for seeking
information.
Furthermore, it was reported that, none of the buffalo farmers considerd

‘documentary’, ‘folk media’ and ‘demonstrations’ as their channel of information. These
were the most rarely used channels by the buffalo farmers and thus it could be interpreted
that farmers were never exposed to these channels due to lack of awareness (Fig. 34).
78
Table 4.28: Distribution of respondents on the basis of channels of information
S. CHANNELS OF ALWAYS (3) SOMETIMES (2) RARELY (1)

NO. INFORMATION FREQ % FREQ % FREQ %
1. Radio 16 13.30 41 34.20 63 52.50
2. Television 83 69.20 33 27.50 4 3.30
3. Mobile phone 94 78.30 10 8.30 16 13.30
4. Internet 67 55.80 15 12.50 38 31.70
5. Veterinary hospital 0 0.00 100 83.30 20 16.70
6. State/Centre University 0 0.00 24 20.00 96 80.00
7. Krishi Vigyan Kendra 0 0.00 61 50.80 59 49.20
(KVK)
8. Field trips/field visits 0 0.00 29 24.20 91 75.80
9. Newspaper/Magazine 1 0.80 36 30.00 83 69.20
10. Farm Publications 0 0.00 2 1.70 118 98.30
11. Short film 0 0.00 1 0.80 119 99.20
12. Documentary 0 0.00 0 0.00 120 100.00
13. Folk media (Puppet 0 0.00 0 0.00 120 100.00
show, drama etc.)
14. Exhibition 0 0.00 1 0.80 119 99.20
15. Demonstrations 0 0.00 0 0.00 120 100.00
16. Trainings 0 0 3 2.50 117 97.50
17. Others 0 0.00 0 0.00 120 100.00
118 119 120 120 119 120 117 120

120
100 96
94
100 83 91 83
80 67
63 61
59
60 38
41 15 36
40 33
16 24 29
16 10 20
20 4 0 0 0 0 1 02 0 1 00 00 01 00 03 00
0
ALWAYS(3) SOMETIMES(2) RARELY(1)
Fig. 34: Distribution of respondents on the basis of channels of information

79
The correlation estimates between the dependent (channel of information) and

independent variables (socio-economic status) are presented in table 4.29. It revealed that
age, family size, herd size, income from animal husbandry, total income and social
participation were negatively and non-significantly associated with channels of
information used by farmers. It was also seen that, family type, land holding, occupation
and cosmopoliteness-localiteness had positive but non-significant relationship with
channels of information. On the other hand, education, mass media and extension contact
were positively and significantly associated with channels of information used by
farmers.
Table 4.29: Relationship between independent variables and channels of

CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
S.NO. INDEPENDENT VARIABLE OF CHANNELS OF
INFORMATION
1. Age -0.197
2. Education 0.284**
5. Land Holding 0.091
6. Herd Size -0.144
7. Occupation 0.073
8. Income From Animal Husbandry -0.094
11. Mass Media 0.571**
12. Extension Contact 0.223*

80
4.4 Mobile application developed for better and fast information dissemination
and to promote better rearing of buffaloes
One of the objectives of the present study was to develop a mobile application for
better and fast information dissemination and to promote better rearing of buffaloes. The
present study identified the information needs of the buffalo farmers and based up on the
findings, a farmer friendly buffalo information android app named ‘BUFFINFO’ was
developed, which focused on providing better and quick information to the farmers to
improve their rearing practices. The contents of the app were available in English as well
as Hindi language. The app provided basic and advanced information along with pictorial
representation about five major buffalo rearing practices namely, ‘Housing and General
Management’, ‘Feeding and Nutrition’, ‘Breeding and Reproduction’, ‘Health care
practices’ and ‘Farm credit and Marketing’. Different important aspects were covered
under each category to enhance the knowledge of the app user. Under ‘housing and
general management’ different categories were the housing plan, housing of buffalo,
buffalo calves, buffalo bull, care of calves and pregnant buffalo, clean milk production,
cleaning and sanitization of shed, daily farm routine and methods of dung disposal and
manure utilization. Different categories under ‘Feeding and nutrition’ included
formulation of balanced ration for buffalo, feeding of calf, feeding of milching buffalo,
feeding of dry buffalo, hay and silage making, colustrum feeding, nutrient inclusion and
salt and urea molasses block. Similarly ‘Breeding and reproduction’ was categorised into
important buffalo breeds, breeding guidelines, signs of heat, pregnancy diagnosis in
buffalo, peripartum care and management, reproductive problems, artificial insemination
and breeding policy. Under ‘Health care practices’ the farmer (app user) would get
information about basics of health care, major infectious diseases, zoonotic diseases,
parasitic and metabolic diseases, first aid in case of emergency, vaccination and
deworming schedule, normal parameters of healthy buffalo and need and methods of
carcass disposal. As information need of majority of buffalo farmers fell under the
category of ‘farm credit and marketing’, the app provided information about Government
schemes for dairy farmers, insurance schemes of animal, FPOs and their benefits to
farmer, schemes for loan to livestock owners, Pashu kisan credit card, value addition of
milk and reliable sources for purchasing buffalos. This informative, user friendly, easily
81
accessible app would be regularly updated to elevate the knowledge of the buffalo rearing
farmers.
4.5 Constraints of assessing the information needs of the buffalo farmers
Constraints limit the range of a person’s actions. In the study, it was

operationalised as certain irresistible forces that acted as hindrance in delivery of
information of buffalo rearing practices, as perceived by the farmers. The schedule used
for measuring the constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the information
contained 12 general constraints, 10 constraints in housing and management, 9
constraints in feeding and nutrition, 10 constraints in breeding and reproduction, 12
constraints in health care practices and 12 constraints in farm credit and marketing.
Results in table 4.30 revealed the overall rank in six major areas viz. general constraints,
housing and management, feeding and nutrition, breeding and reproduction, health care
practices and farm credit and marketing. It is evident from the table 4.30 that farm credit
and marketing constraints were perceived as most serious (81.37 MPS) followed by
breeding and reproduction constraints (66.53 MPS), whereas feeding and nutrition
constraints were perceived as least serious (55.49 MPS) by the buffalo farmers (Fig. 35).
Table 4.30: Overall constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the

MPS (TOTAL SCORE /

TOTAL MEAN± STD
CONSTRAINTS MAXIMUM RANK
SCORE ERROR
SCORE)100
GENERAL 2561 21.34±0.26 59.28 IV
CONSTRAINTS
HOUSING AND 2060 17.17±0.22 57.22 V
MANAGEMENT
FEEDIND AND 1798 14.98±0.29 55.49 VI
NUTRITION
BREEDING AND 2395 19.95±0.22 66.53 II
REPRODUCTION
HEALTH CARE 2714 22.62±0.25 62.82 III
PRACTICES
FARM CREDIT AND 3515 29.29±0.25 81.37 I
MARKETING
82
100 81.37
80 66.53 62.82
59.28 57.22 55.49
60
40
20
MPS
Fig. 35: Constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the information

about different areas of buffalo rearing practices
The item wise scores of the constraints have been presented in tabulated form
(table 4.31). Amongst all the different areas of buffalo rearing practices, the overall most
serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘absence of FPOs in village’
(MPS 99.722) with Rank 1 followed by ‘unawareness about animal insurance scheme’
(MPS 97.222) with Rank 2 and ‘lack of information about government schemes for the
farmers’ (MPS 96.944) with Rank 3. On the other hand, the overall least serious
constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘language barrier’ (MPS 36.111) with
Rank 65 followed by ‘non availability of transport facility for timely sale of milk’ (MPS
36.667) with Rank 64 and ‘lack of information about keeping up to date management
records’ (MPS 37.50) with Rank 63 (table 4.31).
In general constraints, the most serious constraint perceived by the buffalo

farmers was ‘lack of training of farmers’ (MPS 86.389) with Rank I, followed by
‘inefficient extension personnel’ (MPS 83.333) with Rank II whereas, the least serious
constraint perceived was ‘language barrier’ (MPS 36.111) with Rank XII (Fig. 36).
83
In case of housing and management constraints, the most serious constraint

perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘lack of information about antibiotics in milk and
their ill effects to human population’ (MPS 93.889) with Rank I followed by ‘non
availability of milk testing centres’ (MPS 70.00) with Rank II. The least serious
constraint perceived by the farmers was ‘non availability of transport facility for timely
sale of milk’ (MPS 36.667) with Rank X (Fig. 4.37).
In case of feeding and nutrition constraints, the most serious constraint perceived
by the buffalo farmers was ‘high cost and lack of information about availability of
mineral mixture/ UMMB’ (MPS 65.833) with Rank I followed by ‘lack of information
about the utilization of roughage and concentrate’ (MPS 63.056) with Rank II. On the
other hand, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘non-
availability of green and dry fodder’ (MPS 38.056) with Rank IX (Fig. 38).
In case of breeding and reproduction constraints, the most serious constraint

perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘high charges by staff for doing A.I in animals’
(MPS 94.167) with Rank I followed by ‘lack of information about the nearby AI centres’
(MPS 91.389) with Rank II whereas, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo
farmers was ‘lack of information about proper time of mating/ insemination after heat’
(MPS 39.722) with Rank X (Fig. 39).
In case of health care practices constraints, the most serious constraint perceived
by the buffalo farmers was ‘high cost of allopathic veterinary medicines and veterinary
consultation’ (MPS 96.667) with Rank I followed by ‘lack of information about
supplementation in case of deficiency diseases’ (MPS 92.222) with Rank II. On the other
hand, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘lack of
information about signs of common diseases’ (MPS 39.722) with Rank XII (Fig. 40).
In case of farm credit and marketing constraints, the most serious constraint
perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘absence of FPOs in village’ (MPS 99.722) with
Rank I followed by ‘unawareness about animal insurance scheme’ (MPS 97.222) with
Rank II whereas, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘lack
of information on value addition of milk’ (MPS 44.722) with Rank XII (Fig. 41).
84
Table 4.31: Item wise scores of constraints perceived by farmers in accessing the
MPS (total score/

Total Mean ± Std Overall
CONSTRAINTS maximum Rank
score error Rank
score)100
GENERAL CONSTRAINTS
Lack of awareness about 238 1.983±0.037 66.111 V 26
information delivery.
Poor financial condition to 195 1.625±0.065 54.167 VII 43
access information.
Lower literacy rate. 182 1.517±0.059 50.556 VIII 47
Inefficient extension personnel 300 2.5±0.054 83.333 II 17
Language barrier 130 1.083±0.025 36.111 XII 65
Lack of buffalo specific 153 1.275±0.041 42.500 IX 56
information and excess of
unrelated information
Lack of infrastructure 149 1.242±0.039 41.389 X 58
(electricity/transport)
Lack of communication 137 1.142±0.032 38.056 XI 61
facilities and technology
(mobile/computer)
Pre conceived notion that 270 2.25±0.064 75.000 III 20
traditional method is better than
sustainable method.
Long distance from information 228 1.9±0.040 63.333 VI 29
centres.
Lack of interest of young 268 2.233±0.061 74.444 IV 21
generation in animal rearing.
Lack of training of farmers. 311 2.592±0.051 86.389 I 15
HOUSING AND MANAGEMENT
Lack of finance for dairy 209 1.742±0.047 58.056 V 37
management practices.
Lack of information about 135 10125±0.030 37.500 IX 63
keeping up to date management
records.
Lack of information about new 213 1.775±0.055 59.167 IV 34
born calf management.
Lack of information about 180 1.5±0.049 50.000 VII 48
importance of sanitation and
hygiene
Lack of information about clean 163 1.358±0.049 45.278 VIII 53
milking practices.
Lack of information about the 203 1.692±0.059 56.389 VI 40
milk preservation.
85
Non availability of transport 132 1.1±0.03 36.667 X 64

facility for timely sale of milk.
Lack of information about 338 2.817±0.037 93.889 I 6
antibiotics in milk and their ill
effects to human population
Non availability of milk testing 252 2.1±0.046 70.000 II 24
centres.
Lack of infrastructure and 235 1.958±0.072 65.278 III 28
information about manure
utilisation.
FEEDING AND NUTRITION
Non-availability of green and 137 1.142±0.032 38.056 IX 62
dry fodder.
Lack of information about 188 1.567±0.053 52.222 VI 45
preparation of economical and
balanced ration
High cost and lack of 237 1.975±0.043 65.833 I 27
information about availability of
mineral mixture/ UMMB.
Lack of information about 180 1.5±0.053 50.000 VII 49
preservation of fodder.
Lack of information about 169 1.408±0.06 46.944 VIII 51
feeding according to age, sex,
weight
Lack of information about the 227 1.892±0.049 63.056 II 30
utilization of roughage and
concentrate.
Lack of information about 212 1.767±0.073 58.889 V 35
feeding of new born calves.
Lack of information about 225 1.875±0.052 62.500 III 32
nutrition management of
breeding animal.
Lack of information about 223 1.858±0.049 61.944 IV 33
feeding during different stages
of reproductive life of buffalo
BREEDING AND REPRODUCTION
Non- availability of superior 259 2.158±0.07 71.944 VI 23
bulls for mating.
Lack of information about A.I. 284 2.364±0.068 78.889 IV 18
method and perceiving it as an
unnatural process.
Lack of information about the 329 2.742±0.043 91.389 II 10
nearby AI centres
Non availability of doctors and 156 1.3±0.051 43.333 IX 55
professionals at AI centre.
86
High charges by staff for doing 339 2.825±0.037 94.167 I 5

A.I in animals.
Lack of information about 143 1.192±0.045 39.722 X 59
proper time of mating/
insemination after heat.
grading up technique for herd
improvement.
Lack of information about the 275 2.292±0.065 76.389 V 19
indigenous breeds
Lack of information about 167 1.392±0.049 46.389 VIII 52
detection of heat signs in
animals.
Lack of information about the 212 1.767±0.045 58.889 VII 36
precautions of abortion and
repeat breeding in buffalos
HEALTH CARE PRACTICES
Lack of information about signs 143 1.192±0.045 39.722 XII 60
of common diseases disease
Lack of information about the 323 2.714±0.046 89.722 III 12
common zoonotic diseases.
Unawareness about importance 191 1.592±0.061 53.056 IX 44
of deworming and vaccination
in buffalos
Unavailability of medical 201 1.675±0.062 55.833 VII 41
store/pharmacy nearby.
Location of veterinary 206 1.720±0.063 57.350 VI 39
dispensary/ hospital at a far off
place.
Veterinary centre/ dispensary 152 1.267±0.041 42.222 XI 57
functioning without a veterinary
assistant surgeon
Lack of information about First 172 1.433±0.055 47.778 X 50
aid treatment
High cost of allopathic 348 2.9±0.03 96.667 I 4
veterinary medicines and
veterinary consultation.
Lack of information about 332 2.767±0.042 92.222 II 9
supplementation in case of
deficiency diseases.
No separate shed for isolation of 197 1.642±0.051 54.722 VIII 42
buffalo in case diseased
condition.
Lack of information about 239 1.992±0.045 66.389 IV 25
services available for animal
health care in veterinary centres.
87
Unawareness about proper 207 1.725±0.069 57.500 V 38

disposal of dead carcass.
FARM CREDIT AND MARKETING
Less information on marketing 226 1.883±0.069 62.778 X 31
channels
Less information about 334 2.783±0.038 92.778 V 8
credit/loan source.
Lack of information on value 161 1.342±0.052 44.722 XII 54
addition of milk
Lack of milk processing 263 2.192±0.045 73.056 IX 22
infrastructure.
Biased approach of bank 317 2.642±0.046 88.056 VII 14
officials in providing loan to
buffalo farmers.
Lack of personal interest on 308 2.567±0.054 85.556 VIII 16
market and credit.
Distance of market from the 185 1.542±0.051 51.389 XI 46
village.
government schemes for the
farmers
Risk of being in debt 326 2.717±0.046 90.556 VI 11
Lack of information about right 337 2.808±0.036 93.611 IV 7
channels of investment.
Unawareness about animal 350 2.917±0.025 97.222 II 2
insurance scheme.
Absence of FPOs in village. 359 2.992±0.008 99.722 I 1
100 83.333 86.389

66.111 75.000 74.444
80
54.167 63.333
60 50.556 42.500 38.056
41.389
36.111
40 MPS
20
0
Fig. 36: General constraints perceived by buffalo farmers in accessing the

information
88
93.889
100
90
80 70.000
65.278
70 58.056 59.167 56.389
60 50.000
45.278
50 37.500 36.667
40
30
20
10 MPS
0
Fig. 37: Constraints faced by buffalo farmers in accessing the information about
housing and management
100
80 65.833 63.056 61.944
52.222 58.889 62.500
60 50.000 46.944
38.056
40
MPS
20
0
feeding and nutrition
89
91.389 94.167 89.167

100
78.889 76.389
80 71.944
58.889
60 43.333 46.389
39.722
40 MPS
20
0
96.667
100 89.722 92.222
80
55.833 66.389
57.350 47.778 57.500
60 53.056 54.722
39.722 42.222
40
20
0 MPS
90
96.944 93.611 99.722

92.778 88.056 97.222
100 85.556 90.556
80 73.056
62.778
60 51.389
44.722
40
20
0
MPS
Discussion
CHAPTER-5
DISCUSSION
Taking into account the findings of others workers in similar studies, this chapter
deals with comprehensive discussion of the results obtained in the present study. The
results are discussed under the following headings:

5.5 Constraints of assessing the information needs of the buffalo farmers.
Social-economic profile is an economic and sociological measure of a person’s

work experience and often economic and social position of individual or family in
relation to others.
5.1.1 Age
In the present study it was found that, the average age of the buffalo farmers was
52 ± 0.22 indicating that majority of buffalo farmers (75.00%) were middle aged. The
buffalo farmers showed a wide distribution on the basis of degree of variance (S.D=
12.84). It can be concluded that middle aged people were more interested in getting
information about buffalo rearing practices. Bagal et al. (2018) in a study revealed that
average age of the respondent was 57.04 years and majority of the farmers were middle
aged. It might be due to the fact that middle aged farmers possessed more physical vigour
and could shoulder more family responsibilities thus chose dairying as income generating
92
activity. Another reason might be that, the labour involved in the buffalo farming is not
preferred by farmers belonging to young and old age groups. Chandrasekar et al. (2017)
and Adhikari et al. (2020) reported alike findings in their research.
5.1.2 Education
Education plays an important role in development of an individual. As evident

from the results (table 4.2) majority of buffalo farmers (33.33%) had completed
education up to high school and above. Sabapara et al. (2014), Siddiki et al. (2015) and
Tripathi et al. (2021) had reported comparable findings with most of the farmers being
educated. It can be concluded that educational status in the area was satisfactory as
majority farmers were from high school level, this may be due to various opportunities
like the availability of primary school and secondary school at village level and higher
secondary school at nearby villages and family support for education.
5.1.3 Family Type
Majority of the buffalo farmers (82.50 %) had nuclear family whereas, 17.50 per
cent had joint family (table 4.3). Similar findings were reported by Devaki et al. (2015)
and Prajapati et al. (2016) with 79.33 per cent respondents having nuclear families. It
indicates that nuclear family system is eventually replacing joint family system in urban
as well as rural areas. This may be due to changing socio-cultural structure in the area
under study.
5.1.4 Family Size
Table 4.4 revealed that average family size of buffalo farmers was 5.45 ± 0.22.
Buffalo farmers were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± standard
deviation i.e. small (less than 5), medium (5-8) and large (more than 8). The table showed
that majority of the buffalo farmers (48.33%) had medium sized family followed by small
(42.50%) and large (9.17%) sized family. The present findings are comparable with the
findings reported by Chouhan and Kansal (2014), Ram et al (2018) and Haque et al.
(2020). As discussed earlier that most of the families were of nuclear type so the family
93
size was in accordance to it. The reason might be the farmer’s belief that they could lead
comfortable and better life with medium sized families.
5.1.5 Land Holding
In general, the buffalo farmers were marginal land holders. In the present study,
table 4.5 revealed that majority of buffalo farmers (67.50%) had marginal land holding
whereas, 29.47 per cent had small, semi-medium and medium land holding. Landless
respondents constituted 2.50 per cent of the total sample of study whereas, none of them
had a large sized land holding. These findings were in accordance with the findings of
Upadhyay and Desai (2011), Sabapara et al. (2014), Gopi et al. (2017) and Atreya et al.
(2018) who reported that majority of dairy farmers had marginal land holding.
5.1.6 Herd Size
The average herd size of the respondent was 5.61 ± 0.39 and range varied from 2-
31 animals. Buffalo farmers were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ±
standard deviation i.e. small (less than 3 animals), medium (3 to 8 animals) and large
(more than 8 animals). Table 4.6 revealed that majority of buffalo farmers (75.00%) had
medium herd size, 15.00 per cent had large and only 10.00 per cent buffalo farmers had
small herd size. The results were much the same as the findings of Gopi et al. (2017) who
revealed that nearly three-fourth (73.33 per cent) of the farmers had medium livestock
possession. Mahesh et al. (2020) revealed that majority of farmers had medium herd size
with 4 to 9 animals.
5.1.7 Occupation
In the study, it was found that main occupation of majority of buffalo farmers
(54.17%) was agriculture while 17.50 per cent were involved in animal husbandry
practices whereas subsidiary occupation of majority of buffalo farmers (81.67%) was
animal husbandry while 43.33 per cent were engaged in agriculture (table 4.8). Adhikari
et al. (2020) in a study reported that primary occupation of majority of the respondents
(70.83%) was agriculture while 29.17 per cent were performing occupation other than
agriculture as primary occupation. The findings were coherent with the study of Vekariya
94
et al. (2016), Gopi et al. (2017) and Ram et al. (2018) who reported that agriculture and
animal husbandry were major occupation of the farmers.
5.1.8 Income from animal husbandry practices
The average annual income of buffalo farmers from animal husbandry practices
was 190,180 ± 13,009.74 (table 4.9). Buffalo farmers were categorized into three income
groups on the basis of mean ± standard deviation i.e. low (less than Rs 50,000/year),
medium (Rs 50,000- Rs 3,30,00/year) and high (more than 3,30,000/year). The results
revealed that majority of buffalo farmers (86.67%) earned medium income from animal
husbandry practices whereas, 12.50 per cent earned high and 0.83 per cent buffalo
farmers earned low income from animal husbandry practice. Comparable findings were
reported by Siddiki et al. (2015) who reported that per annum income from buffalo
rearing was about Rs 96,340. Animal husbandry practices generate income for the
farmers by selling animal products in the market and thus increasing the total annual
income of the farmers
5.1.9 Total annual income
The average annual income of buffalo farmers was 3,67,880 ± 16,648.53 (table
4.10). Buffalo farmers were categorized into three income groups on the basis of mean ±
standard deviation i.e. low (less than 1.85 lakh), medium (Rs 1.85 lakh-5.50 lakh) and
high (more than 5.50 lakh). The result revealed that most of the buffalo farmers (70.83%)
earned medium level of annual income, 15.83 per cent earned high and 13.33 per cent
buffalo farmers earned low level of annual income. It may be hypothesized that due to
good education level, main source of income based on agriculture and animal husbandry
and good marketing channels buffalo farmers are getting remunerative prices. Another
reason might be the high productivity of buffalos due to improved management practices.
The results were in line with the findings of Vekariya et al. (2017), Singh et al. (2018)
and Meshram et al. (2020) who reported that majority of the respondents in their study
were having medium annual income. Contrary findings were reported by Chandrasekar et
al. (2017), Atreya et al. (2018) and Mahesh et al. (2020) who reported that majority of
the respondents had low level of annual income.
95
5.1.10 Social participation
In the study, table 4.11 revealed that 38.33 per cent buffalo farmers each were
either member of one organization or more than one organization, 15.84 per cent had no
membership and only 7.50 per cent buffalo farmers were office bearers. The results
revealed that farmers’ usually consider social participation as a crucial element in
gathering information, knowledge and awareness about new technologies in buffalo
rearing practices. The results were in accordance to Gopi et al. (2017) who in their study
revealed that 40.00 per cent were member in either dairy co-operative society or primary
agricultural co-operative society; 36.67 per cent of them were member in both dairy co-
operative society and primary agricultural co-operative society. Gupta et al. (2019)
reported that 64 per cent respondents had high to medium level of social participation.
Contrary findings were reported by Sachan et al. (2018) and Vijay et al. (2019) who
revealed that around 65 per cent of respondents had low social participation.
5.1.11 Mass media exposure
In the study, it is evident from table 4.12 that average mass media exposure of the
buffalo farmers was 4.34 ± 0.15 indicating medium level of mass media exposure.
deviation viz. low (less than 3), medium (3 to 6) and high (more than 6). Results revealed
that most of the buffalo farmers (80.83%) had medium mass media exposure, 10.83 per
cent had low and 8.33 per cent buffalo farmers had high level of mass media exposure.
Vijay et al. (2019) reported that 87.50 per cent farmers had medium mass media
exposure. The results were in comparable with the findings of Sabapara et al. (2014), and
Mahesh et al. (2020) who reported that farmers had medium mass media exposure.
5.1.12 Extension contact
In the study, it is evident from table 4.14 that average extension contact of the
buffalo farmers was 4.01 ± 0.13 indicating medium level extension contacts. Buffalo
farmers were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± standard deviation viz.
low (less than 3), medium (3 to 5) and high (more than 5). Results revealed that most of
the buffalo farmers (70.83%) had medium extension contact, 20.83 per cent had high and
96
16.67 per cent buffalo farmers had low extension contact. The probable reason might be
good education level, social participation, information seeking behaviour of the buffalo
farmers and their need to gather information about rearing practices. The results were
comparable with the findings of Gopi et al. (2017) and Vijay et al. (2019) who revealed
that 76.67 per cent respondents had medium level of extension contact. Sabapara et al.
(2014) and Singh et al. (2018) revealed that 70.37 per cent farmers had medium level of
extension contact.
5.1.13 Cosmopoliteness-Localitenss
The average cosmopoliteness-localiteness of the buffalo farmers in the study was

around 11.23 ± 0.25 indicating medium level of cosmopoliteness and localiteness.
deviation viz. low (less than 9), medium (10-13) and high (more than 14). Table 4.16
revealed that majority of the buffalo farmers (51.67%) had medium level
cosmopoliteness-localitenss, 32.50 per cent respondents had low and 15.83 per cent
buffalo farmers had high level of cosmopoliteness-localitenss. The probable reason might
be the interest of farmers to seek information about animal rearing practices from within
as well as outside their community. Kavithaa et al. (2014) in a study revealed that 52.86
per cent dairy farmers belonged to medium category with respect to level of information
seeking behaviour (cosmopoliteness-localitenss). Similar finding were observed by
Chandrasekar et al. (2017) and Sachan et al. (2018).
5.2 Information needs of the buffalo rearing farmers
The information needs of the dairy farmers were assessed and ranked based on
weighted mean score of each item of the buffalo rearing practices. It is evident from table
4.18 that the most needed information was about farm credit and marketing (36.75 WMS)
followed by breeding and reproduction (34.07 WMS), whereas least needed information
by buffalo farmers was about health care practices (19.25 WMS). Similar findings were
reported by Devaki and Senthilkumar (2015) and Jadeja et al. (2019) who observed that
one of the most preferred information need of respondent was farm credit. However
97
researchers like, Subash et al. (2015) and Kumar et al. (2020) observed that feeding was
the area with highest information needs followed by breeding and reproduction.
5.2.1 Level of information needs of the buffalo farmers
The average level of information needs of the buffalo farmers was found out to be
138.07 ± 1.07 which indicated that most of the buffalo farmers had medium level of
information need. For appropriate analysis, buffalo farmers were categorized into three
groups on the basis of mean ± standard deviation viz. low (less than 127), medium (127-
149) and high (more than 149). Table 4.19 revealed that most of the buffalo farmers
(80.00%) had medium level of information needs, 11.67 per cent had high and 8.33 per
cent buffalo farmers had low level of information need regarding buffalo rearing
practices. The results are alike the findings of Jadeja et al. (2019) with majority of farm
women (73.34%) having medium level of information needs. Kumar et al. (2020)
reported medium level of perceived information need amongst buffalo rearing farmers in
Haryana. For enhancing information needs of farmers at the village level, need based and
well-tailored training programmes along with demonstrations must be conducted as
suited to the farmer which would help them increase their extension contacts.
5.2.2 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to housing and management
The results in table 4.20 revealed that information regarding both dung disposal
and manure utilization were ‘most needed’ by majority of the buffalo farmers (32.50%)
followed by care of new born calf (16.70%). Information regarding milk testing
techniques (normal and mastitic milk) was ‘needed’ by majority of the buffalo farmers
(80.80 %) followed by care of buffalos (before, during and after parturition) (63.30 %)
whereas, ‘least needed’ information for 84.20 per cent buffalo farmers was regarding
maintenance of farm records. It can be hypothesised that absence of proper manure
utilisation plants and unawareness amongst the farmers about the methods of dung
disposal increases their need to know more about it. Inadequate source of information and
cosmopoliteness of the farmers might be another reason. Another probable reason might
be distant location of milk testing centres from the villages and lack of timely
organisation of camps in villages increases the information need of the respondents.
98
Kumar et al. (2020) reported that care and management of new born calf was one of the
most needed information by majority of buffalo farmers.
5.2.3 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to feeding and nutrition
The results in table 4.21 revealed that information regarding feeding of new born
calf was ‘most needed’ by majority of buffalo farmers (31.70%) followed by feeding of
sick buffalos (28.30%). Information regarding nutrition management of breeding buffalos
was ‘needed’ by 80.80 per cent buffalo farmers followed by feeding of urea molasses
block (78.30%) whereas, the ‘least needed’ information for majority of buffalo farmers
(74.20%) was regarding importance of clean feeding and watering. Tripathi et al. (2021)
reported that majority of farmers (52%) needed information about making and feeding of
urea treated straw. The findings of Gangil et al. (2019) were contrary to the results as
they reported that the least needed information was about feeding of new born calf.
5.2.4 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to breeding and reproduction
The results in table 4.22 revealed that information regarding venereal diseases
was ‘most needed’ by majority of buffalo farmers (84.20%) followed by silent heat
(54.20%). Information regarding practice of reducing chance of repeat breeding and
anestrus was ‘needed’ by 80.00 per cent of the buffalo farmers followed by peripartum
care and management (74.20%), whereas, ‘least needed’ information for majority of
buffalo farmers (68.30%) was regarding pregnancy diagnosis and service after calving.
Reproductive problems lead to huge losses economically and absence of awareness about
it lead to poor production. Alike to the results, Teja (2013) reported that 80 per cent
farmers needed information on reproductive disorders. Tripathi et al. (2021) revealed
pregnancy diagnosis as one of the least required needs by the respondents.
5.2.5 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to health care practices
The results in table 4.23 revealed that information regarding common zoonotic
diseases was ‘most needed’ by majority of buffalo farmers (90.80%) followed by
deficiency diseases of animals and their symptoms (90.00%). Information regarding
isolation of diseased animals and reporting same to the vet was ‘needed’ by 67.50 per
99
cent of the buffalo farmers followed by first aid treatment (42.50%) whereas, ‘least
needed’ information for majority of buffalo farmers (78.30%) was regarding signs of
common diseases of buffalo. Singh et al. (2020) revealed that majority of farmers needed
information about zoonotic diseases as they were not aware about them.
5.2.6 Information needs of buffalo farmers related to farm credit and marketing
The results in table 4.24 revealed that information regarding subsidies was ‘most
needed’ by majority of buffalo farmers (92.50%) followed by government schemes
(90.80%). Information about demand and supply of the products in market was ‘needed’
by 72.50 per cent buffalo farmers followed by marketing of milk and milk products
(57.50%), whereas, ‘least needed’ information for majority of buffalo farmers (65.00%)
was regarding value addition of milk. This preference of farmers may be due to
requirement of regular investments in dairy business to meet out daily expenses on feeds,
medicine etc. Moreover farmers may also have interest to expand their farm and for this
they require credit and information about getting credit for dairy business. Similarly,
information about government schemes and subsidies may not reach to them timely.
Present findings are in agreement with the earlier findings of Sharma (2016) and Singh et
al. (2016) who observed that majority of farmers were interested in getting information
about government subsidies for dairy farming. The results make it clear that farmers were
keen to know about the subsidies/ incentives offered by the government to support dairy
farming to get benefited, however information about such schemes do not reach farmers
at mass level.
The table 4.25 revealed that education, family size and total income were
negatively and non-significantly correlated with information needs of the farmers with
correlation coefficient value of -0.100, -0.039 and -0.177 respectively. Singh et al. (2015)
revealed a negative non-significant relationship of family size, total income and
qualification with information needs. It was also observed that information needs had
negative and significant relationship with land holding, occupation and income from
animal husbandry with correlation coefficient value of -0.270, -0.184 and -0.204
respectively. That means respondents with larger size of land need more information than
the respondents with small land holding. The results were in nonconformity with the
100
study of Gangil et al. (2019) who reported positive significant relationship of land
holding with the information need.

dependence used by the buffalo farmers
5.3.1 Sources of Information
Majority of the buffalo farmer (96.70%) ‘always’ considered friends and relatives
as their source of information whereas, 86.70 per cent and 53.33 per cent buffalo farmers
‘sometimes’ considered veterinary assistant surgeon and progressive farmers respectively
as their information source. However, 98.30 per cent ‘rarely’ contacted co-operative
personnel as their source of information. The probable reasons might be easy
accessibility and trust upon family and relatives. Veterinary assistant surgeons were
considered as a key source of information for respondents as they have expertise in the
field of animal rearing and they provide first hand information to the farmers. Another
reason might be absence of co-operatives in the sample area or the respondents did not
consider co-operative personnel as a reliable source of information. Similar findings were
observed in the study conducted by Ansari and Sunetha (2014) who reported that 88.33
per cent farmers always sought information from friends and relatives. Tripathi et al.
(2021) revealed that 98 per cent buffalo farmers considered family and friends as their
major informal sources and 67 per cent buffalo farmers considered para-vets as their
formal sources of information on scientific buffalo farming. Positive but non-significant
association of education with source of information with correlation coefficient value of
0.051 and positive significant association of occupation with the source of information
was observed with correlation coefficient of 0.187. Comparable results were observed by
Prasad and Ponraj (2016). It can be hypothesized that farmer occupied in more than one
occupation had access to multiple sources of information which lessens their information
need.
5.3.2 Channels of Information
Majority of the buffalo farmers (78.30%) ‘always’ used mobile phone as their
channel of information followed television (69.20%) whereas, 83.30 per cent
101
‘sometimes’ visited veterinary hospital followed by KVK (50.80%) and none of the
buffalo farmers considered ‘documentary’, ‘folk media’ and ‘demonstrations’ as their
channel of information. In other words, it can be concluded that mobile phones and
television were always used by buffalo rearing farmers. Veterinary hospitals and KVKs
were ‘sometimes’ visited by buffalo farmers for seeking information. Documentaries,
folk media and demonstrations were most rarely used channels of information by buffalo
farmers and it can be interpreted that farmers were never exposed to these channels due
to lack of awareness and conservative nature to stick around traditional practices and not
include new sustainable practices. Bachhav (2012) reported similar findings with 80 per
cent farmers reporting the use of mobile phones for some agricultural activity.
Comparable findings were reported by Singh et al. (2015) who revealed that 85.29
percent farmers got required information through television. Singh et al. (2016) also
reported that radio, television and newspapers have a large audience base due to low cost
of contact per person. Bankapur and Naik (2018) also observed that radio and television
were most used channels of information by the respondents. Gupta et al. (2019) also
reported Animal husbandry officials, veterinary hospitals, A.I centres and KVK as most
used channels of information. Positive significant correlation of education, mass media
and extension contact were with channels of information with correlation coefficient of
0.284, 0.571 and 0.223 was observed. Sriram et al. (2019) observed comparable results
revealing positive and significant relationship of educational status (r2 = 0.306) and
extension contact (r2 = 0.248) with channels of information. It could thus be concluded
that with the increase in education and extension contacts of the buffalo farmers, their
channels to acquire relevant information also increases.
5.4 Mobile Application developed for better and fast information dissemination
and to promote better rearing of buffaloes
A farmer friendly buffalo information android app named ‘BUFFINFO’ has been
developed, which focuses on providing better and quick information to the farmers to
improve their rearing practices. The app provides basic and advanced information along
with pictorial representation about five major buffalo rearing practices namely, ‘Housing
and General Management’, ‘Feeding and Nutrition’, ‘Breeding and Reproduction’,
102
‘Health care practices’ and ‘Farm credit and Marketing’. Different important aspects have
been covered under each category to enhance the knowledge of the app user. Anand et al.
(2020) in their study indicated that there was a strong desire for incorporation of ICT into
farming amongst farmers. So, ICT has the potential to disseminate requisite information
in user friendly, easy accessible, cost-effective form at the right time to make the rural
communities prosperous. Tripathi et al. (2021) in their study have developed mobile
application by assessing and prioritizing information needs in buffalo production system
perceived by farmers. The study also suggested that while developing mobile apps or
other extension service delivery tools, demand driven and value added information must
be provided in time through various information sources and perceived needs of the
buffalo owners must be taken into consideration on priority.
5.5 Constraints of assessing the information needs of the buffalo farmers.
Results in table 4.30 revealed the overall rank in six major areas viz. general
constraints, housing and management, feeding and nutrition, breeding and reproduction,
health care practices and farm credit and marketing. It is evident from the table 4.30 that
farm credit and marketing constraints were perceived as most serious (81.37 MPS)
followed by breeding and reproduction constraints (66.53 MPS), whereas feeding and
nutrition constraints were perceived as least serious (55.49 MPS) by the buffalo farmers.
The probable reason behind it might be the tedious and cumbersome procedure of loan.
Second reason might be the increasing prices in present day thus information about
subsidies is much required by the farmers to help them combat price hike. Another
probable reason might be sudden death of animal due to some diseases or natural hazard,
so to maintain income and buy another animal, farmers need to buy animal insurance
scheme. The results were corroborated with the findings of Devaki and Senthilkumar
(2013) who conducted a study on relationship between different characteristics of
livestock farm women on information need perception and observed that the farm credit
(85.00 per cent) was considered as the most important area requiring information to the
farm women respondents. The results were not in accordance with the study of Minhaj et
al. (2019) who reported feeding constraints as most serious, whereas health constraints as
least serious by the respondents.
103
The item wise scores of the constraints have been presented in tabulated form
(table 4.31). Amongst all the different areas of buffalo rearing practices, the overall most
serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘absence of FPOs in village’
(MPS 99.722) with Rank 1 followed by ‘unawareness about animal insurance scheme’
(MPS 97.222) with Rank 2 and ‘lack of information about government schemes for the
farmers’ (MPS 96.944) with Rank 3. On the other hand, the overall least serious
constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘language barrier’ (MPS 36.111) with
Rank 65 (table 4.31). It might be due to unawareness about benefits of FPOs amongst
farmers as Jammu and Kashmir has two FPOs only, unwillingness of farmers to join
insurance schemes as most farmers believe that claim settlement is tedious, lack of proper
information sources available to the farmers. The results were more or less in agreement
with Gamit et al. (2021) who revealed that in Jammu, high cost of raw material for dairy
animal shed, high cost of feed supplements or mineral mixture, high cost of dry fodder
and non-availability of pastureland, repeat breeding problem in dairy animals and high
cost of treatment were most serious constraints of the farmers.
In general constraints, the most serious constraint perceived by the buffalo

farmers was ‘lack of training of farmers’ (MPS 86.389) with Rank I, followed by
‘inefficient extension personnel’ (MPS 83.333) with Rank II whereas, the least serious
constraint perceived was ‘language barrier’ (MPS 36.111) with Rank XII. The probable
reason might be absence of regular need based training programmes for the famers to
improve their skill and practices. Inadequate farmer-extension agent ratio and no filling
of vacancies of extension personals in the department is another probable reason of the
constraint. Third reason might be the conservative nature of the farmers leading them to
stick to traditional method of rearing. These finding were in agreement with the findings
of Singh et al. (2018) who reported that majority of the respondents (70.00%) believe that
‘lack of motivated extension workers at the grass root level’ was the major constraint.
Gopi et al. (2020) also reported that lack of veterinary extension services at field level
was an important constraint. Necessary steps must be taken to fill up the existing vacant
posts of Veterinary Assistant Surgeons at block or village along with organisation of
some awareness programmes by universities. Tiwari et al. (2021) reported lack of
training facilities and lack of credit facilities as most serious constraints. The study stated
104
that this was because, small and marginal farmers were unable to get proper training as
most of the training facilities were available to large or progressive farmers. Reluctance
to adopt and experience new techniques and methods in their farm was also a reason.
In case of constraints faced by the buffalo farmers in accessing information

regarding housing and management, lack of information about antibiotics in milk and
their ill effects to human population (MPS 93.889) with Rank I was perceived as the most
serious constraint followed by, non availability of milk testing centres (MPS 70.0000
with Rank II. The least serious constraint perceived was non availability of transport
facility for timely sale of milk by the farmers (MPS 36.667) with Rank X. These finding
were not in agreement with the findings of Sarita et al. (2017) who reported that for 72
per cent respondents, lack of knowledge and resources for cheap and scientific housing
were found to be the most serious constraints.
In case of feeding and nutrition constraints, the most serious constraint perceived
by the buffalo farmers was ‘high cost and lack of information about availability of
mineral mixture/ UMMB’ (MPS 65.833) with Rank I followed by ‘lack of information
about the utilization of roughage and concentrate’ (MPS 63.056) with Rank II. On the
other hand, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘non-
availability of green and dry fodder’ (MPS 38.056) with Rank IX. These finding were in
agreement with the findings of Rajpoot et al. (2018) who revealed that 64 per cent
farmers did not use mineral mixture/ common salt in their feed whereas, 64 per cent
respondents did not feed recommended quantity of concentrate to the animal. Harishsa et
al. (2019) reported that one of the major economic constraints of 51.67 per cent farmers
was high cost of cattle feed and mineral mixture.
In case of breeding and reproduction constraints, the most serious constraint

perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘high charges by staff for doing A.I in animals’
(MPS 94.167) with Rank I followed by ‘lack of information about the nearby AI centres’
(MPS 91.389) with Rank II whereas, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo
farmers was ‘lack of information about proper time of mating/ insemination after heat’
(MPS 39.722) with Rank X. Singh et al. (2015) conclusively revealed that inadequate
facilities of AI centre was the most serious constraint faced by the farmers. These finding
105
were in accordance to Pata et al. (2018) who revealed that unavailability of timely A.I.
facility at village and lack of knowledge of breeding management were most serious
constraints of the farmers. Similar findings were observed in study conducted by Minhaj
et al. (2019) revealing that inadequate knowledge to detect heat signs in dairy animals
was the least serious constraint.
In case of health care practices constraints, the most serious constraint perceived
by the buffalo farmers was ‘high cost of allopathic veterinary medicines and veterinary
consultation’ (MPS 96.667) with Rank I followed by ‘lack of information about
supplementation in case of deficiency diseases’ (MPS 92.222) with Rank II. On the other
hand, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘lack of
information about signs of common diseases’ (MPS 39.722) with Rank XII. Rathod et al.
(2011), Mohapatra et al. (2012) and Singh et al. (2015) revealed the majority of farmers
were of the belief that non availability of adequate veterinary services and high cost of
medicine were the major health care constraints faced by them. This thus, affects the
health of the animals that are not treated timely due to low income of the farmers.
In case of farm credit and marketing constraints, the most serious constraint
perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘absence of FPOs in village’ (MPS 99.722) with
Rank I followed by ‘unawareness about animal insurance scheme’ (MPS 97.222) with
Rank II whereas, the least serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘lack
of information on value addition of milk’ (MPS 44.722) with Rank XII. Mohapatra et al.
(2012) in their study reported difficult loan procedure, high investment and inadequate
bank finance to purchase milch animal, as some of the most serious constraints faced by
the farmers. These finding were also in agreement with the findings Adhikari et al.
(2020) who revealed that 45 per cent respondents considered lack of information on
government schemes and subsidies as most serious constraints. It was found that there
was unawareness of government support and subsidies available for the farmers.
Summary and Conclusion
CHAPTER-6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
An individual’s or group's desire to acquire information to fulfil a conscious or

unconscious need is what information need stands for. The development of an individual,
society and whole country depends mostly upon information and for this development to
be continuous new and latest information is needed (Phand et al., 2009). Information
must be delivered to the farmers at a time and place of their choice as it would be
beneficial for farmers’ to realize the gains they would earn from the adoption of new
rearing practices and actions to increase the animals’ productivity (Bachhav, 2012). The
basic criterions for increased productivity and development are, knowledge and
information related to agriculture and allied services, as majority of the population is
involved in agriculture (Das, 2012). Due to increasing demand for livestock and its
products, to enhance and strengthen livestock production and management, the delivery
of agricultural allied sector extension services, especially animal husbandry services is an
important emerging area (Kareem et al., 2017). Nowadays, livestock rearing is becoming
more information oriented, and access to accurate and adequate information is very
essential for increasing the overall production and productivity. In the whole array of
agricultural system, the most powerful restriction to the farmers is the lack of livestock
information. The farmers require various types of information for their day-to-day
livestock related activities but the rural areas of the Union Territory of Jammu and
Kashmir lack proper information infrastructure and service centres. It is reported that not
more than 5% of the farm households in India are able to access information about
animal husbandry, the reason of which is primarily, lack of efficient livestock extension
system in place (Singh et al., 2016). Majority of buffalo farmers approach non-formal
sources for information on scientific buffalo farming, sometimes mis-information leads
huge loses to farmers as well as to animals also. Providing right information from
credible source will boost the farmers’ herd productivity. Designing appropriate policies,
programs, and organizational innovations requires understanding farmers’ information
needs. Therefore, there lies the need to assess the information needs of the farmers. In
107
this context, the present study entitled “Information need assessment of buffalo farmers
in Jammu district” was undertaken with the following specific objectives:
1. To identify the information needs of the buffalo farmers living in Jammu

district.
2. To examine the channels of information communication and sources of

information dependence used by the buffalo farmers.
3. To develop a Mobile Application for better and fast information dissemination

4. To analyze the constraints of assessing the information needs of the buffalo

farmers.
The present study was conducted in the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
Ex-post facto and exploratory research design was followed. Multistage sampling plan
was used for the present study. Jammu district, the locus of the present study, was
selected through purposive sampling, whereas blocks, villages and respondents were
selected through simple random sampling method. The population of buffalo farmers is
more or less equal in all the blocks of Jammu district therefore, five blocks namely R.S
Pura, Suchetgarh, Miran Sahib, Satwari and Marh were randomly selected. From each of
the five selected blocks, a comprehensive list of villages was prepared and two villages
from each block were selected randomly. Thus, in totality 10 villages were selected from
five blocks. A list of farmers practicing buffalo farming was prepared. Twelve
respondents were selected from each of these 10 selected villages. Thus constituting a
total sample size of 120 buffalo farmers for the study.
The study revealed that majority of buffalo farmers were middle aged with
average of 52 ± 0.22, educated up to high school and above indicating that level of
education was satisfactory. Buffalo farmers belonged to nuclear and medium sized
family, with an average of 5.45 ± 0.22. Further, most of the buffalo farmers had marginal
land holding and medium herd size with an average of 5.61 ± 0.39. Agriculture and
animal husbandry were main and subsidiary occupation of the farmers respectively. The
108
mean income earned from animal husbandry practices of majority of buffalo farmers was
190,180 ± 13,009.74 and mean total annual income of majority of buffalo farmers was
367,880 ± 16,648.53. Most of the buffalo farmers were members of either one or more
than one organisation indicating medium level of social participation. The mass media
exposure was medium with the mean score 4.34 ± 0.15 and extension contact was
medium with the mean score of 4.01 ± 0.13 of majority of the buffalo farmers. The
cosmopoliteness-localiteness of most of the buffalo farmers was medium with mean
score of 11.23 ± 0.25.
Level of information needs of the buffalo farmers was found out to be medium
with mean score of 138.07±1.07, indicating that majority of the respondents (80.00%)
had medium level of information need. With respect to the overall information needs of
farmers, most needed information was about farm credit and marketing (36.75 WMS).
The most needed information under different buffalo rearing practices were found out to
be information about subsidies (92.50%), information about common zoonotic diseases
(90.80%), venereal diseases (84.20%), dung disposal and manure utilisation (32.50%)
and feeding of the new born (31.70%). Positive non-significant relationship of
information need of buffalo farmers with family type and cosmopoliteness-localiteness
was observed. However, negative significant relation of information needs of buffalo
farmers with land holding, occupation and income from animal husbandry was observed,
whereas, negative non-significant relation with age, education, family size, herd size,
total income, social participation, mass media and extension contact was observed.
Majority of the buffalo farmer (96.70%) ‘always’ considered friends and relatives
as their source of information whereas, 86.70 per cent ‘sometimes’ considered veterinary
assistant surgeon and 98.30 per cent ‘rarely’ contacted co-operative personnel as their
source of information. Positive significant relation of source of information of buffalo
farmers with occupation was observed, whereas, positive non-significant relationship of
source of information of buffalo farmers with age, education, family type, mass media,
extension contact and cosmopoliteness-localiteness was observed. However, negative
significant relation of source of information of buffalo farmers with income from animal
109
husbandry was observed, whereas, negative non-significant relation with family size,
land holding, herd size, total income and social participation was observed.
Majority of the buffalo farmers (78.30%) ‘always’ used mobile phone as their
channel of information whereas, 83.30 per cent ‘sometimes’ visited veterinary hospital
and none of the buffalo farmers considered ‘documentary’, ‘folk media’ and
‘demonstrations’ as their channel of information. Positive significant relation of channels
of information of buffalo farmers with education, mass media and extension contact was
observed, whereas, positive non-significant relationship of channels of information of
buffalo farmers with family type, land holding, occupation and cosmopoliteness-
localiteness was observed. However negative non-significant relation with age, family
size, herd size, income from animal husbandry, total income and social participation was
observed.
A farmer friendly buffalo information android app named ‘BUFFINFO’ was

developed, which focused on providing better and quick information to the farmers to
improve their rearing practices. The contents of the app were available in English and
Hindi languages. The app provided basic and advanced information along with pictorial
representation about five major buffalo rearing practices namely, ‘Housing and General
Management’, ‘Feeding and Nutrition’, ‘Breeding and Reproduction’, ‘Health care
practices’ and ‘Farm credit and Marketing’. This informative, user friendly, easily
accessible app would be regularly updated to elevate the knowledge of the buffalo rearing
farmers.
Amongst the six selected parameters, farm credit and marketing constraints (81.37
MPS) were perceived as most serious by the buffalo whereas, feeding and nutrition
constraints were perceived as least serious. The most serious constraint perceived by the
farmers under major areas were absence of FPOs in village (MPS 99.722), high cost of
allopathic veterinary medicines and veterinary consultation (MPS 96.667), lack of
information about antibiotics in milk and their ill effects to human population (MPS
93.889), high charges by staff for doing A.I in animals (MPS 94.167), lack of training of
farmers (MPS 86.389), high cost and lack of information about availability of mineral
mixture/ UMMB (MPS 65.833).
110
The following conclusions were drawn from the study:
1. Majority of buffalo farmers were middle aged, had education up to high school
and above, belonged to nuclear family with medium family size (5-8 members),
had marginal land holding with medium herd size of 5-8 animals. Agriculture and
animal husbandry were main and subsidiary occupation of majority of buffalo
farmers respectively. Majority of buffalo farmers earned an average income of Rs
50,000 to Rs 3,30,000 per annum from animal husbandry practices and total
annual income of Rs 1,85,505 to Rs 5,50,255. Considering the social
participation, majority of buffalo farmers were either member of one organization
or more than one organization. The mass media exposure, extension contact and
cosmopoliteness-localiteness of majority of the buffalo farmers was medium.
2. Majority of the buffalo farmers (80.00%) had medium level of information need.
With respect to the overall information needs of farmers, most needed information
was about farm credit and marketing (36.75 WMS). The most needed information
under different buffalo rearing practices were found out to be information about
subsidies (92.50%), information about common zoonotic diseases (90.80%),
venereal diseases (84.20%), dung disposal and manure utilization (32.50%) and
feeding of the new born (31.70%).
3. Majority of the buffalo farmer (96.70%) ‘always’ considered friends and relatives
as their source of information whereas, 86.70 per cent ‘sometimes’ considered
veterinary assistant surgeon and 98.30 per cent ‘rarely’ contacted co-operative
personnel as their source of information. Majority of the buffalo farmers (78.30%)
‘always’ used mobile phone, as their channel of information whereas, 83.30 per
cent ‘sometimes’ visited veterinary hospital and none of the buffalo farmers
considered ‘documentary’, ‘folk media’ and ‘demonstrations’ as their channel of
information.
4. A farmer friendly buffalo information android app named ‘BUFFINFO’ was

developed, which focused on providing better and quick information to the
farmers to improve their rearing practices
111
5. Overall most serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘absence of
FPOs in village’ (MPS 99.722) with Rank 1 followed by ‘unawareness about
animal insurance scheme’ (MPS 97.222) with Rank 2 whereas, the overall least
serious constraint perceived by the buffalo farmers was ‘language barrier’ (MPS
36.111) with Rank 65.
Suggestions
1. Reviews on past researches, experiences, present empirical evidences are focal

points revealing presence of a wide scope of improvement in buffalo rearing
practices in the study area.
2. Young farmers need to be encouraged by providing them with the benefits of

government schemes, subsidies, credit, insurance and health facilities to increase
their herd size and production, so that they can earn more income through buffalo
rearing.
3. Information need assessment of buffalo farmers revealed that farmers had

immediate need of farm credit and marketing information and for that, perception
towards farmers must be changed. They must be viewed as an untapped credit
market.
4. The buffalo rearing practices of farmers with respect to housing and management,
feeding and nutrition, breeding and reproduction, health care practices and farm
credit and marketing need to be upgraded by educating them through various need
based and periodical training programmes.
5. The findings need to be addressed before the information delivery system to make
information more relevant and applicable. There is need to strengthen extension
network for buffalo farmers.
6. Provide demand driven and value added information to the farmers through
various sources in timely manner.
112
7. As the findings may provide an in-depth understanding about the relationship of

socio-economic character of the farmer with information needs and sources and
channels of information, it would be helpful in arriving at realistic as well as
actionable goals for any buffalo development programme.
8. As the study points out the major constraints perceived by the buffalo farmers, it
is suggested that policy makers, extension functionaries, veterinarians and farmers
should together work upon them.
References
REFERENCES
19th Livestock census. 2012. All India Report. www.dahd.nic.in
20th Livestock census. 2019. All India Report. www.dahd.nic.in
Adhiguru, P., Birthal, P.S. and Kumar, B.G. 2009. Strengthening pluralistic agricultural
information delivery systems in India. Agricultural Economics Research
Review, 22(1): 71-79.
Adhikari, B., Chauhan, A., Bhardwaj, N. and Kameswari, V.L.V. 2020. A study on
information needs of dairy farmers in hill region of Uttarakhand. Indian Journal
of Dairy Science. 73: 86-90.
Adhikari, B., Chauhan, A., Bhardwaj, N. and Kameswari, V.L.V. 2020. Constraints faced
by dairy farmers in hill region of Uttarakhand. Indian Journal of Dairy
Sciences, 73(5): 464-470.
Anand, S., Prakash, S., Yedida, S. and Singh, A. 2020. Constraints faced by farmers in
access and use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in Bihar.
Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 9(2): 80-85
Ansari, M.A. and Sunetha, S. 2014. Agriculture information needs of farm women: A
study in state of North India. African Journal of Agricultural
Research, 9(19):1454-1460.
Atreya, S., Singh, P., Kumar, B., Kumar, M., Prasad, K. and Kishore, K. 2018. Socio-
economic profile of the dairy farmers in Sultanpur district of Uttar
Pradesh. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 10(12): 0975-3710.
Babu, S.C., Glendenning, C.J., Asenso-Okyere, K. and Govindarajan, S.K. 2012.

Farmers’ information needs and search behaviors. International Food Policy
Research Institute (IFPRI), 1165: 1-37.
Bachhav, N.B. 2012. Information needs of the rural farmers: A study from Maharashtra,
India: A survey. Library Philosophy and Practice, 866: 1-12.
114
Bagal, Y.S., Sharma, L.K. and Manhas, J.S. 2018. Factors affecting utilization of
communication sources by the farmers of Jammu and Kashmir. Indian Journal of
Extension Education, 54(2): 59-64.
Balasubramanian and Charles E M. 1996. Mass media and extension programmes.

Agricultural Extension Review, 8(15): 25-28.
Balkrishna, A., Sharma, J., Sharma, H., Mishra, S., Singh, S., Verma, S. and Arya, V.
2020. Agricultural mobile apps used in India: Current status and gap
analysis. Agricultural Science Digest, 41(1): 1-12.
Bankapur, V.M. and Naik, B.B. 2018. Information needs and seeking behaviour of
farmers in Bhutaramanahatti village of Belagavi district in Karnataka State: A
study, International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research,
5(7): 1474-1477.
Belakeri, P., Prasad, C.K., Bajantri, S., Mahantesh, M.T., Maruthi, S.T. and Rudresh,
G.N. 2017. Trends of mobile applications in farming. International Journal of
Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 6(7): 2499-2512.
Bhanotra, A., Jancy, G., and Singh, M. 2016. Socio-economic status and communication
behaviour pattern of the dairy farmers in Kathua district of Jammu and Kashmir.
International Journal of Farm Sciences, 6(1): 37-42.
CALPI, 2008. The economic rationale of public and private sector roles in the provision
of animal health services. Revue Scientifique et Technique (International Office of
Epizootics), 23: 33-45
Cecchini, S. and Scott, C. 2003. Can information and communications technology

applications contribute to poverty reduction? Lessons from Rural India.
Information Technology for Development, 10: 73-84.
Chakravarthi, M.K., Krishna M.B. and Sreedhar, S. 2017. Constraints of dairy farming in
Kadapa district of Andhra Pradesh. Indian Journal of Animal Production
Management, 33(1-2): 7-10.
115
Chandrasekar, G.K., Satyanarayan, K., Jagadeeswary, V. and Shree, J.S. 2017.

Relationship between socio-economic and psychological factors of dairy farmers
with days open – A Study in Rural Karnataka, Indian Journal of Pure and
Applied Biosciences, 5(1): 171-177
Chauhan, M., and Kansal S.K. 2014. Most preferred animal husbandry information
sources and channel among dairy farmers of Punjab. Indian Research Journal of
Extension Education 14(4): 33-36.
DAE, Bangladesh. 1999. Farmer information needs assessment. Agricultural Extension

Manual: 75-80.
Das, D. 2012. Sources of agricultural information among rural women: a village level
study in Assam. International Journal of Economics and Research, 3(5): 1-2.
Deshetti, M.B. and Teggi, M.Y. 2017. Socio economic profile and constraints faced by
dairy farmers in Vijayapur and Bagalakote districts of Karnataka. Research
Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 8(4): 963-966.
Deshmukh, M.S., Jawle, S.S., Dakore, K.M., Chigure, G.M. and Ramakrishnan, V. 2014.
Constraint faced by farmers in adoption of buffalo management practices,
Aayvagam an International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2A(5): 5-8
Devaki, K. and Senthilkumar, K. 2013. Relationship between different characteristics of

livestock farm women on information need perception. International journal of
Science, Environment and Technology, 2(5): 981-988
Devaki, K., Senthilkumar, K. and Subramanian, R. 2015. Socio-economic profile of

livestock farm women of Thiruvallur district, Tamil Nadu. International Journal
of Science, Environment and Technology, 4(5):1322-1329.
Diekmann, F., Loibl, C. and Batte, M. 2009. The economics of agricultural information:
Factors affecting commercial farmers' information strategies in Ohio. Review of
Agricultural Economics. 31(4): 853-872.
116
Fouad, K., Alary, V., Dubron, A., Bonnet, P., Juanes, X., Nigm, A., Radwan, M.A. and
Abdelghany, S. 2021. Developing a data collection application for following up
the small-scale dairy farms’ performance in rural areas. Egyptian Journal of
Animal Production, 58(2): 63-70.
Gamit, V.V., Odedra, M.D., Ahlawat, A.R., Prajapati, V.S., Patel, H.A. and Gamit, K.C.
2021. Constraint faced by dairy farmers in different state of India: An overview.
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies; 9(1): 1901-1906
Gangil, D., Verma, H. K., Singh, J. and Kashyap, N. 2019. Prioritisation of information
demand of dairy farmers of Punjab. International Journal of Current
Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 8 (1): 2204-2212.
Garai, S., Gouranga M., and Sanjit M. 2012. Information communication behaviour
among the members of livestock-based self help groups of Nadia district of West
Bengal, India. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 7(40): 5483-5490.
Garforth, C., Angell, B., Archer, J. and Green, K. 2003. Improving farmers’ access to
advice on land management: Lessons from case studies in developed
countries. Agricultural Research and Extension Network Paper, 125.
Glendenning, Claire J. & Babu, Suresh & Asenso-Okyere, Kwadwo, 2010. Review of
agricultural extension in India: Are farmers' information needs being met? IFPRI
discussion papers 1048, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
Gopi, R., Manivannan, A., Sindhu, M.G. and Soundararajan, C. 2020. Socio-economic
profile and constraints of dairy farmers in Cuddalore district of Tamil Nadu,
India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Science, 9(4):
1320-1326.
Gopi, R., Narmatha, N., Sakthivel, K.M., Uma, V. and Jothilakshmi, M. 2017. Socio-
economic characteristics and its relationship with information seeking pattern of
dairy farmers in Tamilnadu, India. Asian Journal of Dairy and Food
Research, 36(1): 16-20.
117
Gulati, A., Sharma, P., Samantara, A. and Terway, P. 2018. Agriculture extension system
in India: Review of current status, trends and the way forward. Indian Council for
Research on International Economic Relations, India. p 128.
Gupta, C., Gupta, M., Joshi, P. and Kumar, A. 2021. Information and communication
technology in agribusiness: A study of mobile applications in perspective of
India. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 13(2): 766-774.
Gupta, R., Singh, K., Bhadauria, P. and Jadoun, Y.S. 2019. Extension contact and
extension participation of livestock farmers in Jalandhar district of Punjab- A
Benchmark analysis. Indian Journal of Extension Education, 55(3): 83-87.
Hannure, W.M. and Belsare, V.P. 2018. Socio-economic status of dairy demonstration
farmers in Anand district. Gujarat Journal of Extension Education, 29(1): 25-28.
Haque, M. S., Alam, M. J., Asad, L. Y., Kabir, M. E., and Sikder, T. 2020. Socio-
economic status of buffalo farmers and management practices of buffaloes in
selected areas of Jamalpur district in Bangladesh. Asian-Australasian Journal of
Food Safety and Security, 4(2): 49–57.
Harisha, M., Desai, A., Gopala, G., Biradar, C., and Savanur, M. 2019. Dairy production
constraints in Kolar and Chikkaballapur districts of Karnataka. International
Journal of Livestock Research, 9(10): 148-154.
Jadeja, K.M., Kalsariya, B.N. and Jadeja, M.K. 2019. Information needs of farm women
towards animal husbandry practices. International Journal of Chemical Studies,
7(2): 1613-1616
Jadoun, Y.S., Jha, S.K., Bhadauria, P. and Kale, R.B. 2017. Analysis of constraints faced
by beneficiaries of integrated Murrah development scheme (IMDS) in
Haryana. Buffalo Bulletin, 36(1): 207-213.
Jain, L. and Kour, H. 2015. Social media using mobiles-a boon for the agricultural
extension workers: a generic concept. International Journal of Agricultural
Science and Research (IJASR), 5(5): 295-303.
118
Kareem, M.A., Phand, S.S., Manohari, P.L. and Borade, M. 2017. Animal husbandry
extension service delivery: farmers’ perception in four major Indian
States. Journal of Agricultural Extension Management, 18(2).
Kathiravan, G. and Selvam, S., 2011. Analysis of constraints to livestock production in

Tamil Nadu. Indian Journal of Animal Research, 45(1): 56-59.
Kavithaa, N.V., Rajkumar, N.V. and Lakshmi, C.S. 2014. Information seeking behaviour
of dairy farmers. International Journal of Science, Environment and
Technology, 3(4): 1502-1506.
Khan, I.M., Singh, V. and Garhwal, S. 2011. Preferences of farmers to different sources
and channels in Piprali panchayat samiti of district Sikar, Rajasthan. Rajasthan
Journal of Extension Education, 19: 121-124.
Khan, I.M., Singh, V., and Dhanraj. 2010. Extent of utilization of information sources
and channels used by farmers. Indian Journal of Extension Education and Rural
Development, 17&18: 128-131.
Kour, S., Khan, A., Brahma, B., Jeelani, R., Khursheed, I. and Dua, S. 2019. A study on
buffalo management practices followed by Gujjar tribe of Jammu. Journal of
Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 8(3): 218-221.
Kumar, K., Chander, M., Dixit, V.B. and Tripathi, H., 2020. Constraints perceived by
buffalo farmers in interaction with information providing stakeholders. Asian
Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics and Sociology, 38(11): 199-205.
Kumar, K., Chander, M., Dixit, V.B., Tripathi, H., Bardhan, D. and Verma, M. 2020.
Information needs of buffalo farmers in Haryana. International Journal of Current
Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 9(11): 2858-2865
Kumar, S.S. and Chander, M. 2011. Perceived information needs of dairy farmers in
accessing ICT-enabled village information centres. Journal of Dairying Foods &
Home Sciences, 30(4): 239-241.
119
Kumari, S., Sethi, N., Malik, J.S. and Yogi, V., 2015. Need assessment of women dairy
farmers. Indian Journal of Extension Education, 51(3&4): 75-80.
Livestock census of Jammu and Kashmir. 2012. Department of animal and sheep
husbandry. Government of Jammu and Kashmir. www.jkanimalhusbandry.net/
livestock-census.
Lucky, A.T. and Achebe, N.E.E. 2013. Information communication technology and
agricultural information dissemination: A case study of Institute of Agricultural
Research (IAR) Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Kaduna State. Research Journal
of Information Technology, 5(1): 11-17.
Madhavan, S. 2017. An Overview: Agriculture information needs of farmers.

International Journal of Agricultural Science and Research, 7 (6): 209-216.
Mahesh, Manjunath, Kumar, K.A, Kale, S., Barikar, U. and Sreenivas, B.V. 2020.
Socio-economic profile analysis of dairy farmers of Yadgir district of Kalyana
Karnataka region. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 9(4): 350-353.
Malik, N. and Rathi, P.K. 2020. Information seeking behaviour of farmers in Aligarh
district of Uttar Pradesh. Journal of Krishi Vigyan, 9(1): 211-217.
Manhas, J. and V. Sharma. 2008. Constraints in dairy farming in Jammu district of

Jammu and Kashmir. Indian Journal of Animal Research, 42(1): 49-52.
Meagy, J., Rashid, H., Barker, A., Islam, M. and Islam, N. 2013. Effectiveness of farmer
information needs assessment as perceived by the farmers. Journal of
International Agricultural and Extension Education, 20(2): 34-50.
Meganathan, N., Selvakumar, K.N., Prabu, M., Pandian, A.S.S. and Kumar, G.S. 2010.
Constraint analysis of tribal livestock farming in Tamil Nadu. Tamilnadu Journal
of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 6(1): 12-18.
Meitei, L. S. and Devi, T. 2009. Farmers information needs in rural Manipur: an

assessment. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 56: 35-40.
120
Meshram, M., Khare, N.K. and Singh, S.R.K. 2020. Socio-economic profile of integrated
farming system practicing farmers in Madhya Pradesh State. The Pharma
Innovation Journal, 9(4): 155-159.
Minhaj, S.U., Khandi, S.A., Bafanda, R.A., Bhushan, B., Choudhary, F. and Khateeb,
A.M. 2019. Constraints perceived by dairy farmers in the adoption of improved
animal husbandry practices in Doda district. International Journal of Livestock
Research, 9(2): 319-326.
Mishra, N.K., Landge, S.P., Banthiya V.V., Chopade, S.S., Dhok, A.P. and Patil, D.V.
2019. Perceived information needs of dairy farmers from Nagpur district of
Maharashtra. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied
Sciences, 8(11): 2189-2186.
Mohapatra, A.S., Behera, R. and Sahu, U.N. 2012. Constraints faced by tribal
entrepreneurs in dairy farming enterprise. International Journal of Physical and
Social Sciences, 2(7): 171-184.
Nande, M.P., Gawande, S.H., Patil, A.M. and Khode, N.V. 2009. Information seeking
behaviour of dairy farmers in Nagpur district of Maharashtra. Journal of
Community Mobilization and Sustainable Development, 4(1): 99-102.
Nandi, R. and Nedumaran, S. 2019. Agriculture extension system in India: A meta-

analysis. Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 10(3): 473-479.
Naveed, M. A and Anwar, M. A. 2013. Agricultural information needs of Pakistani

farmers. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 18 (3): 13-23.
NSSO, 2005. Situation assessment survey of farmers: Access to modern technology for
farming., Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of
India. New Delhi. 59th round (January–December 2003), Report No.
499(59/33/2).
Pata, B.A., Odedra, M.D., Savsani, H.H., Ahlawat, A.R., Patbandha, T.K. and Marandi,
S. 2018. Constraints faced by buffalo owners in Junagadh and Porbandar districts
of Gujarat. Journal of Animal Research, 8(6): 1081-1085.
121
Patel, N.B., Saiyed, L.H., Rao, T.K.S., Rana, R.S., Modi, R.J. and Sabapara, G.P. 2013.
Status and constraints of dairying in the tribal households of Narmada Valley of
Gujarat-India. Animal Science Reporter, 7(3): 31-37.
Phand, S., Tiwari, R. and Sharma, M.C. 2009. Assessment of information need of dairy
owners in Maharashtra. Journal of Community Mobilization and Sustainable
Development, 4(2): 4-9.
Prajapati, V.S. 2016. Socio-economic status of livestock farmers of Navasari district of

South Gujarat. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 8(13) :0975-3710.
Prasad, N. and Ponraj, P. 2016. Sources of information in adoption of scientific dairy

farming. Advances in Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 4 (2): 13-18.
Prasad, N., Dalal, R.S., Singh, S.P., and Sangwan, S.S. 2006. Various channels of
information used by dairy farmers in adoption of animal husbandry
practices. Haryana Veterinarian, 45: 71-75.
Rajpoot, J.S., Kirad, K.S., Badaya, A.K. and Chauhan, S.S. 2018. Constraints faced by
dairy farmers while adopting animal management practices in Dhar district of
Madhya Pradesh, India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and
Applied Sciences, 7(01): 3163-3166.
Ram, D.H., Kumar, R., Chaudhari, G.M., Vekariya, S.J. and Savsani, H.H. 2018. A
socio-economic profile of the unorganized dairy farmers. International Journal of
Agricultural Science and Research, 8(5): 49-54.
Ramkumar, S., Garforth, C. and Rao, S.V.N. 2003. Information kiosk for dissemination
of cattle health knowledge: Evaluation report based on preliminary findings of
research. Available at: http://www.dfidahp.org. Accessed on 14 September, 2021.
Rathod, P.K., Chander, M. and Bangar, Y. 2016. Use of mobiles in dairying for
information dissemination: A multi-stakeholder analysis in India. Indian Journal
of Animal Sciences, 86(3): 348-354.
122
Ravikumar, S., Reddy, K.V.R. and Rao B.S. 2007. Farmers’ choice for cost recovery of
veterinary services in different livestock holding systems- A case study of India.
Livestock Research for Rural Development: 19(5): 66.
Sabapara, G.P., Fulsoundar, A.B. and Kharadi, V.B. 2014. Personal, socio-economic
characteristics of dairy animal owners and their relationship with knowledge of
dairy husbandry practices in Surat district of Gujarat. Journal of Animal
Research, 4(2): 175-186.
Sachan, R., Sankhala, G., and Singh, P. 2018. Correlation analysis of socio-economic
variables with adoption of buffalo husbandry practices. International Journal of
Livestock Research, 8(1), 149-157.
Sammadar, A. 2006. Traditional and Post-Traditional: A study of agricultural rituals in

relation to technological complexity among rice producers in two zones of West
Bengal, India. Journal of Culture and Agriculture, 28(2): 108-121.
Sarita, Singh, S.P., Gautam and Ahuja, R., 2017. An analysis of constraints perceived by
dairy farmers in Murrah tract of Haryana state. International Journal of Pure and
Applied Biosciences, 5(5): 1048-1053.
Senthilkumar, S. and Chander, M. 2009. Constraints perceived by dairy farmers in

accessing ICT-enabled village information centres. Indian Journal of Animal
Research, 43(4): 282-284.
Senthilkumar, S., Manivannan, C. and Sureshkannan, S., 2020. Development of mobile

app for sheep and goat farming. International Journal of Development
Extension, 11(1).
Sharma, A. and Singh, A.K. 2016. Information needs of farm women for efficient
farming in Uttarakhand. Journal of Agricultural Search, 3(2): 122-126.
Sharma, A. K., Jha, S.K., Kumar, V., Sachan, R.C. and Kumar, A. 2008. Critical analysis
of information sources and channels preferred by rapeseed-mustard farmers.
Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 8(3): 42-45.
123
Sharma, G. R. K. 2016. Effectiveness of multimedia modules on dissemination of

knowledge among the dairy farmers. Journal of Research and Development,
4(1):1-4.
Shweta, K. 2014. AI for dairy development in Ranchi district of Jharkhand. Indian

Research Journal of Extension Education, 14(1): 90-92.
Siddiki, M.A., Amin, M.R., Kabir, A.K., Faruque, M.O. and Khandaker, Z.H., 2015.
Socio-economic status of buffalo farmers and the performances of buffaloes at
Lalpur Upozila of Natore district in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Animal
Science, 44(3): 157-165.
Singh, A., Sidhu, S., Hundal, J. and Chahal, U. 2016. Information sources for Indian
livestock farmers. Journal of Livestock Science, 7: 150-156.
Singh, H., Singh, J., Verma, H.K. and Kansal, S.K. 2020. Milk quality and safety issues
inside the farm gate of dairy farmers of Punjab (India). Indian Journal of Dairy
Science, 73(6): 614-624.
Singh, J., Kumar, P. and Singh, A. 2018. Constraint analysis of traditional methods of
extension communication in adoption of scientific dairy practices. International
Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 7(08): 4522-4532.
Singh, J., Kumar, P. and Singh, A. 2019. Dissemination of information to dairy farmers
in Jammu and Kashmir: Developing a web module. Information Development.
XX: 1-13.
Singh, K.M., Kumar, A. and Singh, R.K., 2015. Role of information and communication
technologies in Indian agriculture: An overview. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/
10.2139/ssrn.2570710. Accessed on 14 September, 2021.
Singh, N., Malhotra, P. and Singh, J. 2016. Information needs and seeking behaviour of
dairy farmers of Punjab. Indian Journal of Dairy Science, 69(1): 98-104.
Singh, P., Bhatti, J.S., Hundal, J.S. and Kansal, S.K. 2015. Constraints faced by farmers
in adoption of dairy as entrepreneurship. Haryana Veterinarian, 54(1): 67-69.
124
Singh, P.K., Sankhala, G. and Singh, P.K. 2018. Perception of dairy farmers about
Gangatiri cattle rearing in eastern Uttar Pradesh. Indian Journal of Dairy
Science, 71(5): 496-501.
Singh, P.R., Singh, M. and Jaiswal, R.S. 2004. Constraints and strategies in rural
livestock farming in Almora district of hilly Uttaranchal. Indian Journal of
Animal Research, 38(2): 91-96.
Singh, S.P. and Sangwan, S.S. 2017. Perceived training needs of buffalo dairy farmers
regarding scientific animal husbandry practices in Haryana. Asian Journal of
Agricultural Extension, Economics and Sociology, 21(1): 1-7.
Sreeram, V. and Gupta, J. 2017. Mobile-based applications for livestock information

dissemination: the way forward. Journal of Global Communication, 10(2): 84-90.
Sriram, N., Manimekalai, V. And Kumar, M.N. 2019. The relationship between socio-
economic characteristics and information utilization behavior of farmers in
Tiruvanamalai district. International Journal of Educational Science and
Research, 9(4): 21-28
Starasts, A.M. 2004. Battling the knowledge factor: a study of farmers’ information
Seeking learning and knowledge process with an online environment in
Queensland. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Queensland, Australia.
Subash, S., Gupta, J. and Babu, G.P. 2015. Information needs assessment and
prioritization of dairy farmers. Journal of Krishi Vigyan, 4 (1): 51-55.
Sumanth, N., Sanjay, P., Kaveri, K.R., Moitreyee, S.S. and Raj, S. 2020. Agricultural
Extension and Support Systems in India: An Agricultural Innovation Systems
(AIS) Perspective (Karnataka, Maharashtra and West Bengal States of India).
Discussion Paper 20, MANAGE- Centre for Agricultural Extension Innovations,
Reforms and Agripreneurship, National Institute of Agricultural Extension
Management (MANAGE), Hyderabad, India.
125
Susan, K., Chimoita, E.L., Mburu, J., & Wanjala, T., 2019. The effectiveness of
communication channels for the uptake of modern reproductive technologies in
dairy cattle: The case of Kangema, Murang’a County, Republic of
Kenya. International Journal, 5(2), 242-249.
Teja, J. 2013. Effectiveness of mobile telephony in dissemination of information among

livestock based WSHGs – An exploratory study. M.V.Sc. Thesis, Sri
Venkateswara Veterinary University, Hyderabad, India.
Thakur, D. 2016. Informal education needs in dairying and livestock sector. Agriculture
Extension in South Asia, 56: 1-10.
Thuo, M.W. and Njoroge, R.W., 2018. Information Needs and Seeking Behavior of
Young Small-Scale Dairy Farmers in Murang’a County. Kenya. Journal of
Applied Information Science, 6(2): 21-27.
Tiwari, Y., Sharma, H.O. and Awasthi, P.K. 2021. Constraints faced by the respondents
in existing farming systems in Madhya Pradesh. The Pharma Innovation Journal,
10(3): 103-106.
Tripathi, H., Ramesh, N., Dixit, V.B., Kumar, D. and Singh, S. 2021. Assessment and
prioritization of information needs in buffalo production system perceived by
farmers to develop mobile apps as an extension service delivery tool. Buffalo
Bulletin, 40(1): 123-133.
Upadhyay, S. and Desai, C.P. 2011. Participation of farm women in animal husbandry in
Anand District of Gujarat. Journal of Community Mobilization and Sustainable
Development, 6 (2): 117-121.
Vekariya, S.J., Kumar, R., Savsani, H., Kotadiya, C., Chaudhari, G. and Chatrabhuji, B.
2016. Socio-economic profile of Maldhari dairy farmers of South Saurashtra
region. Current Agriculture Research Journal. 4: 186-190.
Vijay, N., Bhanotra, A.K., Sawant, M., Yankam, S.R. and Akshay, G. 2019. Socio-
personal and economic profile of ITK practicing dairy farmers in Palghar district
of Maharashtra. International Journal of Farm Sciences, 9(4): 15-19.
126
Wijngaert, L.V.D. 1999. Matching media – Information need and new media choice. Vol.
4, Telematica Institute Fundamental Research Series, Enschede, Netherland. p:
124.
Appendix
Appendix
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of

Jammu
Division of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension Education
INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
Title of Research Problem: Information Need Assessment Of Buffalo Farmers In
Jammu District.
Name of Respondent: ……………………Name of village: ……………………………………..

Name of block: …………………………..Name of tehsil: ………………………………………
Name of district: ………………………..
Mobile no.: ……………………………… Date: ……………………….
Part I
Socio-economic Profile of the respondent
1. Age ( Years): …………………………………….
2. Education (No. of years of formal education completed): ………………………………
S No. Category Score
1. Illiterate 0
2. Can read only 1
3. Can read and write 2
4. Primary School 3
5. Middle School 4
6. High and 10+2 5
7. Graduation and above 6
3. Family type: Joint/nuclear
4. Family size:
No. of family members:
Male Female Children Total
5. Land holdings: ………………………………….
Category Size-Class Score

Landless No land 0
Marginal Below 1.00 hectare 1
Small 1.00-2.00 hectare 2
Semi- Medium 2.00-4.00 hectare 3
Medium 4.00-10.00 hectare 4
10.0 hectare and above
Large 5
6. Herd Size:
Animal In Dry Heifer Female Male Bull/bullock Total

lactation calves calves
Buffalo
Cattle
Others
7. Occupation:
S.NO Category Main (01) Subsidiary (02)
1. Agriculture
2. Animal Husbandry
3. Private Job
4. Retd./Pension
5. Business/Shop
6. Govt. Job
7. Student
8. Casual labor
9. MGNREGA
10. Others
8. Income from Animal Husbandry practices: …………………………..
9. Total annual income:
i. From dairying: Rs……………………………

ii. From agriculture: Rs…………………………
iii. Other sources: Rs…………………………….
iv. Total: Rs………………………………………
10. Social Participation:
S.No. Organisation Member Office bearer

1. Panchayat
2. Milk producer co-operative society
3. Farmer Producer Organisations (FPO)
4. Self help group (SHG)
5. Farmers discussion group
6. Religious committees
7. Political Organisation
8. Sarpanch/Panch/Pradhan
9. Others
11. Communication profile/ Source of Information:
1. Mass media exposure

S.No. Mass media No Yes
1. Radio
2. Television
3. Mobile phone
4. Internet
5. Newspaper/magazines/bulletins
6. Short film
7. Documentary
8. Kisan call centre
9. Farm publication
10. Veterinary camps
11. Kisan melas/cattle show
12. Exhibitions
13. Folk media
14 Others
2. Extension contact
S.No. Extension personnel/agency No Yes
1. Department of Animal
Husbandry (VAS/Livestock
Assistant)
2. Department of Agriculture
(AO)
3. Scientists from State/Central
Universities
4. Private input dealers
5. KVK personnel
6. Progressive dairy farmers
7. Milk union supervisors
8. Others
12. Information Seeking Behaviour:
Cosmopoliteness-localiteness:
Whom do you contact for getting information?

S.No. Information sources Always (2) Occasional (1) Never (0)
A. Personal Localite
1. Family
2. Friends and relatives
3. Progressive farmers
4. Neighbors
5. Technical persons
6. Village leader
7. Religious head
8. Veterinary/ agriculture
student
B. Personal Cosmopolite
1. Single Window System
a) Veterinary officer/doctor
b) Private medicine dealer
c) Milk cooperative society
d) Personnels of voluntary
organizations
e) Agri-Input dealers
2. Panchayat samiti
a) Gram sevak
b) Rural development officer
c) Agriculture extension officer
d) Block development officer
3. University
a) Livestock assistant
b) Subject matter Specialist
c) Scientist
4. Bank
a) Agriculture officer
b) Veterinary officer
c) Branch officer
d) Branch manager
Part II
Information needs of the buffalo farmers

Information about Most needed Needed Least needed
1. Scientific and low cost
animal shed preparation
2. Aeration or ventilation in
shed.
3. Summer and winter
management of buffalos.
4. Care of buffaloes (before,
during and after
parturition).
5. Care of new born calf
(dehorning, weaning and
castration).
6. Clean milk production
7. Milking techniques (Best
Milking method and Best
Time of milking)
8. Milk testing techniques
(Normal and mastitic milk)
9. Preservation of milk
10. Dung disposal.
11. Manure utilization
12. Cleaning and sanitization
of shed.
13. Maintenance of farm
records.
Information about Most needed Needed Least Needed
1. Feeding according to age,
sex, weight
2. Concentrate feeding
3. Mineral mixture
supplementation
4. Enrichment of poor quality
roughage and its storage.
5. Preparation of economical
and balanced ration
6. Feeding of urea molasses
block.
7. Importance of salt in feed
8. Importance of colostrum
feeding
9. Importance of clean
feeding and watering
10. Fodder production for
buffalos
11. Nutrition management of
breeding buffalo.
12. Feeding of pregnant
buffalo
13. Feeding of lactating
buffalo
14. Feeding of new born calf.
15. Feeding of sick buffalo.

1. Breed selection
2. Breeding age and weight
3. Selection of parent stock
and breeding strategy
4. Care of breeding bull.
5. Indigenous breeds of the
region.
6. Advantages of crossbred
over indigenous breed.
7. Heat detection and correct
time of mating.
8. Pregnancy diagnosis
9. Service after calving
10. Practice of reducing
chance of repeat breeding
and anestrus.
11. Delayed puberty
12. Silent heat
13. Veneral diseases
14. Peripartum care and
management.
15. Artificial insemination in
buffalo with improved
germplasm.
16. Infertility problems
17. AI centers nearby

1. Signs of common diseases
of buffalo
2. Precautions when animal
is sick.
3. Information about the
common zoonotic
diseases.
4. Deworming schedule
5. Vaccination schedule.
6. Diagnosis of contagious
diseases and their
treatment
7. First aid treatment
8. Deficiency diseases of
animals and their
symptoms.
9. Isolation of diseased
animals and reporting
same to the vet
10. Proper disposal of dead
carcass.

Information about Much needed Needed Least Needed
1. Information about credit
facilities.
2. Information about
institutional and non
institutional loans.
3. Information about Farmer
producer organization
(FPO) and it’s benefits.
4. Mode of disbursement
government schemes
subsidies.
investments.
8. Information of local
market.
9. Insurance of animal.
10. Information regarding
Pashu kisan credit card.
Information about demand
11. and supply of the products
in market.
12. Information about value
addition of milk.
13. Marketing of milk and
milk products.
14. Selling milk through
cooperatives
15. Purchasing animals from
reliable sources
PART III
SOURCES AND CHANNELS OF INFORMATION
A. INFORMATION SOURCES
S.No. Sources Always Sometimes Rarely
1. Veterinary assistant surgeon

2. Agriculture officer
3. Livestock assistant
4. Extension officer
5. Progressive livestock owners
6. Local leader
7. Panchayat member
8. Co-operative personnel
9. Neighbors
10. Friends
11. Relatives
12. Subject Matter Specialists/
Scientists
13. Others
B. CHANNELS OF INFORMATION
S.No. Channels Always Sometimes Rarely
1. Radio
2. Television
3. Mobile phone
4. Internet
5. Veterinary hospital
6. State/Centre University
7. Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK)
8. Field trips/field visits
9. Newspaper/Magazine
10. Farm Publications
11. Short film
12. Documentary
13. Folk media( Puppet show,
drama etc.)
14. Exhibition
15. Demonstrations
16. Trainings
17. Others
PART-IV
CONSTRAINTS OF ASSESSING INFORMATION NEEDS OF THE BUFFALO
FARMERS
GENERAL CONSTRAINTS
S.No Constraints Very serious Serious Somewhat
serious
1. Lack of awareness about
information delivery.
2. Poor financial condition to
access information.
3. Lower literacy rate.
4. Inefficient extension personnel
5. Language barrier
6. Lack of buffalo specific
information and excess of
unrelated information
7. Lack of infrastructure
(electricity/transport)
8. Lack of communication
facilities and technology
(internet/mobile/computer)
9. Pre conceived notion that
traditional method is better
than sustainable method.
10. Long distance from
information centres.
11. Lack of interest of young
generation in animal rearing.
12. Lack of training of farmers.

serious
1. Lack of finance for dairy
management practices.
2. Lack of information about
keeping up to date
management records.
3. Lack of information about new
born calf management.
importance of sanitation and
hygiene
clean milking practices.
6. Lack of information about the
milk preservation.
7. Non availablility of transport
facility for timely sale of milk.
antibiotics in milk and their ill
effects to human population
9. Non availability of milk
testing centres.
10. Lack of infrastructure and
information about manure
utilisation.

S.No. Constraints Very serious Serious Somewhat
serious
1. Non-availability of green and
dry fodder.
preparation of economical and
balanced ration
3. High cost and lack of
information about availability
of mineral mixture/ UMMB.
preservation of fodder.
feeding according to age, sex,
weight
utilization of roughage and
concentrate.
feeding of new born calves.
nutrition management of
breeding animal.
feeding during different stages
of reproductive life of buffalo

S.No Constraints Very Serious Serious Somewhat
serious
1. Non- availability of superior
bulls for mating.
2. Lack of information about A.I.
method and perceiving it as an
unnatural process.
nearby AI centres
4. Non availability of doctors and
professionals at AI centre.
5. High charges by staff for doing
A.I in animals.
proper time of mating/
insemination after heat.
grading up technique for herd
improvement.
indigenous breeds
detection of heat signs in
animals.
precautions of abortion and
repeat breeding in buffalos

serious
signs of common diseases
disease
common zoonotic diseases.
3. Unawareness about
importance of deworming and
vaccination in buffalos
4. Unavailability of medical
store/pharmacy nearby.
5. Location of veterinary
dispensary/ hospital at a far off
place.
6. Veterinary centre/ dispensary
functioning without a
veterinary assistant surgeon
First aid treatment
8. High cost of allopathic
veterinary medicines and
veterinary consultation.
supplementation in case of
deficiency diseases.
10. No separate shed for isolation
of buffalo in case diseased
condition.
services available for animal
health care in veterinary
centres.
12. Unawareness about proper
disposal of dead carcass.
serious
1. Less information on marketing
channels
2. Less information about
credit/loan source.
3. Lack of information on value
addition of milk
4. Lack of milk processing
infrastructure.
5. Biased approach of bank
officials in providing loan to
buffalo farmers.
6. Lack of personal interest on
market and credit.
7. Distance of market from the
village.
government schemes for the
farmers
9. Risk of being in debt
right channels of investment.
11. Unawareness about animal
insurance scheme.
12. Absence of FPOs in village.
Vita
VITA
Name of the Student : Anna Singh

Father’s Name : Raj Paul Singh
Mother’s Name : Neelam Singh
Nationality : Indian
Date of Birth : 31-01-1996
Permanent home Address : 447/2 Vikas Lane, Talab Tillo, Jammu,
Jammu and Kashmir (U.T.)
EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION
Bachelor's Degree : B.V.Sc. and A.H.

University and Year : SKUAST-J (2018)
of Award
OGPA : 7.470/10.00
Master's Degree : M.V.Sc. (Veterinary and Animal Husbandry
Extension Education)
University and Year : SKUAST-J, R. S. Pura, Jammu - 2021
of Award
OGPA : 8.23/10.00
CERTIFICATE-Iv
Cartified that all the
necessary corrections as
suggested by the external
nerlevaluator and the Advisory Committee have been
duly incorporated in the
entitled "Information Need Assessment of Buffalo Farmers in Jammu District"
rhmitted by Ms. Anna Singh. Registration No. .J-19-MV-580.
br
Dr. S. A. Khandi
Major Advisor and Chairman
Advisory Committee
No::AU FVSI/ VAHEE|2031-22 | 322

Dated: 12. I 262|
Dr. Kamal Sarma

Professor and Head
Husbandry Extension Education

MVSC Thesis of Veterinary Extension Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

MVSC Thesis of Veterinary Extension Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MVSC Thesis of Veterinary Extension Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMATION NEED ASSESSMENT OF BUFFALO

FARMERS IN JAMMU DISTRICT

Thesis submitted to Faculty of Veterinary Sciences and Animal Husbandry

MASTER OF VETERINARY SCIENCE

Division of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension Education

This is to certify that the thesis entitled Information Need Assessment of

for the degree Master of Veterinary

under my supervision and

have been duly acknowledged.

Head of the Division

for the degree.

Place: R.S.Pura, Jammu

Date: 3 0. 01. 2o21

Advisory Committee Members:

Dr. Pranav Kumar

Dr. M.A. Malik

No. J-19-MV-580, to the faculty of Post Graduate Studies. Sher-e-Kashmir University of

degree of Master of Veterinary Science in Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension

Dr. S.A. Khandi

Dr. Kamal Sarma

Dr. M.S. Bhadwal

at SKUAST-Jammu. The academics emvironment and freedom in this

institute led me to the precise path of research.

T consider it my privilege to express an immense sense of gratitude to my major

advisor Dr. S. A. Khandi, Assistant Professor, Division of Veterinary and Animal

which will act as guiding force for my whole life

and Head, Division of

their valuable suggestions and inspiration

Division of Veterinary and Animal

Sharma, Dr. Rahul Bajroliya. Dr.

for their wholehearted

and affection during tough times

Paul Singh and Neelam

ngh for their motivation. thoughts and moral support

provide all the necessary facilities and guidance.

Place: R.S. Pura

Dated: 3o 09 do U (Anna Singh)

Jammu district using a pre tested and well structured

Signature of Major Advisor

CHAPTER PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 8-21

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 22-40

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 106-112

A.I. Artificial Insemination

A.O Agriculture Officer

et al. and others

GoI Government of India

viz. it is permitted to see

MPS Mean Percent Score

e.g. For example

GDP Gross Domestic Products

NSSO National Sample Survey Office

SHG Self Help Group

KVK Krishi Vigyan Kendra

VLDA Veterinary and Livestock Development Assistant

Fig. 2: Comparison of buffalo population of India in 2012 and 2019

As agriculture system becomes more complex, farmers’ access to reliable, timely