As the trade liberalization in agriculture and dairy products has progressed, attention has increasingly focused on technical measures such as food safety, regulations, labeling requirements, and quality and compositional standards. The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) sets important requirements for adoption and implementation of food safety and quality and recognizes the standards, guidelines, and recommendations determined by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC). CAC standards have been formulated for a majority of dairy products, such as maximum permissible levels of contaminants/additives and hygienic requirements for production. However, there has been increased concern about these measures, particularly in the case of smallholder dairy production systems, as their application necessarily adds to the transactions cost of international trade.
Figure 2.6 Anand Pattern cooperative milk producers' organization
Figure 2.7 Producer-processor linkages: Private dairy plants
Source: Personal discussions with private sector.
The chemical contaminants for which CAC standards have been set include heavy metals (lead), 85 pesticide residues, and 10 veterinary drug residues in milk and dairy products. However, the Indian national standards are lower than international/developed country standards, and infrastructure is deficient due to lack of resources and inadequate information. In the case of lead, for example, maximum levels of 0.05 ppm in butter and 0.02 ppm in milk have been recommended by the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants, whereas the Indian standard is 2.5 ppm for milk. The CAC has also set maximum residue limit (MRL) for 85 pesticide residues, compared with India's 24 pesticides. Likewise, the CAC has set MRLs for 10 veterinary drug residues, whereas India has not yet set MRLs for veterinary drugs. The 33rd Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants has recommended an MRL of 0.5 ppb for Aflatoxin M1 in milk, compared to an Indian national limit of 0.03 ppm. The CAC has incorporated several provisions in its proposed Model Certificate for Export and Import of Milk Products that would be extremely difficult for most developing countries, including India, to comply with.
The CAC is also concerned about the microbiological quality of milk and dairy products, and has recommended measures to minimize microbiological contamination. CAC guidelines stipulate that the raw material should be produced in a way that minimizes bacterial count, growth, and contamination. To achieve this, the CAC recommends the application of the Principles of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system.
Smallholder production in India is often based on hand milking, with few or no cooling facilities and inappropriate animal housing and poor animal health protection in most parts of the country. The Indian dairy industry will have to gear up to meet international regulatory requirements and ensure that dairy plants get HACCP certification. Some steps have already been taken in this direction, but there is a long way to go. The National Dairy Development Board, under its Perspective Plan 2010, has started a Clean Milk Production Programme, and more than 12,000 village dairy cooperative societies in 16 states have been brought under it. Similar initiatives have been taken by various state milk marketing federations and other agencies. Sixty-three milk-processing plants/dairies in the cooperative sector have obtained International Standards Organization (ISO)/HACCP certification with assistance from NDDB. Private sector dairy plants have taken similar steps to ensure the quality of raw material; for example, Nestle has provided bulk coolers to farmer societies and launched awareness programs in the area. However, current levels of infrastructure and financial resources are too low to achieve the desired standards.
Animal welfare, which includes establishing norms for animal protection on the farm, during transport, and at the time of slaughter, is a growing source of concern among animal protection organizations, consumers, and decision makers. Although animal welfare is not currently covered under the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement, these issues are coming under increasing public scrutiny. Two main types of policies relate to animal welfare: (i) to support production methods that promote animal welfare and (ii) to impose requirements on imports so that acceptable standards of animal welfare are applied during production and transportation. National authorities must seek to reduce the negative effects of commercialization of livestock farming and trade on animal welfare. The WTO recognizes the Office International des Epizooties (OIE) as the international organization responsible for the development and promotion of international animal health standards, guidelines, and recommendations affecting trade in live animals and livestock products. These OIE activities cover safety procedures for raw materials during production and first-stage processing before they enter the market.
2.3.1 Animal Diseases and Programs for Control of Diseases
Since the introduction of an extensive crossbreeding program, the susceptibility of these exotic breeds to various diseases has increased. In order to reduce morbidity and mortality, state governments are attempting to provide better health care facilities through polyclinics and veterinary hospitals/dispensaries/first-aid centers, including mobile veterinary dispensaries. At present, 26,717 polyclinics/hospitals/dispensaries and 28,195 veterinary aid centers supported by about 250 disease diagnostic laboratories are functioning in the states and union territories. In addition, there are about 26 veterinary vaccine production units, 19 in the public sector and 7 in the private sector. The import of vaccines by private agencies is also permitted. The statewide details of veterinary institutions in the country are given in Annex Table 2.7.
The Government of India and the state governments have initiated various schemes to provide livestock health services and disease control. In most of the states, a large proportion of the budget is spent on salary and wages and little is left for providing services. The Government of India has proposed a comprehensive scheme, "Livestock Health and Disease Control" in three components: (i) control of animal diseases, (ii) Foot and Mouth Disease Control Programme (new), and (iii) National Project on Rinderpest Eradication, by merging various schemes during the Tenth Five Year Plan.
The central government provides assistance to state/union territory governments for control of tuberculosis, brucellosis, and swine fever; sterility and abortions in bovines; control of emerging and exotic diseases; strengthening of state veterinary biological production centers and disease diagnostic laboratories; and creation of disease-free zones. The incidence of livestock diseases in India during 2001 is given in Annex Table 2.8.
Since in March 1998, the country has been provisionally free from rinderpest disease; however, the government has initiated a National Project on Rinderpest Eradication to achieve the final stage of freedom from that disease and from contagious bovine pleuro pneumonia by strengthening veterinary services as per the guidelines prescribed by the OIE. Surveys have been initiated in about 1,162 villages to generate information. Eradication of rinderpest is a three-stage process: (i) provisional freedom from the disease, (ii) substantive freedom from the disease, (iii) freedom from rinderpest infection. The successful implementation of this program would benefit livestock farmers, boost export of livestock products, and pave the way for control programs against other diseases, such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD).
FMD is a major disease facing Indian livestock; it reduces milk yields and draft power. The disease is prevalent all over the country. Strains O, A, and Asia1 are active, while strain C has not been reported since 1996. No systematic control and vaccination program against FMD exists in the country, even though there is a massive but sporadic vaccination program. More than 25 million vaccinations are carried out every year against FMD, but this program is ineffective, as FMD protection is based on herd immunity. Over 85 percent of the individuals in an area have to be vaccinated to establish herd immunity. The population at risk in the country (all susceptible species) is about 420 million, and barely 5 percent of the animals at risk are vaccinated. The central government has proposed a new Foot and Mouth Disease Control Programme in specified areas in the country under a macro-management approach during the Tenth Plan.
2.3.2 Environmental Concerns
Livestock and livestock waste produce ammonia, carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, nitrous oxide, and other trace gases, which affect the world's atmosphere and contribute to global warming. Of all the gases, methane is the most important in causing global climate change. It is largely a product of animal production and manure management, which contribute about 16 percent of total methane volume.
In India, livestock is an integral part of crop farming, and resource use in mixed farming (crop + livestock) is often highly self-reliant, as nutrients and energy flow from crops to livestock and back. Such a system offers positive incentives to compensate for environmental effects ("internalize the environmental costs"), making them less damaging or more beneficial to the natural resource base. Pollution problems in rural areas are internalized, as the small amount of waste produced is used as fuel or organic manure. However, small-scale urban or peri-urban production systems (which are dependent on external supplies of feed, energy, and other inputs and are strongly market driven), if not properly controlled, may create environmental pollution. Therefore, the challenge is to identify regulations and incentives that force the polluter to internalize the environmental costs at a minimum cost to the consumer. In India, there are no environmental regulations related to milk production in rural areas; there are regulations for peri-urban and urban dairy farming, but the implementation is extremely poor.
Annex Table 2.1 Per capita monthly consumption expenditure for a period of 30 days on milk and milk products in rural and urban areas: 1970-71 to 1999-2000 (Rupees)
NSS Round |
Milk and milk products |
Meat, egg, fish |
Total food |
Total nonfood |
Total exp. |
Avg. size of household |
25th Round (1970-71) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
3.03 (11.7) |
1.02 |
25.98 |
9.33 |
35.91 |
- |
Urban |
5.01 (14.7) |
1.90 |
34.04 |
18.81 |
52.85 |
- |
27th Round (1972-73) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
3.22 |
1.09 |
32.16 |
12.01 |
44.17 |
5.22 |
Urban |
5.91 |
2.07 |
40.84 |
22.49 |
63.33 |
4.72 |
32nd Round (1977-78) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
5.29 |
1.84 |
44.33 |
24.56 |
68.89 |
5.22 |
Urban |
9.16 |
3.33 |
57.67 |
38.48 |
96.15 |
4.89 |
38th Round (1982) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
8.45 |
3.40 |
73.73 |
38.71 |
112.45 |
5.20 |
Urban |
15.15 |
5.92 |
96.97 |
67.06 |
164.03 |
4.85 |
42nd Round (1986-87) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
13.48 |
5.25 |
92.55 |
48.38 |
140.93 |
5.26 |
Urban |
23.32 |
9.25 |
128.99 |
93.66 |
222.65 |
4.79 |
43rd Round (1987-88) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
13.63 |
5.11 |
100.82 |
57.28 |
158.10 |
5.08 |
Urban |
23.83 |
8.85 |
139.75 |
110.18 |
249.93 |
4.71 |
44th Round (1988-89) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
15.65 |
6.12 |
111.80 |
63.30 |
175.10 |
5.17 |
Urban |
26.74 |
10.59 |
152.49 |
114.36 |
266.85 |
4.87 |
45th Round (1989-90) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
18.35 |
6.84 |
121.78 |
67.68 |
189.46 |
4.96 |
Urban |
29.53 |
11.42 |
165.46 |
132.54 |
298.00 |
4.66 |
46th Round (1990-91) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
19.04 |
7.08 |
133.34 |
68.70 |
202.12 |
4.81 |
Urban |
32.37 |
12.27 |
185.77 |
140.00 |
326.75 |
4.55 |
47th Round (July-Dec. 1991) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
21.90 |
8.20 |
153.50 |
89.91 |
243.50 |
5.00 |
Urban |
37.21 |
13.49 |
207.77 |
162.57 |
370.34 |
4.73 |
48th Round (Jan. -Dec. 1992) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
23.00 |
8.00 |
161.00 |
87.00 |
247.00 |
5.20 |
Urban |
42.00 |
14.00 |
224.00 |
175.00 |
399.00 |
4.80 |
49th Round (Jan. -June 1993) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
23.00 |
9.00 |
159.00 |
85.00 |
244.00 |
5.10 |
Urban |
41.00 |
14.00 |
221.00 |
162.00 |
382.00 |
4.60 |
50th Round (July 1993-June 1994) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
27.00 |
9.40 |
178.00 |
104.00 |
281.00 |
4.90 |
Urban |
45.00 |
15.50 |
250.00 |
208.00 |
458.00 |
4.50 |
51st Round (July 1994-June 1995) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
27.00 |
10.00 |
189.00 |
121.00 |
309.00 |
4.90 |
Urban |
49.00 |
17.00 |
271.00 |
237.00 |
508.00 |
4.60 |
52nd Round (July 1995-June 1996) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
32.38 |
10.94 |
207.75 |
136.53 |
344.29 |
5.00 |
Urban |
56.45 |
19.11 |
299.98 |
299.28 |
599.26 |
4.60 |
53rd Round (Jan. -Dec. 1997) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
39.31 |
11.79 |
231.99 |
163.02 |
395.01 |
5.00 |
Urban |
62.75 |
19.58 |
320.26 |
325.19 |
645.44 |
4.60 |
54th Round (Jan. -June 1998) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
36.54 |
12.65 |
232.40 |
149.67 |
382.07 |
5.00 |
Urban |
64.63 |
21.94 |
339.71 |
344.57 |
684.27 |
4.70 |
55th Round (July 99-June 2000) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
42.56 (21.6) |
16.14 |
288.80 |
197.28 |
486.07 |
5.00 |
Urban |
74.18 (16.7) |
26.77 |
410.86 |
444.10 |
854.96 |
5.00 |
Source: NSSO, 2001.
Annex Table 2.2 Milk production trends in different states and union territories of India: 1991-92 to 2000-01 (thousands of metric tons)
State |
1991-92 |
1992-93 |
1993-94 |
1994-95 |
1995-96 |
1996-97 |
1997-98 |
1998-99 |
1999-00 |
2000-01 |
2001-02 |
Andhra Pradesh |
2943 |
3103 |
3766 |
4221 |
4261 |
4471 |
4473 |
4842 |
4730 |
4904 |
5145 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
7 |
21 |
21 |
22 |
42 |
44 |
43 |
45 |
45 |
45.5 |
55 |
Assam |
639 |
658 |
676 |
698 |
699 |
714 |
719 |
725 |
822 |
852 |
894 |
Bihar |
3210 |
3195 |
3215 |
3250 |
3321 |
3410 |
3420 |
3440 |
3740 |
3878 |
4068 |
Chandigarh |
34 |
37 |
38 |
39 |
41 |
42 |
43 |
43 |
42 |
44 |
46 |
Dadra and Nagar Haveli |
3 |
10 |
7 |
8 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
8 |
10 |
10 |
1 |
Daman and Diu |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
11 |
Delhi |
227 |
235 |
252 |
257 |
261 |
264 |
267 |
290 |
295 |
306 |
321 |
Goa |
28 |
30 |
33 |
36 |
37 |
37 |
38 |
41 |
43 |
45 |
47 |
Gujarat |
3591 |
3795 |
3935 |
4459 |
4608 |
4831 |
4913 |
5059 |
5124 |
5313 |
5573 |
Haryana |
3565 |
3715 |
3850 |
4062 |
4055 |
4204 |
4373 |
4527 |
4673 |
4845 |
4976 |
Himachal Pradesh |
597 |
610 |
654 |
663 |
676 |
698 |
714 |
724 |
745 |
772 |
810 |
Jammu and Kashmir |
515 |
937 |
780 |
641 |
869 |
992 |
979 |
990 |
1000 |
1037 |
1088 |
Karnataka |
2475 |
2590 |
2736 |
3003 |
3190 |
3460 |
3970 |
4231 |
4925 |
5106 |
5357 |
Kerala |
1785 |
1889 |
2001 |
2118 |
2192 |
2258 |
2343 |
2420 |
2673 |
2771 |
2907 |
Lakshadweep |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Madhya Pradesh |
4806 |
4879 |
4975 |
5047 |
5125 |
5224 |
5377 |
5442 |
5600 |
5806 |
6091 |
Maharashtra |
3955 |
4102 |
4250 |
4812 |
4991 |
5127 |
5193 |
5609 |
5810 |
5850 |
6024 |
Manipur |
83 |
83 |
84 |
64 |
57 |
61 |
62 |
65 |
67 |
69 |
73 |
Meghalaya |
50 |
52 |
53 |
54 |
57 |
58 |
59 |
61 |
65 |
67 |
71 |
Mizoram |
8 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
17 |
20 |
10 |
10 |
11 |
Nagaland |
43 |
44 |
45 |
43 |
44 |
46 |
46 |
47.5 |
49.5 |
51 |
54 |
Orissa |
505 |
542 |
565 |
584 |
648 |
687 |
672 |
733 |
795 |
824 |
865 |
Pondichery |
27 |
27 |
32 |
33 |
33 |
38 |
36 |
36 |
35 |
36 |
38 |
Punjab |
5382 |
5583 |
5970 |
6215 |
6424 |
6755 |
7165 |
7394 |
7700 |
7984 |
8375 |
Rajasthan |
4474 |
4586 |
4958 |
5103 |
5449 |
5874 |
6487 |
6923 |
5820 |
6034 |
6330 |
Sikkim |
29 |
30 |
30 |
32 |
33 |
34 |
35 |
34.5 |
43 |
44 |
46 |
Tamil Nadu |
3357 |
3468 |
3524 |
3695 |
3791 |
3976 |
4061 |
4273 |
4256 |
4413 |
4629 |
Tripura |
32 |
34 |
35 |
38 |
39 |
44 |
57 |
76 |
49 |
51 |
53 |
Uttar Pradesh |
10206 |
10649 |
10991 |
11321 |
11878 |
12387 |
12934 |
13618 |
15176 |
15735 |
16506 |
West Bengal |
3019 |
3023 |
3095 |
3250 |
3341 |
3376 |
3415 |
3441 |
3750 |
3888 |
4079 |
India |
55620 |
57962 |
60607 |
63804 |
66198 |
69147 |
71940 |
75182 |
78117 |
80817 |
84570 |
Source: NDDB, 2003.
Annex Table 2.3 Per capita availability of milk in major states and union territories in India: 1991-92 to 2000-01 (gram/day)
State |
1991-92 |
1992-93 |
1993-94 |
1994-95 |
1995-96 |
1996-97 |
1997-98 |
1998-99 |
1999-00 |
2000-01 |
Andhra Pradesh |
121 |
126 |
151 |
167 |
167 |
173 |
170 |
182 |
186 |
189 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
22 |
65 |
64 |
65 |
121 |
124 |
119 |
121 |
118 |
117 |
Assam |
78 |
79 |
80 |
81 |
80 |
80 |
79 |
79 |
88 |
89 |
Bihar |
102 |
99 |
97 |
96 |
96 |
96 |
94 |
92 |
98 |
99 |
Chandigarh |
145 |
153 |
152 |
150 |
153 |
151 |
150 |
145 |
137 |
138 |
Dadra and Nagar Haveli |
59 |
189 |
126 |
138 |
82 |
63 |
60 |
114 |
136 |
130 |
Daman and Diu |
0 |
26 |
25 |
24 |
0 |
22 |
21 |
20 |
19 |
18 |
Delhi |
66 |
66 |
68 |
67 |
65 |
63 |
62 |
65 |
63 |
63 |
Goa |
66 |
69 |
75 |
81 |
82 |
81 |
82 |
87 |
90 |
93 |
Gujarat |
238 |
247 |
251 |
278 |
282 |
290 |
289 |
291 |
289 |
294 |
Haryana |
593 |
603 |
610 |
628 |
611 |
618 |
627 |
634 |
638 |
645 |
Himachal Pradesh |
316 |
318 |
335 |
335 |
336 |
341 |
343 |
343 |
347 |
354 |
Jammu and Kashmir |
183 |
324 |
263 |
210 |
277 |
308 |
296 |
292 |
287 |
290 |
Karnataka |
151 |
155 |
161 |
174 |
182 |
195 |
220 |
231 |
264 |
270 |
Kerala |
168 |
176 |
185 |
194 |
199 |
203 |
209 |
214 |
234 |
241 |
Lakshadweep |
53 |
52 |
51 |
51 |
50 |
49 |
48 |
47 |
47 |
46 |
Madhya Pradesh |
199 |
198 |
198 |
197 |
196 |
195 |
197 |
195 |
197 |
200 |
Maharashtra |
137 |
140 |
142 |
157 |
160 |
161 |
160 |
169 |
171 |
169 |
Manipur |
124 |
121 |
119 |
88 |
77 |
80 |
79 |
81 |
81 |
81 |
Meghalaya |
77 |
78 |
78 |
77 |
79 |
79 |
78 |
78 |
81 |
82 |
Mizoram |
32 |
35 |
34 |
33 |
32 |
31 |
58 |
66 |
32 |
32 |
Nagaland |
97 |
95 |
92 |
84 |
82 |
81 |
77 |
76 |
75 |
74 |
Orissa |
44 |
46 |
47 |
48 |
53 |
55 |
53 |
57 |
61 |
62 |
Pondichery |
92 |
90 |
105 |
106 |
104 |
117 |
109 |
107 |
102 |
103 |
Punjab |
727 |
741 |
778 |
795 |
807 |
834 |
869 |
880 |
900 |
917 |
Rajasthan |
279 |
278 |
294 |
295 |
307 |
323 |
348 |
362 |
297 |
300 |
Sikkim |
195 |
197 |
191 |
198 |
198 |
199 |
199 |
190 |
225 |
229 |
Tamil Nadu |
165 |
168 |
169 |
176 |
178 |
185 |
187 |
195 |
192 |
197 |
Tripura |
32 |
33 |
34 |
36 |
37 |
41 |
52 |
68 |
43 |
44 |
Uttar Pradesh |
201 |
205 |
207 |
208 |
214 |
218 |
222 |
229 |
249 |
253 |
West Bengal |
121 |
120 |
121 |
125 |
126 |
125 |
125 |
123 |
132 |
135 |
India |
180 |
184 |
189 |
195 |
198 |
203 |
207 |
213 |
217 |
220 |
Source: NDDB, 2003.
Annex Table 2.4 Plan-wise outlay and expenditure of central and centrally sponsored schemes under animal husbandry in India: 1950-51 to 2001-02 (Rupees)
Plan/Year |
Total Plan Outlay |
Animal Husbandry |
Dairying |
Total |
|||
Outlay |
Exp. |
Outlay |
Exp. |
Outlay |
Exp. |
||
First Plan (1950-55) |
1960.0 |
14.19 |
8.22 |
7.81 |
7.78 |
22.00 |
16.00 |
Second Plan (1955-60) |
4600.0 |
38.50 |
21.42 |
17.44 |
12.05 |
55.94 |
33.47 |
Third Plan (1960-65) |
8576.5 |
54.44 |
43.40 |
36.08 |
33.60 |
90.52 |
77.00 |
Annual Plan (1966-67) |
6625.4 |
41.33 |
34.00 |
26.14 |
25.70 |
67.47 |
59.70 |
Fourth Plan (1967-72) |
15778.8 |
94.10 |
75.51 |
139.00 |
78.75 |
233.10 |
154.26 |
Fifth Plan |
39426.2 |
- |
178.43 |
- |
- |
437.54 |
232.46 |
Sixth Plan (1980-85) |
97500.0 |
60.46 |
39.08 |
336.10 |
298.34 |
396.56 |
337.42 |
Seventh Plan (1985-90) |
180000.0 |
165.19 |
102.35 |
302.75 |
374.43 |
467.94 |
476.78 |
Annual Plan (1990-91) |
- |
43.71 |
36.18 |
79.67 |
41.43 |
123.38 |
77.61 |
Annual Plan (1991-92) |
- |
57.97 |
43.28 |
97.49 |
77.99 |
155.46 |
121.27 |
Eighth Plan |
434100.1 |
400.00 |
305.43 |
900.00 |
818.05 |
1300.00 |
1123.48 |
1992-93 |
80771.0 |
56.54 |
43.85 |
99.76 |
136.69 |
156.30 |
180.54 |
1993-94 |
100120.1 |
78.26 |
54.59 |
257.74 |
216.44 |
336.00 |
271.03 |
1994-95 |
112197.1 |
98.28 |
60.64 |
224.43 |
185.09 |
322.71 |
245.73 |
1995-96 |
128590.0 |
94.00 |
66.66 |
250.00 |
179.67 |
344.00 |
246.33 |
1996-97 |
- |
103.94 |
81.04 |
155.98 |
100.29 |
259.92 |
181.33 |
Ninth Plan (1997-2002) |
2345.64 |
1076.12 |
- |
469.52 |
- |
1545.64 |
- |
1997-98 |
- |
160.15 |
94.84 |
39.00 |
29.24 |
199.15 |
124.08 |
1998-99 |
- |
170.40 |
53.03 |
50.60 |
23.97 |
221.00 |
77.00 |
1999-2000 |
- |
160.08 |
97.26 |
73.90 |
16.45 |
233.98 |
113.71 |
2000-01 |
- |
124.90 |
85.10 |
51.00 |
39.59 |
175.90 |
124.69 |
2001-02* |
- |
156.49 |
115.61 |
37.45 |
37.60 |
193.94 |
153.21 |
Note: *: Provisional.
Source: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics 2002, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India.
Annex Table 2.5 State-wise number of dairy plants registered under Milk and Milk Products Order (MMPO) in India: March 31, 2002 (capacity in thousands of liters/day)
States/Union territories |
Cooperative |
Private |
Others |
Total |
||||
No. |
Capacity |
No. |
Capacity |
No. |
Capacity |
No. |
Capacity |
|
By Central Authority |
||||||||
Andhra Pradesh |
13 |
2905 |
6 |
855 |
1 |
200 |
20 |
3960 |
Bihar |
6 |
485 |
1 |
120 |
0 |
0 |
7 |
605 |
Delhi |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8 |
6500 |
8 |
6500 |
Goa |
1 |
30 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
30 |
Gujarat |
14 |
6170 |
2 |
300 |
6 |
640 |
22 |
7110 |
Haryana |
5 |
400 |
14 |
3390 |
0 |
0 |
19 |
3790 |
Himachal Pradesh |
3 |
44 |
2 |
345 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
389 |
Karnataka |
12 |
1833 |
5 |
495 |
1 |
400 |
18 |
2728 |
Kerala |
4 |
400 |
3 |
125 |
0 |
0 |
7 |
525 |
Madhya Pradesh |
7 |
1200 |
4 |
1100 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
2300 |
Maharashtra |
17 |
3570 |
18 |
3900 |
15 |
2700 |
50 |
10170 |
Orissa |
7 |
182 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
7 |
182 |
Pondicherry |
1 |
50 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
50 |
Punjab |
12 |
1570 |
12 |
3050 |
0 |
0 |
24 |
4620 |
Rajasthan |
12 |
1290 |
9 |
1050 |
0 |
0 |
21 |
2340 |
Sikkim |
1 |
15 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
15 |
Tamil Nadu |
13 |
3880 |
4 |
526 |
0 |
0 |
17 |
4406 |
Tripura |
1 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
10 |
Uttar Pradesh |
7 |
1540 |
33 |
6664 |
0 |
0 |
40 |
8204 |
West Bengal |
2 |
216 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
820 |
4 |
1036 |
Total |
138 |
25790 |
113 |
21920 |
33 |
11260 |
284 |
58970 |
By State Registering Authorities |
||||||||
Andhra Pradesh |
0 |
0 |
9 |
588 |
0 |
0 |
9 |
588 |
Bihar |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Delhi |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Goa |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Gujarat |
3 |
110 |
1 |
390 |
1 |
30 |
5 |
530 |
Haryana |
0 |
0 |
23 |
1200 |
2 |
130 |
25 |
1330 |
Himachal Pradesh |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Karnataka |
2 |
75 |
14 |
615 |
0 |
0 |
16 |
690 |
Kerala |
7 |
365 |
4 |
113 |
2 |
35 |
13 |
513 |
Madhya Pradesh |
3 |
50 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
20 |
5 |
70 |
Maharashtra |
18 |
636 |
50 |
1675 |
23 |
695 |
91 |
3006 |
Orissa |
1 |
30 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
30 |
Pondicherry |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Punjab |
1 |
60 |
19 |
755 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
815 |
Rajasthan |
2 |
47 |
8 |
547 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
594 |
Sikkim |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Tamil Nadu |
12 |
485 |
12 |
345 |
0 |
0 |
24 |
830 |
Tripura |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Uttar Pradesh |
25 |
746 |
147 |
4177 |
0 |
0 |
172 |
4923 |
West Bengal |
0 |
0 |
3 |
90 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
90 |
Total |
74 |
2604 |
290 |
10495 |
30 |
910 |
394 |
14009 |
Total (Central + State registration) |
212 |
28394 |
403 |
32415 |
63 |
12170 |
678 |
72979 |
Source: GOI, 2002.
Annex Table 2.6 Crossbred cattle population in India by state: 2002
State/Union territories |
Cattle |
Milk cattle |
Total milk cattle |
|
Crossbred |
Indigenous |
|||
Andhra Pradesh |
10602070 |
227559 |
143062 |
1657721 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
452920 |
2330 |
51855 |
54185 |
Assam |
8000304 |
84327 |
1264863 |
1349190 |
Bihar # |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Gujarat |
6748835 |
134840 |
1346015 |
1480855 |
Goa |
87978 |
3236 |
11652 |
14888 |
Haryana |
2399832 |
166773 |
305693 |
472466 |
Himachal Pradesh |
2094511 |
161419 |
294892 |
456311 |
Jammu and Kashmir |
3175473 |
271513 |
427023 |
698536 |
Karnataka |
10831134 |
522553 |
1757415 |
2279968 |
Kerala## |
3396335 |
785357 |
329657 |
1115014 |
Madhya Pradesh |
19496874 |
58384 |
3090922 |
3149306 |
Chhatisgarh |
8852544 |
26904 |
1093102 |
1120006 |
Maharashtra |
18070537 |
732957 |
2181531 |
2914488 |
Manipur |
508264 |
12865 |
47824 |
60689 |
Meghalaya |
738262 |
7322 |
131332 |
138654 |
Mizoram |
83312 |
2492 |
3999 |
6491 |
Nagaland |
383308 |
28490 |
34253 |
62743 |
Orissa |
13810489 |
234057 |
1705325 |
1939382 |
Punjab |
2638978 |
631135 |
197287 |
828422 |
Rajasthan |
12141402 |
75376 |
2408575 |
2483891 |
Sikkim |
143024 |
13517 |
15031 |
28548 |
Tamil Nadu |
9046538 |
144617 |
131761 |
276378 |
Tripura |
1227568 |
18438 |
253841 |
272279 |
Uttar Pradesh and Uttranchal |
22047295 |
444160 |
2937289 |
3381449 |
West Bengal# |
17831665 |
296753 |
2740176 |
3036929 |
Andaman and Nicobar Islands |
60180 |
1494 |
10866 |
12360 |
Chandigarh |
7254 |
3773 |
357 |
4130 |
Delhi |
95660 |
31816 |
19461 |
51277 |
Pondicherry |
3399 |
209 |
339 |
548 |
Lakshadweep |
122621 |
16850 |
6228 |
23078 |
Daman and Diu |
5450 |
2 |
625 |
627 |
India ** |
175055016 |
5141458 |
24229351 |
29370809 |
Note: #: Census work not initiated in these states/union territories; ##: Based on 1996 census data; **: Total Excludes Bihar/Jharkhand and Dadra and Nagar Haveli.
Source: GOI, 2003.
Annex Table 2.7 Veterinary institutions in India by state, as of March 31, 1999
States/Union Territories |
Veterinary Hospitals/ Polyclinics |
Veterinary Dispensaries |
Veterinary Aid Center/Stockmen CenterMobile Dispensaries |
Andhra Pradesh |
285 |
1808 |
2889 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
1 |
93 |
169 |
Assam |
26 |
434 |
1213 |
Bihar* |
62 |
1154 |
3832 |
Goa |
4 |
26 |
52 |
Gujarat |
14 |
453 |
553 |
Haryana |
553 |
857 |
751 |
Himachal Pradesh |
334 |
1520 |
14 |
Jammu and Kashmir |
195 |
146 |
460 |
Karnataka |
244 |
803 |
2191 |
Kerala |
278 |
831 |
22 |
Madhya Pradesh$ |
772 |
2445 |
90 |
Maharashtra |
31 |
1156 |
2134 |
Manipur |
55 |
101 |
29 |
Meghalaya |
4 |
59 |
79 |
Mizoram |
5 |
40 |
101 |
Nagaland |
4 |
27 |
133 |
Orissa |
13 |
527 |
2937 |
Punjab |
1261 |
1535 |
45 |
Rajasthan |
1319 |
285 |
1276 |
Sikkim |
12 |
25 |
58 |
Tamil Nadu |
168 |
828 |
4649 |
Tripura |
9 |
44 |
371 |
Uttar Pradesh# |
2044 |
2973 |
2720 |
West Bengal |
110 |
612 |
1360 |
Chandigarh |
5 |
8 |
1 |
Delhi |
48 |
24 |
1 |
Lakshadweep |
2 |
7 |
7 |
Pondicherry |
3 |
14 |
4 |
Total |
7872 |
18845 |
28195 |
Note: *: Including Jharkhand, $: Including Chattishgarh, #: Including Uttaranchal.
Source: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics - 2002.
Annex Table 2.8 Incidence of major livestock diseases in India, January through December 2001
Disease Name |
Species Name |
Outbreaks |
Attack |
Deaths |
Foot and Mouth Disease |
Bovine |
2638 |
62499 |
1274 |
Ovine/Caprine |
21 |
12542 |
208 |
|
Swine |
28 |
163 |
29 |
|
NS |
789 |
11757 |
28 |
|
Buffalo |
14 |
6781 |
105 |
|
Subtotal |
3490 |
93742 |
1644 |
|
Haemorrhagic Septicaemia |
Bovine |
1150 |
6177 |
2867 |
Ovine/Caprine |
11 |
1439 |
149 |
|
Buffalo |
410 |
2399 |
894 |
|
Sheep and Goat |
0 |
21 |
10 |
|
NS |
32 |
505 |
39 |
|
Subtotal |
1603 |
10541 |
3959 |
|
Black Quarter |
Bovine |
840 |
2905 |
1273 |
Ovine |
0 |
45 |
41 |
|
Buffalo |
11 |
106 |
44 |
|
Subtotal |
851 |
3056 |
1358 |
|
Anthrax |
Bovine |
157 |
690 |
417 |
Ovine/Caprine |
128 |
456 |
388 |
|
Buffalo |
3 |
15 |
13 |
|
NS |
5 |
10 |
7 |
|
Subtotal |
293 |
1171 |
825 |
|
Fascioliasis |
Bovine |
625 |
5165 |
4 |
Ovine/Caprine |
52 |
1385 |
59 |
|
Buffalo |
9 |
24 |
0 |
|
Swine |
2 |
2 |
0 |
|
NS |
83 |
9273 |
368 |
|
Subtotal |
771 |
15849 |
431 |
|
Enterotoxaemia |
Ovine/Caprine |
421 |
4340 |
1694 |
Subtotal |
421 |
4340 |
1694 |
|
Blue Tongue |
Ovine/Caprine |
710 |
17983 |
1884 |
Subtotal |
710 |
17983 |
1884 |
|
Contagious Caprine Pleuro-Pneumonia |
Ovine/Caprine |
16 |
964 |
197 |
Subtotal |
16 |
964 |
197 |
|
Amphistomiasis |
Bovine |
231 |
3993 |
14 |
Caprine |
25 |
311 |
2 |
|
Buffalo |
3 |
9 |
0 |
|
NS |
8 |
190 |
0 |
|
Subtotal |
267 |
4503 |
16 |
|
Schistosomiasis |
Bovine |
37 |
257 |
0 |
Subtotal |
37 |
257 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salmanellosis |
Swine |
24 |
336 |
6 |
Bovine |
1 |
100 |
23 |
|
Subtotal |
25 |
436 |
29 |
|
Coccidiosis |
Bovine |
104 |
17840 |
373 |
Ovine/Caprine |
62 |
3745 |
0 |
|
Swine |
32 |
569 |
47 |
|
Avian |
962 |
134449 |
7690 |
|
Buffalo |
31 |
202 |
0 |
|
NS |
129 |
1053 |
194 |
|
Subtotal |
1320 |
157858 |
8304 |
|
Ranikhet (New Castle) Disease |
Avian |
1387 |
71478 |
27994 |
Subtotal |
1387 |
71478 |
27994 |
|
Rabies |
Bovine |
83 |
384 |
297 |
Canine |
20 |
71 |
70 |
|
Buffalo |
6 |
43 |
41 |
|
Caprine |
10 |
65 |
65 |
|
NS |
11 |
91 |
75 |
|
Subtotal |
130 |
654 |
548 |
|
Babesiosis |
Bovine |
447 |
9454 |
26 |
Buffalo |
15 |
33 |
0 |
|
Caprine |
27 |
196 |
0 |
|
Camel |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
NS |
2 |
56 |
1 |
|
Subtotal |
492 |
9740 |
27 |
|
Mastitis |
Bovine |
155 |
25624 |
9 |
Buffalo |
20 |
162 |
0 |
|
Caprine |
26 |
3940 |
0 |
|
Subtotal |
201 |
29726 |
9 |
|
Brucellosis |
Bovine |
2 |
34 |
1 |
Ovine/Caprine |
1 |
26 |
0 |
|
Subtotal |
3 |
60 |
1 |
Source: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics 2002, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India.