Economics of Livestock Production in Various Ecological Zones of Punjab - Survey 26-08-09

L&DDD
Economics of Livestock Production

In
Various Ecological Zones of
Punjab
By:
Dr Maqsood Ahmad
Department of Livestock Economics
University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore-54000
Tel: 042-9211449-ext.245, Cell: 0321-6970156,
Email: drmaqsoodvet@yahoo.com
Supervised By:
Prof. Dr Tallat Naseer Pasha
Dean Faculty of Life Sciences & Business Management

University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore-54000
Livestock & Dairy Development

Department
Planning & Evaluation Directorate
Government of Punjab,
Lahore
L&DDD
Abbreviations
Abbreviatio
n
L&DD
Abbreviated
FC
VC
TC
GF
DF
Conc.
Equip.
Elec
IR
TFC
TVC
Depp.
Vet. Serv.
Fixed Cost
Variable Cost
Total Cost
Green Fodder
Dry Fodder
Concentrates
Equipment
Electricity
Interest rate
Total Fixed Cost
Total Variable Cost
Depreciation
Veterinary Services
Livestock & Dairy Development Board,

Punjab
L&DDD
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sr. #
Contents
Page #
01
Summary
03
02
Introduction
04
03
Objectives of Study
05
04
Methodology & Criterion

o Target Areas
o Methodology
06
06
09
05
Economics of milk production

Gujranwala area
Bhakkar area
Jehlum area
Pakpattan
Faisalabad area
Lahore area
10
11
15
19
23
28
34
06
Beef Production in Punjab
37
07
Peri-Urban Commercial Farming &Marketing Chain
38
08
Milk & Milk By-Products Processing And Marketing
40
09
Sources of Milk Production
41
10
Average Unit Productivity
42
11
Cost of Milk Production
44
12
Milk Supply Channels; Cost and Sale
45
13
Salve Value of Milk
46
14
Managemental Practices
47
15
Milk By-Products
52
16
Major Findings
55
17
Recommendations
57
14
References
58
Table & Chart Index

Sr
1
Table ID
G-1
Description
Fixed Cost & its elements-Gujranwala
L&DDD

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
G-2
G-3
G-4
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
J-1
J-2
J-3
J-4
P-1
P-2
P-3
P-4
F-1
F-2
F-3
F-4
L-1
L-2
L-3
L-4
BE-1
WMP
SRPS-P
MPr
EOM
ML-1
EI-1
DepPA-Com
S&EqPA-Com
IRPA-Com
TFCPA-Com
LaPA-Com
ElPA-Com
GFPA-Com
DFPA-Com
CoPA-Com
VSPA-Com
TVCPA-Com
TCPA-Com
MYPA-Com
MPPL-Com
IPA-Com
PPA-Com
CAAG

Profitability-Gujranwala
Fixed Cost & its elements-Bhakkar
Fixed Cost & its elements- Bhakkar
Fixed Cost & its elements- Bhakkar
Profitability- Bhakkar
Fixed Cost & its elements-Jhelum
Fixed Cost & its elements- Jhelum
Fixed Cost & its elements- Jhelum
Profitability- Jhelum
Fixed Cost & its elements-Pakpattan
Fixed Cost & its elements- Pakpattan
Fixed Cost & its elements- Pakpattan
Profitability- Pakpattan
Fixed Cost & its elements-Faisalabad
Fixed Cost & its elements- Faisalabad
Fixed Cost & its elements- Faisalabad
Profitability- Faisalabad
Fixed Cost & its elements-Lahore
Fixed Cost & its elements- Lahore
Fixed Cost & its elements- Lahore
Profitability- Lahore
Beef Production
World Mutton production (Million Tons)
Small Ruminants Prod. Systems in Pakistan
Mutton Production (000 tons)
Export of Mutton
Mortality Loss per Annum
Education Impact
Depreciation per animal (comparison)
Shed & Equip. per animal (comparison)
Interest rate per animal (comparison)
Total Fixed Cost per animal (comparison)
Labor per animal per animal (comparison)
Electricity per animal (comparison)
Green Fodder per animal (comparison)
Dry Fodder per animal (comparison)
Concentrates per animal (comparison)
Vet Services per animal (comparison)
Total Variable cost per animal (comparison)
Total cost per animal (comparison)
Milk yield per animal (comparison)
Milk Price per liter (comparison)
Income per animal (comparison)
Profitability per animal (comparison)
Comparison at a glance!
Note: All values & Graphical presentations depict per animal per day values, until &
unless otherwise mentioned.
Graphical & Statistics Array

Sr
1
Graph ID
TCC
Description
Total Cost (Comparison )
L&DDD

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
PrC
FC-G
VC-G
TC-G
Pr-G
FC-B
VC-B
TC-B
Pr-B
FC-J
VC-J
TC-J
Pr-J
FC-P
VC-P
TC-P
Pr-P
FC-F
VC-F
TC-F
Pr-F
FC-L
VC-L
TC-L
Pr-L
MPLA
LAF
LAF-ZW
DepPA-Com
S&EqPA-Com
IRPA-Com
TFCPA-Com
LaPA-Com
ElPA-Com
GFPA-Com
DFPA-Com
CoPA-Com
VSPA-Com
TVCPA-Com
TCPA-Com
MYPA-Com
MPPL-Com
IPA-Com
PPA-Com
CAAG
Executive Summary
Profitability (Comparison )
Fixed Cost- Gujranwala
Variable Cost-Gujranwala
Total Cost-Gujranwala
Profitability-Gujranwala
Fixed Cost- Bhakkar
Variable Cost- Bhakkar
Total Cost- Bhakkar
Profitability- Bhakkar
Fixed Cost- Jhelum
Variable Cost- Jhelum
Total Cost- Jhelum
Profitability- Jhelum
Fixed Cost- Pakpattan
Variable Cost- Pakpattan
Total Cost- Pakpattan
Profitability- Pakpattan
Fixed Cost- Faisalabad
Variable Cost- Faisalabad
Total Cost- Faisalabad
Profitability- Faisalabad
Fixed Cost- Lahore
Variable Cost- Lahore
Total Cost- Lahore
Profitability- Lahore
Mortality Loss per Annum
Literacy Among Farmers
Literacy Among Farmers (Zone wise)
Depreciation per animal (comparison)
Shed & Equip. per animal (comparison)
Interest rate per animal (comparison)
Total Fixed Cost per animal (comparison)
Labor per animal per animal (comparison)
Electricity per animal (comparison)
Green Fodder per animal (comparison)
Dry Fodder per animal (comparison)
Concentrates per animal (comparison)
Vet Services per animal (comparison)
Total Variable cost per animal (comparison)
Total cost per animal (comparison)
Milk yield per animal (comparison)
Milk Price per liter (comparison)
Income per animal (comparison)
Profitability per animal (comparison)
Pakistan has larger base of dairy sector
allied with the agriculture.
Dairy sector
generates
employment
and
business
opportunities, particularly in the rural and
peri-urban areas. Numbers of people in urban
areas are also involved in dairy based business

and earn revenue. The public sector
departments hold primary responsibility to guide
the farmers and play their significant role in dairy
sector development. The research based
decisions of policy makers will have real impact
on welfare of farmers and progress of all the
stakeholders of this sector.
The livestock sector plays a vital role in
the economies of many developing countries. It
provides food or, more specifically, animal
protein in human diet, income, employment and
possibly foreign exchange. For low-income
producers, livestock also serves as a store of
wealth, provides draught power, and organic
fertilizer for crop production and can even be a
means of transport. Milk provides relatively quick
returns for small-scale livestock keepers and
smallholders produce the vast majority of milk in
most developing countries. It is a balanced
nutritious food and is a key element in
household food security.
In Pakistan, the livestock sector as a
whole plays a crucial role in the countrys rural
economy and within this sector milk is the
largest and single most important commodity.
Pakistan is the fourth largest milk producer in the
world and the importance of the countrys dairy
sector can be judged from the fact that in terms
of market value, its contribution to Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) surpasses all the major
crops. During 2002-2005, milk and milk products
worth US$10,167 million were exported from
Pakistan.
In spite of the above, there is a dearth of
research and documentation regarding the dairy
sector in Pakistan. No serious effort has been
made to understand the dynamics of this
important sector. Furthermore, Pakistan's dairy
industry is plagued by a number of problems
which include: a lack of commercial dairy farms,
low productivity, weak infrastructure, a lack of
financial facilities, and the ready availability of
raw milk to a poor and uneducated population.
The current process of collecting milk from a
large number of subsistence farmers is timeconsuming, costly and prone to adulteration. The
government, after initially ignoring the dairy
sector, has now realized its importance and
embarked upon a number of initiatives to boost
the sector. Under the new programs, the
L&DDD
Pakistan government has created the Pakistan
Dairy Development Company (PDDC) and
Livestock & Dairy Development Board (LDDB).
In Pakistan only 3-4 per cent of total milk
is currently processed and marketed through
formal channels. The remaining 97 per cent of
milk reaches end users for immediate
consumption through an extensive, multi-layered
distribution system of middlemen. More than half
of this milk collected by urban traders and
processing industries comes from small herd
families. These farmers can usually sell either to
middlemen such as gawalas (local milk
collection, transportation, and distribution
people), to shops, or direct to the (usually rural)
consumer. The farm gate price of milk ranges
from PKRs19 to PKRs40 per liter. This variation
is not linked to the quality of the milk but is rather
determined by the financial arrangement
between the buyer and seller and geographical
location. Currently, there are no policies to
regulate milk prices at the farm level. In
consequence, the market forces operating in a
totally unregulated environment are exploiting
the poor farmers by offering low prices for their
produce.
The purpose of the study was to
generate policy-relevant research and to identify
the cost structure in various ecological area and
marketing practices of input and output using
qualitative research techniques. A team of three
researchers was trained in qualitative data
gathering techniques and supervised by a senior
researcher (Prof. Dr. Maqsood Ahmad) who
gave back-up support. Key informants were
identified in several scoping visits and were
interviewed in ensuing visits. Observations were
also conducted at milk collection centers. Field
data was collected from various Punjab Zones.
Various geographical zones, according
to ascending order of their profitability and
productivity, are described for birds eye view
In Thall Livestock Production Zone (ie Bhakkar), farmers having 1-5 animals have
total variable cost (TVC) per day per animal Rs
100.35; their total fixed cost (TFC) was Rs 14.6
& the total cost (TC) turns out to be Rs. 114.9
.The profit was Rs -23.46. Farmers having 6-10
have TVC per day per animal Rs 70.6; their TFC

was Rs 14.9 & the TC turns out to be Rs 85.5.
The profit was Rs 3.53. Farmers having 11-20
have TVC per day per animal Rs 50.1; their TFC
was Rs 15.1 & the TC turns out to be Rs 65.2 .
The profit was Rs 13.74.Finally, farmers having
21 & above have TVC per day per animal Rs
50.2; their TFC was Rs 17.8 & the TC turns out
to be Rs 70.0. The profit was Rs 24.76. Major
reasons for these low values, as described
above, are lack of irrigation water, deep sub-soil
water, lack of dairy breeds, non-availability of
fodder & lack of sowing of berseem fodder.
In
Southern
Punjab
Livestock
Production System (i-e Pakpattan), farmers
having 1-5 animals having total variable cost
(TVC) per day per animal Rs 97.86; their total
fixed cost (TFC) was Rs 19.86 & the total cost
(TC) turns out to be Rs. 117.73 .The profit was
Rs -11.62. Farmers having 6-10 have TVC per
day per animal Rs 74.08; their TFC was Rs 17.8
& the TC turns out to be Rs 91.95. The profit
was Rs 9.76. Farmers having 11-20 have TVC
per day per animal Rs 69.7; their TFC was Rs
19.8 & the TC turns out to be Rs 89.59. The
profit was Rs 14.52.Finally, farmers having 21 &
above have TVC per day per animal Rs 70.33;
their TFC was Rs 22.12 & the TC turns out to be
Rs 92.44. The profit was Rs 15.9.Despite of
presence of buffalo breed (Nili Ravi) as well as
fertile land & abundance of water, results were
not that good. Major reasons for these declined
values include low milk price (i-e Rs 21 approx.),
less stress on animal care & management.
In Barani Rain Fed Production Zone
(i-e Jhelum), farmers having 1-5 animals have
total variable cost (TVC) per day per animal Rs
97.86; their total fixed cost (TFC) was Rs 19.86
& the total cost (TC) turns out to be Rs.
117.73 .The profit was Rs -11.62. Farmers
having 6-10 have TVC per day per animal Rs
to be Rs 91.95. The profit was Rs 9.76. Farmers
to be Rs 89.59 . The profit was Rs 14.52.Finally,
farmers having 21 & above have TVC per day
per animal Rs 70.33; their TFC was Rs 22.12 &
the TC turns out to be Rs 92.44. The profit was
Rs 15.9.Major hindrances for these in-sufficient
values, are sole land grazing & poor genetic
potential .However, Buffalo is rapidly replacing
L&DDD
the Dhanni cows as milch animals. On scattered
plain land in hilly areas, the farmers manage the
fodder sowing including varieties of berseem
grass & maize. Although, the milk production
was not that good along the river but remittances
from abroad to local households create good
purchasing power. Demand was high as
compared to the supply, but the production was
low. The reason behind is that milk is an income
elastic product.
In Peri-Urban Milk Production System
(i-e Faisalabad & Lahore), farmers having 1-5
animals, have total variable cost (TVC) per day
per animal Rs 264.26 & 233.55; their total fixed
cost (TFC) was Rs 22.59 & 31.50 , and the total
cost (TC) turns out to be Rs. 286.9 & 265.05
respectively for Faisalabad & Lahore .The profit
was Rs 33.66 & 28.28, respectively. Farmers
172.07& 215.15; their TFC was Rs 29.28 &
26.21; the TC turns out to be Rs 201.34 & 241.5,
respectively. The profit was Rs -5.09 & 37.87,
respectively. Farmers having 11-20 have TVC
per day per animal Rs 163.2 & 158.01; their TFC
was Rs 24.55 & 27.05 the TC turns out to be Rs
187.75 & 185.26, respectively. The profit was Rs
47.16 & 61.97.Finally, farmers having 21 &
above have TVC per day per animal Rs 155.25
& 130.23; their TFC was Rs 30.47 & 34.71 the
TC turns out to be Rs 185.70 & 164.95. The
profit was Rs 53.52 & 157.19 respectively. Major
reasons for these considerable values are high
animal yield, more purchasing power in urban
areas, availability of green fodder &
concentrates (such as cotton seed cakes, wheat
bran, rape seed cake & waste bread)
Finally, in Northern Punjab Irrigated
Zone (i-e Gujranwala), farmers having 1-5
animals, have total variable cost (TVC) per day
per animal was Rs 125.98; their total fixed cost
(TFC) was Rs 22.24 & the total cost (TC) turns
out to be Rs. 148.22 .The profit was Rs 21.35.
Farmers having 6-10 have TVC per day per
animal Rs 98.42; their TFC was Rs 23.17 & the
TC turns out to be Rs 121.59. The profit was Rs
51.51. Farmers having 11-20 have TVC per day
per animal Rs 81.47; their TFC was Rs 22.16 &
the TC turns out to be Rs 103.63 . The profit was
Rs 100.63.Finally, farmers having 21 & above
have TVC per day per animal Rs 66.67; their
TFC was Rs 25.71 & the TC turns out to be Rs
L&DDD
92.38. The profit was Rs 182.21.The major

edges present in this area, as listed above, are
fertile land, sub-soil fit water, availability of canal
water for fodder irrigation, awareness among
farmers & convenient provision of veterinary
services.
organization, such as a milk producers

association. Across most other major dairyproducing countries, dairy farmers are organized
into their own associations, which support farmer
training and management, enable investment in
infrastructure and provide support services.
As a matter of fact, 82% milk is

contributed by buffaloes with averagely 18
buffaloes with one former, while 4 cows are
averagely owned by one farmer with 18% share
in the milk industry.
Sustained effort on the part of the

government and the private sector is needed to
improve animal stocks and feed, management
practices, and production technologies in order
to harness the immense potential of this
important livestock sector, in view of its
contribution to GDP. Private companies engaged
in milk collection and processing could help
farmers to upgrade supply chains by facilitating
investment in chilling tanks for purchasing and
collecting of milk, which would give farmers a
guaranteed sale for quality milk; improve the
quality of feed to ensure a better quality of milk
in the form of advances tied to procurement of
better feed; and demonstrate the health and
safety problems associated with poor quality
milk that would increase the potential sale of
processed milk and milk products.
GRAPH_ID: TCC
The government should improve and

enforce existing food safety standards in line
with international standards; provide practical
training to farmers on modern farming practices;
raise capacity of training institutions to provide
required training and qualifications; and
investigate modern technologies, systems, and
underlying seasonal economics of dairy
production to better inform investment decisions
and correct market distortions.
GRAPH_ID: PrC
This survey brings forward the valued
findings, which may help the planning
departments, key stakeholders, policy makers
and other associated to take effective decisions
in the development of dairy industry. The
proportion of small milk producers is quite high,
which hinders the economies of scale and
profitability in the milk production.
any
Another serious issue is the absence of

formal or even informal farmers
Finally, on a social level, attempts to

enhance production of smallholder dairying are
important not only for raising milk yield in the
country but could also become an effective tool
for raising income levels of impoverished rural
households. Successful interventions in this type
of dairy farm could be the key to alleviating
poverty in rural areas. This research is
commissioned by Planning & Evaluation
Department, L&DD, and Govt. of the Punjab.
The study aims at investigating the
market structure, sources of milk production,
average unit productivity, sale value of milk and
cost of production in peri-urban & rural areas of
Punjab. The research also explores sale, cost,
L&DDD

production and quantity of by-products of milk
purchased by milk centers. All the data is
collected on semi-structured questionnaire
through interviews of farmers and milk centers of
respective zones.
The said survey reveals that maximum
profitability is enjoyed by livestock holders of
Northern Punjab (i-e Gujranwala).The reason
behind was fertile land, sub-soil fit water,
availability of canal water for fodder irrigation,
awareness among farmers & convenient
provision of veterinary services. On the other
hand, minimum profitably (even some times
loss) is observed in Thall Livestock Production
Zone of Bhakkar. Major reasons for this pitfall
were lack of irrigation water, deep sub-soil water,
lack of dairy breeds, non-availability of fodder &
lack of sowing of berseem fodder.
Next five years, in Pakistan, are subject

to huge dairy bloom. This is the reason why a lot
many investors from textile (e-g Nishat textile %
Sapphire Textile) & other business sectors have
diverted their attention towards this sector. This
advancement creates a vast scope in Livestock
Management & Farming. Exotic breeds such as
Friesian & Jersey are being imported and
managed in our environment. However, certain
issues need to be addressed to acclimatize
these animals in hot dry environment of
Pakistan.
Average milk production of cattle/buffalo
per day per animal is about 5-6 liters. This yield
is extremely low as compared to Ireland,
Australia, Germany, Brazil and other advanced
countries. This huge gap can be filled by
observing modern dairy advancements such as
genetic selection, Artificial Insemination, embryo
transfer, mechanization, integrated farming,
proper management & other modern techniques.
contributes 52% of agri share. Livestock is by far

the most important sub-sector. The share of
agricultural growth has jumped from 25.3
percent in 1996 to 49.6 percent in
2006(Livestock census, 2006) and it contributes
almost 52 % of Agriculture GDP (Economic
Survey, 2007-2008). Value of milk is greater than
the value of any single most important crop of
Pakistan.
Scientists have identified six ecological
agriculture zones for the purpose of research
and development and for livestock production
system. Following zones have been identified by
the Livestock & Dairy Development, Govt. of
Punjab.
Punjab Irrigated Zone (Gujranwala)
Thall Livestock Production Zone (Bhakkar)
Barani Rain Fed Production Zone (Jhelum)
Southern Punjab Livestock Production

System
(Pakpattan)
Peri Urban Milk Production System

(Faisalabad & Lahore)
It is noteworthy to mention that Livestock

is the most important source of employment in
the rural agriculture sociology of Punjab.
Aims & Objectives

Objectives of Study:
Introduction
Agriculture is a major source of

employment for rural population of Pakistan and
its share in GDP is 21% and employs 43.4% of
the total workforce in Pakistan. Livestock
To assess milk and meat production cost

in the various production systems.
Factors affecting cost of peri-urban milk
production.
To study milk and meat marketing
system.
To appraise the management practices
of the system
To assess the socio- economic status of
milk and meat production.
Economics of mutton production.
Purpose of the study was to estimate the

economics of milk meat and goat sheep
production. As the land holding is squeezing day
L&DDD

by day and our farmer is highly under employed
in disguised labor productivity. Crop production
is stagnant and only daily cash flow source is
meat and milk and a good source of livelihood
and life sustenance.
Govt. of Punjab is striving through its
Dept. of L&DD to improve this important sector
for poverty eradication and to increase the
income of the farmers, developing the Livestock
wealth of the province. The specific objective of
the study were as under
The study aims at surveying the farmers
of various areas and milk centers in urban areas
of Punjab. The study tries to investigate in the
following areas:
Source of Milk Production
Average unit productivity
Cost of Milk Production
Milk Supply Channels
Management practices in peri-urban areas
By Products of Milk
Criterion for Selection of Sample

Area
One Union council from each tehsil was
randomly selected from each District and one
village from each Union Council was selected.
List of livestock farmers having 1-5, 6-10, 11-20
& 21 and above animals was prepared. Ten
farmers from each strata on the basis of
livestock herd size were interviewed for meat &
milk economics.
As the keeping of sheep goat is very scarce. In
the same village all the sheep goat farmers will
be interviewed for collection of data. For finding
out real economics of milk & meat assessment
Gawala Colonies of Lahore & Faisalabad &
Gujranwala are also surveyed. Target farmers
were studied to calculate Economics of the
production system.
For example: in Lahore, three milch
colonies were Thokar Niaz Baig, Sagian Hence,
Shahdra and Harbanspura were surveyed.
Similarly, in Faisalabad, Govt. supported and
established colonies at Chekader Aminpur Road
& Sathiana Road were studied.
Target Areas:
The number of dairy farms visited for
sample collection depends on number of
animals. There was random sampling and farms
from different areas. The number of dairy farms
visited from different areas is depending upon
population and management system of herds.
Punjab milk production base is highly
scattered with small holding and land-less
livestock farming and dairy enterprise is
dominated by the private sector, with the
government playing only a regulatory role.
According to the Livestock Census held in 2006,
among the 8.4 million reported dairying
households, 51% own a herd size of just 1-5
animals. Another 28% households maintain herd
sizes of 6 to 10 animals, whereas, only 14.23%
of the herd sizes are composed of 11 to 20
animals. Only 6.72% of the farms in the country
come under the large category where more than
20 animals are kept.
Literature Review:
Approximately, 80% of the milk is
produced in rural areas, with peri-urban and
urban areas accounting for another 15% and
5%, respectively (Livestock census, 2006). Only
3% of total production in the country is marketed
through formal channels. The remaining 97% is
produced and marketed in raw form by informal
agents in the marketing chain portion of the milk
producers.
To ensure development of the countrys
dairy sector, it is important that critical support is
provided to the promotion of smallholder
producers in peri-urban areas. Key issues for
promoting smallholder based dairy development
would be to organize farmers, integrate
production with marketing, enhance access to
credit, upgrade milk marketing chains through
adoption of modern technology, enhance market
information, and improve farm profitability.
Despite decades of neglect by the
government, Pakistan is the fifth largest milk
producer in the world.(2003) According to the
Pakistan Livestock Census held in 2006 overall,
milk production increased by 35.6 percent since
10

1996. Buffaloes and cows are major milk
producing animals.
According to a study on Milk Marketing
conducted by FAO in Pakistan in 2003, 80% of
the milk in the country is collectively produced by
rural commercial and rural subsistence
producers. The peri urban producers account for
15% of the milk production, whereas urban
producers contribute 5% to the total milk
production in the country (FAO, 2003)
Punjab Milk production base is
associated on a large number of problems,
poverty of the farmers, poor management and
under fed herd, lack of commercial dairy farms,
low productivity due to poor nutrition, a weak
infrastructure, lack of financial facilities, and the
ready availability of raw milk to a poor and
uneducated population. Although Pakistan was
ranked fourth among the five leading milk
producing countries in the world, with an
estimated 60 million animals having produced
closely to 42.29 million tons of milk in year 2008
and over 31 million tons during 2005-06 as the
5th largest producer of milk in the world, its yield
per animal is only one-fifth of Germany and
Holland.
Methodology
The study attempts to investigate
different variables of interest related to milk
production. The Punjab is selected as sample to
study the research issues and collect data
L&DDD
through self-constructed research questionnaire.
The variables are primarily extracted from
manuscript of focus group discussion, held in
livestock departments. All the stakeholders and
active players of dairy farming share their
observations and experiences based on
objectives set by study sponsor. The
questionnaire was further validated by pilot
testing of 15 respondents and number of errors
regarding language, structure, and flow and
scale options were removed. Faisalabad &
Gujranwala are also surveyed.
Various owners/ managers of dairy
farms and milk shops/collection centre were
interviewed by professional surveyors &
livestock-management students, based on
system sampling. Quality of survey was ensured
through 10% back checking. All the data is
analyzed on statistical software & finally the
results are produced for interpretation.
A comprehensive questionnaire was
designed after pre-testing all the aspects of cost
structures i.e., value of animal, interest rate on
this value, depreciation @ of 5% of animals,
sheds, chaff cutter, rope and utensils.
Depreciation of agri implements for crops was
taken at the rate of 10% of the value. For
calculations of variable cost the market rate of
fodder crops, dry fodder and concentrate rations
were accounted for. The contract labor cost of
the area was calculated towards family labor.
11
L&DDD
Estimation of cost and return in milk, business in different

ecological zones of Punjab.
The following areas/districts were selected.
1. Thall Livestock Production Zone
Bhakkar
2. Southern Punjab Livestock Production System
Pakpattan
3. Barani Rain Fed Production Zone
Jhelum
4. Peri Urban Milk Production System
Faisalabad & Lahore
5. Punjab Irrigated Zone
Gujranwala
Each ecological district is discussed one by one.
1. Thall Livestock Production Zone (Dist. Bhakkar)

12
L&DDD
Milk Production
In Bhakkar, three Tehsils: Mankera,
Darya Khan and Bhakkar were selected .Each
Village from each Tehsil was selected as
sampling area. Main milch animal was Dhanni
and few Dhanni Crosses with Jersey and
Friesian As a matter of fact, animal grazing was
interspersed, grazing was the major concern to
feed the animals.
Fixed Cost
Sample size was 135 respondents. For
Bhakkar the fixed cost per animal per day was
calculated. The depreciation of animal was Rs.
4.41, 4.69, 4.84 and 5.59 per animals per day for
the farm size group of 1-5 animal, 6-10 animals,
11-20 animals and 21 and above animals
respectively. Depreciation of sheds and
equipment was Rs. 1.37, 0.84, 0.57, 1.05 per
animal per day by the farm size in the
descending order, respectively. Interest on the
value of animal per day was Rs. 8.82, 9.38, 9.68
and 11.18, respectively,
For calculation of income from milk total

milk production, milk fed to calves and milk
marketed was apportioned. Home consumption
milk was also inducted in the income stream of
the milk.
Total Cattle: 1483

Milking Cattle 398
FC
Animals
1-5 Animals
Frequency
6-10 Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
Depp._Animals
Equip&Shed
IR
TFC
38
51
4.41
4.69
1.37
0.84
8.82
9.38
14.60
14.91
30
16
4.84
5.59
0.57
1.05
9.68
11.18
15.10
17.82
135
Table ID:B-1
GRAPH ID: FC-B
Variable Cost
13
L&DDD

The total variable cost comprises of
aggregation of costs for electricity, Vet Services,
Labor, Green Fodder, Dry Fodder and
Concentrates. Green Fodder and Dry Fodder is
fed to all animals but concentrate diet is only fed
to milking cattle.
& above Animals .Similarly, Vet Services count

for 0.63, 0.57, 0.41 & 0.28 respectively. Labor
costs 37.5, 22.31, 14.38 & 15.96 respectively.
Similarly, Green Fodder, Dry Fodder &
Concentrates count for 48.11 7.73
3.22,
36.30 6.04 4.03, 26.55 4.46 3.09, 22.33
4.91
5.52 respectively for 1-5 Animals, 6-10
Animals, 11-20 Animals & 21 & above
Animals
Variable cost per day per cow for

electricity was 3.15, 1.42, 1.2 & 1.2 for 1-5
Animals, 6-10 Animals, 11-20 Animals & 21
VC
Animals
Frequen
cy
Labo
r
Elec
Vet
Serv
GF
1-5 Animals
38
37.50
3.15
0.63
6-10
Animals
51
22.31
1.42
0.57
11-20
Animals
30
14.38
1.22
0.41
21 & Above
16
15.96
1.21
0.28
Total
48.1
1
36.3
0
26.5
5
22.3
3
DF
Conc.
TVC
7.73
3.22
100.35
6.04
4.03
70.68
4.46
3.09
50.11
4.91
5.52
50.22
135
Table ID:B-2
GRAPH ID: VC-B

Total Cost
Comprise of total fixed cost and total
variable cost. Total cost per cow per day was Rs.
114.95, 85.59, 65.21 & 68.04 by farm size I, II, III
and IV, respectively. Fixed cost per cow per day

was Rs. 14.6, 14.9, 15.1 & 17.8 and variable
14
L&DDD

cost was Rs. 100.35, 70.68, 50.11 & 68.04 by
the farm size I, II, III and IV, respectively.
Farmer Group
Animals
FC
freque
ncy
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
Depp.
_
Equip&Sh
ed
VC
IR
38
4.41
1.37
8.82
51
4.69
0.84
9.38
30
4.84
0.57
16
5.59
1.05
9.68
11.1
8
TFC
14.6
0
14.9
1
15.1
0
17.8
2
Labo
r
37.50
22.31
14.38
15.96
Ele
c
3.1
5
1.4
2
1.2
2
1.2
1
Vet
Serv
0.63
0.57
0.41
0.28
GF
48.1
1
36.3
0
26.5
5
22.3
3
TC
DF
7.7
3
6.0
4
4.4
6
4.9
1
Con
c.
3.22
TVC
100.3
5
TC
114.9
5
4.03
70.68
85.59
3.09
50.11
65.21
5.52
50.22
68.04
135
Table ID: B-3
GR
APH ID: TC-B
Income
Milk yield per day per cow was 4.1 liters,
4.1liters, 3.6 liters and 4.3 liters, by all the farm
size in descending order, respectively and price
per liter was Rs. 22.2, 21.38, 21.9 and 21.6 by
all farm categories, respectively.
15
L&DDD
Farmer Group
Animals
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
Freque
ncy
FC
VC
TC
TFC
TVC
TC
Income
MY
38
0.00
100.35
114.95
4.12
51
0.00
70.68
85.59
4.17
30
0.00
50.11
65.21
3.61
Rate
22.1
8
21.3
8
21.8
9
Incom
e
91.49
89.13
78.95
Prof
t
23.4
6
3.53
13.7
4
16
L&DDD

21 & Above
Total
16
0.00
50.22
68.04
4.30
21.5
6
92.79
24.7
6
135
Table ID:B-4
GRAPH ID: Pr-B

Milk market channel was Dodhis, Shops
and sale to nearby households. Marketing was
not a problem and demand for milk was higher
as compared to supply for consumption. The byproducts prepared in the area was raw cheese,
Doda, khoya, sweets, Dhahi and Lassi by the
end users.
in descending order. Least profit was observed

by the small holder, however profit increases
along as the number of animals increased.
Highest profit was observed by the commercial
farm having greater than 20 cattle. Management
practices and health protection were better by
the large farmers and use of technology to
reduce the cost.
Profit per cow was Rs. -23.46, 3.53,

13.74 & 24.76 respectively per day by farm type
2. Southern Punjab Livestock Production System (Pakpattan)

Milk Production
Southern Punjab Pakpattan is the
breeding area For calculation of income from
milk total milk production, milk fed to calves and
milk marketed was apportioned. Home
consumption milk was also inducted in the
income stream of the animals.
Cost of milk
Fixed Cost
Sample size was 160 respondents.
For Pakpattan, the fixed cost per animal

per day was calculated. The depreciation of
animal was Rs. 6.3, 5.7, 6.4 and 6.9 per animals
per day for the farm size group of 1-5 animal, 610 animals, 11-20 animals and 21 and above
animals respectively. Depreciation of sheds and
17
L&DDD

equipment was Rs. 1.1, 0.6, 0.6, 1.2 per animal
per day by the farm size in the descending order,
respectively. Interest on the value of animal per
day was Rs. 12.5, 11.5, 12.8 and 13.9,
respectively.
Total Animals:
Milking Animals:
1923
713
FC
Animals
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
Frequenc
y
Equip &
Shed
Depp.
IR
TFC
48
6.26
1.08
12.52
19.86
46
5.74
0.63
11.49
17.86
42
24
160
6.42
6.97
0.61
1.20
12.84
13.94
19.87
22.12
Table ID: P-1
GRAPH ID: FC-P

Variable Cost
to milking animals.

15.66 , 26.38 8.54 12.66 , 25.94
8.70 15.67 , 24.40
10.20 22.10
respectively for 1-5 Animals, 6-10 Animals,
11-20 Animals & 21 & above Animals
Variable cost per day per animal for

animals, 6-10 Animals, 11-20 Animals & 21
18
L&DDD
VC
Animals
Frequenc
y
Labor
Electr
Vet serv
GF
DF
Conc
TVC
19
L&DDD

1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
48
37.96
1.66
1.03
32.50
9.06
46
21.98
3.73
0.79
26.38
8.54
42
18.06
0.97
0.38
25.94
21 & Above
Total
24
160
12.16
1.11
0.36
24.40
8.70
10.2
0
15.6
6
12.6
6
15.6
7
22.1
0
97.86
74.08
69.72
70.33
Table ID: P-2
GRAPH ID: VC-P

Total Cost
variable cost. Total cost per animal per day was
Rs. 117.7, 91.9, 89.6 & 92.4 by farm size I, II, III
and IV, respectively. Fixed cost per animal per
day was Rs. 19.9, 17.9, 19.9 & 22.12 and
variable cost was Rs. 97.9, 74.08, 69.72 & 70.33
by the farm size I, II, III and IV, respectively.
20
L&DDD
Farmer
Group
Animals
1-5
Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 &
Above
Animals
Total
FC
Freque
ncy
48
46
42
24
160
Dep
p.
VC
Equip &
Shed
6.2
6
5.7
4
6.4
2
TFC
0.61
12.5
2
11.4
9
12.8
4
19.
86
17.
86
19.
87
37.9
6
21.9
8
18.0
6
1.20
13.9
4
22.
12
12.1
6
1.08
0.63
6.9
7
IR
Labo
r
Elec
tr
Vet
serv
GF
1.66
1.03
3.73
0.79
0.97
0.38
32.5
0
26.3
8
25.9
4
1.11
0.36
24.4
0
TC
DF
Conc
TVC
9.06
15.66
8.54
12.66
8.70
15.67
97.
86
74.
08
69.
72
10.2
0
22.10
70.
33
Table ID: P-3
GRAPH ID: P-3

Income
Milk yield per day per animal was 4.49
liters, 4.38 liters, 4.43 liters and 4.67 liters, by all
the farm size in descending order, respectively
Farmer
Group
Animals
and price per liter was Rs. 23.6, 23.2, 23.52 &
23.20 respectively.
Incom
e
Total
Freque
ncy
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
48
21 & Above
Total
24
160
46
42
TFC
19.8
6
17.8
6
19.8
7
22.1
2
TVC
TC
MY
Rate
Income
97.86
117.73
4.49
23.64
74.08
91.95
4.38
23.20
69.72
89.59
4.43
23.52
70.33
92.44
4.67
23.20
106.1
0
101.7
1
104.1
1
108.3
5
Proft
-11.62
9.76
14.52
15.91
21
TC
117.
73
91.9
5
89.5
9
92.4
4
L&DDD
Table ID: P-4
GRAPH ID: Pr-P

as compared to supply for consumption. The
byproducts prepared in the area was raw
cheese, khoya, sweets, Dhahi and Lassi by the
end users.

farm having greater than 20 animals.
Management practices and health protection
were better by the large farmers and use of
technology to reduce the cost.
Profit per animal was Rs. -11.62, 9.76,

3. Barani Rain Fed Production Zone (Jhelum)

Milk Production
milk was also inducted in the income stream of
the animals.
Fixed Cost

Jhelum the fixed cost per animal per day was
calculated.
The depreciation of animal was Rs.

6.49, 6.13, 6.08 and 6.36 per animals per day for
respectively. Depreciation of sheds and
22
L&DDD

Total Animals:
Milking Animals:
value of animal per day was Rs. 12.97, 12.25,

12.16 and 12.71, respectively,
1279
391
FC
Frequenc
y
Animals
Equip&She
d
Depp.
IR
TFC
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
56
6.49
2.08
12.97
21.54
27
6.13
1.56
12.25
19.94
19
6.08
1.51
12.16
19.75
21 & Above
15
6.36
1.26
12.71
20.33
Total
117
Table ID: J-1
GRAPH ID: FC-J

& above Animals .Similarly, Vet Services counts
24.80,
29.11 10.13 13.08, 24.78
8.83
11.44,
11.40 23.68
23.59 respectively for 1-5
& above Animals
Variable Cost
to milking animals.
Variable cost per day per animal
for electricity was 2.02, 1.37, 1.02 & 0.88 for 1-5
VC
Animals
1-5 Animals
Freque
ncy
56
LABOR
46.38
Elec
2.02
Vet
serv
1.11
GF
38.95
DF
11.69
Conc
TVC
24.80
124.95
23
L&DDD

6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
27
31.55
1.37
1.27
29.11
10.13
13.08
86.51
19
25.34
1.02
1.02
24.78
8.83
11.44
72.44
15
11.95
0.88
0.10
11.40
23.68
23.59
71.59
117
Table ID: J-2
GRAPH ID: VC-J

Total Cost
Rs. 146.49, 106.45, 92.19 & 91.92 by farm size
I, II, III and IV, respectively.
Fixed cost per animal per day was Rs.

21.54, 19.94, 19.75 & 20.33 and variable cost
was Rs. 124.95, 86.51, 72.44 & 71.59 by the
farm size I, II, III and IV, respectively.
24
L&DDD
FC
Farmer Group
Animals
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
Freque
ncy
Dep
p.
6.4
9
6.1
3
6.0
8
6.3
6
56
27
19
15
VC
Equip&S
hed
IR
12.9
7
12.2
5
12.1
6
12.7
1
2.08
1.56
1.51
1.26
TFC
LABOR
21.
54
19.
94
19.
75
20.
33
46.38
31.55
25.34
11.95
Ele
c
2.0
2
1.3
7
1.0
2
0.8
8
Vet
serv
1.11
1.27
1.02
0.10
GF
38.
95
29.
11
24.
78
11.
40
DF
Con
c
11.
69
10.
13
8.8
3
23.
68
24.
80
13.
08
11.
44
23.
59
117
GRAPH ID: TC-J

Income
liters, 5.97 liters, 4.81 liters and 5.50 liters, by all
the farm size in descending order, respectively
TC
Farmer Group
Animals
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
and price per liter was Rs. 27.63, 27.74, 26.58 &
27.47 respectively.
Frequency
TFC
Income
TVC
TC
M.Y
Rate
Income
Proft
56
56.00
112.00
146.49
6.00
27.63
165.75
19.26
27
27.00
54.00
106.45
5.97
27.74
165.69
59.25
19
19.00
38.00
92.19
4.81
26.58
127.75
35.56
15
15.00
30.00
91.92
5.50
27.47
150.97
59.05
117
Table ID: J-4
25
TVC
124.
95
86.5
1
72.4
4
71.5
9
L&DDD
GRAPH ID: Pr-J

An increasing trend of replacing cattle
with buffalo was seen and stall feeding with
grown fodder especially berseem and maize was
observed. Availability of pure high quality milk
was the priority of home consumer farmers.
Milk market channel was Dodhis, Tea
Shops and sale to nearby households.
Marketing was not a problem and demand for
milk was higher as compared to supply for
consumption. The byproducts prepared in the
area was raw cheese, khoya, sweets, Dhahi and
Lassi by the end users.
Profit per animal was Rs. 19.26, 59.25,

Peri urban Milk Production

For calculation of economics of animals in per urban area, two big cities were selected.
1. Lahore &
2. Faisalabad
26
L&DDD
4. Peri urban Punjab (Faisalabad)

Faisalabad city have a population of
more than five million with high opportunities of
employment in industrial sector. There is a high
demand of milk and milk products. For supply of
milk to the city, there are two large cattle
colonies established by the local authorities for
the farmers.
Forty five farmers were interviewed from
the two organized colonies Chakader Aminpur
road and Satiana road Faisalbad. Organized
sheds were constructed by the farmers. Land
was allotted to each farmer, boundary walls
enclosed each farm separately. Major milk
animal was buffalo of Nili-Ravi and Ravi breed
with few cows by some farmers. Cow milk was
not preferred by the consumers due to low fat
contents and total SNF.
Cost of milk
Fixed Cost
Faisalabad, the fixed cost per animal per day
was calculated. The depreciation of animal was
Rs. 6.7, 9.12, 8.11 and 10.14 per animals per
day for the farm size group of 1-5 animal, 6-10
animals, 11-20 animals and 21 and above
animals respectively. Depreciation of sheds and
16.21 and 20.27, respectively
27
L&DDD
FC
FC
Animals
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
Frequen
cy
IR
TFC
Depp
6.60
EquiP& Shed
2.80
13.20
22.59
9.12
1.93
18.23
29.28
15
20
8.11
0.23
16.21
24.55
10.14
0.07
20.27
30.47
Table ID: F-1
GRAPH ID: FC-F
Total fixed cost was Rs. 22.6, 29.28,

24.55 and 30.47, respectively.
Variable Cost
Dominant proportion of cost was from
variable cost. The total variable cost comprises
of aggregation of costs for electricity, Vet
Services, Labor, Green Fodder, Dry Fodder and
to milking animals. Fodder offered to the animal
was Berseem, Sugarcane and Maize during
Rabi season and Kharif fodder used was Jawar,
Sadhabahar, Maize fodder.
The
feed
ingredients
used
as
concentrate ration were cotton seed cake,
rapeseed cake, maize oil cake, gluten feed 30%,
Roti, double roti waste of confectionaries. Fifty %
farmers used DCP bone meal and mineral

mixture in the Vanda. Fodder and ingredients
markets were available in the vicinity of dairy
farms. Feeding cost was the dominant
proportion of variable and total cost, it was
almost 70% of all the cost in milk production.
for 2.68, 0.56, 1.03, & 0.66 respectively. Labor
Concentrates count for 85.35 29.98 48.1,
71.48 27.73 29.4, 66.79
20.37 43.5,
39.03 20.29
74.23 respectively for 1-5
& above Animals
28
L&DDD
VC
Animals
1-5
Animals
6-10
Animals
1120Animals
21 & Above
Frequency
Labor
Elec
Vet Serv
GF
DF
Conc
TVC
92.33
4.94
2.68
85.35
29.98
48.1
264.5
39.77
2.89
0.56
71.48
27.73
29.4
172.7
15
29.48
2.29
1.03
66.79
20.37
43.5
163.6
20
19.56
1.47
0.66
39.03
20.29
74.23
155.2
Total
Table ID: F-2
GRAPH ID: VC-F

Total Cost
Rs. 148.22, 121.59, 103.63 & 92.38 by farm size
I, II, III and IV, respectively. Fixed cost per animal
per day was Rs. 22.24, 23.17, 22.16 & 25.71
and variable cost was Rs. 125.98, 98.42, 81.47
& 66.67 by the farm size I, II, III and IV,
respectively.
29
L&DDD
TC
Farmer Group
Frequen
Animals
cy
1-5
5
Animals
6-10
5
Animals
11-20
15
Animals
21 &
20
Above
FC
Dep
p
EquiP&
Shed
6.60
2.80
9.12
1.93
8.11
10.1
4
0.23
0.07
IR
13.2
0
18.2
3
16.2
1
20.2
7
VC
TFC
22.5
9
29.2
8
24.5
5
30.4
7
Labor
92.33
39.77
29.48
19.56
Ele
c
4.9
4
2.8
9
2.2
9
1.4
7
Vet
Serv
2.68
0.56
1.03
0.66
GF
85.3
5
71.4
8
66.7
9
39.0
3
DF
29.9
8
27.7
3
20.3
7
20.2
9
TC
Con
c
0.00
0.00
0.00
74.2
3
TVC
215.2
9
142.4
2
119.9
7
155.2
5
TC
237.8
8
171.7
0
144.5
2
185.7
2
Total
Table ID: F-3
GRAPH ID: TC-F
Milk yield per

day per animal was
10.14 liters, 6.25
liters, 7.47 liters and
7.27 liters, by all
the farm size in
descending
order,
respectively
and
price per liter was Rs.
31.6, 31.4, 31.4 and
32.9 by all farm
categories,
Income
respectively.
Income
Farmer
Group
Frequen
cy
TFC
TVC
TC
MY
1-5 Animals
5.00
10.00
10.00
10.14
6-10
Animals
10.00
6.25
15
30.00
30.00
7.47
21 & Above
20
5.00
15.0
0
20.0
0
10.00
11-20
Animals
40.00
40.00
7.27
Rate
31.6
0
31.4
0
31.4
7
32.9
0
Income
320.5
1
196.2
5
234.9
1
239.2
5
Profit
33.66
-5.09
47.16
53.52
Total
Table ID: F-4
30
L&DDD
GRAPH ID: Pr-F

byproducts prepared in the area were raw
end users.
Profit per animal was Rs. 33.66, -5.09,

Disease and mortality

For Veterinary health cover L&DD
Department has established veterinary hospital
inside these gawala colonies. Vaccines of HS
and FMD were generally performed in routine
and there were general awareness among the
farmers. Deworming was also carried out on
almost all the farms.
5. Peri-Urban Punjab (Lahore area)

Milk Production
In Lahore the 80% herd were Buffalo
and 20% Cross Bred Cattle. Body weight of
cross bred cattle was little low but production
was equal to buffalo. So cows was taken as
equal unit
In Lahore, three milch colonies were
Thokar Niaz Baig, Sagian Shahdra and
Harbanspura. They were surveyed to collect the
relevant data. For calculation of income from
milk total milk production, milk fed to calves and
milk marketed was apportioned. Home
consumption milk was also inducted in the

income stream of the animals.
Fixed Cost: Sample size was 40

respondents. For Lahore the fixed cost per
animal per day was calculated. The depreciation
of animal was Rs. 9.7, 8.4, 8.51 and 11.09 per
animals per day for the farm size group of 1-5
animal, 6-10 animals, 11-20 animals and 21 and
above animals respectively. Depreciation of
sheds and equipment was Rs. 2.39, 0.98, 1.72,
1.44 per animal per day by the farm size in the
17.02 and 22.18, respectively,
31
L&DDD
Milking Units 523

Total Units
927
Animals
Freque
ncy
FC
Depp.
EquiP&Sh
ed
IR
TFC
1-5 Animals
9.70
2.39
19.41
31.50
6-10 Animals
11-20
Animals
8.41
0.98
16.82
26.21
12
8.51
1.72
17.02
27.25
21 & Above
21
11.09
1.44
22.18
34.71
Total
40
Table ID: L-1
GRAPH ID: FC-L

Variable Cost
to milking animals.
Variable cost per day per animal
for electricity was 2.4, 2.3, 1.9 & 1.5 for 1-5

& above Animals .Similarly, Vet Services counts
Concentrates count for 89.01
44.05
31.04 , 108.92 31.43 38.18 , 70.96
20.3530.54 & 65.29
18.28
25.05
respectively for 1-5 Animals, 6-10 Animals,
11-20 Animals & 21 & above Animals
32
L&DDD
VC
Animals
1-5
Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 &
Above
Total
Freque
ncy
Labor
Vet
serv
Elec
GF
DF
Conc
TVC
65.69
2.39
1.37
89.01
44.05
31.04
233.55
33.23
2.27
1.11
108.92
31.43
38.18
215.13
12
33.39
1.89
0.87
70.96
20.35
30.54
158.01
21
40
19.38
1.52
0.71
65.29
18.28
25.05
130.23
Table ID: L-2
GRAPH ID: VC-L

Total Cost:
Rs. 265.05, 241.33, 185.26 & 165.95 by farm
size I, II, III and IV, respectively.
Fixed cost per animal per day was Rs.
31.5, 26.21, 27.25 & 34.71 and variable cost
was Rs. 233.55, 215.13, 158.01 & 130.23 by the
farm size I, II, III and IV, respectively.
33
L&DDD
Farmer
Group
Animal
s
1-5
Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 &
Above
FC
Freque
ncy
VC
EquiP&S
hed
9.70
2.39
8.41
0.98
12
8.51
11.0
9
1.72
21
Total
Dep
p.
1.44
IR
19.
41
16.
82
17.
02
22.
18
TFC
31.
50
26.
21
27.
25
34.
71
Lab
or
65.6
9
33.2
3
33.3
9
19.3
8
Ele
c
2.3
9
2.2
7
1.8
9
1.5
2
Vet
serv
1.37
1.11
0.87
0.71
GF
89.0
1
108.
92
70.9
6
65.2
9
TC
DF
44.
05
31.
43
20.
35
18.
28
Co
nc
31.
04
38.
18
30.
54
25.
05
TVC
233.
55
215.
13
158.
01
130.
23
TC
265.
05
241.
33
185.
26
164.
95
40
Table ID: L-3
GRAPH ID: TC-L

Income
Milk yield per day per animal was 8.0 liters, 8.27 liters, 6.67 liters and 8.68 liters, by all the farm
size in descending order, respectively and price per liter was Rs. 36.67, 33.75, 37.08 and 37.11 by all farm
categories, respectively.
Farmer Group
Animals
1-5 Animals
6-10 Animals
11-20 Animals
FC
Freque
ncy
3
4
12
TFC
3.00
4.00
12.00
21 & Above
21
21.00
Total
40
VC
TC
TVC
TC
Income
6.00
8.00
24.00
6.00
8.00
24.00
MY
8.00
8.27
6.67
Rate
36.67
33.75
37.08
Income
293.33
279.20
247.22
Proft
28.28
37.87
61.97
42.00
42.00
8.68
37.10
322.14
157.19
Table ID: L-4
34
L&DDD
GRAPH ID: Pr-L

byproducts prepared in the area was raw
end users.
61.97 & 157.19 respectively per day by farm
type in descending order. Least profit

was observed by the small holder, however profit
increases along as the number of animals
increased. Highest profit was observed by the
commercial farm having greater than 20 animals
due to economies of scale. Management
practices and health protection were better by
the large farmers and use of technology to
reduce the cost.
6. Gujranwala District (Northern irrigated Punjab)

Milk Production
Gujranwala is an agriculture district of
almost small and landless holdings, highly
populated with organized villages. Four union
councils were selected: Noshera virkan, Tehsil
Noshera, Sohdra in Tehsil wazirabad, and Union
council Narang in Tehsil Kamonkey. Farmers
were put in groups of 1-5 animals, 6-10 animals,
11-20 and 21 and above animal.
As the farm size increases, the profit per
animal also increases due to the economy of
scales & superior genetics of animals.
Commercial farmer received RS 182.2 per day
as profit by selling most of the milk to the
household & tea-shops. Consumer of industrial
area of Gujranwala has good purchasing power.
In Gujranwala, concentrate feed being

used was cotton seed cake, rape seed cake,
wheat bran and dry bread. Supply system from
farm to the market was a network of wanda
shops along the road bus stops , big villages,
towns and cities. These shops also supply
fodder, seed, fertilizers and other agri inputs to
the local farmers.
milk was also included in the income stream of
the animals. Following was the cost structure
35
L&DDD
Fixed Cost
Gujranwala the fixed cost per animal per day
was calculated. The depreciation of animal was
Rs. 6.7, 7.2, 7.0 and 8.4 per animals per day for
respectively.
Milking Units= 436
Total Units
1075
Animals
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
Depreciation of sheds and equipment

was Rs. 2.1, 1.5, 1.2, 0.7 per animal per day by
the farm size in the descending order,
respectively. Interest on the value of animal per
day was Rs. 13.4, 14.5, 14 and 16.7,
respectively.
=
FC
Dep
Equip &
p
Shed
Freque
ncy
6
6.70
2.14
7.24
1.46
12
7.00
1.16
18
45
8.35
0.65
IR
13.4
0
14.4
7
14.0
0
16.7
1
TFC
22.2
4
23.1
7
22.1
6
25.7
1
Table ID:G-1
GRAPH_ID: FC-G
Variable Cost
to milking animals.
for 1-5 Animals, 6-10 Animals, 11-20 Animals
& 21 & above Animals

& above Animals . Similarly, Vet Services count
Concentrates count for Rs 33.92 16.02 37.48,
24.96, 17.72, 27.83, 23.12, 9.37, 23.17,
18.82, 6.91, 18.90 respectively
36
L&DDD
Animals
1-5
Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
Frequen
cy
6
Electr
9
12
18
45
21 & Above
Total
3.47
Vet
Serv
1.16
1.95
1.00
1.86
2.61
VC
Labor
GF
DF
Concen
TVC
33.92
33.92
16.02
0.00
88.50
24.96
24.96
17.72
0.00
70.59
0.83
0.63
23.12
18.82
23.12
18.82
9.37
6.91
0.00
0.00
58.30
47.78
Table ID:G-2
GRAPH_ID: VC-G
Total Cost
Rs. 148.22, 121.59, 103.63 & 92.38 by farm size
I, II, III and IV, respectively. Fixed cost per animal
Farmer
Group
Animal
sto
s
ck
1-5
Animals
6
6-10
Animals
9
11-20
Animals
12
21 &
Above
18
Total
45
De
pp
6.7
0
7.2
4
7.0
0
8.3
5
FC
Equip &
Shed
2.14
1.46
1.16
0.65
per day was Rs. 22.24, 23.17, 22.16 & 25.71

and variable cost was Rs. 125.98, 98.42, 81.47
& 66.67 by the farm size I, II, III and IV,
respectively.
VC
IR
13.
40
14.
47
14.
00
16.
71
TF
C
22.
24
23.
17
22.
16
25.
71
Elec
tr
Vet
Serv
3.47
1.16
1.95
1.00
1.86
0.83
2.61
0.63
Lab
or
33.9
2
24.9
6
23.1
2
18.8
2
GF
33.
92
24.
96
23.
12
18.
82
TC
DF
16.
02
17.
72
9.3
7
6.9
1
Conc
en
37.48
27.83
23.17
18.90
TVC
125.
98
98.4
2
81.4
7
66.6
7
TC
148.
22
121.
59
103.
63
92.3
8
Table ID:G-3
37
L&DDD
GRAPH_ID: TC-G
Income
liters, 5.5 liters, 6.7 liters and 8.9 liters, by all the
farm size in descending order, respectively and
price per liter was Rs. 32.30, 31.50, 30.60 and
30.80 by all farm categories, respectively.(Ref:
Table ID:)
byproducts prepared in the area were raw
end users.

100.63 & 182.21 respectively per day by farm
type in descending order. Least profit was
observed by the small holder, which is due to
including highest family labor in variable cost.
However profit increases along as the number of
animals increased. Highest profit observed by
the commercial farm having greater than 20
animals. Management practices and health
protection were better by the large farmers and
use of technology to reduce the cost.
38
L&DDD

Farmer Group
Freque
ncy
TFC
TVC
TC
6.00
125.9
8
9.00
98.42
12
18
12.00
18.00
81.47
66.67
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Total
45
M.Y.
148.2
2
121.5
9
103.6
3
92.38
Rate
Income
PROFIT
5.25
32.28
169.57
21.35
5.50
31.50
173.10
51.51
6.67
8.92
30.61
30.79
204.26
274.59
100.63
182.21
Table ID:G-4
GRAPH_ID: PR-G
39
L&DDD
Comparison between Various Zones of Punjab

This Section of the report will comprise..
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Fixed Cost Comparison

Variable Cost Comparison
Total Cost Comparison
Milk Yield & Rate Comparison
Income & Profitability Comparison &
The Fixed cost comparison is further

subdivided into various Fixed Cost Constituents
including Depreciation of Animals (Per Animal
per day), Depreciation of Equipment & Sheds
(Per Animal per day) & Interest Rate (Per Animal
per day). A comprehensive Fixed Cost
comparison will be given at the end of this
comparison. This presentation includes the
tabular as well as graphical data.
A.
The Variable cost comparison is further

subdivided
into
various
Variable
Cost
Constituents including Labor (Per Animal per
day), Electricity (Per Animal per day), Green
Fodder (Per Animal per day), Dry Fodder (Per
Animal per day), Concentrates (Per Animal per
day) & finally Vet Services (Per Animal per day).
A comprehensive Variable Cost comparison will
be given at the end of this comparison.
Additionally, a comparison for profit is
presented. Furthermore, Milk Yield & Rate
Comparison, Income & Profitability Comparison
are given to have a better understanding of the
various ecological zones. Comparison at a
glance !, at the end compares per animal per
day fixed cost, variable cost, total cost, milk yield
& rate, income & profitability.
Fixed Cost Comparison
Fixed Cost Constituents

40
L&DDD
1. Depreciation of Animals (Per Animal per day)

2. Depreciation of Equipment & Sheds (Per Animal per day)
3. Interest Rate (Per Animal per day)
1. Depreciation of Animals (Per Animal per day)
GRAPH_ID: DepPA-Com
Farmer Group
Bhakkar
Pakpattan
Jhelum
Faisalabad
Lahore
Gujranwala
1-5 Animals
4.4
6.3
6.5
6.6
9.7
6.7
6-10 Animals
11-20
Animals
4.7
5.7
6.1
9.1
8.4
7.2
4.8
6.4
6.1
8.1
8.5
7.0
21 & Above
5.6
7.0
6.4
10.1
11.1
8.4
TABLE_ID: DepPA-Com
2. Depreciation of Equipment & Sheds (Per Animal per day)
41
L&DDD
GRAPH ID: S&EqPA-Com

Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
Farmer Group
Bhakkar
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
1.37
1.08
17.64
2.80
2.39
2.14
0.84
0.63
18.76
1.93
0.98
1.46
0.57
0.61
19.36
0.23
1.72
1.16
21 & Above
1.05
1.20
22.36
0.07
1.44
0.65
TABLE ID: S&EqPA-Com
3. Interest Rate (Per Animal per day)
GRAPH ID: IRPA-Com

Farmer Group
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
42
L&DDD

1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
8.8
12.5
2.1
13.2
19.4
13.4
9.4
11.5
1.6
18.2
16.8
14.5
9.7
12.8
1.5
16.2
17.0
14.0
21 & Above
11.2
13.9
1.3
20.3
22.2
16.7
TABLE ID: IRPA-Com
Total Fixed Cost
GRAPH_ID: TFCPA-Com
Farmer Group
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
14.6
19.9
21.5
22.6
31.5
22.2
14.9
17.9
19.9
29.3
26.2
23.2
15.1
19.9
19.8
24.6
27.3
22.2
21 & Above
17.8
22.1
20.3
30.5
34.7
25.7
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
TABLE_ID: TFCPA-Com
43
L&DDD
B.
Variable Cost Comparison
Variable Cost Constituents

1. Labor (Per Animal per day)
2. Electricity (Per Animal per day)
3. Green Fodder (Per Animal per day)
4. Dry Fodder (Per Animal per day)
5. Concentrates (Per Animal per day)
6. Vet Services (Per Animal per day)
1. Labor (Per Animal per day)
GRAPH_ID: LaPA-Com
Farmer Group
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Bhakka
r
Pakpatt
an
38
38
46
92
66
34
22
22
32
40
33
25
14
16
18
12
25
12
29
20
33
19
23
19
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranw
ala
TABLE_ID: LaPA-Com
44
L&DDD
2. Electricity (Per Animal per day)
GRAPH_ID: ElPA-Com
Farmer
Group
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
3.2
1.7
2.0
4.9
2.4
3.5
1.4
3.7
1.4
2.9
2.3
2.0
1.2
1.0
1.0
2.3
1.9
1.9
21 & Above
1.2
1.1
0.9
1.5
1.5
2.6
TABLE_ID: ElPA-Com
3. Green Fodder (Per Animal per day)
45
L&DDD
GRAPH_ID: GFPA-Com
Farmer
Group
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
48
33
39
85
89
34
36
26
29
71
109
25
27
22
26
24
25
11
67
39
71
65
23
19
TABLE_ID: GFPA-Com
4. Dry Fodder (Per Animal per day)
46
L&DDD
GRAPH_ID: DFPA-Com
Farmer
Group
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalaba
d
Lahore
Gujranwal
a
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
7.73
9.06
11.69
29.98
44.05
16.02
6.04
8.54
10.13
27.73
31.43
17.72
4.46
8.70
8.83
20.37
20.35
9.37
21 & Above
4.91
10.20
23.68
20.29
18.28
6.91
TABLE_ID: DFPA-Com
5. Concentrates (Per Animal per day)
47
L&DDD
GRAPH_ID: CoPA-Com
Farmer
Group
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwal
a
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
16
25
49
31
37
13
13
30
38
28
16
11
43
31
23
21 & Above
22
24
74
25
19
GRAPH_ID: Com
6. Vet Services
GRAPH_ID: VSPA- Com
48
L&DDD
Farmer
Group
Bhakka
r
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
0.6
1.0
1.1
2.7
1.4
1.2
0.6
0.8
1.3
0.6
1.1
1.0
0.4
0.4
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.8
21 & Above
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.7
0.7
0.6
GRAPH_ID: VSPA- Com
Total Variable Cost
GRAPH_ID: TVCPA- Com
Farmer
Group
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 & Above
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
100
98
125
264
234
126
71
74
87
172
215
98
50
50
70
70
72
72
163
155
158
130
81
67
GRAPH_ID: TVCPA- Com
49
L&DDD
C. Total Cost Comparison
GRAPH_ID: TCPA- Com

Bhakk
ar
Farmer
Group
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
115
118
146
287
265
148
86
92
106
201
241
122
65
90
92
188
185
104
21 & Above
68
92
92
186
165
92
GRAPH_ID: TCPA- Com
D.
Milk Yield & Rate Comparison
50
L&DDD
GRAPH_ID: MYPA- Com

Farmer
Group
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
4.1
4.5
6.0
10.1
8.0
5.3
4.2
4.4
6.0
6.3
8.3
5.5
3.6
4.4
4.8
7.5
6.7
6.7
21 & Above
4.3
4.7
5.5
7.3
8.7
8.9
TABLE ID: MYPA-Com
GRAPH_ID: MPPL-Com
Farmer
Group
Bhakkar
Pakpatt
an
Jhelum
Faisalab
ad
Lahore
Gujranwa
la
1-5 Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
22
24
28
32
37
32
21
23
28
31
34
32
22
24
27
31
37
31
21 & Above
22
23
27
33
37
31
TABLE ID: MPPL-Com

51
L&DDD
E.
Income & Profitability Comparison
GRAPH_ID: IPA- Com
Farmer Group
Bhakka
r
Pakpatta
n
Jhelu
m
1-5 Animals
91
106
166
6-10 Animals
11-20
Animals
89
102
79
21 & Above
93
Faisalaba
d
Lahor
e
Gujranwal
a
321
293
170
166
196
279
173
104
128
235
247
204
108
151
239
322
275
TABLE ID: IPA-Com
52
L&DDD

GRAPH_ID: PPA- Com
Farmer Group
Bhakkar
1-5 Animals
Pakpatta
n
Jhelum
Faisalaba
d
Lahore
Gujranwal
a
-23
-12
19
34
28
21
6-10 Animals
11-20
Animals
10
59
-5
38
52
14
15
36
47
62
101
21 & Above
25
16
59
54
157
182
TABLE ID: PPA-Com
F.
Comparison, at a glance:
53
L&DDD
GRAPH_ID: CAAG
Milk & Meat Marketing Systems in Punjab

Milk processing and marketing
In Punjab only 3-4 per cent of the total milk is
processed and marketed through formal
channels whereas the remaining 97 per cent of
the milk reaches end users for immediate
consumption through an extensive, multi-layered
distribution system of middlemen. However the
processed milk consumption is growing at the
rate of 20 per cent per year. Pasteurized and
UHT milk in tetra packs are very popular
products (PISDA-USAID, 2006). Most milk
shops
and
bakeries
across
Pakistan
manufacture and sell traditional dairy products
like Dhahi (yoghurt) and khoya (sweet
condensed milk).
Large dairy shops also produce desi ghee and
butter. Processing plants have also introduced a
number of dairy products like yoghurt, drinking
yoghurt, flavored milk, cream, butter, ghee,
cheese and ice cream. However, the quantities
sold are small except for yoghurt and butter.
Industrial processing units have also been set up
in addition to the traditional traders of
sweetmeats, milk, yoghurt, ghee and other dairy
products.
Most
processing
capacity
is
concentrated near larger markets and away from
potential sources of milk. More than 53 modern
milk processing facilities were established before
1974. By 1974 less than half were operating
after the introduction of the first UHT, long-life
milk plant came into operation.
Livestock farming is an integral part of rural
economy of Pakistan. Despite the laissez faire
type of public approach for the development of
this sector, it has grown at impressive rate.
Presently, this sector is sharing almost 50% to

the total value addition in agriculture sector and
almost 11% of national GDP. Only the milk
produced has value higher than the combined
value of wheat and cotton. National Commission
on Agriculture clearly emphasized that one of
the main reasons for the lack of development in
the livestock sub-sector is the exceeding
defective system of marketing of livestock and
livestock products. Realizing the importance of
the issue, a nationwide study was carried out,
with the assistance of FAO Pakistan, to
investigate the marketing of live animals and
their products in the country. Besides marketing
of live animals, the selling system of different
livestock products like milk, meat, wool, hides
and skins were investigated.
It was found that majority of the animals
brought for sale in livestock markets were low
milk yielding and have poor body score. The
livestock markets lack even basic facilities while
local governments collect a handsome amount
of revenues from these markets. Beoparies or
traders are the major players in these markets
while the farmers, as sellers and buyers, have
relatively little information about competitive
prices of the animals
.
In milk marketing, dhodies or milkmen
are the only dominant intermediary. Consumers,
shopkeepers, veterinarians and researchers
report a number of adulterations and
contaminations in the milk supplied by dhodies.
The competitive milk marketing in the
pasteurized and UHT forms is at highly limited
54

scale and UHT milk prices are almost double
than the loose fresh milk supplied by dhodies.
L&DDD
In meat marketing, the abattoirs are the
production points and butchers shops are the
only vending points to the consumers. The
abattoirs are seriously lacking basic sanitation
facilities (like light, adequate water supply, space
for slaughtering and animal keeping, meat

refrigeration, and disposal of offal) all over the
country. A large portion of the by-products such
as blood, glands, intestines, and bones are
either wasted or poorly processed. The hygienic
conditions of the slaughterhouses and meat
shops are very poor. One of the underlying
reasons is that these facilities were not
periodically updated because of complex
administratively procedures involved. The flayers
and butchers are also not professionally trained.
The fixing the prices of beef and mutton by local
governments are serious obstacles in buying
good quality animals for slaughtering.
Due to poor flaying, lot of damages
occurred to hides and skins right at the
production points. The collection and disposal of
these hides and skins is a lengthy process and
proper care is not given to these useful products
on their way from production point till it reaches
the tanneries. In town or city markets, the hides
and skins business is in the hands of
commission agents or arthies. The price is
mostly dictated by the beopari who decides the
price on the basis of weight and cleanliness and
they have the updated price information.
In case of wool, due to clipping with
scissors, the quality is damaged right at the
production point. The local wool collector mixes
fleece of different flock into one consignment
and in this way he adds some dirt to increase
the weight. No quality control measures are
practiced during wool marketing. Virtually all
livestock and livestock products provide
relatively a meager rate of return compared to
the investment. This is true at each stage of
largely traditional marketing systems.
55
L&DDD

Creation of a Livestock Marketing
Regulatory Authority is recommended to ensure
good governance in marketing of livestock and
livestock products, Practicing of SPS measures
in production and marketing of milk and meat
marketing & Provision of milk pasteurization and

chilling facilities in deep rural areas, and
hides/skins processing facilities in Rain fed and
Barani areas is the solution to the problems of
livestock.
Beef & Mutton production
56
Beef Production System:

Most of the meat production was
conventional based on grazing with very poor
management and veterinary facilities. Male
calves after weaning at the age of 8 months are
usually slaughter and their body weight is less
than 100 kg with lean body.
crossbreeding of local cows with exotic semen

and through fattening of cows and buffaloes.
This review discusses various scenarios for beef
production in the country and evaluates work
done in the past to get a true picture for planning
future beef production in Pakistan.
GLOBAL SCENARIO
Animals used for fattening were Dhanni,

non descript with Sahiwal Blood purchased from
local market Jehlum. Fodder was scare in the
areas animals were also grazed for 5 to 8 hours
and fed in the evening hours. Water was
available for drinking by the government water
supply scheme. Animal were offered 2 kg
concentrate ration per day. Profit per animal was
the 5328, by small holding Rs. 4894 for by the
large form respectively.
Small farm was fattened for 90 days &
large form for 113 day. Growth was poor as
breed used were of low per day growth gain.
Sacrificial occasion market was the only factor of
success.
There are probably few people who
keep animals merely as a hobby. Farmers keep
cattle and buffalo to earn livelihood and make
profit. Agriculture business or livestock keeping
has thus emerged as an industry from a merely
sustainable mode of production. With the rising
competition for use of natural resources, it has
become imperative to use these resources
judiciously and efficiently. This trend in
production in all businesses the world over has
put an equal pressure on the animal scientists to
look ways and means for economical livestock
production to feed the growing human
population.
Beef is used as a major source of animal
protein in the world (FAO, 1998) with per capita
availability varying from few kilograms to few
hundred kilograms. The 1.60 million tons beef
produced in Pakistan every year comes mainly
from buffalo (65%) while the rest of it is shared
by cattle. Yet, per capita availability of beef in the
country is less than 8 kg (Anonymous, 1998)
with mutton sharing equally. Masses, therefore,
do not get the minimum required animal
proteins. Beef produced in the country is a byproduct of dairy industry. Research efforts have
been made in the past to produce beef through
World beef breeds. There are more

than 100 beef breeds in the world. But no single
breed of cattle can be claimed to excel all others
in all aspects of beef production under all
conditions; all breeds have strong and weak
points and hereditary variation exists in all
breeds. Although, the available resources,
production
system,
and
environmental
conditions may determine which breed to
choose, selection of a particular breed is usually
a matter of personal choice (Ensminger, 1987).
The 57 breeds found in U.S. have been grouped
into full bred (8), purebred (31), man-made (18)
and a dozen others (Walker, 1989). Most of
these breeds are owned by breed associations
that act as a backbone of the beef industry. They
not only add glamour to the industry, especially
through shows but also with their programs
create a `belonging feeling' for the cattlemen.
Comparative rating of economic traits of 59 beef
breeds of cattle has been described by
Ensminger (1987). Surprisingly though, most of
the beef produced in the world does not come
from beef breeds. In the U.K., for example,
about 1/3 of total beef production is derived from
the beef herds while 2/3 from the dairy herd (cull
cows, pure bred and crossbred calves) (Baker,
1983).Similar trend is observed in Pakistan
Basic principle of beef production.
The most important biological principal of beef
production is that the animals should gain in
weight so that it reaches a live weight suitable
for slaughter within a reasonable period of time.
Thus nutrient intake must exceed requirements
for maintenance of body weight (Wilkinson,
1985). Beef can be produced with little or no
grain with improved forage management, thus
making beef production more competitive and
profitable (Thomas, 1986). Beef production in
most of the United States and elsewhere in the
world is mainly dependent on forages, except
during finishing stage of the animals. It is
estimated that 85.7% of the total feed for beef
57
cattle, in United States, is derived from

roughages. Green and cured fodder can supply
all the nutrients required for the beef cattle,
except common salt and whatever energy rich
feeds may be necessary for additional
conditioning (Ensmmger et al., 1990).
CURRENT BEEF PRODUCTION SITUATION
IN PUNJAB
Beef production through cross
breeding. In Pakistan, cattle and buffalo are
mainly maintained for milk production and to
some extent for draught purpose. There are
neither specific breeds of cattle or buffaloes nor
any specific rearing system for beef production.
Efforts have been made to develop a breed for
beef purpose. The first effort was made by
crossing Charolais with local cows (Sahiwal,
Dajal and Thari). The average birth weight of
Charolais crosses (25 kg) was lower than buffalo
(32.7 kg). The average live weight at 6 and 15
months of age was higher in buffalo calves than
in cross-breds (190 and 326 vs 172.5 and 311
kg, respectively) However, Charolais crosses
had higher live weight (293 kg) than buffalo
calves (277 kg) at the age of 12 months (Usmani
et al., 1979).
In
another
attempt,
Australian
Droughtmaster of Australia was crossed with
Bhagnari. The plan started in 1969 at Beef
Production Research Centre, Sibi, and
Baluchistan. The animals in the third cross
(62.5% Droughtmaster, 37.5% Bhagnari) were
named as 'Narimaster'. The mature weight of
Bhagnari males and females is 545 and 341 kg,
respectively (Bhutto et al., 1993). The birth and
weaning weights and pre-weaning daily growth
rates
of
Bhagnari,
Droughtmaster
and
Narimaster are 23, 27.5, 26 kg; 106, 113, 119 kg
and 0.39, 0.42, 0.45 kg, respectively (Bashir et
al., 1998). These birth weights are not
comparable with the birth weights (34-44 kg) of
crosses of famous beef breeds of cattle in
temperate zones (Thomas, 1986). The
performance of other economic traits (weaning
weight and daily growth rate) of Droughtmaster
in this herd is also not comparable to the
standards of any beef breed, therefore,
continuation of this programme has not been
justified (Khan, 1996).
The latest effort in beef production is

being made by crossing Simmental with the local
cattle population under a project named "Beef
Production through Cattle Cross Breeding" at
LPRI,
Bahadurnagar,
Okara
(personal
communication). The objectives and the
approach of the project, however, does not seem
to be rooted in lessons of Droughtmaster and
Charolais crossbreeding.
Buffalo as a beef animal. Male buffalo
calves grow at an average rate of 0.52 kg/day
purely on forage based diet such as Sadhabahar
(Tahir & Rehman, 1987) The average initial body
weight of the animals in this study was 190 kg.
In studies conducted at LPRI, Bahadumagar
(Pasha & Tahir, 1985; Pasha, 1987; Jabbar &
Iqbal, 1993; Jabbar et al., 1993) it has been
reported that daily growth rate of male buffalo
calves from 0.78 to 1.01 kg having initial body
weight between 116 to 188 kg. In another study
(Pasha, 1986), the average growth rate of male
buffalo calves ranged between 0.43 to 0.7
kg/day. The average initial live weight of animals
in all these groups was 142 and they were
raised on diets containing wheat straw, rice husk
or maize cobs. Information is not available on
the energy consumption of the animals in this
study. However, from the data presented in the
aforementioned studies, it seems that the
difference in growth rate was due to the
difference in the energy intake and initial body
weight of the animals. Basra et al. (1992)
studied the growth response in buffalo male
calves fed different levels of protein and energy.
Calves ranged in age from 6 to 9 months (Av.
weight 110 kg). Highest daily weight gain (728
g/d) was observed in calves fed low protein-high
energy ration. The lowest growth rate (549 g/d)
was in calves fed medium protein-high energy
ration.
In a fattening trial of old bullock
(Anonymous, 1963) done under the Directorate
of Livestock Farms at College of Veterinary
Sciences, Lahore, a maximum of 1.1 kg daily
weight gain was recorded. Whether the gain in
weight was due to fat deposition or lean meat in
the body is not clear but it is assumed that
mostly it should be due to fat deposition because
at the old age this much growth rate in lean meat
is not possible. In later studies on old bullocks
(Barque et al., 1980) weight gain of 0.8 kg has
58
been reported with dressing percentage similar

to buffalo male calves.
Buffalo vs cattle as beef animal. Comparative
Performance of buffalo male calves and
pure and crossbred cattle calves has extensively
been reported. Asrar (1986) reported that
buffalo, Sahiwal and crossbred (Friesian x
Sahiwal) male calves of 12-14 months of age
had weight gain 0.91, 0.94 and 0.97 kg/day,
respectively on a diet having 10.2% CP and 60%
TDN. The average initial body weight in these
calves was 180 kg. Dry matter digestibility and
dressing percentage was slightly better in
crossbred calves. Pasha (1988a) compared the
fattening potential of Sahiwal calves and buffalo
calves on a ration with 13.3 CP and 53% TDN.
The average initial body weight of animals was
200 kg and they were fed ad libitum. The
average growth rate of Sahiwal cow calves (.841
kg/day) was less than buffalo calves (0.970
kg/day). Similar trend in growth rate of Sahiwal
cow and buffalo (0.715 vs 0.765 kg/day and
0.796 vs 0.840 kg/day in cow and buffalo,
respectively) was reported in other studies
(Pasha, 1998b; Ahmad et al., 1995). However,
Basra (1992) reported an opposite trend in the
growth rate of male calves of Sahiwal, crossbred cows and buffaloes at the age of 12-15
months. The concentrate ration had 11.12% CP
and 61.75% TDN. Daily growth rate was the
highest (839-869 g) in cross-bred followed by
Sahiwal cow (795-805 g) and buffaloes (751-781
g). The FCR was 9.9-10.6, 9.5-9.8 and 10.6-10.9
in male calves of Sahiwal and cross-bred cows
and buffaloes, respectively. Similar trend in the
growth rate of cows and buffaloes has been
reported by Mohsin et al., (1995). Varying the
level of fiber and concentrate in their diets, cow
calves had higher growth rate than buffalo
calves (0.769 vs 0.566 and 0.666 vs 0.448
kg/day in cow and buffalo calves, respectively).
Although their average initial body weight was
almost same in all the groups.
Limitations of nutritional experiments. In
most of the nutritional studies reported above,
information on the energy intake of the animals
is not available. Under these circumstances, it is
difficult to know whether the energy
requirements of the animals were met according
to any feeding standards or not. More often than
not, information on the feeding value of green
fodder offered to the animals is lacking. This

information is essential for future planning to
increase production performance of animals.
Most of the research conducted on nutritional
aspects of buffaloes has serious limitations. That
is why on international level, our research on
nutrition has been termed as "feed them and
weigh them" toward manner of utilization of
products for the animals to survive or to
determine performance in one or more traits
when energy intake will not support biological
efficiency (McDowell et al., 1995).
Stimulus for action. Sincerest efforts
are required to develop the local beef
production. The first step would be to change the
current approach in the research. Commercial
viability of the beef production enterprise has to
be established. Except in one study (Tahir &
Rehman, 1987) from among the studies
mentioned above, the animals were raised on
either complete diet or combination of
concentrate mix and available seasonal green
fodder. Partial or full concentrate feeding may
not be economical for beef production. In a
recent study by Jabbar et al. (1997), the animals
raised purely on green fodder had very low
growth rate (211 gram/day). This growth rate is
"unacceptable" in buffalos heifers without any
plausible explanation, if they were fed. Efforts
should be made to explore the possibility of
raising animals purely on the forages. The
reasons for low productivity of animals on forage
should be investigated. Why the science that
can work in other parts of the globe has failed in
this country. This is a food for thought for the
animal nutritionists in this country.
Ecological and environmental conditions
are not very dissimilar in India and Pakistan.
India has made progress in the export of buffalo
meat. Thus frozen buffalo meat is being regularly
exported from India to the Middle East (Joshi,
1988). This is despite the fact that Murrah
buffalo has lower adult body weight (584 kg)
than Nili-Ravi (647 kg)(McDowell et al., 1995).
Studies in Egypt have also shown prospects for
meat production in Egyptian buffaloes. Average
daily gain in Egyptian buffaloes from live weights
of 120 to 450 kg ranges between 500 to 1000
grams per day on low to high energy diets
(Graziani, 1988) despite that their mature body
weight is 121 kg less than Nili- Ravi buffaloes
(McDowell et al., 1995). This also provides a
59
stimulus for action to the Pakistani scientists in

this field.
VARIOUS
ALTERNATIVES
PRODUCTION IN PAKISTAN
FOR
BEEF
1. Produce beef domestically

The beef produced from the available cattle and
buffalo population is as a by-product because
these species have traditionally not been raised
for producing beef. The main purpose has been
the generation of draught power and production
of milk. Animals are slaughtered to fetch beef if
they are surplus and do not perform well for the
main objectives. There is tremendous scope of
improvement in this option because fattening the
surplus has been suggested in the past (Barque
et al., 1980; Gilani, 1980) and most of the
research efforts have been concentrated in this
direction as evident from the studies reviewed in
the preceding sections.
a. From improved genetic potentials of
buffaloes and cattle. There is no
buffalo beef breed in the world and so
the only choice for improving buffalo to
produce more beef is to select buffaloes
for beef generation after generation.
Selection for early maturity and better
milk production is likely to improve
growth because of positive genetic
association
between
growth
and
maturity and milk production. Direct
selection for beef is also possible but
would reduce the rate of gain in milk
production.
Surprisingly
though,
unintentional selection of buffaloes for
higher body size is going on especially
on male side. At cattle/buffalo shows
male are credited for huge size. The
option of selecting buffaloes for meat
has been suggested (Cady et al., 1983)
but requires extreme care (Khan, 1986)
and cannot be suggested under the
prevailing circumstances.
2. Import beef breeds as pure stock
This options is less feasible because it
requires
huge
investment.
Also,
hash
environment, more diseases and poor feeding
resources compel to make this option even more
remote.
3. Import beef
This option does not seems feasible in

the presence of huge livestock population which
even if not being raised for beef can meet the
domestic demand provided efforts and resources
are diverted for improving their growth,
especially in male surplus calves of cattle and
buffalo and fattening of the old/culled animals.
Fear of dependency, introduction of diseases
(such as BSE) and limited foreign exchange
reserves also limit the scope of this option.
Import of beef currently being undertaken by
multinationals for specific purposes is hoped to
stimulate quality beef production from local
resources.
FUTURE BEEF PRODUCTION IN PAKISTAN
In the light of global scenario of beef
production vis-a vis its current situation in
Pakistan, the animal scientists have to accept a
challenge of making the beef production a
commercially viable enterprise. Only then we
can provide enough meat for the masses on
affordable prices or the country has to depend
on other nations for that. Summarized are some
of the possible means through which we can
achieve the goal of economical beef production
in the country.
1. Beef production from forage

The major limiting factors in the
productivity of beef cattle fed forages alone are
that they limit intake of energy, digestibility of
energy, and the efficiency of energy utilization for
animal product (Waldo & Jorgens, 1981). The
dry matter intake (DMI) and digestibility of
forages by the animals can be affected by many
factors.
ii)
2. Nutrient deficiency
An unbalanced ration may affect intake,
digestibility and performance of the animals.
Generally energy and protein get the first
consideration in balancing the rations. Minerals
are also important for promoting intake and
energy utilization in the animals. Sodium
chloride, for example, to a deficient diet may
improve intake (Habib & Siddiqui, 1994).
Deficiency of calcium causes rickets and
phosphorus deficiency results in decreased
growth rates, inefficient feed utilization and a
depraved appetite in the young animals (NRC,
60
1984). These minerals, therefore, must be given

special considerations in feeding beef animals
for their higher growth rates.
3. Use of growth promoters
The non-nutritive feed additives and
implants are used in the feedlot production
(NRC, 1984). The growth promoting implants
promote weight gain and feed efficiency by
repartitioning energy toward muscle growth and
away from fat deposition (Samford, 1987). Feed
additives and antibiotics may increase growth
rate
by
enhancing
nutrient
utilization
(Heinemann et al., 1978; Pendlum et al., 1978)
and/or decreasing expected weight loss due to
sickness or natural but undesirable behavioral
patterns (over eating and normal cycling by
heifers) (Samford, 1997). The implants are
preparations of sex hormones (Estradiol,
Progesterone and Testosterone) (NRC, 1984)
The non-nutritive feed additives include
monensin, lasalocid and other antibiotics. The
research is required to be conducted on the use
of these growth promoters in cow and buffalo
calves meant for meat production to give sound
recommendation to the beef producers in the
country.
4. Cross
Breeding
vs
exploiting
indigenous resources
Crossing of native type of cattle with
improved breeds is an attractive approach as a
population average can be moved to a new
plateau for certain traits rather rapidly
(McDowell, 1983). Dairy cattle cross breeding is
underway in Pakistan and has increased
average milk production per lactation in cross
bred cows compared with their local ancestors.
Trials have also been conducted to compare the
meat production potential of crossbred calves
with local cattle and buffaloes (Asrar, 1986;
Basra, 1992). The results indicate good
prospects for meat production from crossbred
calves on the basis of their daily growth rates.
However, for a long term strategy it should be
carefully planned to achieve a goal in relation to
environmental conditions (McDowell, 1983).
Also, the susceptibility of crossbred animals to
tick and other diseases should be included in the
model to evaluate its suitability for the Pakistani
environment.
In the absence of any typical beef breed

in Pakistan, cattle and buffalo, because of their
comparable growth rate with defined beef
breeds of the world, have the potential to serve
as beef animal. The present challenge to the
animal scientists is to sincerely exploit their
potentials. This also raises another fundamental
question that do we really need to develop or
import a "Beef Breed" in the present situation
and spend a lot of time and resources on it or
simply to work with the "available livestock
resources". The answer is easy to fmd if we
compare the growth performance of `Narimaster'
with Bhagnari cattle or buffaloes. Any research
effort should thus be based on the lessons from
Charolais and Droughtmaster crossbreeding.
Haphazard attempts without objectivity are not
likely to lead us anywhere.
5. Improving beef marketing
In the order of priority the beef is likely to
remain as the third choice after poultry and
mutton among the masses in Pakistan. Majority
of the people are not quality conscious and are
less likely to pay higher prices for a good quality
beef or for an old spent animal's meat. Hence
there is less incentive for the farmers to produce
a quality beef. However, with Government
permission to export the beef, there is a lot of
scope for the local beef industry to develop.
It was explored that animal supply chain
was strongly linked with the village beopari/
livestock traders and butchers. Butcher usually
purchases few animals for local slaughtering
along the road side shops and bus stops.
Shops are known and healthy male
calves are slaughter for rural peoples. However
the beopari/ livestock traders supply these
animals to the near town and big city, where
local authorities have established livestock
markets.Butchure of town and city purchase
animals from these markets and slaughter their
animals in the slaughter houses in the
supervision of area Veterinary Officers.Being the
barai area livestock traders and suppliers of
Rawalpindi Sargodha Balwal, Gujranwala gujrat
and traders of Lahore Markets purchase animals
from the potohar arid Livestock
61
Fre
No of
qu
animal
Breed
en
Purchase
Dep of
Dry
Concentrate
Gree
Feed
Labor/
Total
Sale
price/animal
shed
fodd
ration
cost
animal
Cost
of
Rs
cy
3
5-10
Nonde
12000-00
11-20
script
Dhann
10500-00
er
fodde
1.5
10.5
28.50
r
7.43
46.43
16.60
64.5
ls
23000
1.35
11.75
35.65
10.11
57.51
12.45
3
71.3
23300
Anima
Table ID: BE-1
Mutton Production System:

Sheep and goat production is one of the
major economic activities under the arid and
semi-arid condition of Pakistan. The country has
56.7 million of goat and 30.9 million of sheep.
The main purpose of raising these small
ruminants in the country is mutton production.
The small ruminants share about 40% of total
red meat produced in the country. It has been
observed that in the last many years the overall
per capita consumption of the animal food
products is increasing. Overall annual growth
rate of goat in Pakistan is 3.78% which is
highest in Asia.
Pakistan ranks third in Asia in small
ruminant population. Some famous sheep and
goat breeds which have potential for mutton
production are reported in the paper. Very limited
studies have been conducted on sheep and goat
for mutton production in Pakistan. There is no
feedlot fattening system functioning in the
country. The indicators suggest that there are
bright aspects of sheep and goat to be used as
meat animals. Due to bird flu outbreaks in the
world including Pakistan, there is strong feeling
to exploit small ruminants as alternate and/or
backup source of elite animal protein. To meet
the increasing demand of mutton locally as well
as for export, feedlot operations are required to
be introduced among the farmer community and
in the private sector in Pakistan.
Mutton Production:
Total mutton production data from
small ruminant in Asia has been presented in
table 7.
Introduction:
Small ruminants contribute largely to
the livelihoods of the livestock-keeping
households of low and medium income farmers
in the developing world. The keeping of small
ruminants is mainly concentrated

developing areas of the world.
in
the
Punjab has the highest goat population

(37%) followed by Sindh (24%) Baluchistan
(23%) and NWFP (16%) as shown in table 2
whereas Baluchistan has highest sheep
population (42%) followed by Punjab (25%),
Sindh (11%) and NWFP (8%). The highest
growth rate (6.67%) per year for goat has been
observed in Sindh followed by Balochistan with a
growth rate of 5.67% per year. Whereas, the
sheep population is decreasing at a rate of
1.25% in Punjab and NWFP.
Small Ruminants Production System:
There are three main small ruminant

production systems in various regions of the
country from unknown times. These can be
described as nomadic, transhumant and
sedentary or household. The highest sheep and
goat population (44%) is raised under nomadic
system, followed by transhumant (38%) and
sedentary (18%) as shown in table 6.
Majority of the small ruminants in
Baluchistan and NWFP are raised under
nomadic system. Nomadic flocks have no fixed
base and move constantly throughout the year.
Whereas transhumant system is more common
62
in Punjab and NWFP, under which about 38%

small ruminants are raised
Table : Small Ruminants Production Systems in Pakistan
Production Systems
Province
NWFP
Punjab
Sindh
Balochistan
Total
Nomadic
50
26
44
73
44
Transhumant
33
47
37
21
38
Sedentary/Household
17
27
19
18
Source: Ishaque, 1993

TABLE ID: SRPS-P
sedentary system is found in the cropped areas,
especially in Punjab, NWFP and Sindh.
Sedentary flocks consist of about 20-30 heads.
These are raised normally in villages. Majority of
the flocks are owned by landless families and
represent a major source of family income. Feed
resources for these animals are grazing
wasteland, crop residue / stubbles and cultivated
fodders.
Under this system flock owners have fixed base.

Transhumant flocks are generally smaller than
nomadic flocks and contain more goats (Mack
and Anjum, 1993). The grazing is done on
rangelands and on follow land.
Sheep and goats maintained under these two

systems get more than 90% of their feed from
the rangelands (Khan et al., 2000). The
Table : Mutton Production (000 tons)

Source
of 1976
1986
1996
Annual Increase%
mutton
2004
Annual Increase%
(1976-1996)
(1996-2004)
Sheep
136
225
215
2.90
224
0.4
Goat
178
309
387
5.87
496
2.8
314
534
602
4.59
720
1.96
Total
Source: Agri. Stat. 1976-77, 1986-87, 1996-97, 2003-04

TABLE ID: MPr
Sheep goat flocks are reducing in the
irrigated areas .However, in the Thall & Rain-fed
Potohar area, sheep goat keeping is a good
source of income & employment for the rural
people. Goat population is greater in Rain-fed
area, and sheep production is more in Thall
area. Mix farming with sheep & goat is seen in
both mutton production areas.
pure specimen was seen. Goat breed Beetle-
The flocks are grazed after one hour of
Breed Beetle with red spots, Teddy & Pahari
sunrise till dawn. One shepherd can manage up
like, Teddy in addition to local & Teddy cross.

However, In Barani Rain-fed area, sheep
breeds
were
Salt
range,
Afghan
sheep
(introduced by muhajirs/immigrants), Bulkhy with

blood at different level. Goat breed was Pahari
cross & finally pure teddy.
to 100 animals. Average herd size was 47

animal ranging from 27 to 115 animals. Breed in
No slaughtering of sheep/goat in rural
Thall area was Thalli sheep & varying degrees of
areas
breed impurity of blood in kajli & Lohi sheep. No
slaughtered in the nearby towns & cities for
was
observed.
However,
they
are
63
mutton
production.
Consumer
rates,
here,
Acacia with no roots under the trees in winter.
normally range from Rs 220/Kg to 260/Kg.
But in rain-fed areas, katcha houses were

constructed to fight against rain. People are
Housing:
never willing to invest into the improved housing
No sheds were constructed in the Thall
for sheep & goat.
area. Barns were walled with thorny bushes &

Table: World Mutton Production (Million tons)
1996
2000
2004
2005
Sheep
Goat
sheep goat
Sheep
Goat
Sheep
Goat
World
7.02
3.09
.59
.73
8.20
4.36
8.44
4.53
Asia
2.98
2.11
.48
.67
4.29
3.24
4.50
3.41
Bangladesh
0.25
0.11
.03
.13
0.03
0.14
0.03
0.14
China
1.00
0.81
.44
.30
2.24
1.75
2.40
1.90
India
0.21
0.45
0.22
.46
0.23
0.47
0.24
0.47
Pakistan
0.15
0.28
0.16
0.31
0.16
0.36
0.17
0.37
Source: FAO, 2006

TABLE ID: WMP
Marketing:
Local market were present in both the
Thall & Barani area of Punjab, regulated
by local great authorities, owned by contractor,
who manage them day by day business of the
market. Parchi fee is @ 2% of price of the
animal.
Export of Mutton:
Keeping in view the data presented
in the tables and weight gains under the
traditional farming system, it can be concluded

that there is a great potential to bridge the yield
gap of about 200 percent which can be achieved
through balanced feeding and management
under feedlot farming system.
The data on the export of mutton is
given in Table 16. It clearly shows that the
demand of Pakistani mutton is increasing year
by year in the Gulf States.
Table : Export of Mutton
64
Year
Production
(000 tons)
Export
(000 tons)
2000-01
666
2.69
0.40
2001-02
683
0.79
0.12
2002-03
702
1.09
0.15
2003-04
720
0.53
0.07
2004-05
740
1.90
0.25
Source: Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock, 2006
65
Mortality Losses
Survival of neonatal calves is imperative
for livestock propagation; however, a large
number of calves die during the first year of their
life causing heavy drain on the economics of
livestock production. Mortality of neonatal calves
was attributed to conditions like diarrhea and
pneumonia (Shimizu and Nagatoma., 1978).
However, environmental and managemental
factors hasten the occurrence of such conditions
(Khan and Khan, 1991).
infections especially those causing septicemia

and enteritis (Blood et al., 1994).
According to Afzal et al. the mortality in
cattle and buffalo calves ranged from 29.1% to
39.8%. Martin and Wiggins estimated that 20%
calf mortality resulted in reduction of 38% profit
of a livestock farm. Furthermore, 25% average
early calf mortality hardly provides any chance
for regular replacement of low production
animals. A minimum mortality rate of 5% is
usually acceptable to dairy farm having standard
managemental conditions. In this paper, the
existing on-farm practices of buffalo calves
rearing and mortality incidence in buffalo calves
in commercial dairy farms of Punjab province is
reported.
Calf mortality was associated with the

type of housing, feeding, managemental
practices, weather conditions, external and
internal parasitic infestation and bacterial
Mortality Loss per annum

Animals
1-5
Animals
6-10
Animals
11-20
Animals
21 &
Above
Total
Gujranwa
la
Bhakk
ar
Jhelu
m
Pakpatt
an
Faisalaba
d
Lahor
e
0.0
4165.
4
2316.
7
4495.5
876.9
531.8
1463.0
6808.5
7936.0
1062.0
783.8
3826.7
3937.5
1559.8
745.9
2381.
4
1159.0
1131.9
4717.9
1150.7
244.3
506.9
21086.9
4649.4
3650.1
12274.1
419.3
4078.
4
730.5
7212.
6
Table ID: ML-1

Among the dairy farms of study area
77% of the calves were usually reared to
stimulate milk let down and they were weaned at
the age of 6-12 months. In modern dairy farming
early weaning of calves is preferred to save milk
for marketing. In contrast the weaning age was
high in the majority of the farms of the study
area. In the presence of suckling calves it is
difficult to measure milk production of dams and
also the amount of milk consumed by a calf.
Traditionally farmers were doing little

efforts to stimulate milk letdown in buffaloes with
the help of managemental practices other than
calf suckling. Some of the farmers used
intramuscular injection of Oxytocin for milk
letdown. Only 23%of the calves were reared as
replacement herd in the farms of study area.
66
Graph ID:MLPA
Education Impact Factor

Pakistan is a developing country with a
lot many illiterate people. Illiteracy is the national
problem of Pakistan. Pakistan literacy rate is
nearly 54%' where a literate person is defined as
a one who can read & write ones name. 51.7%
farmers were illiterate, 9.6% were primary,
12.8% were middle, 18.7% were metric , 3.0%
were intermediate , 2.8% were Graduates, 1.3%
were masters. The lack of awareness to various
new techniques, Govt. incentives, modern
management discoveries are the major
hindrances in bring our farmer to present
themselves as profitable livestock farmers.
extension workers from various universities are

busy in providing media consciousness about
common diseases & nutrition recommendations.
Govt. of Punjab has started various

extension programs to bring about availability of
significant important information. Moreover,
67
Zone/Level
%
%
%
%
%
illiterate
primary
middle
metric
Gujranw
Bhak
Jehlu
Pakpat
Faisala
ala
50.5
3.2
12.9
19.4
kar
51.9
8.1
13.3
16.3
m
30.8
15.4
16.2
28.2
tan
60.4
11.9
13.2
9.4
bad
48.9
6.7
13.3
26.7
Lahore
67.5
12.5
7.5
12.5
intermediate
%
7.5
4.4
4.3
1.9
0.0
0.0
Graduation
4.3
2.2
4.4
1.5
2.6
2.6
1.3
1.9
4.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
% masters
Table ID: EI-1
GRAPH ID: LAF
Multi
disciplinary,
extension
demonstration project on integrated resource
management (IRM) of dairy cattle and crop
production is required. Educational tool to teach
producers, extension agents and agricultural
professionals, about how to plan and implement
recommended
production
practices
into
sustainable agricultural production systems.
Program involves animal science, agronomy,
agricultural economics, agricultural engineering,
entomology and plant pathology.
68
Major
Findings
GRAPH ID:
LAF-ZW
Dairy Production is a labor-intensive

business with lot of constraints, poor yield,
poor management, lack of knowledge about

genetics balance feeding and modern
69
breeding. The Pakistan is rich in dairy

animals i-e 60 million large ruminants
making important share of Agriculture and
based in 70% rural population of the
country. Lack of marketing and supply
chain adulteration in dairy and meat
production is another bottleneck of
development.
This survey brings forward the valued

findings, that is improving breed, per unit
output of fodder, research in fodder quality
improvement, modern concepts of housing
and technological package of practices
communicated up to the farmers.
The proportion of small milk producers is

quite high, which help in employment
generation. Increasing the productivity of
small holder should be taken as challenge,
to keep rural urban migration balance.
Anmol Wanda by the Govt. of Punjab by its
L&DD Department is a great contributor for
the farmers, it should be marketed
throughout Punjab through DLO of each
district. Similarly mineral mixture packets
prepared by Veterinary University Lahore
can be marketed through Vet Hospital and
Dispensaries.
The per unit buffaloes and cows milk

production is low and feed ingredients are
costly and adulterated, farmers make
addition of water and different adulterants
to increase their volume and make the
business.
There is general view that artificial

insemination is failure in buffalo and low
quality imported semen of Jersey and
Friesians is supplied by the private sector.
High mortality of calves especially buffalo,
and in small ruminant lambs and kids is
seen due to poor management, lack of
vaccination deworming and feed resources.
PPR disease with high mortality of goat
was observed in Bhakkar.
In the survey area consumers have higher
demand as compared to the supply of milk.
Beef demand and supply was almost equal

and low demand for mutton was seen as
poultry meat supply chain was present up
to the villages with low prices.
Among other types of by-products, ghee,

khoya, raw cheese and sweats were
prepared.
Adulteration
&
lack
of
proper
standardization in weight and packing was
seen in cotton seed cake & rape seed cake
bags and wheat bran.
Recommendations
Genetic improvement:
Despite of wonderful potential of our

animals (e-g Nili Ravi, Sahiwal etc.)
optimum genetic capabilities can only be
used by implying modern discoveries in
Selective Breeding.
Artificial Insemination
AI has got less conception rates & low

acceptability by the farmers. Its full
advantage needs further in-depth physiochemical studies based on our specific
environment, ecology and animal breeds.
Conservation of High potential

breeds:
Our precious dairy breeds need extensive

care in preserving them. A lot many animals
are being cross-bred leaving behind less
chances of pure breeding. Sahiwal Cow is
an example. Punjab govt. Policy of cross
breeding and grading of scrub animals
should be observed strictly. Cholistani & Nili
Ravi need special selective and line
breeding attention in this concern. AI
technician need training about breeding
policy
Cross-breeding of Dhanni Breed:
70
For cross-bred animals, particularly with

Dhanni breed, a comprehensive program is
needed. This will open new horizons of
increasing milk yield and enhancing breed
potential.
Improved Fodder varieties:
Improved fodder varieties of hybrid & multicut seeds should be introduced among the
farmers. Sadhabahar, Lucerne, Mot grass &
Berseem are some of them.
Use of technology:
Use of technology & mechanization,

particularly in fodder conservation, to
increase nutrients & life of hay and silage
should be propagated to the farmers.
Adulteration in rations:
. Bags of 50 Kg may be legalized by the

Govt. Similarly, wheat bran bags should be
standardized in 40 Kg packings of
polythene bags.
Anmol Wanda:
Anmol wanda prepared at research

Institute of L&DD may be marketed through
DLOs in every district & dairy production
area OF Punjab, especially in the Thal &
Rain-fed areas. Moreover, mineral mixture
& TMR should be produced & marketed to
the farmers.
Hay and Silage making:
New projects of hay & silage making need

to be started by the L&DD department.
Furthermore, proper training facilities for
the farmers should be launched.
Drought-resistance Shrubs
Draught-resistance varieties of fodder and

shrubs should be introduced for grazing of
small ruminants in Thall & Rain-fed areas.
Progeny Testing Bulls:
Bull is half of the herd. Hence, progeny

tested Bulls by L&DD should be supplied to
DLOs to keep the bulls in Buffalo-populated
areas for breeding purposes.
Calf fattening:
Young calves should be fattened by feed lot

rations. For this, ration preparation with
high application of technology is required.
Extension Services:
Large number of farmers need to be given
extensive training in the areas of
vaccination marketing, management, value
addition & supply chain enhancement
.
Information Services:
Farmers need to be taught scientific

methods of feeding, feed combinations and
other measures to raise milk production.
training programs should be launched in
animal populated area throughout the
province.
Drinking water & Sanitation:
Availability of clean drinking water may be

insured for Livestock. Similarly, more
attention needs to be diverted towards
proper sanitation procedures.
Dairy-processing Plants:
Small-scale dairy processing technology for

making cheese, Yogurt Dhahi, pasteurized
milk & other innovative products should be
introduced.
Govt. owned Institutes:
Technology should be introduced & applied

in Govt. owned institutes .Quality of vaccine
ie HS, FMD, Pleuropnomonia, Pox, PPR,
Black Quarter may be enhanced.
71
Govt farms need to act as demonstration

units for public & Livestock breeders while
conserving the breeds.
Vet Services:
Provision of vet-services in Thal & Rain-fed

area may be increased, as livestock is
more important milk yield & other Livestock
productions to a great extent. Moreover,
local livestock fairs/mailaas should be
arranged in collaborating with L&DD
department.
Feed-lot rations:
There is no trend of calf-fattening. Feed lot

fattening technology should be introduced
to meet the upcoming requirements of beef
& mutton.
Measuring Standards
Proper method of measurements should be

introduced . Installation of weigh-bridges
and other measuring instruments may be
installed at the livestock markets for
transparent marketing.
72
References
Linkages Program. Report on Dairy

Mission of Pakistan
Tanvir Ali(2006) A case study of milk

production and marketing by small and
medium scale contract farmers of
Haleeb Foods Ltd., Pakistan University
of Agriculture ,Faisalabad - Pakistan.
by
Shamim
Improving peri-urban dairy farms by
Dr Ali Muhammad Khushk and

Aslam
The White
Revolution:
Strategic Plan for the
Pakistan Dairy
Industry, A Report
available on Internet
Govt.
of
Pakistan,
(2006).
2005-06,
Finance,
(Accessed on 3rd July, 2008)
Umme Zia(2007), Improved market

access and smallholders dairy farmers
participation
for
sustainable
development,
consultancy
report
CFC/FIGMDP/16F
Ali
Peter Waynn et al(2006)Mission
and
Saifullah
(2006)Milk
production and marketing, Dawn,
Internet edition January, 2006, Monday
carried out under the auspices of the

Australia Pakistan Agriculture Sector
Memon
http://www.pakissan.com/livestock
PISDA-USAID (2006).
Economic
Survey
Islamabad:
Ministry
of
Islamabad, Pakistan
industry
Rizvi
http://www.pakistaneconomist.com/issu
e2000/issue21/i&e1.htm (Accessed on
3rd July, 2009)
Burki, A. A., Khan, M and Bari, F.

(2005). The state of Pakistans dairy:
An assessment, CMER Working
Paper, 05-34, LUMS: Lahore
dairy
Ahmed
The
Sharif, M., W. Malik, N. I. Hashmi

and U. Farooq. (2003). Action Plan for
Livestock Marketing Systems in
Pakistan, Joint study by Social
Sciences Institute NARC and FAO
Office Islamabad, Pakistan
Tanvir, Ali Dr. (2006) A case study of

milk production and marketing by small
and medium scale contract farmers of
Haleeb Foods Ltd. University of
Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan
Abedullah, Z. M., and Sabir, H.

(2005). Competitive efficiency of milk
production in the Central Punjab,
European
Journal
of
Scientific
Research, Vol. 7, No. 1
73
Berdegue, J. A., Peppelenbos, L.
Din, M., and Babar, M. E. (2006).
Livestock farming in peri-urban areas

Faisalabad,
Pakistan,
Livestock
Research for Rural Development, Vol.
18, No. 2Garcia.
Mahmood, K., and Hemme, T .

(2003). A review of milk production in
Pakistan with particular emphasis on
small-scale producers, PPLPI Working
Paper No. 3,IFCN, Rome
Younas,
M.,
and
Yaqoob,
Aslam,
M.
2004.
Agribusiness
Development Project TA: Pak 4058.
Islamabad
Mack, S. D. and M. S. Anjum .
Pasha, Tallat Naseer, Prof. Dr.

(2006) Feedlot Fattening Of Sheep &
Goats For Quality Mutton Production,
Technical Feasibility University of
Veterinary and Animal Sciences,
Lahore.
M.
(2005). Feed resources of livestock in

the Punjab, Pakistan, Livestock
Research for Rural Development. Vol.
17, No. 2
meat animals of Pakistan. In:

proceeding of the international seminar
on goat production in SAARC
countries. Editors M. Afzal and R. H.
Usmani, PARC, Islamabad.
1993. Livestock planning consultancy,

First mission report, FAO, U. N.,
Rome.
Khan, A. G., A. Azim and M. I.

Anjum. 2003. Prospects of goat as
Lohano, H. D., and Soomro, F. M.

(2006). Unit Root Test and forecast of
milk
production
in
Pakistan,
International Journal of Dairy Science,
Vol. 1, No. 1
Hasnain, H. U. 1985. Sheep and

goats in Pakistan. FAO Animal
production and Health paper 56.
and Bienabe, E. 2005. Regoverning

Markets: Keys to Inclusion of Small
Producers
in
Dynamic
Markets.
Resource Paper for Component 2.
Alexandre, G. and N. Mandonnet.

2005. Goat meat production in harsh
environment.
Small
Ruminant
Research 60:54-66
74
Appendix:
Questionnaire for Cost of Milk and Meat in Various Ecological
Zone Productions
PRODUCER/FARMERS
1. Name of respondent:________________________________
2. Village:____________________ Teh: ________________ District: _________
3. Family Size ________________
4. Educational status: (a) Primary (b) Middle (c) Metric (d) Above Metric
5. Age: _____________ Years in Dairy___________
6. Land holding:
a) Above 25 acres ------------------------------------------------
b) 12.54 to 25 acres---------------------------------------------c) Less than 12.5 acres-----------------------------------------d) Landless (No land)------------------------------------------e) Tenant --------------------------------------------------------f) Land Rent (per acre)----------------------------------------
Animal
Num
Value
ber
Sold for
Rs.
meat
Death /
losses
value
purpose
Cattle
Buffalo
Buff
FYS
Suckers
Sheep
Goat
Kids
Poultry
Others
7. Other type of Business______________________________

8. Strength of livestock maintained by the farmer
Purchase of Animals and Equipments
Buffalo lactating or Advance -----------------------------------------
Pregnant Nili Ravi Buffalo ---------------------------------------------
Adult Buffalo Bull (Nili Breed) -------------------------------------
Chaff Cutter with
Goldamatic water pump -----------------------------------------------
Iron Chain
----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Cane- Rope ------------------------------------------------------------Bucket (Stain -less Steel) ---------------------------------------------
Milk Cans -------------------------------------------------------------
Dial Weighing Scale -----------------------------------------------

Fixed Cost:
Buff in milk.
Cow in milk
Interest rate on the value of animal

Depreciation at @ 5%............................................................
Cost of shed.....
Cost of equipment
Depreciation of shed and equipment..
VARIABLE COST:
Labor Cost
Family Labor engaged in agriculture..men
Hired labor engaged in agriculturemen
Labor hour spent on Livestockhour
Wages per labor per dayRs
Total labor spent on livestock Rs.
FODDER COST
Rabi Fodder sown and purchased
Kharif Fodder sown and purchased..
Rate of fodder per acre.Rs
Dry Fodder fed to animals
Value of dry fodder
Grain fed to animals
Cakes fed to animals
Value of gur and oil fed to animals.
Concentrate ration/Wanda fed to animals.
Total feeding cost Rs..
-------
Electricity & power bill per annum
Deworming cost per animal ..
Vaccination cost per animal ..
Medicine and vet services cost per annum Rs Mortality
--------------------
------Total cost
-----------------Rs
--------=
------------------------
-------------
---------
Total fixed cost + Total variable cost
Milk Disposal:
Total Milk Production
-----------------------liter
Consumption by suckler
-----------------------liter
Household consumption
-----------------------liter
Marketing
-----------------------liter
Price per lit
Rs -------------------
Total income Rs.
Rs.-------------------
Income from FYM
Rs.-------------------
Fixed Cost:
&
Interest rate
Animal depreciation Shed Depreciation
Chain
No of Buff.
-------------
No of Cows
---------
--.------
------------------
------------------
-------------------
--------------------
Variable Cost:
Fodder
Dry Fodder
Concentrate
Type of concentrate
----------------------Labor Medicine
---------------Electicity&power
-----------------------Mortality Cost
-----------
-------------
------------------------
Category period
Buff:
------------
----------------liter
Cattle:
------------
----------------liter
Average production per lactation
Total beef Animal soled No.
-----------------
Beef animals sold on Eid
-----------------
Fattened animals sold
-----------------
Spent animals sold
-----------------
Total Income Received Rs.
-----------------
Goat/ Sheep Livestock Strength

OB
1st Year
2nd Year
3rd Year
4th Year
5th Year
Birth
Sold
Death
Labor
-------
---------------------------
Milk Production per lactation:
--------------
CB
Feeding Practices
Natural Grazing on
public places/Own land/fodder/stal feeding
Fodder land allocated
-----------------
Rent of the land
-----------------
Labor Involved in Farming
----------------- men
Labor hours spent on feeding
----------------- hours
Type of Shed
-----------------
Value of Shed
-----------------
Depreciation of Shed
-----------------
Concentrate fed during the year
-----------------
Diseases of animals
Pneumonia/diarrhea/pox/enterotoxaemia
Vaccination in Practice
-----------------
Vaccination Cost
-----------------
Deworming cost
-----------------
Total Cost
Value of Animals + Feeding + Labor + Shed
+ Vet Cover
--------------------- + ---------- + --------+ ------------ + ------------

Total Income from Animals sold for mutton
Sold for breeding
(Rate per animal---------- No. sold--------)
Domestic Consumption
Mutton animals sold on Eid
Fattened animals sold
Spent animals sold
Total income received Rs.
----------------

Economics of Livestock Production in Various Ecological Zones of Punjab - Survey 26-08-09

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Economics of Livestock Production in Various Ecological Zones of Punjab - Survey 26-08-09

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

L&DDD

Economics of Livestock Production

Economics of Livestock Production

Prof. Dr Tallat Naseer Pasha

Dean Faculty of Life Sciences & Business Management

Livestock & Dairy Development

Economics of Livestock Production

Livestock & Dairy Development Board,

Economics of Livestock Production

Methodology & Criterion

Economics of milk production

Beef Production in Punjab

Peri-Urban Commercial Farming &Marketing Chain

Milk & Milk By-Products Processing And Marketing

Sources of Milk Production

Average Unit Productivity

Cost of Milk Production

Milk Supply Channels; Cost and Sale

Salve Value of Milk

Table & Chart Index

Economics of Livestock Production

Fixed Cost & its elements-Gujranwala

Graphical & Statistics Array

Economics of Livestock Production

Economics of Livestock Production

Economics of Livestock Production

Economics of Livestock Production

92.38. The profit was Rs 182.21.The major

organization, such as a milk producers

As a matter of fact, 82% milk is

Sustained effort on the part of the

The government should improve and

Another serious issue is the absence of

Finally, on a social level, attempts to

Economics of Livestock Production

Next five years, in Pakistan, are subject

contributes 52% of agri share. Livestock is by far

Punjab Irrigated Zone (Gujranwala)

Thall Livestock Production Zone (Bhakkar)

Barani Rain Fed Production Zone (Jhelum)

Southern Punjab Livestock Production

Peri Urban Milk Production System

It is noteworthy to mention that Livestock

Aims & Objectives

Agriculture is a major source of

To assess milk and meat production cost

Purpose of the study was to estimate the

Economics of Livestock Production

Criterion for Selection of Sample

Economics of Livestock Production

Economics of Livestock Production

Estimation of cost and return in milk, business in different

1. Thall Livestock Production Zone

2. Southern Punjab Livestock Production System

3. Barani Rain Fed Production Zone

4. Peri Urban Milk Production System

Faisalabad & Lahore

5. Punjab Irrigated Zone

Each ecological district is discussed one by one.

1. Thall Livestock Production Zone (Dist. Bhakkar)

Economics of Livestock Production

For calculation of income from milk total

Total Cattle: 1483