MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE OF DIRECTION FOR IMPROVEMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND DAIRYING STATISTICS HELD DURING OCTOBER 05-06, 2006 AT PUNE
The meeting of the “Technical Committee of Direction for Improvement of Animal Husbandry and Dairying Statistics” (TCD) was held during OCTOBER 5th and 6th, 2006 at VAIKUNTH MEHTA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CO-OPERATIVE MANAGEMENT (VMNICOM), University Road, Pune, Maharashtra.
The list of participants is given at Appendix-A.
1. Ms. Charusheela Sohoni, Secretary Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries(DAHDF), Government of India (GOI) was chief guest in the meeting. She addressed the participants. Smt. Leena Mehendale, Principal Secretary, ADF, Government of Maharashtra delivered the inaugural address. Dr S.K. Bandyopadhyay, Animal Husbandry Commissioner, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries, Government of India had given keynote address while Shri Arun Saxena Advisor(Statistics), DAHDF, GOI welcomed the participants. The introduction was made by Shri Bijay Kumar Commissioner, Animal Husbandry, Government of Maharashtra. Professor S.A. Siddhanti Head of the Center VMNICOM Pune also addressed the participants. Shri C.P. Meshram Addl. Commissioner (AH) had given vote of thanks.
On the first day,
inauguration of the meeting took place by lighting of the lamp by Smt. Leena
Mehendale, Principal Secretary, ADF, Government of Maharashtra followed by
persons present on the dias. Sri Arun Saxena, Adviser(Statistics) and Co-Chairman TCD welcomed the dignitaries,
members of TCD meeting and other invitees to the meeting. He thanked the
dignitaries for sparing their valuable time for the TCD meeting and opined that
their presence and advice will be of great use and significance in improving
the statistical system of Animal husbandry
livestock and related fields.
Shri Bijay Kumar, Commissioner, Animal Husbandry,
Government of Maharashtra expressed his happiness for holding All India TCD
meeting in PUNE, known as the happening city of India. He felt that by holding
TCD meeting in different parts of the country away from Delhi, GOI has really
given a greater scope for the State Directors to get the first hand experience
on the problems and their possible solutions while keeping themselves free from
constraints of being busy in their administrative works. He said that even he
could gather lot of inputs from holding of TCD meeting in Pune, which otherwise
was missing. He mentioned that it is really
a matter of great pride that many States Directors, Commissioners and
Secretaries of the AH Department of other States were present at Pune TCD
meeting which will go a long way in strengthening the statistical system in
livestock sector. At the same time it also shows presence of keen interest in
livestock statistics by the participating States. Reiterating the practical use
of the Statistics, he recalled the incidence of bird flue ingress in
Maharashtra when he used the data of livestock census 2003 and found it by and
large a useful database. However, he felt that there is need to provide missing
linkages, if purpose of data-use differs from the one for which the data system
is primarily generated. He felt that strength derived due to participation of
Secretary (DAHDF) GOI and Animal Husbandry Commissioner GOI in TCD meeting will
definitely help translate the recommendations of Committee into action. He also
mentioned that there are many areas, where the focus needs to be given
like progeny testing, evaluation of
breeds on different parameters, evaluation of critical inputs of AI programme,
expansion of domain of ISS scheme and web based solutions etc.
Professor S.A.Sidhanti Head of the Center VMNICOM viewed
the TCD meeting a focused programme where deliberations will take place in a
well-established format. He also told about the mandate of VMNICOM and made
every one present aware of Co-operative movement and the role of Late Sri
Vaikunth Mehta in its foundation and development. On behalf of VMNICOM, he
wished all success to the TCD meeting and pleasant stay to all its participants
coming from various States/ UTs of the country.
Smt. Leena
Mehendale, Principal Secretary, ADF, Government of Maharashtra in her inaugural
address expressed her great pleasure that
the Government of India has chosen Pune for holding the TCD meeting. She mentioned that the
development potential of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (ADF) is
tremendous and planners may aspire to attain up to 10 % level of the growth
rate. Information is an asset for planning. The ADF sector is very important
from food security viewpoint. Agriculture and Animal Husbandry sector should go
hand in hand. From energy point of view again, there exists substantial
contribution potential from this sector. She suggested for the mapping of
Census data which may mean convergence of many departments. Time series
analysis and regression analysis should be put to use in order to understand
numbers better. Total productivity and strategy for productivity increase will
be different for different people. She illustrated this concept by giving the
example of sheep rearing activity. It has different dimensions if its aims and
hence people involved are different like for those pursuing for the life
sustaining activity, for commercial or growth potential activity or for export
base increase activity etc. In all such cases, for different people, different
strategies of developments would be relevant. She appreciated calling TCD
meeting at Pune as the participating officers would be free from all file works
and would devote much of their time in deliberations. She wished a great
success to the meeting in achieving its goal.
On the second day, Ms.
Charusheela Sohoni, Secretary Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and
Fisheries (DAHDF), Government of India (GOI) and Chief Guest stressed the need
for timely and reliable statistics on various aspects of Livestock and related
sector. She emphasized that this sector has great scope for economic growth
specially for agriculture sector as it generates gainful employments, provides
food security and encourages the women empowerment. Higher growth rate of 10 %
from 6-7 % in animal husbandry can be achieved, provided the right type of
investment is made and committed people are put in charge of these sectors. Speaking
on lack of suitable human resources with the mandate of getting more work done
with less people, she felt that training is an absolute necessity to build up a
committed workforce. She recounted the global scenario in the area of food
expenditure and deliberated on the perspectives of current livestock census.
The trends in the country show that low yielding variety are being replaced by
high yielding variety of animals in milk sector. While India is a large
producer of milk, country’s productivity is less than half of the world
average. She enumerated reasons for low productivity as (a) poor genetic quality of animals, (b)
diseases in animals and (c) inadequate feed and fodder. She felt that if
diseases are controlled, productivity can be increased by 20 to 25% She
expressed that basic requirement of planning and execution of schemes is to
have reliable data. Livestock Census and Integrated Sample Surveys are main
sources of livestock data bases. Breed wise data was collected during 17th
Livestock Census but only 17 states could get it compiled. There is a need to
improve this part of the Census in its conduction and effective management. To
get data in a lesser time frame, recent technologies of online data entry and
web enabled solutions may be employed. She urged the States/ UTs to fill up the
vacant positions of the staff falling under the plan ISS Scheme and at the same
time, she also emphasized the need for better management of funds, providing
Utilisation Certificates in time and getting benefited by all the components of
the scheme through their better planning, management and responses. The
refresher training in ISS methodologies is one such component of the ISS Scheme
and those States/ UTs who could not take its advantage yet were urged by her to
come forward and get benefited by it at the earliest as the 10th
five year plan is nearing to an end. She thanked the participants and felt that
the Committee will be able to take decisions and give directions which the
States/ UTs will translate into actions.
Dr. S.K. Bandopadhyay,
Animal Husbandry Commissioner Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and
Fisheries (DAHDF), Government of India (GOI) delivered the keynote address
giving details of his observations on livestock census. He reviewed the production estimates of
milk, egg, meat and wool pointing out that the country is a world leader in
milk production but a lot still needs to be done to increase its productivity
and productions of other livestock products. The developmental plans are extremely
dependent upon livestock census data. He recalled that while doing an exercise
for Planning Commission for the development of livestock in coming years,
census data was the basic item on which all the planners based their
calculations. The breed wise data collection in census of livestock is also
very important and essential. According to him, since true identification of
breed is a difficult task, the three dimensional pictures can be generated for
each breed type as single two dimensional photograph will not be sufficient for
identification of breed to be done by relatively less skilled data collectors.
There are different types of breeds in different parts of the country with
different local names, which will require to be taken into consideration. In
the coming census, identification for counting those breeds of livestock that
are popular and are driving the economy of a particular state/ union and also
those that are threatened would be ideal. Only from collecting such data, one
can know how much a specific breed is threatened or important. The scheme
running for protecting the threatened breed will also be benefited by such
database. There is another area, Dr. Bandopadhyay pointed out, that is equally
important is the data on quantity of feed and fodder produced and areas falling
under pastures and their current usages. The data gap in this sector are
causing lot of confusion at planning stage. The data on common property
resources for usage of fodder is also not available. There are similar kinds of
data gaps observed in the vital sectors of breeding including success rate of
AI programmes, impact of AI programme in the milk production. Data on Animal
health sector in terms of number of animals suffering from different disease
types are not adequate. Vaccines are in short supply but to what extent are not
known. He viewed that ISS Scheme is giving 50% funding. The Animal Husbandry
Sector falls under the State subject. Even then, Statistical Cells in the
States are not adequately equipping themselves with the required manpower
assigned for the scheme. The increased demands in Livestock Statistics will not
be met if required manpower is not supplied and are not trained periodically.
2.
The agendawise discussion and decision taken therein are as follows:
Agenda 1: Action Taken Report of last TCD meeting held during 19 –20th September 2005.
The progress on various item was
provided to participants The ATR was approved.
Agenda 2 : Release of
production estimates of milk, egg, wool and meat of the year
2005-06
Dr.
Vishnu Kant Srivastava Director DAHDF introduced the agenda and gave the brief
background. He mentioned that in spite of reminders and also commitment by the
states, we are not able to get the seasonal estimates from many of the states.
On account of this, seasonal estimates could not be released on all India
basis. However, aspiring for seasonal estimates, States/ UTs are now
strengthened to provide annual estimates within the time frame with only a little variation. The States/ UTs should
make a little more effort so that the compilation and release of seasonal
estimates, which is one of the basic objective of Integrated Sample Survey
Scheme could also be achieved. He further mentioned that annexure attached to
agenda notes provide the position of receipt/non receipt along with dates of
receipt of seasonal estimates by State/UT. Advisor (Stats) mentioned that even
if data of some village are not received, the provisional figures may be sent
as per time schedule. The necessary changes may be intimated in the next
seasonal report. Advisor (Stats ) again advised to send the progress report as
per time schedule only. Dr. Srivastava mentioned that this time along with
agenda notes, workbook was also supplied. The workbook contained the data on
many items like targets, refresher training course, component wise breakups of
2005-06 production estimates of major livestock products and booklet containing
the estimates of 2004-05 finalised in the last TCD meeting. It also contained a
note on ISS scheme giving details of its progress during 10th five
year plan and frequently occurring errors in computations of estimates for
major livestock products based on conducted refresher training course for
various States/ Unions for ISS Scheme. With the purpose of checking compilation
error and also applying consistency checks amongst the season wise and annual
estimates provided by the states and also annual estimates obtained by
calculation, a worksheet of States/ Union data for the particular State/ Union
was also distributed. One one-page-feedback form was also distributed giving
the scope for participants to record their views about the estimates/ financial
releases, targets for major livestock products for their States/ Unions. Commissioner Maharshtra Government mentioned
that this was certainly a better approach.
There were detailed discussions for each of the State/UTs for the major livestock products. Most of the States had provided their estimates. J&K provided its projected values. It was observed that there was improbable jump in the milk production estimates of Bihar. Bihar explained it is due to shift of base year from 1982 to 2003 as there were no census results available over a period of time and estimates were kept on being built on 1982 Census database. There was however no explanation available why the change of base from 1982 census to current census of 2003 was not effected for the milk estimates of 2004-05, when almost all the States/ Unions had shifted their base in 2004-05. The evidence provided in the house explained that in Census 2003 the crossbred population has gone up and there is a structural change in the population of cows crossbred and non-descript which is causing such increase. The States, to whom the Bihar estimates were not agreeable on 5th October, agreed to the estimates after looking into the evidence. Thus, after the discussion, milk estimates of Bihar were accepted only provisionally by the house with the statement that the Bihar Government should check its estimates once again and an explanation justifying this rise may be provided in writing to the DAHDF countersigned by the Secretary of the Department of Government of Bihar within a fortnight. Mrs. Amarjeet Kaur Director (Dairy Development) suggested that Bihar should find the estimates of milk of previous years also basing it on 2003-Census in order to introspect to what extent variation were present in the old estimates. This exercise might give some reasonable justification about the causes of such increase. In the light of similar type of consistency from previous years’ estimates, the milk production estimates for Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu also need confirmation and documentation of assignable causes effecting good increase. Dadra and Nagar Haveli estimates were not available. Component wise estimates of milk production were not available from the Jammu & Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh and Lakshdweep.
Estimates of egg production were also discussed. Extreme rise was noticed in estimates of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Nagaland and Daman Diu while shortfalls were noticed in those of Delhi, Arunachal Pradesh & Andaman & Nicobar. Dadra & Nagar Haveli estimates were not available for discussion. Uttar Pradesh pointed out that its estimate is 9227 lakh number and hence falls into its valid limit. Delhi explained its egg production has really gone down. The States/ UTs were told to find out the causes of such extreme rise and fall and intimate the same to DAHDF within a fortnight. The States/ UTs unavailable in the meeting should also send their comments within the fortnight if their estimates are showing the abnormal deviation from previous year. Bihar should send its explanation through its Departmental Secretary.
Estimates of Meat production were discussed. Meat estimates of West Bengal were received during the TCD meeting. Projection for Meat production were received from the state of J&K and Arunachal Pradesh. The meat estimates from Goa, Sikkim, Rajasthan and Dadra & Nagar Haveli were not available. In case of Arunachal Pradesh, projection for meat production for 2005-06 is found to be not consistent with the values of 2004-05 but is consistent with the value of 2002-03. The Estimates of 2003-04 and 2004-05 are found to be consistent. Reasons were not available to explain this aspect of cyclical fluctuation in the meat estimates of Arunachal Pradesh. Such reasons should be explained by the State to DAHDF within a fortnight. Some States like West Bengal wanted their estimates to be considered coming from the recognized and unrecognized sector both as is done for Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu finds estimates from both the sectors on seasonal basis and disseminates the same also separately in every season of the year, whereas other States do not do so, hence it is not possible to classify the estimates of other states coming from both the sectors specially when the meat production is quite underestimated.
Meat estimates of the year 2003-04, which could not be finalized in earlier TCD meetings, as many states could not send their estimates, was also discussed during current TCD meeting and it is found that 12 States still did not send any of their estimates. By projecting their estimates based on estimates 2002-03 and 2004-05, which were already finalized in the previous TCD meetings, estimates at All India level for the year 2003-04 were finalised. These estimates were discussed and found within the consistent range. The estimates of meat production for the year 2003-04 are given in Annexure –VI. States marked “#” should send their estimates if available otherwise. The component wise estimates should also be sent by # sign marked States/UTs, within a fortnight so resolved.
Wool production has registered stability at national level when compared to last years’ estimates. In some of the states, wool production decreased very rapidly. They are Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. At the same time, some states have shown increasing trend. Important ones are AP, Gujarat and JK. Punjab has also included wool production estimates from slaughterhouses which resulted in its higher increase in wool production, adjusting the same gives its trend going towards stabilization. The States of AP, West Bengal and Tamil Nadu provided their estimates in the meeting. The UP explained the reasons of decline of sheep population in its State. There is, according to them, direct competition between agriculture and sheep husbandry for land. The pastures meant for sheep husbandry is increasingly going towards production of cereals UP being diverse in its geo-climatic setup ranging from high rain fed & water logging areas to dry plateau of Bundelkhand, Sheep rearing is generally shifting to Uttaranchal areas which can not be taken into the production estimates of the States after the formation of the separate state of Uttaranchal. UP is mainly producing now coarse type of wool fabrics whose market value is less. However, UP has now started improving its sheep breed for a better quality of wool and is targeting for a better production in coming years.
Number of Milch Animals for 2005-06 and those of 2004-05 were also discussed in the house. They are given at the Annexure –III and IV. The States marked “-“ were asked to provide their estimates within a fortnight,
Due to earlier TCD meetings remaining heavily loaded with the agenda of clearing the backlogs of old years estimates of major livestock products and operations of 17th livestock census work, the estimates of milch animals of in respect of old years 1999-00 to 2003-04 could not come up for discussion, the agenda was taken up during the current TCD meeting. The estimates were discussed and are given at Annexure –V. The estimates of 2003-04, as census is done in 2003 around the mid of period of 2003-04, are decided to be disseminated in place of ISS estimates. The States that had not reported their estimates for the period under reference (1999-00 to 2002-03) and hence are marked with “-“, were asked to provide the same within a fortnight.
Agenda 3: 18th Livestock Census 2007
Shri Nand Lal Director took up the agenda of Livestock
Census. It was informed that breed wise report of 17th Livestck Census is
approved in the July 2006. The reference date of 18th livestock Census is fixed
as 15th October 2007. The schedule for 18th Livestock Census was circulated.
Items on financial allocation, remuneration to enumerators, computer based technology for data collection in the form
of scanning were also discussed. Some of states were of the view that different
payment norms should be kept for enumerators visiting rural areas and urban
areas and similarly for those visiting the hilly and difficult terrains.
Advisor gave details of Technically Advisory Committee meetings, which is right
now looking at the schedule finalisation part of livestock census and told the
house to send their suggestions to the department on all aspects of livestock
census including training in identification of breeds within a fortnight. All
the States/UTs were asked to mark their important breeds and prepare a write-up
on it giving its salient features in brief, which is easy to understand. Such a
write up should be sent to the Department so that instruction booklet on 18th
livestock Census can be prepared.
Agenda 4: Reappraisal of ISS methodologies
Dr. S.K. Bandopadhyay, Animal Husbandry
Commissioner Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (DAHDF),
Government of India (GOI) himself chaired this session. Dr. Vishnu Kant
Srivastava Director has initiated the agenda. Under the changing scenario, the
emphasis has been by the government to implement the cross breeding programmes
in states to increase the production and quality of different livestock
products and hence new breed has come up. In order to assess their performance,
the following information need to be collected under these surveys :
a- Breed –wise milk yield of different species viz cattle, buffalo, goat
b- Information on egg production from commercial poultry farms
c- Breed –wise wool yield from various centers or farms like sheep and wool extension centers, wool shearing centers and sheep breeding farms
d- Information on broiler production and poultry meat.
There
is an increasing tendency of not keeping both buffalo and cow.
Therefore, the selection of households for buffalo or cow yield rates on the
basis of frame of bovine population often selects households in such a way that
yield rate of buffalo is completely missing in the sample in throughout the
season. Therefore, it is required to create different frames for each of them.
Due to changes
in the 18th Livestock Census schedule, ISS Scheme schedule will also
need changes.
Accordingly, there is a need for reappraisal of methodology being used under ISS Scheme.
States
were asked to prepare a note on it and provide the same to the Department for
incorporation of possible improvements, in the ISS Scheme for XI five year plan
which is at formulation stage.
One immediate change in the randomization process at
second stage unit (HouseHold) was deliberated. Randomization process through
the “remainder method” at second stage unit (SSU) is a cumbersome process for
the enumerators. By an example, it was shown as: Say
Example –. Draw a Sample SRSWOR of 4 Households (HHs) from a list of 40 HHs. Let the 2 digit random numbers be 32, 78, 68, 91, 53, 01,23, 03.
Method-1 The sample will be { (32),(78),(68),(91),(53),
(01), (23) and (03)}; rejecting if it is > 40.
Method-2 The sample will be {
(32),(38),(28),(91) (as > 80),(13) }; rejecting only if it is >
highest multiple of 40 below 99
The method-2 (the remainder method) is economical to method-1, whereas method-1 is easy to operate. The method –2 is employed in Integrated Sample Survey (ISS) at FSU as well as at SSU level. The method is useful for FSUs (i.e. for villages selection), because economy really matters there but for SSU ( selection of HHs, ) the Method –1 is a better option as it is easy for the data collectors to operate the procedure in the field. The House accepted the procedure for second stage units.
Agenda 5 XI
Five year Plan proposals for ISS Scheme
The progress of ISS Scheme
during 10th five year plan was reviewed. AHC chaired the session. Studies are
becoming important day by day in order to bridge data gaps. Advisor mentioned
that the proposals for studies should be sent to the department. It was also
pointed out that Dr. Bandopadhyay, Animal Husbandry Commissioner (AHC) in his
keynote address, had enumerated some of the studies filling the various
existing data gaps in livestock sector and the States/UTs might choose some of
them for doing studies to fill the data gaps.
The scheme’s component on IT
Solution was also discussed. It was told to the states that if the money in
respect of IT solution component was not utilized, the States were to utilize
it within a month else in the third release of current year their funds for IT
solution would be adjusted against their salary component because of it being
the last year of 10th five year plan. The benefits accruing due to
this component of the scheme would then not be available for them. Some of
States like Jharkhand responded and promised that money would be used.
Speaking on XI five year plan proposals for ISS Scheme, Shri Bijay Kumar Commissioner Maharashtra suggested that future plan should seek solution in web based technology as it gives more speed and control over data. ISS scheme should strive for it. He also suggested that in order to have a larger maneuverability in results retrieved through such processes the spread sheet adaptability should be ensured for such systems.
Agenda 6 Human Resource Development –State/UTs Statistical Cell
Strengthening the Animal
Husbandry Statistical Unit in States/ Unions for the creation of robust
Statistical Systems, refresher training for the enumerators, tabulators,
supervisors and creations of purposive bonds between them and their indigenous
resources available in the forms of institutes of repute/experts/ resource
persons in the field Animal Husbandry Statistics is very essential. The house
deliberated on this aspect. The States like Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Kerala,
Orissa, Gujarat, Chattisgarh and Maharashtra that had already undergone the
refresher-training course presented their papers. The views of States were that
such training should be conducted periodically in the gap of around 2 to 3
years. These training are very useful as they renew the commitments in the
staff besides refreshing their skills. Gujarat felt the survey tool kit should
be distributed in the training and enumerators should also be trained in
managerial skills of probing, protecting from various occupational hazards,
because data collection in ISS Scheme is done by actually camping in the
villages and round the year. In order to avoid injuries while doing such
activities, the data collectors should be trained periodically. A paper on ISS
Scheme, its frequently occurring errors and possible solutions based on already
conducted refresher training course for various States/UTs was also presented
by Dr Srivastava Director DAHDF
Agenda 7 :
Any other item with the permission of Chair
The following items had been discussed and their background notes were also circulated in the workbook and/ or agenda –notes. Decisions arrived are summarized below.
2Training in ISS
methodologies, held till now and proposals in offing
4Infrastructure data
5Randomisation process of
ISS Scheme
6Schedule of 18th
Livestock Census
7Frequently occurring
computational errors in ISS methodologies
8Progress of ISS Scheme
during 10th five year plan
9Milk, Dung and Egg
Utilisation at national level
10 Studies under ISS Scheme
during 10th Five year Plan.
11.IT Solutions funds
non-utilisation
The milk, egg, dung utilization at national level is not being computed because its primary table across all the States/UTs are not prepared or disseminated in uniform pattern. A format is circulated and it is urged that from 2005-06 onwards this data should be prepared and provided to DAHDF in the prescribed format only to enable the DAHDF build the estimates also at national level. However, for old years from 1999-00 to 2004-05, the simple utilization pattern may be provided to DAHDF, which could be considered for disseminating only the State/UT specific utilization patterns, only after examining it across 2005-06 results so tabulated..
Infrastructure data was circulated and it was approved. The States/UTs were asked to provide the AI data for the years, they had not reported till the time. The table is given at Annexure –VII.
3. Recommendations of TCD Pune 2006
1)
All
the States/ UTs will prepare a brief note
of their suggestions, problems and possible solutions in respect of
Integrated Sample Survey Scheme (ISS) for their possible inclusion into the ISS
Scheme meant for XI five year plan. They will also tell if the scheme is
required for their state.
2)
All
the States /UTs will send the list, photographs and detailed characteristics of
the important breeds of animals, only of their area, preferably to the maximum
of ten unless it is imperative to have more than ten.
3)
The
estimate of major livestock products for the year 2005-06, as given in Anne –I
and II are approved except for milk production estimates of
Bihar, which are accepted provisionally. Bihar should confirm its milk
production estimates and document the possible reasons for such high increase.
The same, countersigned with the Department Secretary of the State may be sent
to DAHDF within a fortnight.
4)
Estimators
reflecting higher increase or decline may be documented for its possible reasons and the same should be sent
to DAHDF. The States/UTs that had not provided the component wise estimates
should send them to the DAHDF within a fortnight. Annexure VIII gives the
actions expected, summarized in tabular form for the agenda items, by the
concerned States/ UTs. The concerned States/UTs may take the action accordingly
and DAHDF should be informed within a fortnight.
5)
It
was decided that after receipt of clarification/ justification of the production
estimates from concerned States/UTs, Adviser (Statistics) may approve them for
further release at All India level.
6)
All
the States/ UTs whose milch animals estimates are still awaited, given in
Annexure –III, IV, V may send the same within a fortnight.
7)
The
willing States/ UTs will send the requirement and plan of refresher training
course in ISS methodologies for their States/ UTs within October.
8)
The
Studies proposal by the willing States/ UTs may be sent to DAHDF by November
15, 2006.
The meeting ended with thanks to the Chair.
|
Ann -I : Estimates of Milk, Egg and Meat @ Production for 2005-06 |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milk |
|
Egg |
|
Meat@ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State |
(000 MT) |
|
(Lakhs Nos) |
|
(000 Tns) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
7624 |
|
164534 |
|
457 |
|
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
48 |
# |
73 |
# |
20 |
# |
|
3 |
Assam |
747 |
|
5359 |
|
27 |
|
|
4 |
Bihar |
5060 |
@ |
10012 |
|
176 |
|
|
5 |
Chhattisgarh |
839 |
|
8875 |
|
4 |
|
|
6 |
Goa |
56 |
|
146 |
|
- |
|
|
7 |
Gujarat |
6960 |
|
5775 |
|
18 |
|
|
8 |
Haryana |
5299 |
|
15125 |
|
73 |
|
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
869 |
|
753 |
|
3 |
|
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
1400 |
# |
6320 |
# |
27 |
# |
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
1335 |
|
6970 |
|
43 |
|
|
12 |
Karnataka |
4022 |
|
18348 |
|
100 |
|
|
13 |
Kerala |
2063 |
|
11956 |
|
56 |
|
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
6283 |
|
9414 |
|
19 |
|
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
6769 |
|
35227 |
|
236 |
|
|
16 |
Manipur |
77 |
|
835 |
|
23 |
|
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
73 |
|
973 |
|
37 |
|
|
18 |
Mizoram |
15 |
|
326 |
|
9 |
|
|
19 |
Nagaland |
74 |
|
868 |
|
63 |
|
|
20 |
Orissa |
1342 |
|
12787 |
|
52 |
|
|
21 |
Punjab |
8909 |
|
35200 |
|
4 |
|
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
8713 |
|
7029 |
|
- |
|
|
23 |
Sikkim |
48 |
|
146 |
|
- |
|
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu |
5474 |
|
62225 |
|
119 |
** |
|
25 |
Tripura |
87 |
|
1100 |
|
12 |
* |
|
26 |
Uttar Pradesh |
17356 |
|
9228 |
|
198 |
|
|
27 |
Uttaranchal |
1206 |
|
1873 |
|
6 |
|
|
28 |
West Bengal |
3891 |
|
29637 |
|
487 |
|
|
29 |
A&N Islands |
20 |
|
477 |
|
0 |
|
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
46 |
|
280 |
|
1 |
|
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
- |
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
1 |
|
11 |
|
- |
|
|
33 |
Delhi |
310 |
|
196 |
|
31 |
|
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
2 |
# |
124 |
# |
- |
|
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
43 |
|
105 |
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
97061 |
|
462307 |
|
2310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- NA |
|
|
** unregistered sector also included. # projected
@ The milk production of Bihar is considered
abnormal due to phenomenal growth of about 70 %. The estimate should be again
examined and reasons the same to be provided.
|
Ann
-II Estmates of wool production for the year 2005-06 |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Wool |
|
Wool from |
|
|
|
Srl. |
States/ UTs |
Production |
|
sources others |
|
|
|
No. |
|
(000 Kg) |
|
(000 Kgs) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
3978 |
# |
- |
|
|
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
14 |
# |
- |
|
|
|
3 |
Bihar |
220 |
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
Chhattisgarh |
244 |
|
- |
|
|
|
5 |
Gujarat |
3123 |
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
Haryana |
1136 |
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
Himachal Pradesh |
1603 |
# |
2 |
$ |
|
|
8 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
7400 |
# |
- |
|
|
|
9 |
Jharkhand |
150 |
|
- |
|
|
|
10 |
Karnataka |
5598 |
|
- |
|
|
|
11 |
Madhya Pradesh |
431 |
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
Maharashtra |
1640 |
|
- |
|
|
|
13 |
Punjab |
712 |
|
150 |
$$ |
|
|
14 |
Rajasthan |
15405 |
|
- |
|
|
|
15 |
Sikkim |
2 |
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
Tamil Nadu |
750 |
# |
- |
|
|
|
17 |
Uttar Pradesh |
1459 |
|
- |
|
|
|
18 |
Uttaranchal |
353 |
|
- |
|
|
|
19 |
West Bengal |
666 |
# |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
44884 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ Farms production |
|
# projected |
|
||
|
|
$$ Wool production from slaughter houses |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann-III: Estmates of annual average milch animals
for 2005-06 |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cows |
Buffaloes |
Goats |
|
|
|
States/ UTs |
Exotic |
ND |
|
|
|
|
|
(in 000) |
(in 000) |
(in 000) |
(in 000) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
5 |
50 |
- |
- |
|
3 |
Assam |
204 |
2520 |
233 |
973 |
|
4 |
Bihar |
743 |
3853 |
3052 |
- |
|
5 |
Chhattisgarh |
66 |
2336 |
295 |
1260 |
|
6 |
Goa |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
7 |
Gujarat |
229 |
2191 |
4334 |
3005 |
|
8 |
Haryana |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
348 |
511 |
487 |
814 |
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
65 |
1759 |
358 |
- |
|
12 |
Karnataka |
936 |
2561 |
2262 |
2660 |
|
13 |
Kerala |
930 |
149 |
21 |
495 |
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
140 |
5828 |
4141 |
4413 |
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
16 |
Manipur |
25 |
90 |
25 |
- |
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
18 |
Mizoram |
5 |
7 |
2 |
- |
|
19 |
Nagaland |
31 |
17 |
3 |
16 |
|
20 |
Orissa |
466 |
3481 |
412 |
143 |
|
21 |
Punjab |
922 |
155 |
3866 |
- |
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
151 |
4114 |
5280 |
10302 |
|
23 |
Sikkim |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu |
2405 |
1280 |
772 |
- |
|
25 |
Tripura |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
26 |
Uttar Pradesh |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
27 |
Uttaranchal |
106 |
611 |
711 |
- |
|
28 |
West Bengal |
774 |
5629 |
219 |
5564 |
|
29 |
A&N Islands |
- |
21 |
7 |
25 |
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
- |
1 |
18 |
- |
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
0.07 |
1 |
0.48 |
2 |
|
33 |
Delhi |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
8550 |
37166 |
26500 |
29671 |
|
|
|
- still awaited |
|
|
|
|
|
Ann-IV: Estmates of annual average milch animals
for 2004-05 |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cows |
Buffaloes |
Goats |
|
|
|
States/ UTs |
Exotic |
ND |
|
|
|
|
|
(in 000) |
(in 000) |
(in 000) |
(in 000) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
474 |
1900 |
4876 |
- |
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
4 |
45 |
- |
- |
|
3 |
Assam |
194 |
2535 |
227 |
983 |
|
4 |
Bihar |
128 |
3754 |
3069 |
- |
|
5 |
Chhattisgarh |
65 |
2313 |
281 |
1200 |
|
6 |
Goa |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
7 |
Gujarat |
215 |
2195 |
4243 |
3020 |
|
8 |
Haryana |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
342 |
535 |
505 |
850 |
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
787 |
715 |
341 |
1096 |
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
- |
1664 |
352 |
4698 |
|
12 |
Karnataka |
922 |
2553 |
2260 |
2661 |
|
13 |
Kerala |
936 |
154 |
22 |
478 |
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
131 |
6776 |
4680 |
3965 |
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
1545 |
4720 |
3773 |
- |
|
16 |
Manipur |
26 |
93 |
29 |
- |
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
17 |
221 |
5 |
- |
|
18 |
Mizoram |
4 |
7 |
2 |
- |
|
19 |
Nagaland |
28 |
16 |
2 |
14 |
|
20 |
Orissa |
453 |
3511 |
406 |
128 |
|
21 |
Punjab |
923 |
161 |
3976 |
- |
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
119 |
4231 |
5332 |
9959 |
|
23 |
Sikkim |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu |
1288 |
1838 |
1236 |
- |
|
25 |
Tripura |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
26 |
Uttar Pradesh |
850 |
5627 |
10228 |
6257 |
|
27 |
Uttaranchal |
104 |
611 |
708 |
- |
|
28 |
West Bengal |
729 |
5533 |
219 |
5525 |
|
29 |
A&N Islands |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
5 |
1 |
15 |
- |
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
33 |
Delhi |
31 |
17 |
113 |
- |
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
0.48 |
4 |
- |
60 |
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
26 |
3 |
2 |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
10349 |
51733 |
46901 |
18257 |
|
|
|
- still awaited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann-V |
Number of Milch Animals in 000 |
|
|
|
Page 1/3 |
||
|
Sl. |
STATE |
|
Year |
1999-2000 |
|
|
Year |
2000-01 |
|
|
No. |
|
Cows Exotic |
Non- Descrpt |
Buffalo |
Goat |
Cows Exotic |
Non- Descrpt |
Buffalo |
Goat |
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
225 |
2313 |
4647 |
|
324 |
2410 |
5092 |
|
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Assam |
160.932 |
2625.851 |
211.094 |
|
167.162 |
2195.032 |
211.747 |
|
|
4 |
Bihar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Chhattisgarh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
Goa |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
Gujarat |
142.439 |
2045 |
3481.5 |
2885 |
138.959 |
2168.2 |
3761.2 |
3020.3 |
|
8 |
Haryana |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
127.028 |
573.439 |
476.77 |
980.205 |
119.527 |
560.109 |
450.634 |
965.261 |
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
787.2 |
529.8 |
495.9 |
1004.4 |
827.5 |
907.6 |
500.4 |
1013 |
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
Karnataka |
604.1 |
3093 |
2377.2 |
2536.691 |
654.9 |
3124 |
2462.2 |
3019.1 |
|
13 |
Kerala |
1179.3 |
338.5 |
43.4 |
741 |
1238.8 |
284.1 |
40.2 |
796.4 |
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
933 |
4280 |
3150 |
|
964 |
4290 |
3150 |
|
|
16 |
Manipur |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
13 |
189.4 |
6.8 |
|
14.2 |
211.6 |
7.2 |
|
|
18 |
Mizoram |
5.416 |
10.94 |
4.58 |
|
4.213 |
9.36 |
2.864 |
|
|
19 |
Nagaland |
21.14 |
14.25 |
3.95 |
|
23.41 |
15.1 |
4.15 |
|
|
20 |
Orissa |
334 |
3503 |
325 |
106 |
332 |
3510 |
339 |
109 |
|
21 |
Punjab |
883.773 |
287.432 |
3533.849 |
|
824.492 |
287.432 |
3635.444 |
|
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
45 |
4585 |
4263 |
7482 |
46 |
4400 |
4294 |
7811 |
|
23 |
Sikkim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu |
892.7 |
2169.1 |
1951.7 |
|
994.3 |
1913 |
1925.4 |
|
|
25 |
Tripura |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
Uttar Pradesh |
622 |
5591 |
9321 |
5700 |
650 |
5591 |
9593 |
6107 |
|
27 |
Uttaranchal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
West Bengal |
542 |
4870 |
217 |
5327 |
575 |
4913 |
217 |
5366 |
|
29 |
A&N Islands |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
4.302 |
0.454 |
17.234 |
|
4.773 |
0.454 |
15.127 |
|
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
Delhi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
0.163 |
0.302 |
0 |
30.238 |
0.169 |
0.308 |
0 |
30.286 |
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
28.814 |
3.427 |
2.616 |
|
29.374 |
2.367 |
1.995 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
7551 |
37023 |
34530 |
26793 |
7933 |
36793 |
35704 |
28237 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blank- still awaited |
|
0 negligible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann-V ( contd. ) -- |
Number of Milch Animals in 000 |
|
|
Page 2/3 |
|||
|
Sl. |
STATE |
|
Year |
2001-02 |
|
|
Year |
2002-03 |
|
|
No. |
|
Cows Exotic |
Non- Descrpt |
Buffalo |
Goat |
Cows Exotic |
Non- Descrpt |
Buffalo |
Goat |
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
341 |
2465 |
5192 |
|
421 |
3133 |
5512 |
|
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Assam |
179.944 |
2348.208 |
223.917 |
|
207.142 |
2514.297 |
231.952 |
|
|
4 |
Bihar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Chhattisgarh |
55 |
1207 |
243 |
1068 |
59 |
1284 |
259 |
1136 |
|
6 |
Goa |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
Gujarat |
162.543 |
2178.6 |
4154.5 |
2903.8 |
170.944 |
2178.7 |
4103.9 |
2980.3 |
|
8 |
Haryana |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
138.281 |
618.883 |
487.407 |
1145.142 |
145.291 |
658.616 |
491.907 |
1204.604 |
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
872.4 |
898.1 |
509 |
1047.2 |
894.3 |
880.9 |
513.5 |
1055.1 |
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
Karnataka |
740.8 |
3139.2 |
2460 |
3074.6 |
715.6 |
2952.9 |
2415.8 |
2865.3 |
|
13 |
Kerala |
1269.8 |
221.6 |
36.7 |
801.7 |
1077.8 |
245.5 |
26.7 |
662 |
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
1240 |
4630 |
3600 |
|
1250 |
4680 |
3660 |
|
|
16 |
Manipur |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
15.4 |
209.7 |
4 |
|
15.2 |
212 |
5.3 |
|
|
18 |
Mizoram |
4.478 |
9.273 |
2.902 |
|
4.677 |
9.355 |
2.484 |
|
|
19 |
Nagaland |
22.35 |
15.35 |
4.48 |
|
24.36 |
15.82 |
4.8 |
|
|
20 |
Orissa |
335 |
3488 |
376 |
108 |
352 |
3412 |
381 |
110 |
|
21 |
Punjab |
867.365 |
261.85 |
3666.345 |
|
872.438 |
218.606 |
5803.857 |
|
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
57 |
4393 |
3921 |
7726 |
62 |
5937 |
4311 |
9823 |
|
23 |
Sikkim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu |
994.3 |
1913 |
1925.4 |
|
1058.4 |
2085 |
1309.6 |
|
|
25 |
Tripura |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
Uttar Pradesh |
766 |
5404 |
9702 |
5943 |
816 |
5487 |
9906 |
6080 |
|
27 |
Uttaranchal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
West Bengal |
611 |
5255 |
218 |
5445 |
688 |
5439 |
218 |
5485 |
|
29 |
A&N Islands |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
4.82 |
0.454 |
16.258 |
|
4.969 |
0.47 |
15.316 |
|
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
Delhi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
0.171 |
0.319 |
0 |
30.322 |
0.173 |
0.325 |
0 |
30.364 |
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
27.221 |
2.734 |
2.531 |
|
26.684 |
2.71 |
2.411 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
8705 |
38659 |
36745 |
29293 |
8866 |
41347 |
39175 |
31432 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blank- still awaited |
|
0 negligible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann-V ( contd. ) -- |
Number of Milch Animals in 000 |
|
Page 3/3 |
||
|
Sl. |
STATE |
|
Year |
2003- Census Values |
|
|
|
No. |
|
Cows Exotic |
Non- Descrpt |
Buffalo |
Goat |
|
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
475 |
1934 |
5227 |
3422 |
|
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
5 |
111 |
5 |
98 |
|
|
3 |
Assam |
161 |
2035 |
199 |
1144 |
|
|
4 |
Bihar |
569 |
2840 |
2678 |
4400 |
|
|
5 |
Chhattisgarh |
67 |
2313 |
280 |
1201 |
|
|
6 |
Goa |
6 |
17 |
16 |
5 |
|
|
7 |
Gujarat |
318 |
2120 |
3938 |
2668 |
|
|
8 |
Haryana |
262 |
309 |
2726 |
297 |
|
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
334 |
479 |
466 |
653 |
|
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
543 |
598 |
543 |
1153 |
|
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
70 |
1830 |
390 |
2449 |
|
|
12 |
Karnataka |
903 |
2500 |
2216 |
2597 |
|
|
13 |
Kerala |
791 |
152 |
18 |
436 |
|
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
136 |
5704 |
4055 |
4282 |
|
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
1390 |
3532 |
3476 |
5852 |
|
|
16 |
Manipur |
23 |
78 |
22 |
13 |
|
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
15 |
215 |
5 |
110 |
|
|
18 |
Mizoram |
4 |
7 |
2 |
7 |
|
|
19 |
Nagaland |
87 |
50 |
7 |
67 |
|
|
20 |
Orissa |
385 |
3235 |
358 |
2727 |
|
|
21 |
Punjab |
741 |
124 |
3106 |
154 |
|
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
235 |
4248 |
5222 |
11581 |
|
|
23 |
Sikkim |
33 |
26 |
1 |
43 |
|
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu |
2353 |
1341 |
792 |
4059 |
|
|
25 |
Tripura |
25 |
215 |
6 |
223 |
|
|
26 |
Uttar Pradesh |
642 |
4901 |
10378 |
5932 |
|
|
27 |
Uttaranchal |
99 |
595 |
682 |
649 |
|
|
28 |
West Bengal |
489 |
5293 |
247 |
7460 |
|
|
29 |
A&N Islands |
5 |
15 |
6 |
25 |
|
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
3 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
|
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
1 |
5 |
2 |
12 |
|
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
33 |
Delhi |
32 |
20 |
139 |
9 |
|
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
1 |
0 |
0 |
22 |
|
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
28 |
7 |
2 |
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
11231 |
46855 |
47224 |
63776 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blank- still awaited |
|
0 negligible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annexure
-VI Meat@ Estimates for the year 2003-04 |
|
|||
|
|
|
Meat Est |
Meat Est. |
Meat Est. |
|
|
|
|
of |
of |
of |
|
|
|
State/
UTs |
2004-05 |
2002-03 |
2003-04 |
|
|
|
|
(000 Tns) |
(000 Tns) |
(000 Tns) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
451 |
398 |
447 |
|
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
8 |
19 |
9 |
|
|
3 |
Assam |
25 |
21 |
23 |
|
|
4 |
Bihar |
175 |
174 |
174 |
# |
|
5 |
Chhattisgarh |
4 |
4 |
4 |
|
|
6 |
Goa |
- |
1 |
4 |
|
|
7 |
Gujarat |
13 |
10 |
11 |
|
|
8 |
Haryana |
9 |
9 |
9 |
|
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
3 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
- |
27 |
27 |
|
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
42.685 |
39.460 |
41.073 |
# |
|
12 |
Karnataka |
99 |
96 |
97 |
|
|
13 |
Kerala |
87 |
168 |
87 |
|
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
16 |
10 |
15 |
|
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
230 |
220 |
225 |
|
|
16 |
Manipur |
23 |
22 |
22 |
# |
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
36 |
33 |
36 |
|
|
18 |
Mizoram |
9 |
8 |
9 |
|
|
19 |
Nagaland |
61 |
24 |
26 |
|
|
20 |
Orissa |
51 |
45 |
45 |
|
|
21 |
Punjab |
4 |
6 |
5 |
# |
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
64 |
59 |
63 |
|
|
23 |
Sikkim |
- |
0 |
0 |
# |
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu** |
85 |
40 |
47 |
|
|
25 |
Tripura |
9 |
0 |
4 |
# |
|
26 |
Uttar Pradesh |
190 |
181 |
187 |
|
|
27 |
Uttaranchal |
5.815 |
8.350 |
7.083 |
# |
|
28 |
West Bengal |
475 |
450 |
462 |
|
|
29 |
A&N Islands |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
- |
0 |
0 |
# |
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
0 |
0 |
0 |
# |
|
33 |
Delhi |
31 |
32 |
32 |
|
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
0 |
0 |
0 |
# |
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
3 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
2211 |
2113 |
2129 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* in Tripura poultry meat
consists of broiler production and production from ducks also |
|||||
|
** Unregistered sector also included. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ meat productiom from
registered sector unless specified otherwise. |
|
||||
|
|
Ann-VII: No. of Artificial Inseminations Performed
during 1997-98 to 2005-06 ( 000 numbers) |
|||||||||
|
Srl |
|
1997-98 |
1998-99 |
1999-00 |
2000-01 |
2001-02 |
2002-03 |
2003-04 |
2004-05 |
2005-06 |
|
NO. |
States/UTs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
Andhra Pradesh |
1942 |
2055 |
2328 |
2562 |
2670 |
2962 |
3104 |
3358 |
3404 |
|
2 |
Arunachal Pradesh |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
3 |
Assam |
44 |
31 |
35 |
49 |
91 |
88 |
109 |
- |
- |
|
4 |
Bihar |
- |
45 |
13 |
22 |
26 |
45 |
59 |
- |
- |
|
5 |
Chattishgarh |
72 |
89 |
85 |
87 |
122 |
151 |
270 |
- |
- |
|
6 |
Goa |
6 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
9 |
9 |
11 |
11 |
10 |
|
7 |
Gujarat |
488 |
521 |
540 |
618 |
645 |
776 |
717 |
402 |
578 |
|
8 |
Haryana |
578 |
512 |
475 |
562 |
802 |
899 |
935 |
1212 |
1422 |
|
9 |
Himachal Pradesh |
377 |
404 |
412 |
406 |
394 |
416 |
419 |
453 |
498 |
|
10 |
Jammu & Kashmir |
- |
154 |
147 |
146 |
160 |
177 |
207 |
- |
- |
|
11 |
Jharkhand |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
12 |
Karnataka |
- |
1365 |
1533 |
1630 |
1867 |
2046 |
2108 |
- |
- |
|
13 |
Kerala |
- |
3567 |
3641 |
3991 |
1249 |
1369 |
1231 |
- |
- |
|
14 |
Madhya Pradesh |
- |
261 |
265 |
286 |
292 |
345 |
398 |
473 |
597 |
|
15 |
Maharashtra |
1563 |
1769 |
1944 |
1785 |
1960 |
1960 |
3425 |
- |
- |
|
16 |
Manipur |
12 |
16 |
13 |
8 |
15 |
10 |
40 |
- |
- |
|
17 |
Meghalaya |
22 |
22 |
20 |
22 |
29 |
24 |
26 |
28 |
26 |
|
18 |
Mizoram |
3 |
4 |
4 |
6 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
|
19 |
Nagaland |
4 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
30 |
- |
- |
|
20 |
Orissa |
596 |
604 |
478 |
472 |
334 |
449 |
497 |
594 |
654 |
|
21 |
Punjab |
1908 |
1947 |
2108 |
1914 |
2229 |
2743 |
3012 |
2773 |
2834 |
|
22 |
Rajasthan |
605 |
641 |
638 |
595 |
638 |
702 |
877 |
968 |
1057 |
|
23 |
Sikkim |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
24 |
Tamil Nadu |
2682 |
2966 |
3147 |
3235 |
3235 |
3228 |
3102 |
2923 |
3287 |
|
25 |
Tripura |
79 |
72 |
65 |
61 |
63 |
64 |
66 |
67 |
78 |
|
26 |
Uttaranchal |
- |
- |
- |
- |
92 |
97 |
109 |
- |
- |
|
27 |
Uttar Pradesh |
2845 |
2936 |
2498 |
1531 |
1703 |
1736 |
1784 |
2194 |
2334 |
|
28 |
West Bengal |
- |
668 |
744 |
1200 |
1006 |
1076 |
1183 |
- |
- |
|
29 |
A & N Islands |
4 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
- |
- |
|
30 |
Chandigarh |
10 |
9 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
9 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
|
31 |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
32 |
Daman & Diu |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
33 |
Delhi |
- |
13 |
12 |
13 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
17 |
16 |
|
34 |
Lakshadweep |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
35 |
Pondicherry |
94 |
98 |
89 |
96 |
96 |
105 |
80 |
- |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
13936 |
20784 |
21260 |
21324 |
19766 |
21519 |
23835 |
15487 |
16809 |
|
|
- NA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annexure
VIII - Actions required by the States /UTs for PUNE TCD 2006 |
|||
|
Srl.
No. |
Item |
States/UT |
required actions |
|
1 |
Milk
2005-06 |
|
|
|
|
1. Bihar |
Confirm
& document reasons |
Reasons
countersigned may |
|
|
|
be sent
to DAHDF. |
|
|
|
2.TN
& MP |
Possible
reasons of increase in Milk Production may be sent |
|
|
|
3.
Arunachal Pradesh, JK, Lakshdweep:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Componentwise
estimates should be provided. |
|
|
|
4. Dadra
& Nagar Haveli:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Estimates
may be provided. |
|
|
2 |
Egg
2005-06 |
|
|
|
|
1. Bihar,
Gujarat, Nagaland, Daman & Diu:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Possible
reasons of increase in Egg Production may be sent |
|
|
|
2.
Arunachal Pradesh, Delhi, A&N Island:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Possible
reasons of decline in Egg Production may be sent |
|
|
|
3.
Arunachal Pradesh, JK, Lakshdweep:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Componentwise
estimates should be provided. |
|
|
|
4. Dadra
& Nagar Haveli:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Estimates
may be provided. |
|
|
3 |
Meat
2005-06 |
|
|
|
|
1.
Arunachal Pradesh, JK:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Componentwise
estimates should be provided. |
|
|
|
2.
Arunachal Pradesh |
|
|
|
|
|
Resons
for cyclical fluctuation may be provided. |
|
|
|
3.
Rajasthan, Sikkim, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu &
Lakshdweep:- |
||
|
|
|
Estimates
may be provided. |
|
|
4 |
Meat
2003-04 |
|
|
|
|
1. All
the States whose estimates are marked # in Annexure VI. |
||
|
|
|
Componentwise
estimates should be provided. |
|
|
5 |
Wool
2005-06 |
|
|
|
|
1. Bihar,
MP, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh |
|
|
|
|
|
Possible
reasons of decline in wool Production may be sent |
|
|
|
2. AP,
Gujarat, JK |
|
|
|
|
|
Possible
reasons of increase in wool Production may be sent |
|
|
|
3.AP,
Arunachal Pradesh, HP, JK, TN & WB:- |
|
|
|
|
|
Componentwise
estimates should be provided. |
|
|
6 |
Milch
2005-06, Milch 2004-05 |
|
|
|
|
States
whose estimates are marked "-" |
|
|
|
|
|
They may
send their estimates, if applicable.. |
|
|
7 |
Milch
1999-00 to 2002-03 |
|
|
|
|
States
whose estimates are Blank |
|
|
|
|
|
They may
send their estimates, if applicable.. |
|
|
8 |
Milk,
Egg & Dung 2005-06 Utilisation in the prescribed format |
||
|
|
All
States:- |
|
|
|
|
|
May send
it. In case of not avaialble, NIL reply may be sent. |
|
|
9 |
Refresher
Training Course for ISS methodologies: |
||
|
|
States:
Bihar, Jharkhand, Punjab, Uttaranchal, A&N, D&N Haveli,Delhi |
||
|
|
|
Plans are
still awaited. May send them. |
|
|
10 |
Artificial
Insemination data |
|
|
|
|
All
States whose data in Annexure VII is marked "-" under 2004-05 &
2005-06 |
||
|
|
|
Provide
the same if applicable. |
|
Appendix-A
List of participants in the Meeting of the
Technical Committee of Directions for improvement of Animal Husbandry &
Dairying Statistics held on 05-06.10.2006 at VMNICOM, University Road, PUNE.
|
Sl. No. |
Name of the participants |
Designation |
|
|
1 |
Ms Charusheela Sohoni |
Secretary DAHDF, GOI |
|
|
2 |
Dr. S.K. Bandyopadhyay |
Animal Husbandry Commissioner GOI |
|
|
3 |
Smt. Leena Mehendale, |
Principal Secretary, ADF, GO Maharashtra |
|
|
4 |
Shri Arun Saxena, Co-Chairmen,TCD |
Advisor (Stat.), DAH&D,GOI |
|
|
5 |
Professor S.A. Siddhanti |
Head of the Center VMNICOM Pune |
|
|
6 |
Shri Bijay Kumar |
Commissioner, A.H., GO Maharashtra |
|
|
Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries Government of India |
|||
|
7. |
Smt. Amarjeet Kaur |
Director (DD) |
|
|
8 |
Dr.Vishnu Kant Srivastava |
Director (AHS) |
|
|
9 |
Smt Shobha Marwah |
Director (Fy) |
|
|
10 |
Shri. Nand Lal |
Joint Director (AHS) |
|
|
11 |
Dr Chandramani Sharma |
Deputy Director (AHS) |
|
|
12 |
Shri J.K. Maurya |
Economic Officer |
|
|
13 |
Shri. Gurbax Singh |
Statistical Investigator |
|
|
Vaikunth Mehta National Institute of Co-operative Management |
|||
|
14 |
Dr.S.Y.Deshpande |
Assistant Prof. VMNICOM Pune |
|
|
Central Statistical
Organisation |
|||
|
15 |
Dr. J. Yadav |
Director |
|
|
National
Informatics Centre |
|||
|
16 |
Dr. Brij Bhushan |
Technical Director , NIC N.Delhi |
|
|
17 |
Smt Sardesai |
Technical Director , NIC Pune |
|
|
National Dairy Development Board |
|||
|
18 |
Dr. C.L. Dadhich |
Sr. General Manager |
|
|
19 |
Dr.T.N.Dutta |
Specialist III, NDDB, Anand |
|
|
College of Veterinary
Sciences, Shirwal, Pune |
|||
|
20 |
Dr. S.G.Narayankhedkar |
Dean, KNP Veterinary College |
|
|
Directorate of
Economics & Statistics, Maharashtra |
|||
|
21 |
Shri A.M.Jadhav |
Additional Director |
|
|
Directorate of
Fisheries, Maharashtra |
|||
|
22 |
Shri Vilas Gawali |
Deputy Director |
|
|
23 |
Shri H.K.Bage |
Statistical Assistant |
|
|
Maharashtra Livestock
Development Board |
|||
|
24 |
Dr. D.M. Chavan |
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
25 |
Dr. K.C.Sharma |
Livestock Development Officer |
|
|
States/UTs Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying/ Veterinary Services |
|||
|
26 |
Shri |
Mohammed
Deen |
Commissioner
& Secretary |
Jammu
& Kashmir |
|
27 |
Shri |
Narendra
Kumar |
Development
Commissioner |
Delhi |
|
28 |
Shri |
P.Sharat
Chandra |
Commissioner |
Manipur |
|
29 |
Dr. |
L.Mohan |
Director |
Andhra
pradesh |
|
30 |
Dr. |
Th.
Dorendra Singh |
Director |
Manipur |
|
31 |
Dr. |
D.Khonglah |
Director |
Meghalaya |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
Dr. |
K.L.Khurana |
Director |
NCT of
Delhi |
|
33 |
Shri |
C.P
Meshram |
Addl.
Commissioner |
Maharashtra |
|
34 |
Dr. |
P.Gabriel |
Additional
Director |
Tamil
Nadu |
|
35 |
Dr. |
K.A.Naveen |
Vet.
Assist. Surgeon |
A&Nicobar
Island |
|
36 |
Dr. |
R.
Mahadevan |
Assistant
Director |
Andhra
pradesh |
|
37 |
Dr. |
Hage
Tabin |
Deputy
Director |
Arunachal
Pradesh |
|
38 |
Shri |
Krishna
Murari Prasad |
Assistant
Director |
Bihar |
|
39 |
Shri |
Amanjot
Singh |
Research
officer |
Chandigarh |
|
40 |
Shri |
Vishwanath
Verma |
Assistant
Director |
Chattishgarh |
|
41 |
Dr |
D.R.P.
Menezes |
Assistant
Director |
Goa |
|
42 |
Dr. |
M.R.Patel |
Joint
Director |
Gujarat |
|
43 |
Shri |
Satish
Chander Mohan |
Deputy
Director |
Haryana |
|
44 |
Dr. |
B.P.Malhotra |
Joint
Director |
Himachal
Pradesh |
|
45 |
Dr |
Bindeshwari
Choudhary |
Joint
Director |
Jharkhand |
|
46 |
Smt. |
J.Vijanna |
Joint
Director |
Kerala |
|
47 |
Dr. |
Rakesh
Kumar Sharma |
Under
Secreatry |
Madhya
Pradesh |
|
48 |
Shri |
S.N.Mishra |
Assistant
Statistical Officer |
Madhya
Pradesh |
|
49 |
Shri |
R.G.Thakur |
Assistant
Director |
Madhya
Pradesh |
|
50 |
Shri |
R.C.Shukla |
Assistant
Statistical Officer |
Madhya
Pradesh |
|
51 |
Dr. |
M.G.Gatte |
Deputy
Commissioner |
Maharashtra |
|
52 |
Dr. |
Th.
Debendra Kumar |
Deputy
Director |
Manipur |
|
53 |
Shri |
T.Marbaniang |
Dy.Director(Statistics) |
Meghalaya |
|
54 |
Dr. |
Saingura
Sailo |
Joint
Director |
Mizoram |
|
55 |
Shri |
Lianmawia |
Research
Officer |
Mizoram |
|
56 |
Dr. |
P.
Bhujaga Rao |
Joint
Director |
Pondicherry |
|
57 |
Dr. |
Vijaya
Kumar |
Dy. Chief
Executive Officer |
Punjab |
|
58 |
Dr. |
Teja Ram |
Deputy
Director |
Rajasthan |
|
59 |
Dr. |
J. Datta |
Assistant
Director |
Tripura |
|
60 |
Dr. |
P.S.Gautam |
Joint
Director |
Uttar
Pradesh |
|
61 |
Dr. |
R.P.
Bahuguna |
Joint
Director |
Uttaranchal |
|
62 |
Dr. |
P.K.Bhattacharya |
Joint
Director |
West
Bengal |
|
63 |
Dr. |
V.G.Ramteke |
Joint
Commissioner |
Maharashtra |
|
64 |
Dr. |
B.M.Bhuktar |
Joint
Commissioner |
Maharashtra |
|
65 |
Shri |
S.M.Bhabhale |
Deputy
Director |
Maharashtra |
|
66 |
Dr. |
S.N.Gumble |
Assistant
Commissioner |
Maharashtra |
|
67 |
Dr |
R.S.Palimkar |
L.D.O |
Maharashtra |
|
68 |
Shri |
S.D.Joshi |
S.A. |
Maharashtra |
|
69 |
Dr. |
Ch.
Srinivasa Raju |
Field
Officer |
Andhra
Pradesh |
|
70 |
Shri |
P.S.Borah |
Statistical
Inspector |
Arunachal
Pradesh |
|
71 |
Shri |
Ramesh
Sharma |
Deputy
Superintendant |
Bihar |
|
72 |
Shri |
Gurudas
J. Gaundalkar |
Statistical
Officer |
Goa |
|
73 |
Shri |
Ishwari
Singh |
Statistical
Assistant |
Himachal
Pradesh |
|
74 |
Shri |
Maheswar
Mohanty |
Sr.
Statistician |
Orissa |
|
75 |
Dr. |
Sanjeev
Kumar Sharme |
ICC |
Uttar
Pradesh |
|
76 |
Shri |
Naresh
Mohan Naithani |
Field
Officer |
Uttaranchal |