M. Raj Reddy*
INTRODUCTION
In many ways cultural life in India, especially in the country-side, is intimately associated with livestock. The contribution of livestock to the national economy is indeed vast. The livestock production systems generally followed in the country are based upon mixed farming in which crop-livestock integration is the tradition. Cattle and buffalo are raised in small mixed farms. Very few herds exceeding 20 animals exist. Cattle and buffalo occupy a pivotal position in the national life contributing significantly towards country's milk and draft requirements. Sheep and goat raising through small and marginal farmers and agricultural labourers offers good scope in the country. Sheep and goat contribute about half of the total meat production of the country. During last two decades a rapid development in the poultry industry has taken place.
TRENDS IN ANIMAL POPULATION AND PRODUCTION
The trends in livestock population are presented in Table 1. The annual percent growth of goats, cattle, buffalo, swine and poultry was 1.3, 0.2, 1.2, 4.3 and 2.3, respectively, from 1970 to 1984. However, there was a decrease in sheep and horse population with an annual change of 0.3 and 0.7 percent, respectively. The trend in the growth of buffalo and goats was encouraging and this trend indicates that many small and marginal farmers are taking up buffalo and goat farming as these livestock are mainly owned by small and marginal farmers. The pigs showed high growth rate from 1970 to 1980 but there was a sharp decline from 1980 to 1984 and this trend may be due to steep rise in the prices of feedstuffs and less demand for pig meat. During the 1970s the broiler production made its beginning and reached a level of 30 million by 1980 from 4 million in 1971. From 1980 to 1984 broiler production increased to more than double (about 75 million birds).
The data pertaining to livestock production are given in Table 2. There was an average annual percentage increase of 4.6, 2.5 and 10.9 in milk, meat and egg production, respectively, from 1970 to 1984 which is an encouraging trend. Buffalo contributed 55 percent; cattle 42 percent; and goats, 3 percent of the total milk production of the country. There was sharp increase in poultry meat production with an annual increase of 7.8 percent from 1970 to 1984 and this impressive growth was due to the introduction of broilers during the 1970s. The sheep and goat population showed an average annual increase of 1.5 percent. The growth rate was, however, much higher during the last four years, i.e., 1980 – 84 (2.5 percent per annum). Among all the livestock products, egg production recorded high growth rate of 10.9 percent per annum during the last 15 years. during this period the annual production of eggs has nearly trebled (15,000 million) while broiler production has increased twenty-fold (75 million birds).
The per capita availability of eggs was 19.3 and that of poultry meat was 240 g in 1984 though there was a phenomenal growth in poultry production, the fastest in India's agricultural sector. The per capita consumption of eggs and poultry meat almost doubled between 1970 and 1984. There was not much change in the per capita availability of beef, pork and mutton during last 15 years though there was a positive trend in the growth of these meat items. The per capita consumption of milk increased from 41 to 52 kg from 1970 to 1984. The bulk of the consumption of these livestock products is centred around urban areas where the people have the purchasing capacity and so the per capita figures do not truly reflect the national level of consumption of these items.
The percentage increase in demand for various livestock products is presented below. It is clear from the data that there was 54 to 116 percent increase in demand of livestock products from 1971 to 1985 and about 151 to 245 percent increase from 1971 to the year 2000. This trend may be attributed to the rising level of income, urbanization and increased awareness for the protective foods.
FEED SUPPLY
The trends in land utilization is presented in Table 3. The arable land availability in the country increased by 2.7 percent in the last 15 years. However, there is a significant decrease for land planted to permanent crops (21.3 percent) and permanent pastures and meadows (8.0 percent) from 1970 to 1984. This trend may be due to increased human population and hence, the demand for food and commercial crops is increasing year after year.
Feed Supply from Cultivated Land
No accurate estimates are available on the amount of green fodder produced through cultivated fodders. It is estimated that 180 and 227 million mt of green fodder was produced through cultivated fodders in 1970 and 1984, respectively.
High-yielding short duration forage varieties to suit the various agro-climatic regions of the country have to be developed and popularized for increased fodder production. Fodder seed of all high yielding legume and non-legume forages have to be produced commercially and should be made available readily to the farmers at competitive prices in order to encourage the cultivation of fodder crops on large scale. Further, efforts should be made to create an assured market for the cultivated fodders. For maximizing fodder production, suitable cropping programmes have to be developed to suit most types of farmers and to all regions of the country. Mixed farming has to be encouraged so as to enable the farmers to take up fodder production along with cash, food and fibre crops. Work on new forage crops, crop combinations and cultural practices have to be taken up to maximize forage production. Extension efforts should be directed towards demonstrating the research results by taking up on-farm testing.
Table 1. Livestock Population
Item | 1970 (1,000 head) | 1984 (1,000 head) | Annual Change (percent) |
Horses | 1,000 | 900 | - 0.7 |
Sheep | 42,600 | 40,980 | - 0.3 |
Goats | 67,500 | 80,800 | 1.3 |
Cattle | 176,450 | 182,160 | 0.2 |
Buffalo | 54,200 | 64,000 | 1.2 |
Swine | 4,800 | 8,650 | 4.3 |
Poultry | 116,500 | 160,000 | 2.3 |
Table 2. Livestock and Poultry Products
Item | 1970 | 1984 | Annual Percentage Growth | Per Capita Consumption | |
1970 (kg) | 1984 (kg) | ||||
Meat (1,000 mt) | |||||
Beef | 170 | 220 | 2.0 | 0.31 | 0.33 |
Pork | 52 | 84 | 4.1 | 0.09 | 0.11 |
Sheep and goat | 356 | 438 | 1.5 | 0.64 | 0.66 |
Poultry | 69 | 150 | 7.8 | 0.12 | 0.24 |
Milk (1,000 kl) | 20,675 | 34,825 | 4.6 | 40.88 | 51.83 |
Eggs (million pieces) | 5,340 | 14,100 | 10.9 | 9.80 | 19.30 |
Table 3. Land Utilization
Item | 1970 (1,000 ha) | 1984 (1,000 ha) | 1970 (percent) | 1984 (percent) | Percent Change |
Arable land | 160,460 | 164,850 | 54.0 | 55.4 | 2.7 |
Permanent crops | 4,450 | 3,500 | 1.5 | 1.2 | -21.3 |
Total cultivated land | 164,910 | 168,350 | 55.5 | 56.6 | 2.1 |
Permanent pastures, meadows | 12,990 | 11,950 | 4.4 | 4.0 | -8.0 |
Total agricultural land | 177,900 | 180,300 | 59.8 | 60.6 | 1.4 |
Forest and woodland | 66,180 | 67,420 | 22.3 | 22.7 | 1.9 |
Crop Residues
Crop residues are a major source of roughage to Indian cattle. It is estimated that 204 and 250 million mt of crop residues were produced during 1970 and 1984, respectively. Fibrous crop residues like rice and other cereal straws are the major feed resources of the country accounting for 59 percent in 1970 and 60 percent in 1984 of the total dry matter (total feedstuffs inclusive of green fodder, pasture grasses and concentrate feeds) produced. Even though the livestock feedstuffs are in short supply, still most of these crop residues are not effectively utilized. Usually in many parts of the country these materials, especially rice straw and other cereal straws, are wasted as they are fed in long form without chaffing. Further, the methods developed for improved utilization of these low-quality crop residues are not commonly practiced by the farmers as the advantage of these methods have not been demonstrated at the farm level. Hence, the nutrients from these crop residues are also wasted to a great extent. In order to utilize effectively the available crop residues, the methods for improved utilization of low-quality roughages like chaffing, ammoniation with urea, ensiling, supplementing with leguminous fodder, enrichment with deficient nutrients, etc., would be demonstrated in each village so that the farmers can be convinced of the advantages.
Permanent Pastures/Meadows
The present status of grass lands in India is in a deteriorated condition. This is the result of decades of over-grazing and neglect. No organized and scientific grass land farming systems are being followed in the country. Although accurate estimates of area under existing grass lands in the country are not available, the area classified as permanent pasture and other grazing land is about 3 to 4 percent of the total land area. It was estimated that 270 and 266 million mt of grass was produced during 1970 and 1984, respectively, from pastures and grazing lands.
Agro-industrial By-products
The by-products obtained from grain processing (brans), oil seed processing (oil meals), pulses processing (chunni) are the major and important feed ingredients that are commonly fed to Indian livestock as concentrate feeds. Almost all the quantities of these by-products produced in the country are utilized as livestock feed except the quantities exported to other countries. These by-products are considered as traditional or conventional feedstuffs. The brans are the main source of concentrate feeds accounting to 47 percent in 1970 and 40 percent in 1984 of the total concentrate feeds produced in the country. Another important source of concentrate feeds are oil meals constituting 31 percent in 1970 and 26 percent in 1984 of the total concentrate feeds produced. Thus, these two industrial by-products cover more than 70 percent of the total concentrate feeds fed to Indian livestock. Though there is a wide gap between availability and requirement of concentrate feeds in the country, still the Government is encouraging exports of these commodities causing severe set back for economic livestock production.
Non-conventional Feed Resources
There are many non-traditional or non-conventional materials (Table 5) which are available in abundance and which can form potential source of feedstuffs for feeding to livestock, if sufficient information regarding their suitability, nutritive quality, etc. is equally available. At present these materials are utilized for feeds but only to a small extent. Long-range studies have to be undertaken on the utility of these non-conventional feed resources, as most of these materials are not palatable when fed independently to livestock and contain some undesirable factors. Another important limiting factor in expanded and more efficient use of these non-traditional feedstuffs is extension service. There is a paucity of economic analysis and on-farm testing of these materials.
Formula Feed Industry
The compound feed industry in India is some 20 years old already. The Compound Livestock Feed Manufacturers Association of India (CLFMA) formed in 1967 is contributing significantly for the growth and development of the feed industry. There is a tremendous growth in the production and supply of compound feeds by the members of CLFMA during last 15 years. Formula feed for poultry and livestock grew 384 percent and 499 percent, respectively, between 1970 and 1984.
The production of cattle feed by CLFMA members account for 60 percent of the total production of compound cattle feed by the organized sector of the feed industry. For the overall organized poultry feed sector, the share of CLFMA members was around 50 percent. Thus the aggregate quantum of cattle feed and poultry feed produced in the organized sectors for the years 1970 and 1984 would be about 0.209, 0.168 and 1.251, 0.813 million mt, respectively. Besides the contribution of organized sectors, there are many manufacturing units like farm mixing, custom mixing, etc. in the country which also contribute about 30 percent of the cattle feed production in the organized sector and 50 percent in case of poultry feed.
Table 4. Trends in Feed Production
Feedstuff | 1970 (million mt) | 1984 (million mt) | Percent Change |
Fodder crops | 180.0 | 227.4 | 26.3 |
Crop residues | 204.2 | 250.2 | |
Grains and pulses | 1.8 | 6.5 | 261.1 |
Sugar crops (tops) | 1.9 | 2.6 | 36.8 |
Vegetable and fruit crops | 0.7 | 1.5 | 114.3 |
Permanent pastures, grazing and other sources | 270.0 | 266.0 | -1.5 |
Agro-industrial by-products | |||
Grain processing (brans and broken rice) | 8.9 | 10.3 | 15.7 |
Pulses processing (chunnies) | 0.5 | 0.5 | -- |
Sugar processing (molasses) | 0.08 | 0.1 | 25.0 |
il industry processing (oil meals) | 5.8 | 6.8 | 17.2 |
Other food industries | 1.7 | 1.8 | 0.6 |
Table 5. Non-conventional Feed Resources
Name | Botanical Name | Quantity Available (1,000 mt) | DP (percent) | TDN (percent) |
Mahua seed cake | Bassia latifolia | 391 | 8.0 | 60.0 |
Mango seed kernel | Mangifera indica | 740 | 4.7 | 70.0 |
Babul pod chunni | Acacia nilotica | -- | 5.8 | 62.3 |
Vilayati babul pods | Prosopis juliflora | 1,000 | 7.0 | 75.2 |
Sal seed meal | Shorea robusta | 4,800 | 1.6 | 61.0 |
Kuvadia seeds | Cassa tora | -- | 16.6 | 59.4 |
Pilludi cake | Salvadora oleoides | 46 | -- | -- |
Tamarind seed | Tamarindus indica | -- | 15.3 | 60.1 |
Warai bran | Panicum millaceam | 10 | -- | -- |
Rale seeds | Setariah alica | 10 | 6.5 | 69.9 |
Ambadi cake | Hibiscus cannabinus | 48 | 5.7 | 62.4 |
Kokam cake | Garcinia indica | 5 | 9.3 | 70.0 |
Thumba cake | Citrulus colocynthis | 23 | -- | -- |
Palas cake | Butea frondosa | -- | 6.6 | 63.5 |
Nigar cake | Guizotia abysbimicacass | 100 | 10.9 | 58.7 |
Kosem cake | Scheilchera oleosa | 100 | -- | -- |
Karanj cake | Pongamia globra | 100 | 25.5 | 62.0 |
Anattoseed (spent) | Bixa crellana | 10 | 7.9 | 67.2 |
Coffee seed husk | Caffe arabica | 40 | 3.1 | 50.0 |
Coconut pith | Cocos nucifera | 200 | -- | 62.7 |
Tapioca starch waste | Manihot utilissima | 20 | -- | -- |
Tea waste | Comellia sinesis | 25 | 9.7 | 43.0 |
Cocoa husk | Theobroma cocoa | 20 | -- | -- |
Neem seed cake | Azadirachta indica | 75 | 6.5 | 62.5 |
Kod husk | Paspalum scorbiculum | 720 | -- | -- |
Castor bean meal | Ricinus communis | -- | 22.5 | 64.0 |
Poultry manure | -- | 4,800 | -- | -- |
The production of formula feed is less than half the installed capacity. The low utilization of the installed capacity of the feed plants is mainly due to non-awareness of the importance of balanced feeds on the part of most farmers, low-productivity of the livestock, non-remunerative price for the livestock products and increasing costs of feed ingredients.
The Government policies like cash compensatory support on export of extractions of rice bran, groundnut meal, etc. are responsible for the steep increase in domestic prices of these important feedstuffs. Another important problem faced by the formula feed industry is non-availability of molasses. Allocation of molasses to various industries is done by the Government. Although the feed industry's requirement of molasses is meager (about 6 to 8 percent or 0.2 million mt) of total molasses produced in the country to use molasses in cattle feed production. The industry is made to starve for want of this versatile raw material.
Feed Balance Sheets
Total nutrient requirements, by species and total nutrient availability by source for the years 1970 and 1984, are presented in Tables 6 and 7. The availability and requirements of metabolizable energy (ME) and digestible protein (DP) for the years 1970 and 1984 are summarized in Table 8. It is evident from these tables that both nutrients are deficient and the gap between availability and requirement of these nutrients are quite wide. There is a deficiency of 37.6 and 32.3 percent in ME and 61.9 and 54.0 percent in DP during the years 1970 and 1984, respectively. There was slight improvement in energy and protein availability during 1984 over 1970. Based on these estimates, the trend in feed balances indicate that there is more than 30 percent deficiency in ME and more than 50 percent in DP availability in the country. However, these estimates do not include many non-conventional and other animal feeds, which are at present used to some extent but the availability of which can not exactly be quantified at this stage.
Prospects and Problems of Developing Feed Resources
During last three decades the Government has under taken ambitious breeding programmes for improving the genetic potential of indigenous livestock but not planned suitable programmes to argument animal feed and fodder resources of the country to meet the requirements of improved livestock.
Table 6. Non-conventional Feed Resources
Feedstuff | ME | DP | ||||
1970 (Mcal/kg) | 1984 (Mcal/kg) | Percent Change | 1970 (1,000 mt) | 1984 (1,000 mt) | Percent Change | |
Crop residues | 357,100 | 431,487 | 20.8 | 2.779.6 | 3,371.4 | 21.3 |
Grains, pulses root crops | 5,148 | 18,311 | 255.7 | 179.9 | 486.0 | 170.2 |
Fodder crops | 97,200 | 122,796 | 26.3 | 2,700.0 | 3,411.0 | 28.3 |
Oil crops | -- | 2,447 | -- | -- | 80.9 | -- |
Sugar crops | 887 | 1,218 | 37.3 | 13.3 | 10.2 | 36.6 |
Vegetable crops | 291 | 702 | 141.2 | 4.3 | 10.5 | 114.3 |
Grazing | 116,640 | 114,912 | -1.5 | 2,700.0 | 2,600.0 | -1.5 |
Grain processing | 20,807 | 24,105 | 16.9 | 723.9 | 865.7 | 19.6 |
Sugar processing | 399 | 539 | 35.1 | 3.4 | 4.6 | 35.3 |
Oil Processing | 15,730 | 18,461 | 17.4 | 2,039.0 | 2,393.0 | 17.4 |
Other processed foods | 2,073 | 4,962 | 139.4 | 175.4 | 206.7 | 17.6 |
Total | 616,275 | 739,940 | 20.1 | 11,318.8 | 13,508.0 | 19.3 |
Table 7. Total Nutrient Requirement, by Species
Species | 1970 | 1984 | ||
ME (million Mcal) | DP (1,000 mt) | ME (million Mcal) | DP (1,000 mt) | |
Horses | 4,906 | 161.0 | 4,415 | 144.9 |
Mulses and asses | 5,322 | 174.5 | 5,543 | 181.8 |
Yakes and chauri | 5,494 | 180.3 | 5,151 | 169.0 |
Sheep | 24,878 | 1,107.0 | 23,880 | 1,062.5 |
Goats | 27,925 | 776.7 | 33,427 | 929.7 |
Cattle | 708,805 | 10,785.8 | 737,177 | 21,558.2 |
Buffalo | 191,838 | 5,649.0 | 243,241 | 7,224.2 |
Hogs | 11,230 | 490.6 | 20,238 | 884.0 |
Poultry | 7,390 | 453.8 | 20,276 | 1,241.0 |
Total | 987,788 | 19,779.7 | 1,093,348 | 33,395.5 |
Table 8. Livestock and Poultry Production, 1984–88
Item | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 | 1987 |
Beef cattle | 6,867 | 6,831 | 6,912 | 6,995 |
Dairy cattle | 173 | 208 | 154 | 293 |
Buffalo | 2,620 | 2,559 | 2,535 | 2,612 |
Horse | 675 | 711 | 718 | 725 |
Goat | 8,141 | 8,341 | 8,591 | 8,849 |
Sheep | 4,365 | 4,473 | 4,607 | 4,746 |
Pig | 3,854 | 4,348 | 4,636 | 4,941 |
Poultry Indigeneous chicken | 166,815 | 167,748 | 171,210 | 180,113 |
Layer | 19,559 | 32,324 | 34,169 | 37,077 |
Broiler | 110,403 | 121,442 | 133,583 | 146,947 |
Duck | 24,694 | 28,743 | 30,582 | 32,539 |
Source: Directorate General of Livestock Services
Another important aspect to be considered immediately in order to bridge the gap between availability and requirements is to eliminate the unproductive livestock.
Considering the difficult situation in feedstuffs availability in the country there is an urgent need for the conservation of feedstuffs for obtaining optimum output by feeding balanced rations to the superior stocks, cross-bred and indigenous breeds and their followers. The low-producing, uneconomic stock and the unproductive animals can be maintained on subsistence allowance till they are eliminated. Popularization of feeding balanced diets will reduce wastage of nutrients and ensure economy. Reduction and elimination of worm burden and shortening of dry periods is an effective way of feed utilization.
Long range plans have to be developed to improve the pasture lands, fallow lands, river banks, rail and road sides, uncultivated wastes and forest lands for increased fodder production. Unoccupied wastelands, fallow lands, etc. have to be for planted to fodder trees and bushes, etc., which will not only supply fodder but also provide soil cover and check soil erosion.
Tree leaves and shrubs are important sources of fodder for livestock. Camels and goats, in particular, obtain a major portion of their nutrient requirements from tree leaves and shrubs. During periods of scarcity, tree leaves act as major source of fodder. Hence, efforts should be made to plant as many fodder plants as possible and these plantations should be effectively managed for optimum yield.
Another important problem of the livestock industry in the country is the availability of quality feed ingredients and feed additives. There is, at present, no legislation in the country to prevent adult ration of feedstuffs and feed additives and as such the livestock producers are not ensured of a supply of quality ingredients and hence the livestock producers are put to heavy loss.
In-depth study covering evaluation of total feed resources, potentiality of increasing feed supply and on-farm testing of locally available non-conventional feed resources and development of suitable feeding systems based on non-conventional feedstuffs should be undertaken.
On-farm research and demonstrations have to be undertaken in the country-side on improved utilization of crop-residues, agro-industrial by-products, etc. by applying appropriate and technology.
A major constraint to improved feedstuffs utilization is the gap between research and extension and lack of appropriate system for disseminating research finding to farmers. Furthermore, economic analyses meaningful to farmers are lacking. Therefore, suitable steps should be taken immediately on these aspects to improve quality and quantity of animal feedstuffs in the country in order to meet the growing demand for animal feeds. The demand for livestock products is increasing yearly due to growth of human population and per capita income. Hence the demand for quality feedstuffs for economic livestock production will increase also year after year.
Ricardo Manurung*
INTRODUCTION
Feed resource is a very important factor in animal production. About 35 percent of Indonesia's feed supply comes from grass, 50 percent from crop residues and 15 percent from green forage. Much of the forage comes from the garden and pasture land where green forage can be cut and fed fresh to ruminants.
Distribution of Livestock and Poultry
The distribution of livestock and poultry in Indonesia generally depends on the population, i.e., the more population, the more the number of animals (Table 1). About 63 percent of the total population of Indonesia live on Java Island where most of the livestock and poultry are raised. Competition in using the farming area to produce crop for people and feed resources for animal is one major problem in Indonesia. The industrial development and urbanization phase is fast reducing the farm areas, specially in the populous places of Java, Bali and Lombok.
Since 1978, the Government started to supply livestock, especially in the transmigration areas funded from domestic sources as well as foreign fund. By 1986, there were already 20,732 head of large cattle and 3,372 head of small livestock in the transmigration areas. The potential farm area outside Java is still broad to support development of animal production. The slope land area in Sumatara, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Irian Jaya that can be used for farming (sloping 0–8 percent) is 24 million ha. Only about 6 million ha is currently utilized. Land areas with slopes of 6 to 15 percent which still can accommodate livestock is more than 6 million ha. Swamp areas of 38 million ha are not used but can be developed to support livestock.
Most of the domestic animal and animal product supplies comes from smallholders even as the average number of livestock household is limited (Table 3). This is because livestock and poultry industry is not the primary source of income for farmers. In fact, only a small part of farmer's family income comes from livestock.
DISTRIBUTION OF ANIMAL FEED RESOURCES
Pastures have not yet developed well in Indonesia as they are still in natural conditions (Table 4). Farmers do not grow fodder crops or forage of any type for livestock due to the availability of fresh forage most of the year. But efforts are being made to introduce and distribute various leguminous plants and grass to improve feed resources. Examples of these are: Leucaena leucocephala, Panicum maximum, Pennisetum purpureum, Brachiaria decumbens, and setaria splendida. These are distributed by seed extension centres at the village level, district, and province levels.
The government is now subsidizing projects aimed at intensification of animal feed green forage, steep pasture, development and crop residues processing.
The improvement of animal feed resources affecting the forage, use of crop residues and industrial by-products and the production of concentrates pertain to the following:
Estimates of animal feed supplies (“Pakan”) in Indonesia in 1984 were 12,127,793 mt of TDN, against a potential of the animal feed supply of 20,010,858 mt as shown below. The supply consists of grass (field grass and excellent grass), crop residues, and green forage.
The difference between the actual and potential TDN estimates of animal feed supply may be attributed to the lack of knowledge and skill on the part of the livestock raisers. They are unable to take advantage of the animal feed supply sources available. This is also influenced by the lack inexpensive techniques for processing crop residues.
With this problem in mind, the Government continues to institute measures to further develop the livestock and feed industries through the following:
Some specific measures taken by the Government to help stabilize the supply-demand situation and prices of livestock and poultry products are:
The 1975 rule on license as agreed upon between the agriculture and industry ministries provides that the Industry Ministry will extend licenses for laboratory facilities needed for livestock ration analysis. On the other hand, the Agriculture Ministry will provide the raw materials and supervision of the ration analysis and, subsequently, certify and register the ration for commercial distribution.
Table 1. Distribution of Large and Small Livestock Reared by Households, 1980 (Number of head)
Province | Livestock Species | ||||
Cattle/Dairy cattle | Swamp Buffalo | Horse | Goat/Sheep | Pig | |
D.I. Aceh | 208,201 | 169,292 | 5,261 | 308,532 | 5,546 |
Sumatera Utara | 170,830 | 143,614 | 5,487 | 516,043 | 567,351 |
Sumatera Barat | 193,346 | 113,814 | 5,088 | 115,416 | 33,033 |
Riau | 32,140 | 29,672 | 34 | 123,137 | 23,556 |
Jambi | 35,852 | 55,358 | 937 | 117,512 | 4,370 |
Sum Selatan | 144,441 | 42,900 | 1,189 | 186,829 | 46,046 |
Bengkulu | 28,037 | 29,535 | 640 | 69,402 | 107 |
Lampung | 177,527 | 33,052 | 530 | 468,266 | 20,246 |
DKI Jakarta | 6,259 | 1,641 | 85 | 32,117 | 17,584 |
Jawa Barat | 209,903 | 443,229 | 14,393 | 4,618,576 | 13,961 |
Jawa Tengah | 1,386,224 | 327,512 | 22,346 | 3,899,500 | 91,814 |
D.I. Yogyakarta | 239,164 | 17,022 | 1,530 | 451,401 | 10,170 |
Jawa Timbi | 3,488,821 | 186,634 | 86,545 | 3,185,270 | 47,118 |
Bali | 425,983 | 7,279 | 3,456 | 52,883 | 539,303 |
N.T.B. | 277,279 | 203,037 | 66,863 | 288,743 | 16,953 |
N.T.T. | 485,983 | 156,134 | 159,823 | 329,935 | 928,439 |
Kal. Barat | 88,052 | 1,076 | 16 | 48,595 | 454,121 |
Kal. Tengah | 15,579 | 3,677 | 68 | 11,014 | 83,429 |
Kal. Selatan | 54,800 | 13,608 | 1,390 | 40,582 | 2,585 |
Kal. Timur | 10,601 | 5,751 | 31 | 24,622 | 69,890 |
Sulawesi Utara | 202,501 | 491 | 12,397 | 73,986 | 189,090 |
Sulawesi Tengah | 172,250 | 10,774 | 5,059 | 127,362 | 71,213 |
Sulawesi Selatan | 836,664 | 340,268 | 151,409 | 353,834 | 157,705 |
Sulawesi Tenggar | 64,996 | 8,022 | 4,379 | 46,641 | 3,743 |
Malaku | 31,994 | 6,672 | 4,161 | 98,273 | 40,690 |
Irian Jaya | 14,206 | 206 | 1,147 | 18,434 | 425,182 |
Timor Timur | 39,705 | 40,229 | 21,584 | 91,813 | 202,243 |
Total | 9,041,491 | 2,390,600 | 526,973 | 15,758,718 | 4,065,488 |
Source: Agricultural Census 1983.
Table 2. Percentage Distribution of Lifestock, 1983
Province | Livestock Species | ||||
Cattle/Dairy cattle | Swamp Buffalo | Horse | Goat/Sheep | Pig | |
D.I. Aceh | 2.30 | 7.08 | 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.14 |
Sumatera Utara | 1.89 | 6.01 | 1.42 | 3.27 | 13.96 |
Sumatera Barat | 2.14 | 4.76 | 0.97 | 0.73 | 0.81 |
Riau | 0.36 | 1.24 | 0.01 | 0.78 | 0.58 |
Jambi | 0.40 | 2.32 | 0.18 | 0.75 | 0.11 |
Sum Selatan | 1.60 | 1.79 | 0.23 | 1.19 | 1.13 |
Bengkulu | 0.31 | 1.24 | 0.12 | 0.44 | 0.00 |
Lampung | 1.96 | 1.38 | 0.10 | 2.97 | 0.50 |
DKI Jakarta | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.20 | 0.43 |
Jawa Barat | 2.32 | 18.54 | 2.72 | 29.31 | 0.34 |
Jawa Tengah | 15.34 | 13.70 | 4.24 | 24.74 | 2.26 |
D.I. Yogyakarta | 2.65 | 0.71 | 0.29 | 2.86 | 0.25 |
Jawa Timbi | 38.60 | 7.82 | 6.74 | 20.21 | 1.16 |
Bali | 4.71 | 0.30 | 0.68 | 0.34 | 13.27 |
N.T.B. | 3,07 | 8.49 | 12.69 | 1.83 | 0.42 |
N.T.T. | 5.39 | 6.53 | 30.33 | 2.47 | 22.84 |
Kal. Barat | 0.97 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.31 | 11.17 |
Kal. Tengah | 0.17 | 0.15 | 0.01 | 0.07 | 2.05 |
Kal. Selatan | 0.61 | 0.57 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.06 |
Kal. Timur | 0.12 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.16 | 1.72 |
Sulawesi Utara | 2.34 | 0.02 | 2.35 | 0.47 | 4.65 |
Sulawesi Tengah | 1.91 | 0.45 | 0.96 | 0.81 | 1.75 |
Sulawesi Selatan | 9.16 | 14.23 | 28.73 | 2.25 | 3.88 |
Sulawesi Tenggar | 0.72 | 0.34 | 0.83 | 0.30 | 0.09 |
Malaku | 0.35 | 0.28 | 0.79 | 0.62 | 1.00 |
Irian Jaya | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.22 | 0.12 | 10.46 |
Timor Timur | 0.44 | 1.68 | 4.10 | 0.58 | 4.97 |
Total | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 4,065,488 |
Source: Statistical Book of Livestock, 1986, Directorat Tenderal Pertanian.
Table 3. Distribution of Households Rearing Livestock
Province | Household | Beef cattle | Average per Household | Household | Buffalo | Average per Household |
D.I. Aceh | 67,727 | 207,421 | 3.1 | 68,378 | 169,406 | 2.5 |
Sumatera Utara | 55,548 | 158,467 | 2.9 | 59,567 | 143,614 | 2.4 |
Sumatera Barat | 115,233 | 292,638 | 197 | 65,800 | 113,814 | 1.7 |
Riau | 11,874 | 32,130 | 2.7 | 9,859 | 29,672 | 3.0 |
Jambi | 17,148 | 35,539 | 2.1 | 17,572 | 55,349 | 3.1 |
Sum Selatan | 51,025 | 154,034 | 2.8 | 11,910 | 42,900 | 3.6 |
Bengkulu | 9,393 | 27,766 | 2.8 | 9,952 | 29,1535 | 3.0 |
Lampung | 90,140 | 177,019 | 2.0 | 14,881 | 33,062 | 2.2 |
DKI Jakarta | 99 | 211 | 2.1 | 825 | 1,641 | 2.0 |
Jawa Barat | 83,061 | 170,349 | 2.0 | 215,438 | 443,229 | 2.1 |
Jawa Tengah | 753,300 | 1,342,501 | 1.8 | 147,646 | 327,560 | 2.2 |
D.I. Yogyakarta | 148,881 | 236,287 | 1.6 | 8,158 | 16,991 | 2.1 |
Jawa Timbi | 1,784,391 | 3,423,362 | 1.6 | 72,920 | 186,664 | 2.6 |
Bali | 203,414 | 425,611 | 2.1 | 3,128 | 7,279 | 2.3 |
N.T.B. | 120,913 | 276,968 | 2.3 | 47,048 | 203,037 | 4.3 |
N.T.T. | 93,643 | 485,404 | 5.2 | 41,330 | 156,184 | 3.7 |
Timor Timur | 9,376 | 39,282 | 4.2 | 8,249 | 40,229 | 4.9 |
Kal. Barat | 31,871 | 87,326 | 2.7 | 394 | 1,076 | 2.7 |
Kal. Tengah | 5,558 | 15,571 | 2.6 | 658 | 3,677 | 5.6 |
Kal. Selatan | 20,597 | 54,735 | 2.7 | 3,936 | 13,662 | 3.5 |
Kal. Timur | 3,861 | 10,491 | 2.7 | 1,839 | 5,751 | 3.1 |
Sulawesi Utara | 77,153 | 202,343 | 2.6 | 296 | 491 | 1.7 |
Sulawesi Tengah | 57,544 | 172,223 | 3.0 | 3,132 | 110,774 | 3.4 |
Sulawesi Selatan | 209,824 | 835,494 | 4.0 | 117,309 | 340,273 | 2.9 |
Sulawesi Tenggar | 19,804 | 64,952 | 3.3 | 3,031 | 8,022 | 2.6 |
Malaku | 9,220 | 31,745 | 3.4 | 1,041 | 6,672 | 6.4 |
Irian Jaya | 3,010 | 13,968 | 4.6 | 179 | 307 | 1.7 |
Total | 4,053,417 | 8,861.897 | 2.2 | 934,476 | 2,390,871 | 2.6 |
Table 4. Distribution of Pasture Lands, Paddy Fields and Other Dry Lands, 1980
(Unit: ha)
Province | Pasture Land | Other Dry Lands | Paddy Fields | Total |
D.I. Aceh | 154,429 | 1,905,164 | 272,664 | 2,332,257 |
Sumatera Utara | 356,653 | 2,734,539 | 449,564 | 3,540,766 |
Sumatera Barat | 47,953 | 1,262,687 | 108,879 | 1,519,519 |
Riau | 5,188 | 2,478,477 | 130,202 | 2,613,797 |
Jambi | 53,879 | 1,858,045 | 145,935 | 2,047,859 |
Sum Selatan | 146,741 | 3,870,913 | 308,108 | 4,325,762 |
Bengkulu | 9,531 | 754,098 | 66,077 | 829,706 |
Lampung | 139,957 | 174,099 | 147,410 | 2,020,466 |
DKI Jakarta | -- | 48,626 | 10,997 | 59,623 |
Jawa Barat | 68,138 | 2,023,563 | 1,208,667 | 3,000,368 |
Jawa Tengah | 3,995 | 1,489,914 | 1,014,864 | 2,508,773 |
D.I. Yogyakarta | 59 | 211,451 | 65,114 | 277,624 |
Jawa Timbi | 5,893 | 1,907,477 | 1,190,633 | 3,104,003 |
Bali | 2,123 | 312,058 | 99,219 | 413,400 |
N.T.B. | 120,297 | 403,336 | 186,752 | 710,385 |
N.T.T. | 784.922 | 1,798,107 | 70,032 | 2,648,061 |
Timor Timur | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Kal. Barat | 34,500 | 948,788 | 234,099 | 1,217,387 |
Kal. Tengah | 147,769 | 2,677,961 | 94,414 | 2,920,144 |
Kal. Selatan | 53,502 | 750,901 | 313,064 | 1,117,467 |
Kal. Timur | 67,675 | 1,795,212 | 196,851 | 2,059,738 |
Sulawesi Utara | 88,352 | 761,140 | 42,885 | 892,477 |
Sulawesi Tengah | 84,536 | 1,162,047 | 41,245 | 1,287,828 |
Sulawesi Selatan | 359,921 | 3,415,768 | 545,069 | 4,320,758 |
Sulawesi Tenggara | 125,065 | 1,178,987 | 16,186 | 1,320,238 |
Malaku | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Irian Jaya | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Total | 2,861.008 | 37,468,358 | 7,068,940 | 47,388,306 |
GOVERNMENT POLICIES
The government has been trying to provide green forage in connection with the agro-forestry and fisheries development concept which aims to:
Livestock extension officers visit villages to give guidance on animal care and feeding, supply forage seeds, and demonstrate how to collect, dry, process and store crop residue/industrial by-products.
The government has also implemented price supports on some feed stuffs and provided fertilizer subsidies in an effort to expand domestic production of feeds, including the supply stabilization for fish meal, soybean cake and cake materials for animal feed industries.
FUTURE PROSPECT
The basic government standard recommended for food nutrient per capita per day is 50 gram protein, 40 gram food crop protein, 4 gram animal product protein and 6 gram protein from fish. Compared with the existing food, nowadays, animal product protein is only 2.34 gram per capita per day, which means that there is a long way to go in terms of making available large quantities of animal products to approach the recommended protein level. Therefore, animal protein availability needs to be increased by increasing the supply of animal products. This problem is confounded by the fact that the import volume of meat eggs and dairy products in 1985 was still high. Domestic production of livestock is simply inadequate.
Human population in the country increased by 2.1 percent in 1984 compared with 4.5 and 7.2 percent for livestock and poultry, respectively. Food crop projection increase was 1–4 percent per year over the past few years. If this trend should continue indefinitely, the future prospect is that animal protein intake should approach the recommended level.
The government has been trying to improve the competitive climate in animal feed trade, especially on the import side. One objective is to stimulate competition while another is to protect domestic crop producers.
Cultivated lands areas are an important source of both rough-hage and energy feed stuffs. Paddy produces the most crop residues but, only about 2 percent of straw is used for feed. Rice bran is a very valuable by-product which can provide a major locally-produced energy supplement source in concentrate feeds, especially for poultry and swine.
Palm/coconut cake plays a major role as an animal feed in Indonesia. Up until now, crop residue and by-product used for feed represent only about 15 percent of the total crop residue available. There is a great lack of proper utilization of crop residues for concentrates feeds. The promotion of integrated crop livestock systems is a planning approach which deserves in-depth study because the prospect of livestock and poultry and feed industries in the future is still bright.
Appendix Table 1. Livestock Ownership
(Unit: Head per household)
Province | Daily Cattle | Cattle | Buffalo | Horse | Goat/Sheep | Pig |
D.I. Aceh | 5.3 | 2.8 | 2.5 | 2.3 | 4.3 | 9.9 |
Sumut | 7.5 | 1.9 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 4.5 | 2.5 |
Sumbar | 4.0 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.3 | 2.5 | 8.1 |
Riau | 0.0 | 2.7 | 3.1 | 0.0 | 4.4 | 6.0 |
Jambi | 114.3 | 1.0 | 3.2 | 1.7 | 3.8 | 14.7 |
Sumsel | 31.1 | 3.4 | 5.2 | 2.0 | 4.5 | 5.3 |
Bengkulu | 2.0 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 3.9 | 2.5 | 3.6 |
Lampung | 2.4 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 3.3 | 3.8 |
DKI Jakarta | 13.1 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 2.7 | 5.4 | 217.3 |
Jabar | 3.4 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 3.5 | 5.8 |
Jateng | 2.0 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 3.3 | 6.0 |
D.I. Yogyakarta | 2.4 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 0.7 |
Jatim | 2.6 | 1.9 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 3.0 | 10.3 |
Bali | 0.0 | 2.1 | 2.3 | 2.0 | 3.7 | 1.9 |
N.T.B. | 3.3 | 2.3 | 4.3 | 2.3 | 3.8 | 2.5 |
N.T.T. | 8.0 | 8.0 | 2.9 | 2.4 | 4.2 | 3.2 |
Kalbar | 3.7 | 2.7 | 3.7 | 0.0 | 3.4 | 3.9 |
Kalteng | 0.3 | 2.6 | 5.6 | 12.5 | 4.4 | 2.9 |
Kalsel | 2.9 | 2.7 | 3.5 | 1.4 | 4.6 | 4.9 |
Kaltim | 20.0 | 2.8 | 3.1 | 0.0 | 4.8 | 4.3 |
Sulut | 13.3 | 2.6 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 3.7 | 2.7 |
Sulteng | 14.3 | 3.0 | 3.4 | 1.8 | 4.3 | 2.4 |
Sulsel | 3.6 | 3.9 | 2.9 | 1.5 | 3.1 | 2.5 |
Sultra | 3.7 | 3.3 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 3.3 | 1.7 |
Maluku | -- | 3.4 | 6.4 | 2.2 | 5.3 | 2.9 |
Irian Jaya | 16.7 | 4.6 | 1.7 | 2.2 | 4.7 | 5.3 |
Timtim | 2.1 | 3.6 | 4.6 | 1.8 | 4.0 | 2.2 |
Appendix Table 2. Distribution of Frozen Semen to Regions, 1980–84
(Unit: Head per household)
Province | 1980/1981 | 1981/1982 | 1982/1983 | 1983/1984 | 1984/1985 |
D.I. Aceh | 7,395 | 2,544 | 6,365 | 5,550 | 8,710 |
Sumatara Utara | 11,316 | 9,720 | 14,290 | 15,605 | 16,929 |
Sumatara Berat | 12,721 | 9,816 | 13,129 | 13,244 | 15,318 |
Lampung | 11,204 | 14,000 | 16,654 | 20,759 | 26,193 |
Jawa Barat | 40,530 | 59,679 | 67,024 | 81,309 | 95,505 |
Jawa Tengah | 82,348 | 88,969 | 111,891 | 137,642 | 144,036 |
d. I. Yogyakarta | 15,144 | 17,892 | 16,832 | 25,869 | 30,060 |
Jawa Timur | 18,320 | 50,1780 | 59,454 | 128,600 | 205,963 |
Bali | 2,524 | 3,014 | 2,177 | 6,672 | 6,615 |
N.T.B. | 7,200 | 2,599 | 2,119 | 1,262 | 4,244 |
N.T.T. | 4,365 | 5,151 | 5,130 | 4,420 | 4,023 |
Sulawesi Selatan | 1,400 | 2,557 | 7,714 | 4,312 | 10,163 |
Sulawesi Utara | 2,473 | 2,560 | 1,939 | 876 | 2,444 |
Sulawesi Tengah | -- | 1,632 | 3,795 | 1,196 | 3,498 |
Kalimantan Selata | 2,564 | 2,556 | 6,511 | 6,304 | 4,849 |
Kalimantan Barat | 1,620 | 2,041 | 2,844 | 1,614 | 1,626 |
Riau | -- | -- | 2,786 | 2,828 | 4,362 |
Jambi | -- | -- | 2,216 | 2,236 | 2,436 |
Kalimantan Timur | -- | -- | 2,268 | 400 | 1,616 |
Bengkulu | -- | -- | 625 | 2,114 | 3,826 |
Sumatara Selatan | -- | -- | 2,744 | 946 | 4,001 |
DKI Jaya | -- | -- | 3,000 | 3,338 | 1,765 |
Sulawesi Tenggara | -- | -- | -- | 1,630 | 6,472 |
Laintain | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Total | 221,124 | 275,511 | 351,502 | 472,899 | 608,402 |
Source: Statistical Hand Book of Livestock, 1986, Directorat Jenderal Pertanakan.
Appendix Table 3. Volume of Meat, Eggs and Dairy Products Importation, 1979–85
(Unit: mt)
Year | Meat | Dairy Products | Butter | Cheese | Eggs |
1979 | 1,650.6 | 54,436.0 | 4,384.5 | 869.3 | 164.4 |
1980 | 1,625.2 | 73,019.2 | 1,309.2 | 1,053.0 | 143.6 |
1981 | 2,154.2 | 56,496.5 | 5,633.4 | 1,366.2 | 187.3 |
1982 | 2,562.0 | 52,635.5 | 12,276.1 | 1,269.6 | 182.2 |
1983 | 2,876.4 | 42,433.0 | 16,833.9 | 1,417.4 | 76.5 |
1984 a | 2,376.4 | 393.9 | 9,391.1 | 1,711.9 | 51.8 |
1985 b | 193.3 | 4,618.5 | 876.2 | 99.9 | 2.2 |
Note: a Revised figures.
b Tentative figures (Jan. - Sept., 1985).
Appendix Table 4. Livestock and Poultry Production, 1984–88
Item | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 | 1987 | 1988 | Average increase (percent/year) |
Beef cattle | 6,867 | 6,831 | 6,912 | 6,995 | 7,078 | 1.2 |
Dairy cattle | 173 | 208 | 154 | 293 | 329 | 18.1 |
Buffalo | 2,620 | 2,559 | 2,535 | 2,612 | 2,639 | 1.0 |
Horse | 675 | 711 | 718 | 725 | 733 | 1.0 |
Goat | 8,141 | 8,341 | 8,591 | 8,849 | 9,114 | 3.0 |
Sheep | 4,365 | 4,473 | 4,607 | 4,746 | 4,888 | 3.0 |
Pig | 3,854 | 4,348 | 4,636 | 4,941 | 5,267 | 6.0 |
Poultry | ||||||
Indigeneous chicken | 166,815 | 167,748 | 171,210 | 180,113 | 189,479 | 5.2 |
Layer | 19,559 | 32,324 | 34,169 | 37,077 | 39,709 | 7.1 |
Broiler | 110,403 | 121,442 | 133,583 | 146,947 | 161,644 | 10.0 |
Duck | 24,694 | 28,743 | 30,582 | 32,539 | 34,621 | 6.4 |
Source: Directorate General of Livestock Services
Appendix Table 5. Area Harvested, Production and Yield, Selected Crops, (1984–88)
Items | Commodity | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 | 1987 | 1988 |
Area harvested (000 ha) | Paddy | 9,764 | 9,768 | 9,769 | 9,863 | 9,982 |
Maize | 3,096 | 3,295 | 3,229 | 3,265 | 3,310 | |
Cassava | 1,350 | 1,518 | 1,555 | 1,593 | 1,635 | |
Sweet potato | 264 | 290 | 296 | 301 | 307 | |
Groundnut | 538 | 579 | 601 | 622 | 652 | |
Soybean | 853 | 979 | 1,026 | 1,062 | 1,100 | |
Green pea | 297 | 319 | 342 | 372 | 403 | |
Production (000 mt) | Paddy | 25,148 | 16,430 | 27,386 | 28,347 | 29,362 |
Maize | 5,383 | 5,694 | 5,994 | 6,308 | 6,656 | |
Cassava | 14,167 | 15,403 | 16,145 | 16,919 | 17,756 | |
Sweet potato | 2,167 | 2,331 | 2,401 | 2,482 | 2,564 | |
Groundnut | 533 | 580 | 621 | 672 | 724 | |
Soybean | 769 | 1,015 | 1,174 | 1,250 | 1,370 | |
Green pea | 204 | 231 | 261 | 296 | 340 | |
Yield average (kg/ha) | Paddy | 26.70 | 27.38 | 28.04 | 28.70 | 29.42 |
Maize | 17.12 | 17.82 | 18.56 | 19.32 | 20.11 | |
Cassava | 99.00 | 101.00 | 104.00 | 106.00 | 109.00 | |
Sweet potato | 79.50 | 80.40 | 81.20 | 82.20 | 83.60 | |
Groundnut | 9.55 | 10.01 | 10.37 | 10.79 | 11.09 | |
Soybean | 9.85 | 10.37 | 11.45 | 11.76 | 12.46 | |
Green pea | 6.87 | 7.24 | 7.62 | 8.02 | 8.44 |
Source: Directorate General of Livestock Services
Appendix Table 6. Projected Feedstuff Needs for Concentrate, 1984–88
Commodity (000 mt) | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 | 1987 | 1988 | Percent Annual Increase |
Maize | 725.9 | 692.0 | 866.5 | 950.7 | 1,046.5 | 9.6 |
Coconut cake | 296.8 | 329.7 | 268.0 | 423.4 | 525.4 | 78.0 |
Bran | 1,330.0 | 1,434.2 | 1,547.4 | 1,687.2 | 1,890.2 | 42.1 |
Maize bran | 223.0 | 241.0 | 260.9 | 186.4 | 325.6 | 9.9 |
Soybean cake | 224.1 | 252.2 | 283.5 | 319.0 | 362.4 | 12.8 |
Fish meal | 85.9 | 95.7 | 207.1 | 119.0 | 135.5 | 12.1 |
Cassava cake | 451.6 | 479.7 | 509.3 | 541.0 | 574.1 | 6.2 |
Sago | 96.4 | 103.1 | 109.7 | 116.6 | 124.1 | 6.5 |
Miscellaneous | 276.2 | 299.3 | 323.8 | 254.0 | 298.1 | 9.6 |
Total | 3,710.3 | 4,226.3 | 4,376.3 | 4,797.6 | 5,381.8 | 9.7 |
Appendix Table 7. Projected Forage Demand, 1984–88 a
Animal Type | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 | 1987 | 1988 | Percent Annual Increase |
Beef cattle | 6,695,582 | 6,775,259 | 6,855,855 | 6,937,470 | 7,020,026 | 1.19 |
Dry cattle | 167,632 | 197,973 | 233,807 | 276,126 | 326,104 | 18.10 |
Buffalo | 2,895,092 | 2,924,911 | 2,955,038 | 2,955,475 | 3,016,225 | 1.03 |
Goat | 1,147,075 | 1,181,487 | 1,216,932 | 1,253,440 | 1,291,043 | 3.00 |
Sheep | 615,182 | 633,637 | 652,647 | 672,226 | 692,393 | 3.00 |
Horse | 607,230 | 613,302 | 619,435 | 625,630 | 631,886 | 1.00 |
Total | 12,127,793 | 12,326,569 | 12,533,744 | 12,750,367 | 12,977,677 | 1.70 |
Note: a Calculated from livestock population projection.
Kenichi Kameoka*
TRENDS IN ANIMAL INDUSTRY
Dairy Cattle
The population of dairy cattle in Japan in 1950 was about 200 thousand head only. Since then, it increased rapidly and reached a plateau in 1970 at 1.8 million head. On the other hand, the number of dairy farms totalled 133 thousand in 1950, increased until 1960 and thereafter decreased to 79 thousand in 1986. This means that the feeding number per farm has been increasing since the 1960s. There are many farms now where more than 100 head each are raised. Such expansion has been pursued for the purpose of improving the farm economy, particularly in terms of increasing farm income.
Total raw milk production is continuously increasing, but the growth of milk consumption has not been as high as that of milk production. This widening gap between milk production and milk consumption has resulted in larger amounts of raw milk being used for milk products for which the Japanese Government pays subsidy. Thus, since 1980, the government has decided to control milk production by setting an upper limit on the raw milk entitled to subsidy.
However, as farmers devote more efforts in improving the farm economy, the milk-producing ability per cow has also improved. Many cows can now produce more than 10,000 kg of milk per year, the highest recorded being over 20,000 kg.
Beef Cattle
The status of the beef cattle industry is something different from that of dairy cattle. The population of beef cattle has declined since the mid-1960s due mainly to the mechanization of agriculture. By the 1980s, however, the population started to increase as a result of the steady demand for beef and the government's policy of encouraging beef production.
Dairy beef production initiated in 1960 has become an increasingly large business. At present, two-thirds of beef production come from dairy cattle, half of which are from dairy steers and the other half from culled lactating cows.
There are many problems in beef production in Japan arising from the narrowness of the forage production area, the small size of beef cattle farms and the tendency of farmers to produce high quality beef, among others. Consequently, the production cost is relatively high and there are strong pressures to open the beef market to foreign countries.
Table 1. Status of the Dairy Cattle Industry
Item | 1965 | 1970 | 1975 | 1980 | 1983 | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 |
Feeding number (1,000 head) | 1,370 | 1,800 | 1,790 | 2,090 | 2,100 | 2,110 | 2,110 | 2,100 |
Head per farm | 3.4 | 5.9 | 11.2 | 18.1 | 21.3 | 24.3 | 25.6 | 26.8 |
Number of farms (1,000) | 350 | 307 | 160 | 115 | 99 | 87 | 82 | 79 |
Total raw milk yield (1,000 t) | 3,271 | 4,789 | 5,006 | 6,498 | 6,848 | 7,200 | 7,436 | -- |
Drinking milk consumption (1,000 t) | 2,022 | 2,652 | 3,179 | 4,010 | 4,139 | 4,329 | 4,308 | -- |
Milk yield/cow/year (kg) | 4,100 | 4,420 | 4,464 | 5,006 | 5,356 | 5,442 | 5,640 | -- |
Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan. In some tables, however, estimated figures are calculated by the author or some other entity.
Table 2. Status of the Beef Cattle Industry
Item | 1965 | 1970 | 1975 | 1980 | 1983 | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 |
Feeding number (1,000 head) | 1,885 | 1,789 | 1,857 | 2,281 | 2,492 | 2,572 | 2,587 | 2,639 |
Head per farm | 1.3 | 2.0 | 3.9 | 6.5 | 7.6 | 8.2 | 8.7 | 9.2 |
Number of farms (1,000) | 1,434 | 901 | 473 | 352 | 328 | 314 | 298 | 287 |
Carcass production (1,000 t) | -- | 282 | 335 | 431 | 505 | 538 | 555 | -- |
Beef consumption (g/person/day) | 4.1 | 5.9 | 7.0 | 9.6 | 11.4 | 11.8 | 12.0 | -- |
Average daily gain (kg) | ||||||||
Japanese native cattle | -- | -- | 0.57 | 0.59 | 0.59 | 0.60 | 0.61 | -- |
Hostein steer | -- | -- | 0.89 | 0.97 | 1.00 | 1.01 | 1.01 | -- |
Swine
Due to the increasing demand for pork, the swine population is growing rapidly. The number of farms, however, has been decreasing year by year due to the rationalization of swine farm management.
Production cost has decreased as a result of the decline in the price of commercial feed due to the strong yen and improvement in pig production performance such as in feed conversion, expansion of number of head per farm and so on. Consequently, competitiveness in foreign markets has been enhanced.
Broilers
The broiler industry was initiated in Japan around 1950. The various trends such as number of farms and chicken per farm, are almost similar to those of the swine industry. Broiler farms are located mostly in the southwestern part of Japan.
Layers
Eggs are very familiar items in the Japanese diet, and thus, egg production developed relatively earlier than the other animal industries. The consumption per person reached a maximum in 1970. Since then, the consumption rate has been maintained at about the same level.
The consumer price of egg is rather cheap compared with imported ones, and almost all the demand is supplied by domestic production.
FEED SUPPLY
Concentrate Feed
The status of the feed industry is shown in Table 6. Feed imports in the form of concentrate and raw materials account for about 90 percent of the total supply in 1984. Table 7 shows the cost side of the feed used in the animal industry in Japan. The share of feed cost to the total production cost is very high and almost all of the feed supply for swine, poultry and dairy steer fattening, except milk production, depends on commercial feed. Concerning concentrate feed, both price and sufficient supply are primary considerations. The government maintains various kinds of policies, including tax-free system for imported feed grains. Accordingly, feed grain production in Japan is very difficult due to the large price differential between the imported and domestic supply.
Table 3. Situation of Swine
Item | 1965 | 1970 | 1975 | 1980 | 1983 | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 |
Feeding number (1,000 head) | 3,975 | 6,335 | 7,684 | 10,065 | 10,273 | 10,423 | 10,718 | 11,061 |
Head per farm | 5.7 | 14.2 | 34.4 | 79.8 | 101.7 | 133.3 | 129.1 | 149.5 |
Number of farms (1,000) | 701 | 445 | 223 | 126 | 101 | 92 | 83 | 74 |
Carcass production (1,000 t) | -- | 778 | 1,023 | 1,429 | 1,430 | 1,433 | 1,558 | -- |
Pork consumption (g/person/day) | 8.2 | 14.4 | 19.9 | 26.4 | 26.3 | 26.5 | 28.2 | -- |
Number of pigs weaned (head/sow/year) | -- | -- | 16.4 | 16.4 | 16.9 | 17.3 | 17.3 | -- |
Feed conversion | -- | -- | 3.32 | 3.03 | 3.08 | 3.23 | 3.06 | -- |
Table 4. Status of the Broiler Industry
Item | 1965 | 1970 | 1975 | 1980 | 1983 | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 |
Feeding number (million) | 18 | 54 | 88 | 131 | 130 | 135 | 143 | 155 |
Head per farm (1,000 head) | 0.9 | 3.0 | 7.6 | 15.8 | 18.1 | 19.5 | 21.4 | 23.1 |
Number of farms (1,000) | 20 | 18 | 12 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
Carcass production (1,000 t) | -- | 496 | 759 | 1,121 | 1,257 | 1,324 | 1,361 | 1,387 |
Consumption (g/person/day) | 5.2 | 10.1 | 14.4 | 21.1 | 23.5 | 24.5 | 25.2 | -- |
Slaughter body weight (kg) | -- | -- | 1.96 | 2.27 | 2.35 | 2.38 | 2.41 | -- |
Feed Conversion | -- | -- | 2.57 | 2.27 | 2.28 | 2.30 | 2.28 | -- |
Table 5. Status of the Layers Industry
Item | 1965 | 1970 | 1975 | 1980 | 1983 | 1984 | 1985 | 1986 |
Feeding number (1,000 head) | 40 | 169 | 155 | 164 | 172 | 176 | 177 | 180 |
Head per farm | 27 | 70 | 230 | 653 | 869 | 952 | 1,036 | 1,116 |
Number of farms (1,000) | 3,243 | 1,703 | 509 | 187 | 145 | 134 | 124 | 116 |
Egg yield (1,000 t) | -- | 1,765 | 1,806 | 1,992 | 2,091 | 2,145 | 2,158 | -- |
Consumption (g/person/day) | 30.9 | 39.8 | 37.5 | 39.2 | 39.9 | 40.6 | 30.8 | -- |
Egg production ratio (percent) | -- | -- | 70.1 | 72.3 | 74.8 | 75.3 | 75.4 | -- |
Feed Conversion | -- | -- | 2.76 | 2.52 | 2.46 | 2.43 | 2.42 | -- |
Table 6. Feed Supply Situation
(Unit: 1,000 mt)
Item | Protein (In DCP base) | Energy (In TDB base) | ||
1970 | 1984 | 1970 | 1984 | |
Roughage | 524 | 712 | 4,656 | 5,130 |
Concentrate | ||||
Domestic supply | ||||
domestic raw material | 520 | 708 | 2,297 | 2,181 |
raw material imported | 891 | 1,589 | 2,176 | 3,330 |
Imported | 1,117 | 1,767 | 9,266 | 15,831 |
Self-sufficiency ratio (%) | 20.6 | 17.4 | 16.7 | 10.2 |
Table 7. Share of Feed Cost to Total Animal Production Cost
Item | Production Cost (Secondary) | Cost of Feed | ||||
Total | Commercial Feed | |||||
(A) (yen) | (B) (yen) | (B/A) (percent) | (C) (yen) | (C/A) (percent) | (C/B) (percent) | |
Milk (per 100 kg) | 8,761 | 4,803 | 54.8 | 3,057 | 34.9 | 63.6 |
Cattle fattening (wagyu) | ||||||
(per 100 kg live weight) | 101,447 | 40,027 | 39.5 | 36,858 | 36.3 | 92.0 |
(dairy steer) | 70,439 | 32,405 | 46.0 | 31,163 | 44.2 | 96.2 |
Pig fattening | ||||||
(per 100 kg live weight) | 40,577 | 14,693 | 36.2 | 14,688 | 36.2 | 99.9 |
Broiler | ||||||
(per 100 kg live weight) | 22,720 | 15,870 | 69.9 | 15,870 | 69.9 | 100.0 |
Egg (per 100 kg) | 24,675 | 15,272 | 61.9 | 15,268 | 61.9 | 99.9 |
Table 8. Grassland Establishment
Item | 1965 | 1970 | 1975 | 1980 | 1983 | 1985 |
Area of grassland establishment (1,000 ha) | 21 | 31 | 15 | 15 | 8 | 6 |
Total grassland area (1,000 ha) | 144 | 279 | 377 | 449 | 475 | 488 |
Table 9. Production of Forage
Item | 1965 | 1970 | 1975 | 1980 | 1983 | 1985 |
Area of forage crop | ||||||
Whole Japan (1,000 ha) | 509 | 666 | 840 | 1,003 | 1,041 | 1,019 |
Hokkaido (1,000 ha) | -- | 366 | 530 | 599 | 600 | 600 |
Yield (t/ha, in fresh matter) | 28.6 | 36.7 | 38.4 | 38.4 | 39.7 | 41.3 |
Table 10. Quantitiers of Roughage Imported
(Unit: 1,000 mt)
Item | 1980 | 1983 | 1985 | 1986 |
Hay cube | 295 | 404 | 492 | 537 |
Baled hay | 115 | 100 | 200 | 396 |
Rice straw | 48 | 100 | 87 | 121 |
Nevertheless, some attempts have been made to improve the domestic production of feed grains. Examples are a research project which was intended to increase rice yields up to 50 percent through the improvement of selected rice strains over a 15-year period. The central idea was to utilize rice as feed; encourage barley cultivation by promising to purchase the products, and so on. At present, almost all of the feed grains supply such as corn, sorghum and barley are imported. Rice bran and fish meal are the main domestic sources for concentrate feed.
Forage Production
Forage is essential to ruminants. From the standpoint of land utilization, it is important to use the land effectively for growing forage crops.
The status of grassland development in the country is shown in Table 8. Most of the grasslands are located in mountain areas in the Hokkaido, Tohoku and Kyushu districts. These grassland areas were formerly used as range for horses and forest. In these grassland, dairy heifers and beef cattle breeders are chiefly raised, and milk production and beef cattle fattening are done in lowland areas. In the northern districts, species of grass grown on the grassland are orchard grass, blue grass and timothy grass. These are raised in the other districts, in addition to perennial Italian rye grass. The main forage crops grown are Italian rye grass, corn and sorghum which are fed mostly as silage.
The trends in forage crop yield and area are shown in Table 9. The total yield of forage has been increasing, but the average number of cattle for feeding per farm is expanding year by year as already shown.
In the outskirts of urban areas, the shortage of cultivation area for forage crop has become pressing. Nutritional disturbance due to the lack of forage feed has also become apparent in some farms. As a result, purchasing hay from Hokkaido has become common and even imported roughage are used in such farms.
On the other hand, there is a government policy to reduce ricelands involving about 700,000 ha due to the surplus rice supply. While it is desirable to grow fodder crops in some of these ricelands, fodder crop cultivation is not effectively performed for various reasons except in fields owned by cattle feeding farms.
UNUTILIZED FEED RESOURCES
It is estimated that nearly 10 million mt (TDN base) of unutilized feed resources exist in Japan. These consist mainly of food industry by-products, farm crop residues, garbage, chicken manure, etc.
Speaking of food industry by-products, the utilization rate of these by-product materials which are produced in large amounts at one place or in dry state are comparatively high. Poor utilization occurs when these materials are produced in wet state or small amounts in one place. For instance, beer by-products are produced in wet state but in a large factory so that large amounts are produced in one place. Consequently, the utilization rate is very high, almost 100 percent. On the other hand, by-products of potato starch manufacture are produced in relatively small factories, and the utilization rate is very low due to the high cost of transporting them to the farms. Soybean oil meal and wheat bran are produced both in large factories and in dry state, hence almost all of these by-products are used as feed. However, in the case of rice bran, which has relatively high nutritive value and is produced in dry state, the utilization rate is only 56 percent, which is relatively low. This is due to the system of polishing rice in Japan, that is, the large number of rice shops where rice polishing is done is scattered all over the country. There is, therefore, the problem of collecting rice bran as feed.
A similar situation exists for farm crop residues, rice straw, in particular, which are produced in cattle feeding farms or nearby places are almost 100 percent used as feed. However, in other cases, these are burned or used as manure. As a result, 121,000 mt of rice straw are imported annually from the Rep. of China as feed. The above-mentioned phenomenon occurs for economic reasons.
Various kinds of technical countermeasures are being developed by research such as those on the improvement of the feed quality of unutilized feed resources, collection and transport system and storage methods, among others. Recently, the safety of feeds has also become a serious concern. Residues of pesticide, contamination of heavy metal and mycotoxin are being strictly controlled.
The utilization of chicken manure in various ways is also being studied in various ways, but the results are not adopted due to emotional psychological resistance.
FEED MILLING INDUSTRY
There are about 200 mills owned by 116 private companies and cooperatives. The formula feed industry expanded very rapidly until the first oil shock. Since then, its growth slowed down and the construction of factories in expectation of the continued expansion of demand resulted in surplus equipment and hence, in bad business. Recently, however, the situation in the industry has improved due to the strong yen.
The following are the needs of the feed industry: i) suitable placement of factories; ii) improvement of feed transport system; iii) modernization of equipment; and iv) integration of factories.
It is desirable to maintain a stable supply and suitable price of formula feed. Accordingly, the government employs various measures such as tax-free importation of feed grains, stabilization fund which is used when the price of formula feed goes up abnormally, storage for feed grains, insurance for formula feed quality, etc.
Table 11. Some Examples of Feed Resources as By-Products, 1984
Item | Total Output (1,000 mt) | Of which: Used as Feed (percent) |
Grain processing | ||
Wheat bran | 1,192 | 100 |
Rice bran | 831 | 56 |
Distillery and brewery | ||
Beer by-product | 103 | 99 |
Sake by-product | 231 | 13 |
Alcohol by-product | 1,586 | 0 |
Oil industry | ||
Soybean meal | 2,905 | 100 |
Rape seed meal | 755 | 10 |
Farm residue | ||
Rice straw | 12,000 | 20 |
Sweet potato | 1,145 | 25 |
Radish leaves | 1,360 | 10 |
Garbage (in fresh matter) | 3,320 | -- |
(in DM) | 830 | 10 |
Table 12. Trend in Formula Feed Production
Year | Total Production (1,000 mt) | Of which: Designated for Each Animal Group (%) | ||||
Poultry | Swine | Dairy Cattle | Beef Cattle | Others | ||
1960 | 2,882 | 80.5 | -- | 10.7 | 0.2 | 8.6 |
1965 | 8,150 | 65.2 | 21.8 | 9.8 | 1.0 | 2.2 |
1970 | 15,076 | 56.1 | 26.1 | 11.5 | 5.8 | 0.5 |
1975 | 16,818 | 52.6 | 26.9 | 10.9 | 9.2 | 0.5 |
1980 | 22,252 | 48.1 | 28.8 | 10.4 | 12.2 | 0.4 |
1982 | 22,877 | 49.8 | 27.2 | 10.4 | 12.0 | 0.6 |
1984 | 24,494 | 44.7 | 26.4 | 10.4 | 11.3 | 0.4 |
1985 | 25,233 | 43.8 | 27.6 | 10.2 | 11.1 | 0.3 |
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF FEED RESOURCES
The most important point is to enhance the production of forage crops, including the improvement of grasslands. However, inasmuch as Japan has limited land areas, the effort would likewise be limited. It is also necessary to develop methods to make use of the unutilized feed materials.
Furthermore, it is essential to adopt effective feeding practices in order to produce animal products with less feed. For this purpose, the following should be investigated: i) feed properties; ii) nutrient requirement of animals; iii) feed storage and processing methods.