Thumbnail Image

Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa

In the imperial Gazetteer of India 1878, Pusa was recorded as a government estate of about 1350 acres in Darbhanba. It was acquired by East India Company for running a stud farm to supply better breed of horses mainly for the army. Frequent incidence of glanders disease (swelling of glands), mostly affecting the valuable imported bloodstock made the civil veterinary department to shift the entire stock out of Pusa. A British tobacco concern Beg Sutherland & co. got the estate on lease but it also left in 1897 abandoning the government estate of Pusa. Lord Mayo, The Viceroy and Governor General, had been repeatedly trying to get through his proposal for setting up a directorate general of Agriculture that would take care of the soil and its productivity, formulate newer techniques of cultivation, improve the quality of seeds and livestock and also arrange for imparting agricultural education. The government of India had invited a British expert. Dr. J. A. Voelcker who had submitted as report on the development of Indian agriculture. As a follow-up action, three experts in different fields were appointed for the first time during 1885 to 1895 namely, agricultural chemist (Dr. J. W. Leafer), cryptogamic botanist (Dr. R. A. Butler) and entomologist (Dr. H. Maxwell Lefroy) with headquarters at Dehradun (U.P.) in the forest Research Institute complex. Surprisingly, until now Pusa, which was destined to become the centre of agricultural revolution in the country, was lying as before an abandoned government estate. In 1898. Lord Curzon took over as the viceroy. A widely traveled person and an administrator, he salvaged out the earlier proposal and got London’s approval for the appointment of the inspector General of Agriculture to which the first incumbent Mr. J. Mollison (Dy. Director of Agriculture, Bombay) joined in 1901 with headquarters at Nagpur The then government of Bengal had mooted in 1902 a proposal to the centre for setting up a model cattle farm for improving the dilapidated condition of the livestock at Pusa estate where plenty of land, water and feed would be available, and with Mr. Mollison’s support this was accepted in principle. Around Pusa, there were many British planters and also an indigo research centre Dalsing Sarai (near Pusa). Mr. Mollison’s visits to this mini British kingdom and his strong recommendations. In favour of Pusa as the most ideal place for the Bengal government project obviously caught the attention for the viceroy.

Browse

Show more
Show more
Reset filters
Subject: Extension Education × Author: Dhakade, Manoj × End date: 2020 × Start date: 2017 × Thesis Type: M.Sc ×
Reset filters

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ThesisItemOpen Access
    Determinants of livelihood security among small and marginal farmers in Betul district of Madhya Pradesh
    (DRPCAU, Pusa, 2020) Dhakade, Manoj; Paswan, Arun Kumar
    The study entitled “Determinants of livelihood security among Small and Marginal farmers in Betul district of Madhya Pradesh”. The study was carried out with the specific objectives to measure the livelihood security among small and marginal farmers along with the factors associated with livelihood security among the selected farmers. An attempt was also made to find out the constraints in attaining livelihood security. The present research enterprise was carried out in Multai and Betul blocks of Betul district of Madhya Pradesh. From each block, two villages were randomly selected. From each selected village, 10 small and 10 marginal farmers were identified. Thus, a total 80 farmers of the four villages were finally constructed as sample for the study purposes. The study revealed that, majority of respondents (51.20 percent) were belonged to the middle age group, having primary level of education (31.25 percent), belongs to the SC category (40 percent), medium size of family (50 percent), equal percent of respondents were found marginal as well as small size of land holding (50 percent), possessed medium number of livestock (42.5 percent),had membership in one organization (52.50 percent), medium level of experience in farming (47.5 Percent). Further study shows that majority of respondents (47.50 percent) were involved in agriculture + labourer occupation, most of the respondents had low family income (52.50 percent), medium cropping system (41.25 percent) and most of the respondents (36.25 percent) had medium level of mass media exposure. The study shows that regarding livelihood security majority of the respondents had medium level of food security (36.25 per cent), economic security, (42.5 per cent), health security (51.25 per cent), educational security (43.75 per cent), social security (42.5 per cent), institutional security (61.25 per cent), and study also shows that 48.75 percent respondents had medium level infrastructural security. Whereas majority of respondents (41.25 percent) had medium level (0.48 – 0.55 score) of overall livelihood security and overall extent of livelihood security was found to be 51 per cent. The findings indicated that, variables size of land holding and cropping system were showing positive correlation, at 5% level of significance and annual family income was also shows positive correlation, at 1% level of significance with the ‘livelihood security’ of the respondents. The regression analysis showed that experience in farming, annual family income, and cropping system were the most important factors contributing, significantly, towards the ‘livelihood security of the respondents. The R2 (0.4070) indicated that the set of independent variables altogether explain 40.70 per cent of the total variability towards dependent variable i.e. likelihood security. The major constraints faced by respondents were lack of awareness of appropriate technologies and technical knowledge to improve crop productivity, low market prices of the products, lack of information on the product's marketing, and repeated crop failures were the main constraints experienced by the respondent for attaining livelihood security. The study suggests that there is a need to provide proper educational, economical, institutional, social and health, facilities, to the farming community for improving their livelihood.