The research aims to study the effect of alternative feed technology utilization include costs of alternative feed technology and added labor costs to the value added or revenue added of cattle farming. The aims for search the effort the development of beef cattle feed technology utilization in increasing household income, improving production yields and can reduce the cost factors needed in cattle farming. The study was conducted in the Minahasa Regency of North Sulawesi Province, Indonesia. The research method that has been used is a survey method to cattle farmers with an interview approach based on a list of questions (questionnaires). The research sample are cattle farmers household with the criteria: a minimum of one year experience in cattle farm, and using alternative feeds such as hay, silage, ammonia of crop waste, urea molasses block and dry straw tower. Alternative feed technology cost and alternative feed technology workflow costs in cattle farming have a significant effect on value added cattle. Allocation of farmer workforce after using feed technology is actually higher than before they use feed technology, but the parameter coefficient of alternative feed technology cost has a positive sign indicate that even though production costs increase but produce greater additional revenue cattle farming.
PROFIT ANALYSIS OF THE BAT BUSHMEAT TRADER IN THE TRADITIONAL MARKET IN AMURANG AND MODOINDING DISTRICKS OF SOUTH MINAHASA REGENCY. This study aims to analyze how much profit bat traders make in traditional markets in South Minahasa Regency. This research was conducted using a survey method and analyzes the level of business profit and its ability to generate profit (profitability) in bat meat dealers in traditional markets in the South Minahasa Regency. The results of this study show that the total cost of bat dealers reached an average of IDR 3.800.068. with an average acceptance of bat traders of IDR 4.898.438 per week. The total profit per bat dealer per week was IDR 849,557. with a gross margin of the traditional Amurang market of 0.13 and the traditional Modoinding market of 0.29.
This study aims to analyze the impacts of feedtechnology usage in raising the revenue of beef cattle farmers in North Dumoga Subdistrict, Bolaang Mongondow Regency, North Sulawesi Province. The results of study showed that:(1)Feed technology usage led to increased production costs, but it also led to increased revenue, resulting in increased revenue of household of traditional cattle farmers, (2)Expended labor of respondent farmers after using feed technology was higher than before using feed technology, which seemed different with Chayanov' theory stating that using technology would reduce expended working hours of family in their farming, so it provided leisure time for family members for recreation or other activities. This difference was due to the characteristics of traditional technology or hereditary technology with working time allocation of human labor that was still likely to be higher than advanced technology and intermediate technology, (3)The highest revenue raising of beef cattle farm equal to 18.29% occurred to the application of simulation usageof feed technology with subsidy policy by the government tocattle farm production cost reduction equal to 25%onthe economy of traditional beef cattle farmers; and (6) Some policies could improve the production and suppress cost factors sothey could increase the household economy of traditional beef cattle farmers. Some suggestions for policy makers based on the results of this study, it is expected to implement the policiesof(1)feed technology support in the economy of beef cattle farmers, and (2)subsidy of the increase in the number of cattle ownership.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.