Consider the following statements about the Rashtriya Gokul Mission : I. It is important for the upliftment of rural poor as majority of low producing indigenous animals are with small and marginal farmers and landless labourers. II. It was initiated to promote indigenous cattle and buffalo rearing and conservation in a scientific and holistic manner. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Explicit objectives listed for Rashtriya Gokul Mission include development/conservation of indigenous breeds and increasing milk production/productivity, and strategies mention delivering quality AI service at farmers' doorstep.

A student could infer that productivity-boosting services delivered to farmers may be intended to raise farm incomes and so check whether beneficiaries include small/marginal or poor rural farmers.

RGM-related items (NKBC, RGM Award, ePashuhaat) focus on conserving breeds, enhancing production and creating market platforms—components that typically aim to improve livestock returns.

One could extend this by examining whether market access and production enhancement measures are targeted or accessible to the rural poor (smallholders) to assess upliftment intent.

National Livestock Mission (a related livestock policy) explicitly lists productivity enhancement, entrepreneurship development and employment generation as objectives, including conservation of breeds and rural slaughterhouses.

Use this pattern that national livestock sub-missions aim at employment and entrepreneurship to check if RGM similarly lists rural employment/upliftment among its stated beneficiaries.

The IRDP (a rural poverty programme) explicitly includes livestock and poultry development as measures to assist targeted rural poor groups via income-enhancing activities.

A student can generalize that livestock-focused programmes have historically been used to uplift rural poor and therefore investigate whether RGM adopts similar targeting or subsidy mechanisms.

Textbook summary of rural development programmes shows government programmes aim to provide additional income sources to rural households, often via targeted schemes for small/marginal farmers.

Extend this rule by checking whether RGM is framed/implemented as a rural development/income-augmentation programme targeting disadvantaged rural groups.

States that small farmers constitute about 80% of total farmers in India, highlighting their numerical dominance among farm households.

A student could combine this with data on livestock ownership per household type to assess whether the numerically dominant small farms likely hold a large share of animals.

Says cattle keeping supplements income of rural households, especially marginal farmers and landless workers, indicating these groups commonly keep cattle.

One could extrapolate that if marginal/landless households commonly keep cattle, they may also own many of the lower-producing indigenous animals used as subsidiary income sources.

Notes that the White Revolution especially benefited small and marginal farmers and landless labourers through dairy co‑operatives, bringing millions into milk production.

A student might use this to argue many small holders own milch animals (including indigenous types) and then investigate production levels by breed ownership among co‑op members.

Describes broad native breeds and reduced genetic variability due to exotic breed introduction, implying coexistence of many local (often lower‑yielding) breeds.

Combine this with knowledge that smallholders often cannot afford high‑input exotic crosses to infer smallholders may disproportionately keep low‑producing indigenous breeds.

Lists specific better breeds of Indian buffalo (Murrah, etc.) and notes buffaloes contribute a large share of milk, distinguishing higher‑yielding breeds from other indigenous stock.

A student could contrast the distribution of named high‑yield indigenous breeds (likely held by better‑off farmers) with general buffalo ownership to judge whether low‑producing animals are more common on small holdings.