Livestock grew 3.75% versus 0.65% for important crops.

What it does not prove: One fiscal year's growth gap is not evidence that farmers are deliberately diversifying; it is equally consistent with a poor crop year, since cotton actually fell about 0.5% in the same period. Growth rates also say nothing about who owns the animals — a 3.75% rise in livestock value added can accrue to larger herd owners rather than to the landless or near-landless rural poor.

Memory hook: 3.75% vs 0.65% → herds carried the sector while crops stalled

Rebuts the claim: "A bad crop year means a bad year for the whole rural economy" — livestock grew nearly six times faster than important crops in FY2025-26.