Agriculture in the Indian Himalayan Region: Current status ... · Agriculture in the Indian...

NMSHE Task Force on Himalayan Agriculture

1

Agriculture in the Indian Himalayan Region: Current status, challenges and way forward

NMSHE-Task Force on Himalayan Agriculture

Indian Council of Agricultural Research Ministry of Agriculture& Farmer’s Welfare, Govt. of India

National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Ecosystem

Department of Science and Technology Ministry of Science and Technology, Govt. of India


2

Contents

1. Background 2. Methodology

2.1. Indicators 2.2. Datasets and Analysis

3. Status and Trends 3.1 Agriculture Scenario 3.2 Agrobiodiversity 3.3 Land degradation and soil health 3.4 Status of Shifting Agriculture 3.5 Agroforestry and C-sequestration 3.6 Livestock husbandry and fish production 3.7 Impacts of climate change on agriculture

4.0 Policy Implications 5.0 Future Directions References


3

1. BACKGROUND Indian Himalayan Region (IHR), an ecologically fragile landscape spread over 53.7 million ha, is inhabited by over 51 million people who practice hill agriculture for sustenance on 13.6 % of the total IHR area. Major components of Himalayan agriculture includes crops, livestock, horticulture, fisheries and agroforestry and it shows great diversity within different geographic regions of this mountain system. Himalayan agriculture is also susceptible to various natural and anthropogenic factors, and it faces constraints such as small and fragmented holdings, undulating terrains, limited scope for irrigation and farm mechanization, poor soil quality, limited resource availability, inadequate processing, storage, and marketing facilities for produce, besides man-animal conflicts causing crop damage. Transmigration and environmental degradation due to soil erosion are other cardinal issues that confront the Himalayan region and its agriculture to the extent that the land holding in the hill area is smaller (700-900 m2) than the national average (1370 m2). The present document provides the current status and issues of Himalayan agricultural systems including agroforestry and livestock farming. 2. METHODOLOGY

In order to assess the health status of the Himalayan ecosystem, the Task Force

has adopted the following methodology to achieve the objective of enabling the farmers to be climate smart and the farming systems to be climate resilient in the Indian Himalayan Region viz., (i) Secondary sources of information are collated to identify the data gaps, primary data collection is adopted in the project sites; (ii) Using available historical information, the datasets were simulated using available climate models to have certain projections on the variability impact of climate on agricultural and/or allied parameters so as to undertake appropriate interventions in the pilot and TIS sites (Table 1); (iii) Simultaneously, information on agrobiodiversity, animal/fish breeds, crop diversification, choice of crops, production, productivity, socio-economic aspects etc. were collected through periodical questionnaire survey (iv) Screening and identification of local landraces of food crops and animal breeds and existing practices suitable for further improvement, (v) Identification of interventions in different sectors of agriculture such as crops, horticulture, animal husbandry, fisheries and natural resource management to enable climate resilience in the project sites (Table 2). While doing so, conscious effort is also taken to build the capacities of the farmers through skilling and technology demonstration processes as well. In order to assess the soil health in the Himalayan agro-ecosystems, standard analytical procedures as given in Allen et al., (1974) were followed. Benefit cost ratios are being estimated to arrive at the efficacy of different interventions in the project sites so as to record success stories that could be upscaled further.


4

Table 1. List of Pilot sites and TIS under NMSHE TF-6 Zones Pilot Sites Target Intervention Sites (TIS)

Cold Arid Himalaya

• Stakmo village, Leh, J & K • Bodh-Kharboo, Kargil, • Stakna, Leh, J & K

• Chushot village (Fishery) • Khurdong, Leh (Yak)

Lower and Middle Himalaya

• Jur Kafun village, • Kumhali village, Himachal

Pradesh

• Kotha-Tarli, Uttarakhand (NRM) • Hartola village, Uttarakhand (Livestock) • Doonagiri area (Dudholi and Todra village),

Uttarakhand (Fishery) • Sunkhiya village, Uttarakhand (Horticulture)

North East Himalaya

• Lipu-Namchi Village, Arunachal Pradesh

• Nyukmadung and Lubrang, Arunachal Pradesh

• Chandanpokpi village, Manipur • Mawthei village, Meghalaya • Bikhawthlir Village, Mizoram • Hukphang village, Nagaland • Phek district, Nagaland • Timpyem, East Sikkim • Lachen and Thangu, North

Sikkim • Gobinda Thakur Para, Tripura

• Mandala, Arunachal Pradesh (Yak) • Mawthei village, Meghalaya (Agroforestry) • Lamphelpal, Manipur (Rice) • ICAR farm, Manipur (Rice-Tomato) • Tamenglong , Manipur (Orange) • Tamenglong , Manipur (banana) • Bishnupur, Manipur (Vegetable) • Chandel, Manipur (Pine) • Chandel, Manipur (Jhum) • Senapati, Manipur (kiwi fruit) • Senapati, Manipur(tree bean) • Senapati, Manipur (oak)

Note: Pilot sites are those sites where interventions are introduced for the first time ever, while the TIS are those where specific interventions such as livestock, fishery, horticulture, natural resource management (NRM) etc. are attempted. The Task Force on Himalayan Agriculture is working on 15 pilot sites and 18 TIS.

Table 2. Technological Interventions in the IHR Natural Resource Conservation

Crop Horticulture Agroforestry

Livestock & Animal Husbandry

Fishery

• Terrace renovation and land shaping

• Staggered Contour trenches (SCT) for soil conservation

• Integrated Nutrient Management & Organic Farming

• Zero Tillage and In situ moisture conservation techniques

• Water conservation and harvesting system

• Drainage line treatment • Contour Survey for

establishment of Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT)

• Micro rain water harvesting structures and polytanks

• Carbon stock under different landuse systems

• Integrated Farming System (IFS) model and intercropping in NEH

• Types and use of Frost in Leh and Nubra valley

• Climate resilient varieties for enhancement of agricultural productivity

• Introduction of system of rice intensification

• Promoting intercropping for various crops

• Demonstration of Azolla cultivation

• Planned honey bee pollination enhancing fruit/crop production

• Weed management techniques

• Integrated Pest Management

• Raised and sunken bed technology for crop intensification

• Zero till cultivation of pulses and oilseeds

• Quality planting materials

• Protected cultivation in poly houses

• Replacement of temperate crops with low chilling requirement

• Genetic improvement through bio-technological tools

• Technology demonstrated for controlling of powdery mildew and wooly apple aphis disease

• Location-specific models of agroforestry system

• Promoting suitable multi purpose trees for tree husbandry

• Alder based rice farming

• Introduction of cross bred and improved strain

• Area-specific de-worming and vaccination

• Artificial insemination

• Value addition of yak hair fibre and yak milk

• Deep litter pig housingand feeding mgt.

• Fodder preferred by mithun

• Mapping of Gastrointestinalparasite affected Goat in LMH

• Feeding management in camels

• Backyard poultry

• Introduce fish hatcheries

• Rearing different types of fishes suiting to climate specific changes

• Cold water fishery -community approach

• Introduction of composite climate resilient fish farming

• Aquaculture suitability and fish migration maps

• GIS data base of Fish diversity in Lower & Middle Himalaya


5

2.1 Indicators To elucidate the Health of Himalayan agro-ecosystem, quantifiable indicators have been identified for periodical monitoring and are listed in the Table 3. Agricultural systems being smaller in unit size, unlike perennial ecosystems cannot be measured on a definite scale. However, all the system-based indicators can be monitored during every cropping season to understand the seasonality and also annual variations that would clearly elucidate the impact of the Task Force Interventions in respective sites over the years and signify the way forward for possible replications of such interventions elsewhere to enable climate resilience in agriculture vis-a-vis agro-ecosystem health. For instance, extent of crop diversification is an important indicator as it is a viable climate smart agriculture practice that significantly enhances crop productivity vis-a-vis resilience in rural smallholder farming systems.

Table 3. Quantifiable Indicators to elucidate the Health of Himalayan Agro-Ecosystem

Criteria Indicators Unit Scale

Biological • Extent of Crop diversification • Change (%) in cropping system • Change (%) in choice of crops • Net sown area • Area under shifting cultivation • Productivity • Food Production • Livestock population • Disease incidence in livestock,

poultry and piggery • Presence (or absence) of various

fish species across thermal regime

• Village • Village • Village • Village • Village • Agricultural System/Village • Agricultural System/Village • Agricultural System/Village • Village • Agricultural System/Village • Basin Level

Physicochemical • Soil moisture • Evapotranspiration • Soil erosion index • Runoff loss • Soil carbon sequestration • Soil nitrogen

• Watershed • Watershed • Watershed • Watershed • Agricultural System • Agricultural System

Socio-economic • Number of farmers who have adopted organic farming practices

• % Increase in Farmer’s Income • Improvement in Infrastructure for

irrigation and electricity • Improvement in Farmer’s Health • Enhancement in Literacy • Enhancement in On farm and Off-

farm Employment • Increment in Market

Opportunities • Any avenues for Agri-tourism

• Village/State

• Village/State • Village/State • Village/State

• Village/State • Village/State

• Village/State

• Village/State


6

Further, the physico-chemical indicators will help assess the health of IHR’s soil. Overall, the health of agricultural systems is reflected not only in environmental factors but also in economic soundness and social considerations. These aspects are included as number of farmers who have adopted organic farming practices, % Increase in farmer’s income, improvement in irrigation infrastructure, improvement in farmer’s health practices, enhancement in literacy, enhancement in on-farm and off-farm employment opportunities including market. The change in terms of percentage or actual over assessment period could showcase the impact of climate change or our effort towards achieving climate resilience.

2.2. Datasets and Analysis Datasets on environmental aspects are collected from meteorological departments and other sources in respective survey areas. Digital globe Quick Bird, India WRIS (ISRO) and ASTER satellites data are used to digitize the spatial extent of their water resources of entire Indian Himalayan States. In addition, authentic documents such as Agriculture Statistics at a Glance (2016), Basic Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Statistics (2015), Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Census of India (2011), etc. do provide useful data. While primary data on agricultural crops and system are being collected from the pilot sites, supplementary evidences from secondary sources of information (published/unpublished) are also taken into account to develop comprehensive datasets that are monitorable. For instance, the Task Force on Himalayan Agriculture has prepared digital maps related to climate suitability of various crops, genetic resources, aquaculture suitability maps, watershed maps, socio-economic, temperature, rainfall, moisture index, mean potential evapotranspiration (PET) maps, etc. along with long-term yield trends of major crops in the IHR. Climate data sets are further analysed using different models and software like MIAMI model, Cropwat 8.0, Arc GIS 10.2, MOHC-HadGEM2-ES, CSIRO-MK3 6.0, NCAR-CSM4, CESM1-CAN5, ASTER, Quick Bird, etc. to arrive at some trends and log-term projections.

3.0 STATUS AND TRENDS 3.1 Agricultural Scenario Although, the IHR contributes to only 8.7% of country’s total agricultural land, majority of the population of the IHR states is dependent on agriculture for its livelihood. Different region of the IHR practices different types of farming systems like mixed cropping, mono-cropping, Jhum cultivation, fisheries, dairy, horticulture, pastureland, etc. Out of India’s total agricultural households (902011), 15.68% (141440) belongs to the Himalayan states (Table 4) whose major crops are potato, onion, rice, wheat, coarse cereals, bajra, maize, etc. Nevertheless, the average yield of IHR states (1680.58 kg/ha) is less than the national average (2984 kg/ha), which denotes the low productivity in the Himalayan states. These states also contribute 18.56% of the total horticulture production of India. As far as milk, egg, wool, meat and fishery is concerned, the IHR states produces 6.49%, 9.14%, 24.11%, 15.17% and 20.38% of the total country’s milk, egg, wool, meat and fish production, respectively.


7

Table 4.Demography and Agriculture Scenario in the Himalayan states of India Sl. No.

State Population in IHR (2011)

Rural Population (2011)

Agriculture land (2013-14) (‘000 ha.)

Estimated No. of Agriculture Households (‘00)

Food Grain Yield (kg/ha)

Horticulture Area (‘000Ha)

1 J&K 1,25,41,302 91,08,060 1070 11283 1275 417.52

2 Himachal Pradesh

68,64,602 61,76,050 812 8811 1896 322.28

3 Uttarakhand 1,00,86,292 70,36,954 1550 10608 1811 315.61

4 Sikkim 6,10,577 4,56,999 97 674 1579 77.64

5 Meghalaya 29,66,889 23,71,439 1056 3544 2532 129.34

6 Arunachal Pradesh

13,83,727

10,66,358 424 1080 1889 125.32

7 Mizoram 10,97,206 5,25,435 402 758 1607 149.91

8 Tripura 36,73,917 27,12,464 273 2445 2783 148.20

9 Manipur 25,70,390 17,36,236 384 1762 1509 98.34

10 Nagaland 19,78,502 14,07,536 693 2621 2065 97.06

11 Assam 31205576 26807034, 3357 34230 2021 679.86

12 West Bengal 91276115 62183113 5662 62624 2698 1836.93

Total IHR 166255095 121587678 15780 141440 680.58 (Av)

4398.01

Total India 1210569573 833463448 181850 902011 2984 (Av) 23787.34

Source: Agriculture Statistics at a Glance (2016), Census of India (2011)

3.2 Agrobiodiversity The richness in agro-biodiversity of this mountainous region warrants a great concern for its sustainable management and utilization of Plant Genetic Resources (PGR) of agri-horticultural crops, besides huge floristic wealth for the well-being of mankind. The NEHR with its diverse physiography has generated a profusion of habitats that harbour diverse biota with high-level endemism. For instance, the region accounts for about 43% of the flora in India and is a hot spot of bio-diversity having many endemic species, which includes more than 50 bamboo species, more than 6000 rice germplasm, 14 banana, 17 citrus, 600 orchids and many medicinal and aromatic plants (Ngchan et al., 2015). The aquatic bodies of the region harbours a rich diversity of ichthyo-fauna, viz., 274 fish species belonging to 114 genera under 37 families and 10 orders constitute about 34% of the total fresh water fish species of the country (Babu et al., 2017).

Out of total fish fauna available in India, 17% fishes were documented from the mountain ecosystem establishing the status of the area as a centre of origin and evolution of biotic forms (Ghosh, 1997). About 36 species of freshwater fishes (out of 1,300) are endemic to the Himalayan region (Ghosh, 1997). For the whole Himalayas, 218 species are listed (Menon, 1962). Although the Himalayan states contribute a meagre contribution (about 1.34%, 2013-14) of the total inland production and 0.86% (2013-14) of the total fish production of India, it plays an important role in employment generation and fulfilment of cheap animal protein demand. This is also a fact to consider that although national fish production is increasing, the production from the hill states is showing a declining trend over last decade (2000-01: 1.18%; 2011-12: 0.83%) indicating changes in the mountain ecosystem i.e. unavailability of water, change in river course, and lack of other infrastructure facilities.


8

Table 5. Agro-biodiversity hotspots of India S. No.

Agro-biodiversity Region

Districts Tribal Population

1. Cold Desert Western Himalayas covering Ladakh and Kargil. Upper reaches of Lahual-Spiti

The population of tribals in Ladakh and Kargil region is 0.09 million and 0.12 million representing 71.8% and 86.9% of its population respectively. The tribal population in Lahual-Spiti region represents 81.4% of its total population.

2. Western Himalaya

Srinagar, Anantnag, Udhamput, Riasi, Kathu in J&K, all the districts of H. P except the cold arid region and all the districts of Uttarkhand.

The tribal population in Himachal Pradesh is 0.36 million.

3. Eastern Himalaya

The hotspot area includes all the districts of Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Darjeeling district of West Bengal.

The tribal population of Arunachal Pradesh is 0.7 million, representing about 64% of its population. The tribes of Arunachal Pradesh are: Abor, Aka, Aptani, Dafla, Galong, Khampti, Khowa, Mishmi, Momba, Any Naga tribes, Sherdukpen, Singpho. The tribes of Sikkim are: Bhutia, Lepcha. The tribal population of Sikkim is 0.11 million, representing 20.6% of its population.

4. Brahma- putra Valley

The hotspot area includes the following districts: Dhubri, Kokrajhar, Bongaigaon, Bareta, Nalbari, Goalpara, Kamrup, Golaghat, Darrang, Morigaon, Nagaon, Sonitpur, Jorhat, Lakhimpur, Sibsagar, Dibrugarh, Dhemaji and Tinsukia.

The notified tribal areas are North Cachar district and Karbi Anglong district. The tribal population is 3.3 million representing 12.4% of its population. The main tribes are Barmans, Boro, Chakma, Deon, Kachan, Garo, Hojai, Hajong, Hmar, Kachari, Khasi, Jaintia, Lalung, Any Kuki, Lakher, Mari, Mech, Any Mizo, Mikir, Miri, Any Naga tribes, Pawi, Rabha, and Syntheng.

5. Khasia-Jaintia-Garo Hills

Includes all the seven districts, i.e. East Garo Hills, West Garo Hills, South Garo Hills, East Khasi Hills, West Khasi Hills, Jaintia Hills and Ri-Bhoi.

In this region, all the districts of Meghalaya are notified tribal areas. The population of tribals is 1.9 million representing 85.5% of its population. The main tribes are Chakma, Kachari, Garo, Hajong, Hmar, Khasi Jaintia, Any Kuki, Lakher, Mari (Tai-speakig), Any Mizo, Mikir, Any Naga, Pawi and Synteng.

6. North-Eastern Hills

The hotspot area includes all the districts of Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura and the adjoining Cachar and North Cachar districts of Assam.

The tribal population of Manipur is 0.74 million representing 34% of its population. The main tribes of Manipur are Aimol, Anal, Angami, Chiru, Chothe, Gangte, Himar, Kabui, Kacha Naga, Koirao, Koireng, Korn, Lampgang, Mao, Maram, Maring, Any Mizo (Lushai tribes), Monsang, Moyon, Paite, Purulum, Ralte, Sema, Simte, Suhte, Tangkhul, Thadou, Vaiphul and Zou. The population of tribes in Mizoram is 0.83 million representing 94.7% of its population. The notified Tribal Areas are Chakma district, Mara district, Lai district. The population of tribes in Nagaland is 1.7 million representing 87.7% of its population. The main tribes are Naga, Kuki, Kachari, Mhikir and Garo. The population of tribes in Tripura is 0.99 million which represents 31% of its population. The main tribes are Bhil, Bhia, Chaimal, Chakma, Garoo, Halam, Jamatia, Khasia, Kuki, Lepcha, Lushai, Marg, Munda, Noaita, Orang, Riang, Santal, Tripuri and Uchai.

Source: PPVFRA India (2015)


9

Furthermore, natural populations of fishes have declined due to various anthropogenic activities such as loss of habitat due to river impoundments, excessive fishing pressure and pollution. A brief description of agro-biodiversity regions have been stated in Table 5, which indicates the prosperity of IHR in terms of biodiversity and their association with indigenous communities. Tables 6 and 7 give a brief overview of the production of different commodities (food grain, horticultural crop, milk, egg, meat, fish, livestock and poultry) in IHR showing the richness and self-dependence of the region for the sustenance of livelihood. Seasonal wild edible fruits and vegetables are additional food supplements for the local people in the Himalayan region.

The present day challenge has been the biotic and abiotic stresses that cause

decline in the production and productivity of horticultural crops. For example, in Kullu valley (HP), it has been reported that the rainfall has decreased by about 7 cm, snowfall by about 12 cm, and the mean minimum and maximum temperatures have increased by 0.25 to 1oC in 1990s as compared to 1880s (Vishvakarma et al., 2003). Various studies have reported that apple production in Kullu valley has significantly declined during the 1981-2000 period (Vishvakarma et al., 2003; Vedwan and Rhoades, 2001). These workers observed that apple cultivation has shifted to higher altitudes and apple yield mainly in lower altitudes has declined due to inadequate chilling as the temperature at lower altitudes is rising due to climate change. Because of the change in snowfall, the chilling hours for apple trees are reduced, affecting the time of bud-break. Although the data presented in Table 7 indicate that within NWHR, food productivity is highest in Uttarakhand, followed by HP and J&K, overall food productivity is less (1828 kg/ha) than the national average (2056 kg/ha) and the region is chronically deficient in food availability. This could be due to the fact that in hill regions the farming is mostly organic and the cultivation of traditional crops in contrast to the use of high yielding crop varieties and profound use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides in the Indian plains. In case of animal products, this region contributes just 3.2, 1.12, 1.24 and 0.33 % of total milk, meat, eggs and fish production in the country, but it accounts for 28.5 % of the total wool production in the country and accounts for 2.8 and 1.92 % livestock and poultry population. The Task Force on Himalayan Agriculture documented potential landraces of food

crops that had traits of climate resilience. For instance, 52 landraces of protein-rich French bean, 70 landraces of bird’s eye chilli that has abundant antioxidants and 67 jhum-based maize landraces that are tolerant to water stress have been collected from the study sites and have been deposited to the National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources. Along with this, other traditional practices of the farmers to cope up with the current climate scenario are also documented, mainly from north-eastern Himalayan region.


10

Table 6. Productivity of different commodities in NEH region (2014-15)/(2015-16)

Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2016. Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Directorate of Economics and Statistics; 19th livestock census-2012, All India Report, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi; AP- Arunachal Pradesh

Table 7. Production/productivity of different commodities in the NWHR (2014-15) Commodities North Western Himalayan Region India

J&K HP UK Total NWHR

Total Food Grain Productivity (kg/ha) 1694 1880 1910 1828 (average)

2056

Production of various Horticultural crop (‘000 MT)

2942.06 2396.12 1907.12 7245.3 27772.98

Milk production (‘000 tonnes) 1951 1172 1565 4688 146314

Egg production (Lakhs Nos.) 4958 1084 3697 9739 784839

Meat production (‘000 tonnes) 45 4 26 75 6691

Wool production (‘000 kg) 8371 1663 3697 13731 48140

Fish production (‘000 tonnes) 20.3 10.73 3.93 34.96 10431.36

Total livestock (‘000): number 9201 484.4 4794.7 14480.1 512057.3

Total poultry (‘000): number 8273.7 1104.5 4642 14020.2 729209.34

Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2016. Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Directorate of Economics and Statistics; 19th livestock census-2012, All India Report, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. Note: Total livestock covers cattle, buffalo, sheep, goat, pig, horses & ponies, mules, donkeys, camels, mithun and yak and total poultry include total bird in the poultry farms and hatcheries.

Commodities North East Himalayan Region

AP Assam Manipur Meghalaya Mizoram Nagaland Sikkim Tripura Total

Total Food grain Productivity (kg/ha)

1889 2021 1509 2532 1607 2065 1579 2783 15985

Production of various Horticultural crop (‘000 MT) 2015-16

618 6724.07 788.27 1047.61 673.38 970.99 230.66 1766.38 12819.36

Milk production (‘000 tonnes) 2015-16

50 843 79 84 22 77 50 152 1357

Egg production (Lakhs Nos.) 2015-16

427 4740 1129 1037 377 391 102 2161 10364

Meat production (‘000 tonnes) 2015-16

19 45 26 41 14 36 6 37 224

Fish production (tonnes) 2015-16

4410 291692 31266 6140 6536 7835 443 63560 411882

Total livestock (‘000): number

1413 19082 696 1958 312 911 802 1986 27160

Total poultry (‘000): number

161334

27216 2500 3400 1271 2178 452 4273 202624


11

3.3 Land degradation and soil health A major limiting factor in crop production in IHR is soil degradation that hampers the overall yield of various agricultural commodities. Table 8 shows the extent of degraded soil in north-west Himalayan region of India. Soil is divided into different classes/categories on the basis of their degradation state for prioritization. The total amount of degraded soil in Jammu & Kashmir is 35, 024 t ha-1yr-1 which is 15.76% of state’s total geographical area. Similarly, 32.39% area of Himachal Pradesh and 55.63% area of Uttarakhand belong to degraded category. Overall, 25.2% area in north-west Himalayas belong to degraded soils.

Soils predominantly belong to Entisol, Inceptisol and Alfisol orders, and to a limited extent fall under Ultisols and Mollisol (Sharma, 2004; Table 9). Maximum area of J&K is under Inceptisol while Entsisol soils are prevalent in Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh. Overall, 346.8 ‘000 ha, 13,163.2 ‘000 ha 4195.3 and 458.8 ‘000 ha area of NWHR belongs to Alfisol, Entisol, Inceptisol and Miscellaneous category respectively.

Table 8. Extent of degraded soils in north-western Himalayan region of India (area, km2)

State Total Geographical Area (km2)

Moderate (10-15) (t ha-1 yr-1)

Moderate severe (15-20) (t ha-1 yr-1)

Severe (20-40) (t ha-1 yr-1)

Very severe (40-80) (t ha-1 yr-1)

Very severe (>80) (t ha-1 yr-1)

Total (>10) (t ha-1 yr-

1)

Jammu & Kashmir

222,236 1,400 (1) 1,178 (1) 3,689 (2) 6,067 (3) 22,690 (10) 35,024 (16)

Himachal Pradesh

55,673 3,023 (5) 2,088 (4) 4,120 (7) 3,196 (6) 5,612 (10) 18,038 (32)

Uttarakhand 55,845 4,114 (8) 3,757 (6) 4,931 (9) 18,267 (33) 31,069 (58)

Source: ICAR (2010)

Table 9. Soils of the north-western Himalayan region (area‘000 ha)

States Soil order

Alfisol Entisol Inceptisol Miscellaneous

Jammu & Kashmir 100.0 (0.5) 7552.6 (34.1) 1472.2 (6.4) 47.7 (0.2)

Himachal Pradesh 238.0 (0.4) 2584.3 (51.3) 1099.9 (19.8) 400.0 (0.8)

Uttarakhand 8.8 (0.2) 3026.3 (56.5) 1623.2 (30.3) 11.1 (0.2)

The figures in the parentheses are percentages of total geographical area (TGA)

By and large, the soils of the north-west Himalayan region (NWHR) are

moderately acidic in nature. Soil fertility status of arable land implies that the soils are deficient in available nitrogen. Soil organic carbon content in most of the soils are in the range of medium to high and particularly, in Tarai region, it is very high (>1%). However, available phosphorous content varies from medium to high. Available potash content shows a wide variation spatially from low to high, depending on the intensity of cultivation. Around 10.28% country’s total geographical area is under north-western Himalayan Region. Land utilisation pattern in the north-west Himalayan region is presented in Table 10, revealing the forest as the major land use that covers 49.24 % of the total reporting area of the region. Out of total land not available for cultivation in NWHR (2150 ’000 ha), 26.65%, 52.41%, 20.93% contribution is from J&K, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand respectively.


12

Uttarakhand has maximum fallow land covering 40.97% of total fallow land of NWHR. 1.4% of country’s total net sown area is from NWHR in which the Himachal Pradesh contributes 37.19% (maximum) of total net sown area in NWHR followed by Uttarakhand (35.19%). Apart from this, NWHR contributes 1.59% of country’s total cropped area, out of which 36.12% is from J&K, 29.49% is from Himachal Pradesh and 34.37% is from Uttarakhand. Agricultural land occupies 23.53 % of total reporting area of the region, with only 13.66% of the net sown area. Area under various horticultural crops is relatively small (7.7% of the total reporting area of the region and 4.7% of country’s area).

Table 10. Land use pattern of north-western Himalayan region (‘000 ha) (2013-14)

Land use North Western Himalayan Region India

J&K HP UK Total NWHR

Geographical area 22224 5567 5348 33139 328726

Reporting area for land utilization 4012 4576 5992 14580 307796

Forest 2254 1126 3800 7180 71828

Land not available for cultivation 573 1127 450 2150 43860

Other uncultivable land excluding fallow land 313 1696 898 2907 25832

Fallow land 260 152 286 698 49696

Net sown area 741 550 701 1992 141428

Total cropped area 1155 943 1099 3197 200859

Agri. Land/cultivable land/arable land 1070 812 1550 3432 181850

Area under various horticultural crops (2015-16) 322.28 494.2 315.61 1132.09 23787.34

Cropping intensity 155.9 171.4 156.8 484.1 142.0 Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2016. Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Directorate of Economics and Statistics

Land degradation is a major threat in the Himalayan region. Based on first approximation of soil erosion rates in India (Sharma, 2004), the north-western hills comprising Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand suffer severe soil erosion. Severe soil erosion in Shiwalik and High Himalayas is manifested as large scale deformation of landscape (terrain) brought about by gully erosion and landslides/slips. On an average, the rate of soil loss in this region is more than 20 t ha-1yr-1. The rates were higher for Shiwalik Hills (>80 t ha-1yr-1). Torrent (choes) erosion is also a big hazard in the Shiwalik. Flash floods in choes cause large-scale sediment deposition in piedmonts and flood plain, which inundate crops, erode banks and deposit barren sand and gravels on fertile lands (Sharma, 2004). Today, considerable proportion of the geographical area (more than 50% in Uttarakhand) of the north-western Himalayan region has been under different forms of degradation (Table 8). Overall, the soil erosion situation in Indian Himalayas is really alarming. For example, in the north-western Himalayas, on an average, 17% of the area falls in very severe category with erosion rates > 40 t ha-1 yr-1, while about 25% area has erosion rate of more than 10 t ha-1 yr-1. The states of Uttarakhand in the western Himalayas have 33% area under very severe category that calls for serious efforts to employ appropriate conservation measures to check land degradation problems.


13

3.4 Status of Shifting Agriculture Slash-and-burn agriculture (shifting cultivation) locally known as Jhum is the predominant land use system of the north-east Himalayan (NEH) region. It is an age-old agricultural practice adapted to the socio-cultural framework of the local communities (ICIMOD, 2010). Jhum does not operate in isolation; rather it exists along with various other traditional land-use practices, namely valley rice cultivation, home gardens and traditional plantation systems. Shifting cultivation is mostly practiced in steep slopes. Land is cleared by cutting existing forests and bushes, allowing the felled biomass to dry and finally burning the biomass in the month of March/April. Traditionally the jhum cycle was longer than 15 years and enabled regeneration of forests before the same land was cultivated again. However, in recent decades, due to increased population pressure and socio-cultural changes in the traditional lifestyle of indigenous communities, the jhum cycle has been reduced to 5-6 years and in extreme cases up to 1 or 2 years (Tomar et al., 2012). With this shortening of jhum cycle, the jhum sites fail to recuperate its soil fertility through the biological processes associated with re-vegetation of the area and hence have become severely degraded (Saha et al., 2012). The land preparation and sowing activities are done along the slopes, which promotes soil and nutrient loss. Burning of aboveground biomass increases pH and cations and decrease carbon and N content in surface soils. The soil organic carbon (SOC) content decreases after burning, because of oxidative loss of CO2. Annual loss of top soil, Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium to the extent of 88346, 10669, 0.372 and 6051 Gg had been reported from the region (Sharma and Singh, 2013). At least 10 t biomass/ha is burnt in such cultivation leading to huge CO2 emission levels. Reduction of jhum cycle is causing further land degradation as there is less time left for regaining soil fertility (Tomar et al., 2012). Pangging and Arunachalam (2008) have also stated that there is an urgent need to formulate criteria and indicators (C&I) for practicing jhum, particularly in north-east India, with the help of a third party who shall monitor and assess the management practice of jhum through these standard C&I, thus helping in reducing the adverse impact of jhum. According to some estimates, a total of 1.02 million ha area is still under shifting cultivation in the region (Table 11).

Table 11. Extent of the wastelands in North-East India (km2)

Figure in parentheses represents % of TGA Source: Wastelands Atlas of India, NRSC, Hyderabad, GOI, 2011

States Jhum Scrub land Degraded forest Total

Arunachal Pradesh 2039.56 (2.43%) 2188.21 (2.61%) 1201.68 (1.43%) 5429.45 (6.43%)

Assam 395.21 (0.5%) 4119.79 (5.25%) 2992.54 (3.81%) 7507.54 (9.57 %)

Manipur 471.63 (2.11%) 4679.02 (20.95%) 497.89 (2.29%) 5648.54 (25.2%)

Meghalaya 3268.56 (14.5%) 540.63 (2.41%) 69.28 (0.3%) 3878.47 (17.2%)

Mizoram 1662.08 (7.88%) 2738.07 (12.98%) 558.49 (2.64%) 4958.64 (23.5%)

Nagaland 2357.42(14.21%) 2893.69 (17.45%) 13.51(0.08) 5264.62 (31.7%)

Sikkim ---- 20.23 (0.28%) 61.18 (0.86%) 81.41 (1.14%)

Tripura 102.19 (0.97%) 443.82 (4.23%) 401.17 (3.82%) 947.18 (9.03%)


14

Arunachalam et al. (2002) advocated that the initial slashing and burning becomes a huge one-time source of soil nutrients, while in agroforestry systems the litter and fine roots of the tree component continually add plant nutrients into the soil. The latter could be further improved by selecting biological nitrogen fixing tree species to promote natural nutrient cycling. Apart from bench terraces that are recommended by the state governments to enable shifting cultivators towards settled form of cultivation, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) is also promoting several integrated farming system (IFS) models to replace jhum with a sustainable, resilient and income generating agricultural practice (Singh et al., 2011 ). Some of the best traditional and innovative practices have been documented from the monitoring sites, for instance, in Nagaland, include (a) Placing a fire wood/banana pseudo-stem along the field slope in a regular interval locally known as Munkh and (b) Planting cassava/tapioca on the field border side by side. Interesting storage practice for paddy/grains made of bamboo (locally known as Bhu) is used for less insect-pest infestation. 3.5 Agroforestry and C-sequestration

Although agroforestry is an age-old traditional land use system in the IHR, no reliable database on the extent of agroforestry practices, its components, carbon sequestration potential and economic co-benefits are available. Forest and trees outside the forest play important role in carbon sequestration. Tree-based land use systems sequester carbon in the form of standing biomass and soil organic carbon (SOC). However, there are considerable variations in carbon sequestration potential of tree based land use systems (Table 12).

In the Himalayan region, several studies have been undertaken to estimate the carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry and other tree-based land use systems. In Sikkim, high amount of soil organic carbon in Alnus based agroforestry systems (2.13 %) and Albizia based agroforestry systems (1.13 %). Similarly, in Meghalaya, multipurpose tree Pinus kesiya, Alnus nepalensis, Parki aroxburghii, Michelia oblonga and Gmelina arborea with greater surface cover, litter fall and extensive root systems increased soil organic matter by 96.2 %, (Saha et al., 2010; Shaha and Jha, 2012).

A comparative study on the effect of various multi-purpose trees (MPTs) on SOC of northeast region showed a concomitant rise in SOC in soil under MPTs and subsequent decline in soil of open space over 4-16 years. Maximum rise in SOC was noticed in the soils of Azadiracta indica (28.6 Mg hm-2), followed by Acacia auriculiformis (21.9 Mg hm-

2), Gmelina arborea (21.8 Mg hm-2), Michelia oblonga (16.7 Mg hm-2). An increase in SOC was observed from 3.8 Mg hm-2 in soils of open space to 19.5 Mg hm-2 in that under MPTs over a period of 16 years. The comparatively high organic carbon present in soils under these MPTs indicated an enhanced storage of organic carbon pool in agroforestry systems (Datta and Singh, 2007).

Effect of multipurpose trees on CO2 efflux under hill ecosystem of Northeast India

has also been studied. Cumulative efflux CO2 under multipurpose trees was significantly higher (15%) and ranged from 1.71 g 100 g-1 (Michelia oblonga) to 2.01 g 100 g-1 (Alnus


15

nepalensis) compared to control in 150 days of incubation. In all the treatments, increment in temperature increased the oxidation of soil organic matter, thereby increased the cumulative CO2 efflux from soils. Net carbon sequestered in soil was highest under A. nepalensis (25.7 g kg-1), followed by M. oblonga (19.3 g kg-1), whereas control showed the lowest values (Thangavel et al., 2013). It is well known fact that amount of net carbon stored in the soil had significant and positive correlation with microbial biomass carbon. There is high potential of enhancing the carbon sequestration in the vegetation and soil of the Himalayan region through tree based land use systems. However, increasing forest areas is difficult due to development needs. Practicing perennial agroforestry systems seems to be viable option for increasing carbon sequestration in fragile Himalayan agro-ecosystems. Our Task Force is also promoting the plantation of selected MPTs in the project sites (e.g. Sohiong (Padusn apaulensis), Sohshang (Eleagnus latifolia), Papaya (Carica papaya), Parkia sp. and Michaelia sp.

Table 12. Growing and carbon stock estimate under agroforestry systems in Indian Himalayan states

State Tree green cover (sq km)

Growing stock (m cum)

Carbon stock (million tonnes)

Arunachal Pradesh 2,610 16.659 3.73

Assam 3,922 31.805 6.51

Himachal Pradesh 2,303 15.811 5.09

Jammu & Kashmir 2,728 24.089 6.03

Manipur 606 5.051 0.78

Meghalaya 1,876 15.662 2.42

Mizoram 464 3.831 0.59

Nagaland 1,037 8.661 1.34

Sikkim 128 0.796 0.21

Tripura 576 4.802 0.74

Uttarakhand 1,966 14.277 4.21

West Bengal 4,018 33.508 4.21

Total 22,234 174.952 35.86 Source: State of Forest Report (2015) FSI, Dehradun

3.6 Livestock husbandry and fish production IHR farmers are highly dependent on livestock production to sustain their livelihood. The major livestock of the IHR are cow, buffalo, goat, sheep, mithun, yak, pig, mule, horses, and donkeys, double humped camel of cold deserts and poultry species. Figure 1 shows the comparison study of total number of livestock and poultry population during the 18th livestock Census-2007 and 19th livestock Census-2012, which states that the population of both livestock and poultry in IHR is decreasing. However, the population of fish (Figure 2) first increased from 2013-14 to 2014-15 and then showed a decreasing trend during 2014-15 to 2015-16.


16

Figure1. Comparative study of 18th livestock census-2007 and 19th livestock census-2012 in IHR

According to Agriculture Statistics at a Glance, 2016, the IHR states contribute to 6.49%, 9.14%, 24.11%, and 15.17% of country’s total milk, egg, and wool and meat production, respectively, this indicates the crucial contribution of the states in maintaining the economy of the country. Apart from this, 20.38% of total fish production from the IHR.

Figure 2. Comparative study of Fish population in IHR

Mithun, Yak and Pig are very important livestock species of IHR, especially in the north-east Himalayan region. According to Livestock Census (2012), Mithun (Bos frontalis) has shown to have registered a growth rate of 12.98% over the years. The mithun population in the country is about 2.98 lakhs (Table 13), most of which (99%) are in north-eastern region of India with Arunachal Pradesh (83.5%), Nagaland (11.7%) and Manipur (3.4%) inhabiting the major population. Under the traditional system, mithun are reared with practically zero-input in free range system in the forest with only occasional salt offerings. Hence, mithun meat can be considered as ‘organic meat’ without any human interventions. Mithun milk is very rich in fat (10-14%), however, mithun owners are normally not using these animals for milk production.

83900.1976297.81

140462.72

110392.18

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

18th livestock census 19th livestock census

Po

pu

lati

on

Livestock

Poultry

1976763

2118039

2060829

1900000

1950000

2000000

2050000

2100000

2150000

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Fish population inIHR

Linear (Fishpopulation in IHR)


17

Table 13. Mithun Population in IHR (1997-2012) State Year

1997 2003 2007 2012

Arunachal Pradesh 1,24,000 1,92,000 2,18,931 2,49,000

Assam 0 0 0 0

Himachal Pradesh 0 0 14 918

Jammu & Kashmir 0 24,000 16 57

Manipur 17,000 20,000 10,024 10,131

Meghalaya 0 0 0 0

Mizoram 3,000 2,000 1,939 3,287

Nagaland 33,000 40,452 33,385 34,871

Sikkim 0 0 0 0

Tripura 0 0 0 0

Uttarakhand 0 0 0 0

West Bengal 0 0 0 0

Total 1,77,000 2,78,000 2,64,309 2,98,264 Source: 16th Indian Livestock Census-1997, 17th Indian Livestock Census-2003, 18th Indian Livestock Census- 2007, 19th Indian Livestock Census, 2012

Major breeds of pig reared by the pig farming community in north-east India are Hampshire, Large Black, Large White York Shire, Tamworth, Duroc, etc. and their crosses with indigenous breeds like Niang, Megha, Ghungroo, etc.

Table 14. Pig Population in IHR (1997-2012) States/Year 1997 2003 2007 2012

Arunachal Pradesh 2,49,000 3,30,000 3,55,583 3,56,345

Assam 10,82,000 15,43,000 20,00,429 16,36,022

Himachal Pradesh 7,000 3,000 2,493 5,033

Jammu & Kashmir 12,000 2,000 904 2,421

Manipur 3,88,000 4,15,000 3,13,882 2,77,215

Meghalaya 3,51,000 4,19,000 5,24,357 5,43,381

Mizoram 1,63,000 2,18,000 2,67,361 2,45,238

Nagaland 5,71,000 6,44,000 6,97,791 5,03,688

Sikkim 27,000 38,000 35,250 29,907

Tripura 2,11,000 2,09,000 2,63,694 3,62,534

Uttarakhand 32,000 3,30,000 19,882 6,48,111

West Bengal 8,05,000 13,01,000 8,14,602 46,09,895

Total 38,98,000 54,52,000 52,96,228 92,19,790 Source:16th Indian Livestock Census, 1997, 17th Indian Livestock Census-2003, 18th Indian Livestock Census- 2007, 19th Indian Livestock Census, 2012

Above Table 14 shows that the population of pig is overall increasing. Similar is the case of Yak (Poephagus grunniens) (Table 15). Out of total population of pigs in India (10.29 million), the Indian Himalayan region has 9.21 million pigs, which accounts for 89.56 % of country’s total pig population. Yak is predominantly found in 6 states of the Indian Himalayan region with a population of 76,662. The yaks are considered as life-line for the highlanders in remote terrain where the yak is the only sustainable livelihood due to non-availability of arable land for major agriculture. Beside the source of milk and wool, they are playing a great role in tourism in the IHR.


18

Table 15. Yak population in IHR

Source: 16th Indian Livestock Census-1997, 17th Indian Livestock Census-2003, 18th Indian Livestock Census- 2007, 19th Indian Livestock Census, 2012

3.7 Impact of climate change on agriculture

About 10 % of the known species in the Himalaya has been listed as `threatened’ (IPCC, 2007 a, b, c). Along with this, frequent occurrence of droughts, floods, and even flash floods in the IHR region indicates the catastrophic impacts of climate change in Himalayan region. These changes are expected to further intensify in future which are likely to reduce the agricultural productivity in the region. The already existing problems related to soil fertility and water availability are likely to amplify in a changing climate. Climate change in the Himalayan region poses new challenges to agriculture and food security, especially in the Ladakh region where its impact on cereal production may be negative as high as 18.2 to 22.1%. Massive glacial retreat rates of 178 m year-1 in Parbati Glacier in Kullu District have been reported during 1962 to 2000 (Kulkarni et al., 2004).

Studies on climate change in Ladakh and on the causes of cloudburst in Leh, using

weather data for the last five years (monthly temperature, rainfall, humidity and snowfall) indicate that increased temperature and hot summers in the plains lead to increased evaporation and subsequent cloud formation in the hills. When assessing the warming effects on glacier melting in the Himalaya, the role of black carbon (BC) cannot be overlooked (Ming et al., 2008). In the Himalayan region, solar heating of black carbon (BC) at high elevations may be just as important as carbon-dioxide in the melting of winter snow and glaciers (Ramanathan and Carmichael, 2008). Over centuries, farmers in Ladakh have evolved sustainable farming systems notwithstanding limited resources, amidst a climatically challenging environment. The impact of climate change over the last few years has adversely affected agriculture and livelihood security of the people, e.g. crops, livestock, forestry, tourism, etc. as well as human health. For sustainable agriculture and food security in Ladakh, it is necessary to intensify the production of main staple crops barley and wheat, and alfalfa for fodder. In addition, yield improvement of vegetables is important, as it is a beneficial source of income for the Ladakhi farmers. The local under-utilized and wild horticultural crops including medicinal and aromatic plants also warrants sufficient attention as they are rich sources of various phyto-chemical principles.

State 1997 2003 2007 2012

Arunachal Pradesh 14,000 9,000 14,251 14,061

Assam 0 0 0 0

Himachal Pradesh 7,000 2,000 1,705 2,921

Jammu & Kashmir 33,000 47,000 61,910 54,493

Manipur 0 0 0 0

Meghalaya 0 0 0 0

Mizoram 0 0 0 0

Nagaland 0 0 2 0

Sikkim 5,000 0 5,225 4,036

Tripura 0 0 0 0

Uttarakhand 0 0 50 62

West Bengal 0 0 26 1,089

Total 59,000 58,000 83,169 76,662


19

Various studies have reported that apple production in Kullu valley of lower middle Himalayas has significantly declined during the 1981-2000 period (Vishvakarma et al., 2003; Vedwan and Rhoades, 2001). Given the strong climate dependence of agriculture in north-eastern hill regions of India, even a slight unfavourable shift in its climate could severely affect the agriculture and hence food and livelihood security of the people in this region. In fact, the signs of climate change in north-east Himalayas are becoming increasingly evident in terms of rising temperature and changing rainfall pattern. Temperature is projected to rise by another 3-5ºC during the latter half of this century (Cline, 2007). Summer monsoon rainfall is found to be decreasing significantly during the last century at a rate of ~11 mm/decade. Water requirement for north-east Himalayan agriculture is expected to increase from 20 km3 in 2001 to 28 km3 in 2025. Contrary to this, water availability will decline in a changing climate as evident by the changing rainfall pattern, frequent droughts and recession of river-feeding Himalayan glaciers. Soil acidity, already the biggest problem in north-east Himalayan region, may further intensify under the rising atmospheric CO2 concentration. Soil organic matter, a key determinant of soil health, may also suffer quantitative as well as qualitative decline under the warming atmosphere. Thus, development and implementation of various soil and water conservation and management practices need to be prioritized for climate resilient agriculture in north east India.

Livestock productivity is bound to be affected due to climate change. Available

literature indicates the better ability of local breeds to cope with the changing climate compared to the hybrids. Therefore, unique traits of the local breeds in providing climate-resilience need to be identified and incorporated into the modern breeds. Vast diversity of local crop cultivars/germplasm can also be exploited for developing crops with better tolerance to climatic changes. The C-sequestration potentials of traditional farming systems/land use models needs to be evaluated vis-à-vis improved farming systems/land uses. Bringing awareness through demonstrations, and training to the farmers and extension personnel should be integral parts of the climate change adaptation and mitigation programmes. The existing technologies with potentials to provide some degree of climatic resilience also need to be made available to farming community.

Since climate change poses multiple biotic and abiotic challenges, a focused and

long-term research is required to find solutions to the impending problems in the region. At the same time, there is a scope to improve the resilience of agriculture by application of existing knowledge and technology on farmers’ field as a holistic package. Hence, developing improved technologies through short-term and long-term research programmes is important. At the same time, demonstrating the existing technologies on farmers’ field for enhancing the climatic resilience of north-east Himalayan agriculture is essential. Considering the potential impacts of climate change on the Himalayan ecosystem, few important areas need attention and following issues are immediately required to be addressed for changing climate scenario in mountains for tackling erratic biotic and abiotic stresses:


20

1. Watershed approach: Watershed approach reduces farmers’ risks by integrating various enterprises, harvesting rain water and using harvested water for live saving irrigation during dry season. Percolation tanks, gully control measures, terracing etc. are some of the important mechanical measures in integrated watershed approach.

2. Micro-watershed based farming system approach: Integrated or holistic farming with different topo-sequential cropping involving agri-horti-silvi-pastoral system and agro-pastoral based land use system was found to be most economical with effective soil and water conservation measures in the northeast.

3. Farming system approach: Involving complementarities of crop-animal-horticulture-fishery-agroforestry and sound soil conservation and management practices are initiated in the hills with variation in resource endowment, preferences, and socio-economic position of the specific family.

4. Jhum improvement approach: Use of high yielding stress tolerant varieties, crop diversification, and appropriate soil treatments for fertility build up and higher productivity.

5. Maintenance of soil fertility: The relationship between soil erosion, nutrient, runoff losses, organic matter depletion, and beneficial effects of conservation and management practices occur simultaneously. Maintenance of optimum fertility level with application of regular doses of manure and fertilizers adjusted to soil pH 5.5 to eliminate the aluminium toxicity is recommended. Multiple cropping, inter-cropping, relay cropping, inclusion of legumes in rotation, strip cropping etc. and adoption of integrated nutrient management to ensure better crop productivity, besides maintaining soil fertility.

6. Amelioration of acid soils: Acid soils occupy nearly 81 % of geographical area in the eastern Himalayas. Acidic soils below pH 5.5 occupy around 16.2 mha area. The productivity of such acid soil is hardly about 1 t/ha. Furrow application of lime 25-500 kg/ha of high quality uniform grades /sizes at furrows every year can optimize the yields of crops in acid soils of NEH Region. Use of acid tolerant varieties and application of organic manure also improves productivity of such soils.

7. Organic agriculture: The modern concept of organic farming combines the tradition, innovation and science. High soil organic carbon, plentiful availability of biomass, animal resources and availability of livestock excreta with about 46 million tons of potential manure (Bujarbaruah, 2004) and minimum use of fertilizers and other agrochemicals offers potential for organic farming in the region. The organic farming has emerged as an alternative system of farming which not only addresses the quality and sustainability concerns, but also ensures a profitable livelihood option. Creating more market opportunities for organic products can improve the economic returns of farmers and revive the agriculture sector

in the Hill regions. The state of Sikkim and Mizoram has been declared to be completely organic after a decade of transition (conversion) period along with many districts of Uttarakhand. It is envisaged that the organic agriculture could contribute significantly to reduce the release of greenhouse gases (GHG) and to sequester carbon in soils and biomass and to assist in building resilience and adaptation in farming systems thus, helping in reducing the adverse effect of changing climate on agriculture. Currently, the total area under organic


21

certification in India is 5.71 m ha (2015-16); (26% (1.49 m ha) cultivated area and 74% (4.22 m ha) forest and wild area.

4.0 POLICY IMPLICATIONS In order to better understand the state of mountain agriculture and to improve the status of Himalayan health, there is an urgent need of few implications that may play a crucial role in making the Himalayas climate resilient and self-sufficient. Few of the policy implications are listed below:

Ecological engineering and ecosystem restoration

Regular mapping and assessing ecosystems/resources

Conservation plan for agrobiodiversity

Documentation and validation of Traditional Knowledge System on Agricultural Systems Management.

District-level agriculture Contingency Plan

Disaster management plan for every district in IHR.

Awareness and capacity building of farmers Evidence over the past few decades has established that significant changes in climate are taking place worldwide as a result of enhanced anthropogenic activities. Despite the spectacular success of the Green Revolution and achieving self-sufficiency in the food production (Table 4), there are increasing concerns on sustaining the pace of agricultural growth. Lack of yield breakthroughs, deteriorating soil health, ground water depletion, declining size of operational holdings and labour shortage are cited as prime reasons for slow agricultural growth. Added to these factors are the climate change and climate variability which are now emerging as major concerns.

In order to achieve climate resilience, out of 183 districts of IHR, agricultural contingency plans have been prepared for 112 districts by National Initiative in Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA) to guide the farmers in the present unpredictable climatic scenario. Along with this, the Task Force on Himalayan Agriculture is also deeply devoted in making the Himalayan farmers’ climate smart in 15 pilot sites and 18 target intervention sites (TIS) ranging from 154 m asl in Nagaland to 4480 m asl in Leh. So far, the the task force successfully introduced 111 crop varieties, 22 livestock varieties and 10 fish varieties into these sites for enhancement of agricultural productivity. Simultaneously, 155 capacity building programs were also conducted in the Himalayan states which include workshops, training, awareness program, field demonstration and scientist-farmer interaction, etc. In this way, the Task Force could reach out to the farmers with modern climate resilient tools and technologies along with improved varieties of crops, poultry, fish and animal breed. So far, 7112 farmers have been benefitted by our capacity building programs and 2792 farmers by the Task Force interventions. 5.0 FUTURE DIRECTIONS Climate change impacts on agriculture are being witnessed all over the world, but countries like India are more vulnerable in view of the high population depending on


22

agriculture, excessive pressure on natural resources and poor coping capabilities. The negative effects of year-to-year climate variability are already evident. The countrywide rainfall deficiency during 2005-2006 has brought down the production of coarse cereals and oilseeds sharply and caused severe fodder shortage across the country, but the current year (2016-2017) estimates a record food production of 272 million tones backed by a good monsoon. Therefore, climate has become central to agricultural planning and decision making in the country, especially in the Indian Himalayas. Following are therefore suggested future directions to enhance the health of Himalayan agroecosystem and bring in resilience to the Himalayan Agriculture:

Continuous assessment of different crops in the region for vulnerability to climatic stresses and extreme events, in particular, intra seasonal variability of rainfall.

Conservation plans for water resources a basin/watershed development. Integrated Contingency Plans for agriculture from district to block level. In-situ conservation of indigenous genetic resources and protection of traditional

varieties involving the farming communities. Promotion of rain water harvesting structures. Promotion of integrated farming systems and crop diversification. Scientifically horticultural and vegetable production. Protected cultivation and organic and herbal farming. Value addition and Value Chain for agri-produce. Validation of traditional knowledge system of agriculture Screening and identification of adaptive traits in traditional crop varieties and in

indigenous breeds of livestock, fishery and poultry for molecular interventions to enable climate resilience.

Up-scaling of technologies and outputs both through Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) and the National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture for wider adoption by the farmers

Information sharing between departments/agencies and climate cells.

Over all, the Himalayan agriculture is both a challenge and opportunity, as it urge us to mitigate the challenges of climatic disasters while also provisioning ecosystem services including food production through farming systems that are traditionally viable and/or being improved upon for sustainable food production in the ecologically fragile Indian Himalayan region. To enable this, it is important to integrate R&D interventions with the process of developmental outreach so as enable the farmers to be climate smart that calls for a tripartite approach - global, national and regional climate actions that foresight climate resilience per se. The Task Force fully recognizes the data deficiencies across agro-ecosystems in different parts of the ecologically fragile Indian Himalayan Region and attempts to generate primary information as far as possible for inclusive inference. Further, to provision a long-term monitoring of different interventions in the project sites, the information generated are getting shared with State Climate Cells and respective State Government Departments who would be able to take the beneficial task force interventions beyond the project period through long-term monitoring of this dynamic land use system or practice i.e. agriculture.


23

References Agriculture Statistics at a Glance. 2016. Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers welfare. Government of India. 489 p. Allen, S. E., Grimshaw, H. M., Parkinson, J. A. and C. Quarmby 1974. Chemical Analysis of Ecological

Materials. Blackwell Scientific Publication, London. 565p Arunachalam, A., Khan, M.L. and K. Arunachalam. 2002. Balancing traditional jhum cultivation with modern

agroforestry in eastern Himalaya – A biodiversity hot spot. Current Science 83 (2): 117-118. Babu, S., Singh, R. and G. S. Yadav 2017. Organic Farming: Problems and Prospects in North East India.

Accessed from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317011678_Organic_Farming_Problems_and_Prospects_in_North_East_India on 20-11-2017.

Basic Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Statistics. 2015. Government Of India Ministry Of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi

Bujarbaruah, K. M. 2004. Organic Farming: Opportunities and Challenges in North Eastern Region of India. Paper presented at International Conference on Organic Food, held at ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya, during 14–17 February 2004, pp. 13–23.

Census of India. 2011. Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India (ORGI). Cline, W. R., 2007. Global Warming and Agriculture: Impact Estimates by Country (Washington: Center for

Global Development and Peterson Institute for International Economics) Datta, M. and N. P. Singh 2007. Growth characteristics of multipurpose tree species, crop productivity and

soil properties in agroforestry systems under subtropical humid climate in India. Journal of Forestry Research. 18: 261-270

ICAR. 2010. Degraded and Wastelands of India Status and Spatial Distribution 2010. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Indian Council of Agricultural Research. New Delhi. Ghosh, A. K. 1997. Himalayan fauna with special reference to endangered and endemic species. In:

Himalayan Biodiversity: Action plan (ed. U. Dhar). GB Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment & Development, Kosi-Katarmal, Almora, pp. 53-59.

ICIMOD, 2010. Climate Change Vulnerability of Mountain Ecosystems in the Eastern Himalayas. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu, Nepal, 104 p.

IPCC, 2007a. Fourth Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Secretariat Geneva, Switzerland.

IPCC, 2007b. Summary for policymakers. In Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

IPCC, 2007c. Summary for policymakers. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, approved in detail at IPCC Plenary XXVII (Valencia, Spain, 12-17 November 2007), represents the formally agreed statement of the IPCC concerning key findings and uncertainties contained in the Working Group contributions to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

ISFR, 2015. Indian State of Forest Report. FSI, Dehradun. Accessed from http://fsi.nic.in/details.php?pgID=sb_62 on 10-10-2017 on 20-11-2017.

Kulkarni, A. V., B. P. Rathore and A. Suja. 2004. Monitoring of glacial mass balance in the Baspa basin using accumulation area ratio method. Current Science. 86: 101-106.

Menon, A. G. K. 1962. A distributional list of fishes of the Himalayas. Journal of Zoological Society India. 14(1 and 2): 23-32.

Ming, R., Hou, S., Feng, Y., Yu, Q., Dionne-Laporte, A., Saw, J. H., Senin, P., Wang, W., Ly, B. V. and K. L. Lewis (2008) The draft genome of the transgenic tropical fruit tree papaya (Carica papaya Linnaeus) Nature 452:991–996.

Ngchan. S.V., Das, A. and K.P. Mohpatra 2015. National mission for Sustaining Himalayan Ecosystem, Task force on Agriculture- An overview. Sustaining Hill Agriculture in Changing Climate. National Seminar on ‘Sustaining hill Agriculture in changing Climate’. ICAR Research Complex for NEH region.

NRSC, 2011. Wastelands Atlas of India, NRSC, Hyderabad, GOI, 2011


24

Pangging, G. and A. Arunachalam. 2008. Is certification needed for ‘jhum’ cultivation? Current Science, 95 (12): 1655-1656. PPVFRA. 2015. Agro-biodiversity hotspots of India. Accessed From

http://plantauthority.gov.in/hotspots.htm on 10-9-2017. Ramanathan, V. and G. Carmichael. 2008. Global and regional climate changes due to black carbon. Nature

& Geosciences 1: 221-227. Saha, R., Gosh, P. K., Mishra, V. K, Majumdar, B. and J. M. S. Tomar. 2010. Can agroforestry be a resource

conservation too to maintain soil health in the fragile ecosystem of north-east India? Outlook in Agriculture. 39(3): 191-196

Saha, D., Kukal, S. S. and S. S. Bawa. 2012. Soil organic carbon stock and fractions in relation to landuse and soil depth in degraded Shiwalik of lower Himalayas. Land Degradation and Development DOI:10.1002/ldr.2151.

Saha, R. and P. Jha.2012. Carbon Sequestration Potentials of Agroforestry Systems under Climate Change Scenario – Brief Review with Special Emphasis on North-Eastern Hill Regions. Journal of Agricultural Physics. 12: 100-106

Sharma, N. K. and R. J. Singh.2013. Agronomic Practices for Erosion Control. Popular Kheti 1(3): 57-60. (Available online at www.popularkheti.info)

Sharma, P.D. 2004. Managing natural resources in the Indian Himalayas. Journal Indian Society Soil Science. 52(4): 314-331.

Singh, J. P., Gangwar, B., Pandey, D. K. and Kochewad, S.A. 2011. Integrated Farming System Model for Small Farm Holders of Western Plain Zone of Uttar Pradesh. PDFSR Bulletin No. 05, pp. 58. Project Directorate for Farming Systems Research, Modipuram, Meerut, India

Thangavel, R., Manjaiah, K. M., Tomar, J. M. S. and Ngachan, S.V. 2013. Effect of multipurpose tree species on soil fertility and CO2 efflux under hilly ecosystems of Northeast India. Accessed from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258845435_Effect_of_multipurpose_tree_species_on_soil_fertility_and_CO2_efflux_under_hilly_ecosystems_of_Northeast_India on 21-11-2017.

Tomar, J. M. S., Das, A., Lokho, P., Chaturvedi, O.P. and G.C. Munda. 2012. Shifting cultivation in north-eastern region of India – status and strategies for sustainable development. Indian Forester, 52-62.

Vedwan, N. and R.E. Rhoades. 2001. Climate change in the western Himalayas of India: a study of local perception and response. Climate Research 19: 109-117.

Vishvakarma, S. C. R., Kuniyal, J. C. and K. S. Rao. 2003. Climate change and its impact on apple cropping in Kullu valley, North-West Himalaya, India. In: 7th International Symposium on Temperature Zone Fruits in the Tropics and Subtropics. 14-18 October, 2003, Nauni-Solan, Himachal Pradesh.

For any Information, please contact: Task Force Secretariat, NMSHE-TF6, ICAR HQ, NRM Division, Room 333, KrishiAnusandhanBhawan II,

Pusa, New Delhi; Phone – 011-23385065; Email: [email protected]

Agriculture in the Indian Himalayan Region: Current status ... · Agriculture in the Indian...

Documents

Transcript of Agriculture in the Indian Himalayan Region: Current status ... · Agriculture in the Indian...