Assessment of NTFP_Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone

Resource Assessment of NTFPs in SNPBZ 1

Resource Assessment of Commercially Important Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) in Sagarmatha

National Park and Buffer Zone (SNPBZ)

A report

Submitted to Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone Support Project

(SNPBZSP) Namche Bazaar, Solukhumbu

Submitted by Khilendra Gurung

April, 2007


Acknowledgement I am deeply indebted to WWF Nepal Program/Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone Support Project for the financial and technical support to conduct this study. I would like to express special thanks to a number of individuals for their assistance and kind cooperation, without whose support the study would not have been possible. At first, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Mr. Haris Chandra Rai, Project Manager, Mr. Hira Gurung; Account and Administration Officer and other staffs of SNPBZSP, Namche for their encouragement, support, cooperation and suggestions during the entire study period. I am grateful to Ms. Rudriksha Parajuli; Senior Program Officer- Mountain and Ms. Santoshi Thapa; Program Officer- WWF Nepal for their kind cooperation and coordination during the study period. My special thanks go to Mr. Birendra Kanel; Ranger, Mr. Uma Basnet, Mr. Akkal Baniya and Mr. Gajendra Shrestha; Sagarmatha National Park, Namche for their painstaking assistance in the field work and sharing their valuable ideas and experiences. My heartfelt thanks go to Mr. Kazi Sherpa (Sherpa BZCFUG), Mr. Aang Chhiring Sherpa (Muse BZCFUG), Mr. Phurba Sherpa and Mr. Shera Tenzi Sherpa (Red Panda BZCFUG), Mr. Lakpa Galjen Sherpa and Mr. Pasang Dawa Sherpa (Tongong BZCFUG), Pemba Nuru Sherpa (Dudh Kunda BZCFUG), Mr. Ngima Dorji Sherpa (Pema Chholing BZCFUG), Mr. Kumbe Biswokarma (Kongde BZCFUG) and Mr. Pemba Tamang (Himalaya BZCFUG) for their assistance and support in the field trip in Chaurikharka VDC. At last but not least, I would like to thank local communities of Tate, Syangma, Teka, Chhuserma, Sano Gumela, Thulo Gumela, Ngonbotek, Thambo and Jambote and hotel and restaurant owners of the trekking route of Chaurikharka, Namche and Khumjung VDCs for their warm hospitality, assistance in accommodation and for their participation in group discussions.

Khilendra Gurung


Table of contents CHAPTER ONE 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Objectives 2 1.3 Limitations of the study 2 1.4 Study area 3 CHAPTER TWO 2.1 Methodology 4 2.1.1 Primary data collection 4 2.1.1.1 Key informant survey and resource mapping 4 2.1.1.2 Identification of NTFPs 4 2.1.1.3 Inventory of NTFPs 4 2.1.1.3a Habitat identification 4 2.1.1.3b Sampling 4 2.2.1 Secondary data collection 5 2.3.1 Data processing and analysis 5 2.3.1.1 Frequency and relative frequency 5 2.3.1.2 Density and relative density 6 2.3.1.3 Population distribution parameters 6 2.3.1.4 Determination of forest types 6 2.3.1.5 Prioritization of NTFPs 6 2.3.1.6 Rapid vulnerability assessment (RVA) 7 2.4.1 Focus group discussion 7 CHAPTER THREE 3. Results 8 3.1 Assessment of NTFPs in SNPBZ 8 3.1.1 Assessment of NTFPs in Chaurikharka 8 3.1.1a Sherpa BZCFUG 8 3.1.1b Muse BZCFUG 8 3.1.1c Red Panda BZCFUG 9 3.1.1d Tongong BZCFUG 9 3.1.1e Dudh Kunda BZCFUG 10 3.1.1f Pema Chholing BZCFUG 10 3.1.1g Kongde BZCFUG 11 3.1.1h Himalaya BZCFUG 11 3.2 Assessment of NTFP in Namche VDC 11 3.3 Assessment of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC 12 3.4 Population distribution parameters of commercially important NTFPs 13 3.4.1 Chaurikharka VDC 13 3.4.2 Namche and Khumjung VDCs 16 3.5 Forest and vegetation types in SNPBZ 17 3.5.1. Chaurikharka VDC 17 3.5.2. Namche and Khumjung VDCs 19 3.6.1 Prioritization of NTFPs in Chaurikharka VDC 20


3.6.1a Sherpa BZCFUG 20 3.6.1b Muse BZCFUG 21 3.6.1c Red Panda BZCFUG 21 3.6.1d Tongong BZCFUG 22 3.6.1e Dudh Kunda BZCFUG 23 3.6.1f Pema Chholing BZCFUG 24 3.6.1g Kongde BZCFUG 24 3.6.1h Himalaya BZCFUG 25 3.6.2 Prioritization of NTFPs in Namche VDC 26 3.6.3 Prioritization of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC 27 3.7 Threat analysis 27 3.7.1 RVA in Chaurikharka VDC 27 3.7.1a Sherpa BZCFUG 27 3.7.1b Muse BZCFUG 28 3.7.1c Red Panda BZCFUG 29 3.7.1d Tongong BZCFUG 30 3.7.1e Dudh Kunda BZCFUG 30 3.7.1f Pema Chholing BZCFUG 31 3.7.1g Kongde BZCFUG 32 3.7.1h Himalaya BZCFUG 32 3.7.2 RVA of NTFPs in Namche VDC 33 3.7.3 RVA of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC 34 CHAPTER FOUR 4.1 Overview of enterprise modalities to be set up in SNPBZ 35 4.2 Comparative analysis of enterprise modalities in SNPBZ 35 4.3 Identification of enterprise modalities to be set up in SNPBZ 37 4.4 Potential markets of the value added NTFP products 42 4.5 Requirements for enterprise success 42 4.6 Challenges for forest based enterprises 43 4.7 Trade of NTFPs and trading pattern 44 4.8 Value addition of NTFPs 44 4.8.1 Processing technology 45 CHAPTER FIVE 5.1 Biological sustainable harvesting 46 5.1.1 Checklist to assess harvesting sustainability of forest products 46 5.2 Harvesting impact on population dynamics 46 5.3 Establishing sampling areas 47 5.4 Developing a raw material sourcing plan 48 5.4.1 Check list for raw materials sourcing plan 48 5.5 Need based assessment for enterprise set up in SNPBZ 49 CHAPTER SIX 6.1 Conclusion 51 6.2 Recommendations 51 References 53 Annexes


List of map Map 1: Location of the study area in Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone 3

List of figure

Figure 1: Sample plot for inventory 5

List of tables

Table 1: Class distribution of NTFPs in different sites 6 Table 2: Matrix Preference Ranking 7 Table 3: Criteria for RVA 7 Table 4: Assessment of NTFPs in Sherpa BZCFUG 8 Table 5: Assessment of NTFPs in Muse BZCFUG 8 Table 6: Assessment of NTFPs in Red Panda BZCFUG 9 Table 7: Assessment of NTFPs in Tongong BZCFUG 9 Table 8: Assessment of NTFPs in Dudh Kunda BZCFUG 10 Table 9: Assessment of NTFPs in Pema Chholing BZCFUG 10 Table 10: Assessment of NTFPs in Kongde BZCFUG 11 Table 11: Assessment of NTFPs in Himalaya BZCFUG 11 Table 12: Assessment of NTFPs in Namche VDC 12 Table 13: Assessment of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC 12 Table 14: Class distribution of Titepati (Artemisia dubia) in different BZCFUGs 13 Table 15: Class distribution of Nigalo/malingo (Arundinaria maling) in different BZCFUGs 13 Table 16: Class distribution of Lokta (Daphne bholua) in different BZCFUGs 13 Table 17: Class distribution of Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa) in different BZCFUGs 14 Table 18: Class distribution of Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima) in different BZCFUGs 14 Table 19: Class distribution of Jhyau (Parmelia sp) in different BZCFUGs 14 Table 20: Class distribution of Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia) in different BZCFUGs 14 Table 21: Class distribution of Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum) in different BZCFUGs 15 Table 22: Class distribution of Kukurpati (Rhododendron lepidotum) in different BZCFUGs 15 Table 23: Class distribution of Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum) in different BZCFUGs 15 Table 24: Class distribution of Chutro (Berberis wallichiana) in different sites 16 Table 25: Class distribution of Aak sello (Hippophae tibetana) in different sites 16 Table 26: Class distribution of Dhupi (Juniperus indica) in different sites 16 Table 27: Class distribution of Dhupi (Juniperus recurva) in different sites 16 Table 28: Class distribution of Gentiana urnula in different sites 16 Table 29: Class distribution of Bajradanti (Potentilla fruticosa) in different sites 16 Table 30: Class distribution of Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon) in different sites 17


Table 31: Class distribution of Bhale sunpati (Rhododendron setosum) in different sites 17 Table 32: Class distribution of Jangali gulab (Rosa macrophylla) in

different sites 17 Table 33: Class distribution of Jangali gulab (Rosa sericea) in different sites 17 Table 34: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Sherpa BZCFUG 20 Table 35: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Muse BZCFUG 21 Table 36: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Red Panda BZCFUG 22 Table 37: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Tongong BZCFUG 22 Table 38: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Dudh Kunda BZCFUG 23 Table 39: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Pema Chholing BZCFUG 24 Table 40: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Kongde BZCFUG 25 Table 41: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Himalaya BZCFUG 25 Table 42: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Namche VDC 26 Table 43: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC 27 Table 44: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Sherpa BZCFUG 28 Table 45: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Muse BZCFUG 28 Table 46: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Red Panda BZCFUG 29 Table 47: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Tongong BZCFUG 30 Table 48: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Dudh Kunda BZCFUG 30 Table 49: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Pema Chholing BZCFUG 31 Table 50: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Kongde BZCFUG 32 Table 51: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Himalaya BZCFUG 33 Table 52: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Namche VDC 33 Table 53: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC 34 Table 54: Comparative analysis of enterprise modalities on market,

social, technology and conservation criteria in SNPBZ 36 Table 55: Sole and BZCFUG/WAG enterprises in Chaurikharka VDC 37 Table 56: Other enterprise modalities in Chaurikharka VDC 41 Table 57: Identification of different models of enterprises in Namche VDC 41 Table 58: Identification of different models of enterprises in Khumjung VDC 41 Table 59: Potential markets for NTFPs products 42 Table 60: Marketed NTFPs in Chaurikharka VDC 44 Table 61: Value addition techniques 44 Table 62: Processing technology and application 45 Table 63: Rapid assessment of harvesting effects on population dynamics 47 Table 64: Recommended optimal harvesting practices for sustainable

NTFPs product use 47


Abbreviations and Acronyms ANSAB: Asia Network for Sustainable Agriculture and Bio-resources BDS-MaPS: Business Development Services-Marketing Production and Services BZCFUGs: Buffer Zone Community Forest User Groups BZUCs: Buffer Zone User Committees BZUGs: Buffer Zone User Groups Co.: Company DPR: Department of Plant Resources FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization GDP: Gross Domestic Production ha: Hectare IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Ltd.: Limited

m.: Meter MAPs: Medicinal and Aromatic Plants MPR: Matrix Preference Ranking

NARMSAP: Natural Resource management Sector Assistance Program

NSCFP: Nepal Swiss Community Forestry Project NTFPs: Non Timber Forest Products OP: Operational Plan Pc: Piece

pl: Plant Rel.: Relative Rs.: Rupees RVA: Rapid Vulnerability Assessment SNP: Sagarmatha National Park SNPBZ: Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone SNPBZSP: Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone Support Project SNV: The Netherlands Development Organization TISC: Tree Improvement and Silviculture Component VDCs: Village Development Committees WAGs: Women Awareness Groups WWF: World Wildlife Fund


CHAPTER ONE 1.1 Introduction Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) consists of goods of biological origin other than timber or fuelwood derived from forests, other wooded land and trees outside forests (FAO, 1999). NTFPs have been welfare, subsistence or livelihood commodity since long; these are traditional source of food, fiber, medicine, etc. In some rural mountainous areas, it contributes up to 50 % of total annual family income. NTFPs sub-sector in Nepal contributes about 5 % of national GDP out of total estimation of about 15 % from the whole forestry sector (almost 1/3). More than 100 types of plant species are harvested from wild and traded to international market mostly to India; 95 % of the NTFPs are collected from the wild and 90 % are exported to India in raw form. The importance of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (MAPs) has increased progressively over the last two decades. Herbal remedies are increasingly becoming mainstream consumer products manufactured by multinational companies amongst other, and sold in super market chains and in a variety of other outlets, globally. Food supplements, cosmetics, fragrances, traditional cuisine, dyeing and coloring agents are just a few of the application where medicinal, aromatic and dye plants are finding increasing use by the day. As a result there is growing demand of Nepalese MAPs and other NTFPs for these purposes. The diverse geography and climate of Nepal has rendered it a unique land of NTFPs along with other natural resources. However, the commercial exploitation without any conservation measures has threatened many species. The high mountain NTFPs are highly praised for high potency and organic nature, hence they fetch higher prices. In spite of all advantages, the government is still not able to harness the full potential of NTFPs for the welfare of rural communities. The major constraints for such situation are considered to be low capital investments both by the government and private sectors for the overall promotion of NTFPs including enterprise development and the perpetual marketing of quality products; government’s unclear investment policy, lack of proper documentation on species availability (or bio-prospecting) and uses and poor awareness among public on its values. Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone (SNPBZ) harbors a rich source of NTFPs. Although tourism is the main source of local economy in the SNPBZ, there are very limited options of livelihood support in the off trail routes. Conservation initiatives through sustainable use of these NTFPs could uplift the income of off trail communities. Collection, cultivation and harvesting of NTFPs are mainly confined to buffer zone as a result of community ownership inside the National Park. In particular, Chaurikharka Village Development Committee (VDC) possesses a high potential of NTFPs promotion. According to the resource assessment survey conducted by SNPBZSP during the second quarter of fiscal year 2006/07, the local users have tremendous drive to promote NTFPs


based products through community based enterprise establishment and marketing endeavors. Conservation and sustainable use of these NTFPs would uplift local livelihood in the SNPBZ if: a) communities take on increased responsibility for management of forest resources; b) ecological monitoring and sustainable harvesting practices are developed; c) communities have greater access to and understanding of the market system; d) sustainable enterprises bring local benefits especially to households in off trail communities; and e) local and scientific knowledge underpins appropriate management systems. To address the current needs, one way would be the establishment of community based forest enterprise adopting both the resource based and market based policy. It is essential that the women, underprivileged groups and buffer zone community forest user groups (BZCFUGs), women awareness groups (WAGs) and buffer zone user groups (BZUGs) should be included in such a model. WAGs and underprivileged groups should be transformed to skillful entrepreneur and BZCFUGs and BZUGs are a commercial entity, taking into account the conservation issues. The semi processed and processed NTFPs products produced from such enterprises should be promoted to the market after the value addition in the local level thereby benefiting the local communities. In this scenario, the present study is justifiable in terms of linking local livelihood with resource management, initiating community based forest enterprises and its linkage to market through product promotion. It would certainly assist in conserving the biodiversity of the Sagarmatha National Park and its Buffer Zone, which is the ultimate goal set up by WWF Nepal-SNPBZSP. 1.2 Objectives The overall objective is to explore the prospects of NTFPs available in SNPBZ having potentiality for enterprise development and seek possibility of market linkage, in consultation with the local community. The specific objectives are as follows: 1. To conduct the resource assessment of NTFPs in SNPBZ 2. To prioritize NTFPs on the basis of trade value and threat 3. To identify various models of community based forest enterprises to be set up in

SNPBZ 4. To assess the current market status of NTFPs locally and trading pattern of NTFPs 5. To visualize the NTFPs products that can be value added locally 6. To recommend steps to be followed by community for sustainable harvesting of

identified important NTFPs 1.3 Limitations of the study The field work was conducted in February-March and thus majority of the ground vegetation was yet to be regenerated due to the dry season. Also it was difficult to identify deciduous species as they were defoliated. Furthermore, the unfavorable weather


(snow fall) conditions hindered the study. Apparently the area harbors much more species than what is listed in the report. Due to this fact, several high valued NTFPs like Nirmasi (Delphinium himalayi), Kutki (Neopicrorhiza scrophulariiflora), Satuwa (Paris polyphylla), Padam Chaal (Rheum australe), Ban Lasun (Fritillaria cirrhosa), Yarsa Gumba (Cordyceps sinensis) etc. were not visible and therefore not documented in the report. Furthermore, regeneration study was not carried out due to the dry season. Field study during May-July will be more comprehensive in terms of species richness. 1.4 Study area Sagarmatha National Park (SNP) and Buffer Zone in upper part of Solukhumbu district was the area for the study. The study area comprises three VDCs viz. Chaurikharka, Namche and Khumjung. Altogether 8 buffer zone community forest user groups (Sherpa, Muse, Red Panda, Tongong, Dudh Kunda, Pema Chholing, Kongde and Himalaya BZCFUGs) were studied in Chaurikharka VDC. While the forests and scrublands within the buffer zone user committees of Phurte, Sam Singh, Theso, Thamo, Mende, Samde, Thame, Pahare, Thamboche and Hilajung were studied in Namche VDC. Whereas, forests and scrublands of Kyangjuma, Mongla, Tasinga, Phungi Thanga, Tengboche, Deubuche, Pangboche, Dingboche, Phortse, Phortse Thanga, Neute, Dole, Lafarma, Luza, Machhermo, Fanga and Gokyo were studied within Khumjung VDC.

Map 1: Location of the study area in Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone


CHAPTER TWO 2.1 Methodology Current work was completed in four phases viz. primary data collection, secondary data collection, data analysis and report writing. Primary data was collected from the field while secondary data was compiled from various other related documents. 2.1.1 Primary data collection Primary data collection was done by following methods: 2.1.1.1 Key informant survey and resource mapping Information about the availability, current status and use of NTFPs and MAPs was collected from BZCFUGS and BZUGs members. Group discussions were done for listing of available NTFPs and their identification, priority ranking of NTFPs for the inventory and suitable site selection. 2.1.1.2 Identification of NTFPs NTFPs were identified visually on the basis of researcher's knowledge. Unidentified species were identified consulting with the reference literatures (Stainton & Polunin, 1984; Stainton, 1988; Yoshida, 1994; Lama et al. 2001; IUCN, 2004; Bista and Bista, 2005). Documentation of all available NTFPs were carried out according to Shrestha, 1998 & Press et al., 2000. 2.1.1.3 Inventory of NTFPs Inventory methods include two different steps; habitat identification and sampling. 2.1.1.3a Habitat identification The sampling was conducted in defined habitats. The identification of NTFPs habitats was done systematically by observing at each of the following characteristics. • Altitude • Forest type • Aspect • Slope • Plant abundance 2.1.1.3b Sampling Following procedures were applied for the inventory of NTFPs resources by sampling techniques: • At least one vertical elevation line was taken from top to bottom of the habitat. The

number of elevation line depends on the habitat width, plant density, aspect and topography. At some instances, steep and rugged terrain caused the transect line to deviate from the original direction.

• For every elevation line, horizontal sampling lines were set up at 100 m elevation intervals.

• The sampling plots were set up along the horizontal line.


• The plots were determined as 1m ×1m for herbs, 5m×5m for shrubs and 10m×10m for trees (Raunkiaer, 1934).

10 m x 10 m Figure 1: Sample plot for inventory

• An inventory form was filled for every sampling plot.

2.2.1 Secondary data collection Secondary data were collected from all the possible documents, reports, articles, maps, official records, and other published and unpublished materials from ANSAB, DPR, WWF Nepal etc.

2.3.1 Data processing and analysis Data obtained from the field was processed and analyzed to find out frequency, relative frequency, density, relative density, population distribution parameters, matrix preference ranking (MPR), rapid vulnerability assessment (RVA), enterprises development criteria, potential for value addition and market linkage, etc.

2.3.1.1 Frequency and relative frequency Frequency is the number of sampling units in which the particular species occur, thus express the dispersion of various species in a community. It refers to the degree of dispersion in terms of percentage occurrence (Raunkiaer, 1934; Zobel et al. 1987).

100studied quadrats ofNumber Total

occured speciesin which quadrats of No.Frequency ×=

Relative frequency is frequency of a species in relation to other species.

100species all offrequency Total

species a ofFrequency %Frequency Relative ×=

5 m x 5 m 1m x1 m


2.3.1.2 Density and relative density Density expresses the numerical strength of the presence of species in a community. It is the number of individuals per unit area and is expressed as number per hectare (Raunkiaer, 1934; Zobel et al. 1987).

10000quadrat of area studiedquadrat ofnumber Total

spciesany ofplant ofnumber TotalPl/haDensity ××

=

Relative density is the density of a species with respect to the total density of all species.

100species all ofdensity Totalspecies individual ofDensity %Density Relative ×=

2.3.1.3 Population distribution parameters Distribution of NTFP parameters are categorized in following ways.

Frequency Relative Frequency

High Medium Low High Medium Low

>75 31-74 <30 >15 5-15 <5

Population density / ha Relative density

>800 300-800 <300 >15 5-15 <5

Table 1: Class distribution of NTFPs in different sites

2.3.1.4 Determination of forest types Forest types of respective BZCFUGs and VDCs under the study area were determined by visual observation and consulting with Stainton (1972) and document published by TISC, (2002).

2.3.1.5 Prioritization of NTFPs Matrix Preference Ranking (MPR) was used to find out most preferred NTFPs. By using this tool, the most preferred NTFP species was identified from each BZCFUG and VDC for the detail study. The criteria of preference were made by the users, availability of the resources and potential for value addition.

Moreover, the prioritization criteria of other development organizations like NSCFP, SNV, ANSAB, BDS-MaPS and Matrix Ranking Criteria have been thoroughly examined to attain the set objectives with proper justification. S.N. Criteria Scale and value 1 Market demand High (3), Moderate (2), Low (1) 2 Margin / Profit High (3), Moderate (2), Low (1) 3 Availability ( in time ) Almost always(3), Occasionally(2), Seasonal rare (1) 4 Geographical distribution Widespread (3), Moderate (2) ,Low(1) 5 Conservation status Minimum (3), Moderate (2) , Low (1) 6 Potential for cultivation High (3), Moderate (2), Low (1)


7 Regenerative potential High (3), Moderate (2), Low (1) 8 Contribution to income High (3), Moderate (2), Low (1) 9 Gender impact Only women (3), Both men and women (2) , only men (1) 10 Potential for value addition High (3), Moderate (2), Low (1) 11 Processing technology Manual/ local technology (3), Mechanical/ expertise

required (2), Sophisticated / foreign technology (1) 12 Ethnobotanical value Diverse use (3), medium uses (2) , single use (1) Table 2: Matrix Preference Ranking 2.3.1.6 Rapid vulnerability assessment (RVA) RVA method collects information to identify species, resources or sites that may be at risk of over exploitation. It was developed as a quick way of collecting both scientific and indigenous information about species and has been used to recommend whether or not that resource species is suitable for harvest.

Criteria Potential for sustainable use Low High

Ecology

Low abundance (1) High abundance (2) Slow growth (1) Fast growth (2) Slow reproduction (1) Fast reproduction (2) Sexual reproduction only (1) Both sexual & vegetative reproduction (2) Habitat – specific (1) Habitat- non specific (2) High habitat diversity (1) Low habitat diversity (2) High life form diversity (1) Low life form diversity (2)

Life form Tree and shrub (1) and grasses (2) Parts used roots , rhizomes and bulbs ( 1) and leaf, flower, bark , fruit (2) Harvesting

method Size/age classes not selected for harvesting (2), Particular size/age classes selected for harvesting (1)

Table 3: Criteria for RVA Source: Wong & Jenifer, 2001; Cunningham, 1994, 1996 a, 2001; Watts et al., 1996 2.4.1 Focus group discussion Discussion/ interaction programs were held at Chaurikharka VDC with BZCFUGs, WAGs, BZUGs and other stakeholders about the possibility of establishing different model of community based forest enterprises in Chaurikharka VDC and the need based assessment for value addition, focusing the ecological, social and economical sustainability.


CHAPTER THREE

3. Results 3.1 Assessment of NTFPs in SNPBZ Frequency, Relative Frequency, Density and Relative Density of each NTFP species were calculated and analyzed in respective BZCFUGs of Chaurikharka VDC and Namche and Khumjung VDCs. 3.1.1 Assessment of NTFPs in Chaurikharka 3.1.1a Sherpa BZCFUG Altogether 79 NTFP species were recorded from Sherpa BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are presented in table below: Table 4: Assessment of NTFPs in Sherpa BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Artemisia dubia 60 1.863 19924 5.8942 Arundinaria maling 20 0.621 12978 3.8393 Berberis asiatica 80 2.484 2892.8 0.8564 Borinda emeryi 20 0.621 9104 2.6935 Edgeworthia gardneri 40 1.242 4723.2 1.3976 Elsholtzia fruticosa 40 1.242 3789.2 1.1217 Eupatorium adenophorum 40 1.242 24200.4 7.1598 Gaultheria fragrantissima 80 2.484 20355 6.0219 Himalayacalamus hookerianus 40 1.242 7414 2.193

10 Lindera neesiana 40 1.242 1360 0.40211 Quercus semecarpifolia 80 2.484 3823 1.13112 Rhododendron arboreum 80 2.484 4812.4 1.42413 Urtica dioica 40 1.242 8846.4 2.61714 Yushania maling 20 0.621 6260 1.85215 Zanthoxylum armatum 40 1.242 1036.4 0.307

3.1.1b Muse BZCFUG Altogether 84 NTFP species were recorded from Muse BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are presented below: Table 5: Assessment of NTFPs in Muse BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Artemisia dubia 66.67 1.633 6832.667 4.1662 Arundinaria maling 16.67 0.408 30 0.0183 Berberis asiatica 100 2.449 2138.667 1.3044 Daphne bholua 66.67 1.633 3655.333 2.2295 Edgeworthia gardneri 50 1.225 1043.333 0.6366 Elsholtzia fruticosa 50 1.225 367.333 0.2247 Eupatorium adenophorum 50 1.225 4013.333 2.4478 Gaultheria fragrantissima 83.33 2.041 13107.333 7.9939 Himalayacalamus hookerianus 33.33 0.816 118 0.072


10 Lindera neesiana 16.67 0.408 48 0.02911 Rhododendron arboreum 100 2.449 6312 3.84912 Taxus wallichiana 50 1.225 693.333 0.42313 Urtica dioica 16.67 0.408 469.333 0.28614 Yushania maling 33.33 0.816 247 0.15115 Zanthoxylum armatum 33.33 0.816 48 0.029

3.1.1c Red Panda BZCFUG Altogether 56 NTFPs were enlisted from Red Panda BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are given below: Table 6: Assessment of NTFPs in Red Panda BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Artemisia dubia 75 2.521 15981 5.2552 Arundinaria maling 75 2.521 19888 6.5403 Berberis aristata 50 1.681 2294 0.7544 Borinda emeryi 25 0.840 6225 2.0475 Daphne bholua 50 1.681 1581 0.5206 Dipsacus inermis 75 2.521 3039 0.9997 Edgeworthia gardneri 25 0.840 210 0.0698 Elsholtzia fruticosa 50 1.681 1866 0.6149 Gaultheria fragrantissima 100 3.361 39970 13.143

10 Parmelia sp 100 3.361 18911 6.21811 Quercus semecarpifolia 100 3.361 5231 1.72012 Rhododendron arboreum 100 3.361 6932 2.27913 Rhododendron lepidotum 100 3.361 45336 14.90814 Usnea orientalis 100 3.361 2789 0.91715 Zanthoxylum armatum 50 1.681 782 0.257

3.1.1d Tongong BZCFUG Altogether 82 NTFPs were enlisted from Tongong BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are given below: Table 7: Assessment of NTFPs in Tongong BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density R.Density

1 Artemisia dubia 100 2.239 37452.667 10.1782 Berberis asiatica 83.33 1.866 3086.000 0.8393 Daphne bholua 66.67 1.492 6350.667 1.7264 Dipsacus inermis 83.33 1.866 4067.333 1.1055 Elsholtzia fruticosa 66.67 1.492 6006.000 1.6326 Gaultheria fragrantissima 100 2.239 17356.333 4.7177 Parmelia sp 100 2.239 14985.333 4.0738 Potentilla fruticosa 83.33 1.866 25670.000 6.9769 Quercus semecarpifolia 100 2.239 4589.333 1.247

10 Rhododendron arboreum 100 2.239 6309.333 1.71511 Rhododendron lepidotum 83.33 1.866 19207.333 5.22012 Swertia chirayita 16.67 0.373 416.000 0.11313 Taxus wallichiana 50 1.119 143.333 0.039


14 Yushania maling 83.33 1.866 15229.333 4.13915 Zanthoxylum armatum 100 2.239 1778.667 0.483

3.1.1e Dudh Kunda BZCFUG Altogether 63 NTFPs were enlisted from Dudh Kunda BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are presented below: Table 8: Assessment of NTFPs in Dudh Kunda BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Artemisia dubia 75 2.174 17028.000 8.7492 Arundinaria maling 25 0.725 2445.000 1.2563 Berberis asiatica 75 2.174 2199.000 1.1304 Borinda emeryi 25 0.725 9372.000 4.8155 Daphne bholua 25 0.725 150.000 0.0776 Dipsacus inermis 75 2.174 2589.000 1.3307 Elsholtzia fruticosa 100 2.899 6466.500 3.3238 Gaultheria fragrantissima 75 2.174 1525.500 0.7849 Parmelia sp 100 2.899 9153.000 4.703

10 Potentilla fruticosa 75 2.174 12817.500 6.58611 Quercus semecarpifolia 100 2.899 2362.500 1.21412 Rhododendron arboreum 100 2.899 1540.500 0.79213 Rhododendron lepidotum 100 2.899 16218.000 8.33314 Swertia nervosa 50 1.449 3117.000 1.60215 Zanthoxylum armatum 75 2.174 555.000 0.285

3.1.1f Pema Chholing BZCFUG Altogether 64 NTFPs were recorded from Pema Chholing BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are presented below: Table 9: Assessment of NTFPs in Pema Chholing BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Artemisia dubia 100 2.581 29841 11.3972 Arundinaria maling 25 0.645 2880 1.1003 Berberis asiatica 75 1.935 2645 1.0104 Borinda emeryi 25 0.645 7914 3.0225 Daphne bholua 75 1.935 2112 0.8076 Dipsacus inermis 75 1.935 6420 2.4527 Elsholtzia fruticosa 100 2.581 15218.25 5.8128 Gaultheria fragrantissima 75 1.935 6365 2.4319 Parmelia sp 100 2.581 15668 5.984

10 Potentilla fruticosa 50 1.290 15630 5.96911 Quercus semecarpifolia 100 2.581 3801 1.45212 Rhododendron arboreum 100 2.581 2848 1.08813 Taxus wallichiana 100 2.581 1765 0.67414 Yushania maling 50 1.290 4282 1.63515 Zanthoxylum armatum 75 1.935 373 0.142


3.1.1g Kongde BZCFUG Altogether 65 NTFPs were recorded from Kongde BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are presented below: Table 10: Assessment of NTFPs in Kongde BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Artemisia dubia 75 2.290 22648.00 7.1392 Arundinaria maling 62.5 1.908 20086.50 6.3313 Berberis insignis 87.5 2.672 6178.00 1.9474 Cotoneaster frigidus 37.5 1.145 1092.50 0.3445 Daphne bholua 75 2.290 11302.50 3.5626 Dipsacus inermis 87.5 2.672 4108.50 1.2957 Elsholtzia fruticosa 100 3.053 8652.50 2.7278 Gaultheria fragrantissima 37.5 1.145 580.50 0.1839 Parmelia sp 100 3.053 15902.00 5.012

10 Potentilla fruticosa 87.5 2.672 24642.50 7.76711 Quercus semecarpifolia 87.5 2.672 2835.50 0.89412 Rhododendron arboreum 100 3.053 3733.50 1.17713 Rhododendron lepidotum 100 3.053 27463.50 8.65614 Rosa macrophylla 100 3.053 9785.50 3.08415 Zanthoxylum armatum 87.5 2.672 10463.50 3.298

3.1.1h Himalaya BZCFUG Altogether 49 NTFPs were enlisted from Himalaya BZCFUG. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are given below: Table 11: Assessment of NTFPs in Himalaya BZCFUG SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Artemisia dubia 100 2.899 18505 6.1422 Arundinaria maling 75 2.174 25530 8.4743 Berberis asiatica 75 2.174 1994 0.6624 Berberis insignis 75 2.174 3470 1.1525 Borinda emeryi 25 0.725 6300 2.0916 Daphne bholua 100 2.899 15515 5.1507 Elsholtzia fruticosa 100 2.899 7245 2.4058 Parmelia sp 100 2.899 17855 5.9269 Potentilla fruticosa 75 2.174 15410 5.115

10 Quercus semecarpifolia 100 2.899 2300 0.76311 Rhododendron arboreum 100 2.899 3865 1.28312 Rhododendron lepidotum 100 2.899 22465 7.45713 Rosa macrophylla 100 2.899 3440 1.14214 Usnea orientalis 100 2.899 10198 3.38515 Zanthoxylum armatum 100 2.899 12605 4.184

3.2 Assessment of NTFP in Namche VDC Altogether 55 NTFPs were recorded from Namche VDC. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are presented in the table below:


Table 12: Assessment of NTFPs in Namche VDC SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

1 Berberis wallichiana 72.727 3.846 33925.455 9.8542 Cotoneaster microphyllus 90.909 4.808 4798.182 1.3943 Gentiana urnula 72.727 3.846 26990.909 7.844 Hippophae tibetana 9.091 0.481 4181.818 1.2155 Juniperus indica 90.909 4.808 21778.182 6.3266 Juniperus recurva 100 5.288 31667.273 9.1987 Nardostachys grandiflora 18.182 0.962 2609.091 0.7588 Potentilla fruticosa 63.636 3.365 14496.364 4.2119 Rhododendron anthopogon 45.455 2.404 2223.636 0.646

10 Rhododendron cinnabarinum 72.727 3.846 4041.818 1.174

11 Rhododendron setosum 81.818 4.327 52221.818 15.16812 Rosa macrophylla 90.909 4.808 25234.545 7.3313 Rosa sericea 36.364 1.923 3285.455 0.95414 Selinum tenuifolium 27.273 1.442 978.182 0.28415 Swertia racemosa 90.909 4.808 12690.909 3.686

3.3 Assessment of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC Altogether 49 NTFPs were recorded from Khumjung VDC. Among them 15 NTFP species were sorted on the basis of their potentiality for value addition, their abundance and quantification. The details are presented in the table below: Table 13: Assessment of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC SN Botanical name Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel .Density

1 Berberis erythroclada 50.000 2.579 6287.778 2.1482 Berberis wallichiana 94.444 4.871 21755.556 7.4313 Cotoneaster microphyllus 100.000 5.158 39424.444 13.4664 Ephedra gerardiana 38.889 2.006 4945.556 1.6895 Gentiana urnula 77.778 4.011 36172.222 12.3556 Hippophae tibetana 38.889 2.006 3938.889 1.3457 Juniperus indica 88.889 4.585 9462.222 3.2328 Juniperus recurva 66.667 3.438 5140.000 1.7569 Potentilla fruticosa 66.667 3.438 10378.889 3.545

10 Rhododendron anthopogon 33.333 1.719 4070.000 1.390

11 Rhododendron cinnabarinum 55.556 2.865 3127.778 1.068

12 Rhododendron setosum 100.000 5.158 51161.667 17.47513 Rosa macrophylla 61.111 3.152 11868.889 4.05414 Rosa sericea 44.444 2.292 5583.333 1.90715 Usnea longissima 55.556 2.865 9433.333 3.222


3.4 Population distribution parameters of commercially important NTFPs 3.4.1 Chaurikharka VDC Table 14: Class distribution of Titepati (Artemisia dubia) in different BZCFUGs

BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Sherpa Medium Low High Medium

Muse Medium Low High LowRed Panda High Low High MediumTongong High Low High MediumDudh Kunda High Low High MediumPema Chholing High Low High Medium

Kongde High Low High MediumHimalaya High Low High Medium

Table 15: Class distribution of Nigalo/malingo (Arundinaria maling) in different BZCFUGs

BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Sherpa Low Low High Low

Muse Low Low Low LowRed Panda High Low High MediumTongong - - - -Dudh Kunda Low Low High LowPema Chholing Low Low High Low

Kongde Medium Low High MediumHimalaya High Low High Medium

Table 16: Class distribution of Lokta (Daphne bholua) in different BZCFUGs

BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Sherpa - - - -Muse Medium Low High LowRed Panda Medium Low High LowTongong Medium Low High LowDudh Kunda Low Low Low LowPema Chholing High Low High Low

Kongde High Low High LowHimalaya High Low High Medium


Table 17: Class distribution of Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa) in different BZCFUGs BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

Sherpa Medium Low High Low

Muse Medium Low Medium LowRed Panda Medium Low High LowTongong Medium Low High LowDudh Kunda High Low High LowPema Chholing High Low High Medium

Kongde High Low High LowHimalaya High Low High Low

Table 18: Class distribution of Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima) in different BZCFUGs

BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Sherpa High Low High Medium

Muse High Low High MediumRed Panda High Low High MediumTongong High Low High LowDudh Kunda High Low High LowPema Chholing High Low High Low

Kongde Medium Low Medium LowHimalaya Low Low Low Low

Table 19: Class distribution of Jhyau (Parmelia sp) in different BZCFUGs

BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Sherpa High Low High Low

Muse High Low High MediumRed Panda High Low High MediumTongong High Low High LowDudh Kunda High Low High LowPema Chholing High Low High Medium


Table 20: Class distribution of Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia) in different BZCFUGs



Muse High Low High LowRed Panda High Low High LowTongong High Low High LowDudh Kunda High Low High LowPema Chholing High Low High Low


Table 21: Class distribution of Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum) in different BZCFUGs


Muse High Low High LowRed Panda High Low High LowTongong High Low High LowDudh Kunda High Low High LowPema Chholing High Low High Low


Table 22: Class distribution of Kukurpati (Rhododendron lepidotum) in different BZCFUGs

BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Sherpa Medium Low High Medium

Muse Medium Low High MediumRed Panda High Low High MediumTongong High Low High MediumDudh Kunda High Low High MediumPema Chholing High Low High Medium


Table 23: Class distribution of Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum) in different BZCFUGs

BZCFUGs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Sherpa Medium Low High Low

Muse Medium Low Low LowRed Panda Medium Low Medium Low


Tongong High Low High LowDudh Kunda High Low Medium LowPema Chholing High Low Medium Low


3.4.2 Namche and Khumjung VDCs Table 24: Class distribution of Chutro (Berberis wallichiana) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche Medium Low High MediumKhumjung High Low High Medium

Table 25: Class distribution of Aak sello (Hippophae tibetana) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche Low Low High LowKhumjung Medium Low High Low

Table 26: Class distribution of Dhupi (Juniperus indica) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche High Low High MediumKhumjung High Low High Low

Table 27: Class distribution of Dhupi (Juniperus recurva) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche High Medium High MediumKhumjung Medium Low High Low

Table 28: Class distribution of Gentiana urnula in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche High Low High MediumKhumjung High Low High Medium

Table 29: Class distribution of Bajradanti (Potentilla fruticosa) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche Medium Low High LowKhumjung Medium Low High Low


Table 30: Class distribution of Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon) in different sites VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density

Namche Medium Low High LowKhumjung Medium Low High Low

Table 31: Class distribution of Bhale sunpati (Rhododendron setosum) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche High Low High HighKhumjung High Medium High High

Table 32: Class distribution of Jangali gulab (Rosa macrophylla) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche High Low High MediumKhumjung Medium Low High Low

Table 33: Class distribution of Jangali gulab (Rosa sericea) in different sites

VDCs Frequency Rel. Frequency Density Rel. Density Namche Medium Low High LowKhumjung Medium Low High Low

3.5 Forest and vegetation types in SNPBZ 3.5.1. Chaurikharka VDC The ecological zones of the study areas of Chaurikharka VDC encompass the following forest and vegetation types: a. Himalayan Oak-Laurel forest This forest type occurs between 2000-2500m on the south of the main Himalayan range. This forest is characterized by the occurrence of oak (Quercus lanata) and a number of evergreen lauraceous trees as Litsea sp, Dodecadenia sp, Neolitsea sp, Lindera pulcherrima, Symplocos sp and Lyonia ovalifolia. b. Mixed Rhododendron-Maple forest This forest is also known as mixed broadleaved forest lying between elevations of 2600-3000m. Rhododendron arboreum and species of maple (Acer campbelli and A. pectinatum) remain prominent in this forest type. A number of laurels and other evergreen shrubs as Symplocos spp. and Ilex spp. form the second storey; in some areas, Taxus wallichiana and Tsuga dumosa are found in this forest type.


c. Temperate Mountain Oak forest The oak forest (Quercus semecarpifolia) occupies montane level at altitude of 2500-3000m. On humid slopes, oak is associated with hemlock (Tsuga dumosa), rhododendrons and maples. Some understorey layers of laurels (Neolitsea sp, Lindera pulcherrima and Dodecadenia grandiflora) occur in this forest. d. Upper Temperate Blue Pine forest It occurs abundantly between elevations of 2200-2600m in the humid valley. In the northern slopes it is associated with hemlock and oaks. e. Fir-Hemlock-Oak forest It occurs in lower sub-alpine and upper temperate zones at 2800-3400m, characterized by the dominance of silver fir (Abies spectabilis) mixed with hemlock (Tsuga dumosa) on the northern aspects and with oak (Quercus semecarpifolia) on southern aspects. Himalayan yew (Taxus wallichiana) forms the second layer of the forest. f. Silver Fir forest Pure fir forests are generally found at 3000-3600m. Fir forest is associated with a number of rhododendrons as Rhododendron arboreum, R. barbatum, R. hodgsonii, R. campanulatum as the second layer of the canopy. A small stature bamboos Arundinaria spp. Occur at the forest destruction sites. Herbs such as Meconopsis sp, Rosa sp, Primula sp, Anemone sp, Androsace sp cover the grassy floor. g. Birch-Rhododendron forest Birch-rhododendron association is regarded as the tree line vegetation in Nepal Himalaya. Massive stands of birch (Betula utilis) are formed on north facing, shady slopes and ravines with an understorey of rhododendrons, Sorbus sp and maples (Acer sp). Birch forest is often mixed with fir trees rising above the birch canopy. The associated rhododendron species include, Rhododendron campanulatum, R. cinnabarinum, R. hodgsonii. Small stature bamboos as Arundinaria maling form an important component of ground cover with herbs as Primula sp, Rheum sp, Aconitum sp and Swertia sp. h. Silver Fir-Blue Pine forest Silver Fir (Abies spectabilis)-blue pine (Pinus wallichiana) forests occupy side valleys sheltered from wind occurring at an altitude ranging from 3000-3600m. The colonization of pine trees are vigorous at slightly lower elevations, while at higher altitudes blue pine associates is not common.


3.5.2. Namche and Khumjung VDCs The ecological zones of the study areas of Namche and Khumjung VDCs encompass the following forest and vegetation types: a. Silver Fir-Blue Pine forest Silver Fir (Abies spectabilis)-blue pine (Pinus wallichiana) forests occupy side valleys sheltered from wind occurring at an altitude ranging from 3000-3600m. The colonization of pine trees are vigorous at slightly lower elevations, while at higher altitudes blue pine associates is not common. b. Silver Fir forest Pure fir forests are generally found at 3000-3600m. Fir forest is associated with a number of rhododendrons as Rhododendron arboreum, R. barbatum, R. hodgsonii, R. campanulatum as the second layer of the canopy. A small stature bamboos Arundinaria spp. Occur at the forest destruction sites. Herbs such as Meconopsis sp, Rosa sp, Primula sp, Anemone sp, Androsace sp cover the grassy floor. c. Birch-Rhododendron forest Birch-rhododendron association is regarded as the tree line vegetation in Nepal Himalaya. Massive stands of birch (Betula utilis) are formed on north facing, shady slopes and ravines with an understorey of rhododendrons, Sorbus sp and maples (Acer sp). Birch forest is often mixed with fir trees rising above the birch canopy. The associated rhododendron species include, Rhododendron campanulatum, R. cinnabarinum, R. hodgsonii. Small stature bamboos as Arundinaria maling form an important component of ground cover with herbs as Primula sp, Rheum sp, Aconitum sp and Swertia sp. d. Dry alpine scrub This forest type occurs from elevations 4000-4500m. The forest is dominated by dwarf and prostrate junipers (Juniperus recurva and Juniperus indica) along with other xerophyllous plants as Ephedra gerardiana, Cassiope fastigiata, Potentilla fruticosa and Berberis spp (Berberis erythroclada, B. wallichiana). e. Moist alpine scrub The vegetation is dominated by dwarf rhododendrons (Rhododendron anthopogon, R. setosum) at higher altitude and by shrubby rhododendrons (Rhododendron campanulatum, R. cinnabarinum) at slightly lower elevations. Alpine meadows are rich in species of Primula and Meconopsis. Drier sites are occupied by sedges, grasses and Ephedra sp. While moist sites are occupied by some commercially important medicinal herbs as Nardostachys grandiflora, Neopicrorhiza scrophulariiflora, Aconitum sp, Selinum tenuifolium, Swertia sp etc.


f. Upper alpine meadows Alpine meadows are occupied by herbaceous vegetation, basically with sedges and grasses at an altitude between 4500-5000m. This region is dominated by grass species as Carex sp, Agrotis sp and Festuca sp along with Primula sp, Ranunculus sp, Cotoneaster sp, Potentilla sp, Gentiana sp, Bistorta sp, Saxifraga sp, Arenaria sp and so on. Some high value medicinal plants as Aconitum sp, Nardostachys grandiflora, Neopicrorhiza scrophulariiflora, Sedum sp occur in this region. 3.6 Prioritization of NTFPs The species were prioritized based on 8 principal criteria viz. (i) highly demanded commercial species (ii) species having high market price (iii) having potential for domestic value addition (iv) species available over wide geographical range (v) species harvestable in short rotation period (vi) land fertility requirement for species (vii) species importance in ethnobotany and (viii) species conservation status. 3.6.1 Prioritization of NTFPs in Chaurikharka VDC 3.6.1a Sherpa BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Sherpa BZCFUG for value addition and marketing linkage and further assessment are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Argeli (Edgeworthia gardneri), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Sisnu (Urtica dioica) and Nigalo (Arundinaria maling). The details are given in table below: Table 34: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Sherpa BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Arundinaria maling 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 3 29 3 Berberis asiatica 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 4 Borinda emeryi 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 26 5 Edgeworthia gardneri 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 31 6 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 26 7 Eupatorium adenophorum 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 28 8 Gaultheria fragrantissima 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 30 9 Himalayacalamus hookerianus 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 27 10 Lindera neesiana 1 3 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 27 11 Quercus semecarpifolia 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 25 12 Rhododendron arboreum 1 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 2 23 13 Urtica dioica 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 30


14 Yushania maling 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 26 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 33

3.6.1b Muse BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Muse BZCFUG for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Argeli (Edgeworthia gardneri), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Sisnu (Urtica dioica) and Titepati (Artemisia dubia). The details are given in table below: Table 35: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Muse BZCFUG SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 1 2 3 3 23 3 Berberis asiatica 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 4 Daphne bholua 3 3 2 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 24 5 Edgeworthia gardneri 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 31 6 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 26 7 Eupatorium adenophorum 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 28 8 Gaultheria fragrantissima 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 30 9 Himalayacalamus hookerianus 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 27 10 Lindera neesiana 1 3 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 27 11 Rhododendron arboreum 1 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 2 23 12 Taxus wallichiana 3 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 19 13 Urtica dioica 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 30 14 Yushania maling 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 26 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 33

3.6.1c Red Panda BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Red Panda BZCFUG for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Argeli (Edgeworthia gardneri), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa) and Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum). The details are given in table below:


Table 36: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Red Panda BZCFUG SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Arundinaria maling 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 1 2 3 3 25 3 Berberis aristata 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 4 Borinda emeryi 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 1 2 3 2 23 5 Daphne bholua 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 23 6 Dipsacus inermis 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 23 7 Edgeworthia gardneri 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 30 8 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 26 9 Gaultheria fragrantissima 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 30 10 Parmelia sp 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 21 11 Quercus semecarpifolia 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 22 12 Rhododendron arboreum 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 26 13 Rhododendron lepidotum 1 1 3 3 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 22 14 Usnea orientalis 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 20 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 33

3.6.1d Tongong BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Tongong BZCFUG for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima),Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa), Nigalo (Yushania maling) and Chirayito ( Swertia chirayita). The details are given in table below: Table 37: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Tongong BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Berberis asiatica 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24


3 Daphne bholua 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 23 4 Dipsacus inermis 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 23 5 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 26 6 Gaultheria fragrantissima 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 30 7 Parmelia sp 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 21 8 Potentilla fruticosa 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 24 9 Quercus semecarpifolia 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 22 10 Rhododendron arboreum 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 26 11 Rhododendron lepidotum 1 1 3 3 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 22 12 Swertia chirayita 2 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 26 13 Taxus wallichiana 3 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 19 14 Yushania maling 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 26 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 33

3.6.1e Dudh Kunda BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Dudh Kunda BZCFUG for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Nigalo (Arundinaria maling), Nigalo (Borinda emeryi) and Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa). The details are given in table below: Table 38: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Dudh Kunda BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Arundinaria maling 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 29 3 Berberis asiatica 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 4 Borinda emeryi 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 27 5 Daphne bholua 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 23 6 Dipsacus inermis 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 23 7 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 1 27 8 Gaultheria fragrantissima 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 30 9 Parmelia sp 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 21 10 Potentilla fruticosa 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 24 11 Quercus semecarpifolia 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 22 12 Rhododendron arboreum 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 26 13 Rhododendron lepidotum 1 1 3 3 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 22


14 Swertia nervosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 1 24 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 33

3.6.1f Pema Chholing BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Pema Chholing BZCFUG for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Nigalo (Yushania maling), Nigalo (Arundinaria maling), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Nigalo ( Borinda emeryi) and Furmang ( Elsholtzia fruticosa). The details are given in table below: Table 39: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Pema Chholing BZCFUG SN Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Arundinaria maling 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 29 3 Berberis asiatica 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 4 Borinda emeryi 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 27 5 Daphne bholua 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 23 6 Dipsacus inermis 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 23 7 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 1 27 8 Gaultheria fragrantissima 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 30 9 Parmelia sp 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 21 10 Potentilla fruticosa 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 24 11 Quercus semecarpifolia 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 22 12 Rhododendron arboreum 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 27 13 Taxus wallichiana 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 23 14 Yushania maling 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 29 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 33

3.6.1g Kongde BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Kongde BZCFUG for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Nigalo (Arundinaria maling), Lokta (Daphne bholua), Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa) and Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum). The details are given in table below:


Table 40: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Kongde BZCFUG SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Arundinaria maling 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 29 3 Berberis insignis 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 4 Cotoneaster frigidus 2 2 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 22 5 Daphne bholua 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 2 2 3 1 28 6 Dipsacus inermis 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 23 7 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 1 27 8 Gaultheria fragrantissima 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 2 3 2 1 3 26 9 Parmelia sp 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 21 10 Potentilla fruticosa 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 24 11 Quercus semecarpifolia 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 22 12 Rhododendron arboreum 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 27 13 Rhododendron lepidotum 1 2 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 25 14 Rosa macrophylla 1 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 21 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 34

3.6.1h Himalaya BZCFUG Prioritized NTFP species of Himalaya BZCFUG for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Nigalo (Arundinaria maling), Nigalo (Borinda emeryi), Lokta (Daphne bholua), Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa) and Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum). The details are given in table below: Table 41: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Himalaya BZCFUG SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Artemisia dubia 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 30 2 Arundinaria maling 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 29 3 Berberis asiatica 1 1 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 23


4 Berberis insignis 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 5 Borinda emeryi 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 29 6 Daphne bholua 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 2 2 3 1 28 7 Elsholtzia fruticosa 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 1 27 8 Parmelia sp 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 21 9 Potentilla fruticosa 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 24 10 Quercus semecarpifolia 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 22 11 Rhododendron arboreum 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 27 12 Rhododendron lepidotum 1 2 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 25 13 Rosa macrophylla 1 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 21 14 Usnea orientalis 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 1 1 2 22 15 Zanthoxylum armatum 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 34

3.6.2 Prioritization of NTFPs in Namche VDC Prioritized NTFP species of Namche VDC for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Seabuckthorn (Hippophae tibetana), Dhupi (Juniperus indica and Juniperus recurva), Jatamansi (Nardostachys grandiflora), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon), Jangali gulab (Rosa macrophylla and Rosa sericea). The details are given in table below: Table 42: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Namche VDC SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Berberis wallichiana 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 22 2 Cotoneaster microphyllus 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 19 3 Gentiana urnula 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 1 1 1 21 4 Hippophae tibetana 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 32 5 Juniperus indica 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 2 3 3 3 31 6 Juniperus recurva 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 26 7 Nardostachys grandiflora 3 3 1 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 30 8 Potentilla fruticosa 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 2 24 9 Rhododendron anthopogon 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 3 2 3 2 3 28 10 Rhododendron cinnabarinum 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 18 11 Rhododendron setosum 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 20 12 Rosa macrophylla 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 2 25 13 Rosa sericea 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 2 25 14 Selinum tenuifolium 1 2 1 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 23


15 Swertia racemosa 1 1 2 3 3 2 3 1 3 1 1 1 22

3.6.3 Prioritization of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC Prioritized NTFP species of Khumjung VDC for value addition, marketing linkage and further study are Seabuckthorn (Hippophae tibetana), Dhupi (Juniperus indica and Juniperus recurva), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon) and Jangali gulab (Rosa macrophylla and Rosa sericea). The details are given in table below: Table 43: Matrix preference ranking of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC SN

Criteria⇒

NTFP species ⇓ M

arke

t dem

and

Mar

gin

\ Pr

ofit

Ava

ilabi

lity

( in

time

)

Geo

grap

hica

l di

stri

butio

n

Con

serv

atio

n st

atus

Pote

ntia

l for

cul

tivat

ion

Reg

ener

ativ

e po

tent

ial

Con

trib

utio

n to

inco

me

Gen

der

impa

ct

Pote

ntia

l for

val

ue

addi

tion

Proc

essi

ng te

chno

logy

Eth

nobo

tani

cal v

alue

Tot

al

1 Berberis erythroclada 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 22 2 Berberis wallichiana 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 22 3 Cotoneaster microphyllus 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 19 4 Ephedra gerardiana 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 24 5 Gentiana urnula 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 1 1 1 21 6 Hippophae tibetana 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 32 7 Juniperus indica 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 2 3 3 3 31 8 Juniperus recurva 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 26 9 Potentilla fruticosa 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 2 24 10 Rhododendron anthopogon 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 3 2 3 2 3 28 11 Rhododendron cinnabarinum 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 18 12 Rhododendron setosum 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 20 13 Rosa macrophylla 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 2 25 14 Rosa sericea 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 2 25 15 Usnea longissima 1 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 18

3.7 Threat analysis Rapid vulnerability assessment (RVA) analysis was carried out for the prioritized NTFP species of respective BZCFUGs of Chaurikharka VDC and Namche and Khumjung VDCs of SNPBZ. RVA was conducted on the basis of the following criteria: 1) Ecology, 2) Life form, 3) Parts used and 4) Harvesting method.

3.7.1 RVA in Chaurikharka VDC 3.7.1a Sherpa BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Sherpa BZCFUG are Siltimur (Lindera neesiana), Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Chutro (Berberis asiatica),


Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below: Table 44: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Sherpa BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓

Abu

ndan

ce

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 163 Berberis asiatica 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 154 Borinda emeryi 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 165 Edgeworthia gardneri 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 176 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 187 Eupatorium adenophorum 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 188 Gaultheria fragrantissima 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 159 Himalayacalamus hookerianus 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 16

10 Lindera neesiana 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1311 Quercus semecarpifolia 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1412 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1413 Urtica dioica 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1914 Yushania maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1615 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15

3.7.1b Muse BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Muse BZCFUG are Siltimur (Lindera neesiana), Lauth salla (Taxus wallichiana), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Lokta (Daphne bholua), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below: Table 45: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Muse BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 163 Berberis asiatica 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 15


4 Daphne bholua 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 145 Edgeworthia gardneri 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 176 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 187 Eupatorium adenophorum 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 188 Gaultheria fragrantissima 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 159 Himalayacalamus hookerianus 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 16

10 Lindera neesiana 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1311 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1412 Taxus wallichiana 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1313 Urtica dioica 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1914 Yushania maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1615 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15

3.7.1c Red Panda BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Red Panda BZCFUG are Lokta (Daphne bholua), Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Chutro (Berberis aristata), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Jhyau (Parmelia sp) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below: Table 46: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Red Panda BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 163 Berberis aristata 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 154 Borinda emeryi 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 165 Daphne bholua 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 146 Dipsacus inermis 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 177 Edgeworthia gardneri 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 178 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 189 Gaultheria fragrantissima 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 15

10 Parmelia sp 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1511 Quercus semecarpifolia 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1412 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1413 Rhododendron lepidotum 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1714 Usnea orientalis 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1915 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15


3.7.1d Tongong BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Tongong BZCFUG are Lauth salla (Taxus wallichiana), Lokta (Daphne bholua), Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Jhyau (Parmelia sp) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below: Table 47: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Tongong BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Berberis asiatica 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 153 Daphne bholua 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 144 Dipsacus inermis 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 175 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 186 Gaultheria fragrantissima 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 157 Parmelia sp 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 158 Potentilla fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 179 Quercus semecarpifolia 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 14

10 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1411 Rhododendron lepidotum 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1712 Swertia chirayita 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1613 Taxus wallichiana 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1314 Yushania maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1615 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15

3.7.1e Dudh Kunda BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Dudh Kunda BZCFUG are Lokta (Daphne bholua), Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Jhyau (Parmelia sp) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below: Table 48: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Dudh Kunda BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e


1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 163 Berberis asiatica 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 154 Borinda emeryi 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 165 Daphne bholua 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 146 Dipsacus inermis 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 177 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 188 Gaultheria fragrantissima 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 159 Parmelia sp 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 15

10 Potentilla fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1711 Quercus semecarpifolia 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1412 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1413 Rhododendron lepidotum 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1714 Swertia nervosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1715 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15

3.7.1f Pema Chholing BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Pema Chholing BZCFUG are Lauth salla (Taxus wallichiana), Lokta (Daphne bholua), Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Jhyau (Parmelia sp) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below: Table 49: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Pema Chholing BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e 1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 163 Berberis asiatica 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 154 Borinda emeryi 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 165 Daphne bholua 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 146 Dipsacus inermis 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 177 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 188 Gaultheria fragrantissima 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 159 Parmelia sp 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 15

10 Potentilla fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1711 Quercus semecarpifolia 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 14


12 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1413 Taxus wallichiana 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1314 Yushania maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1615 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15 3.7.1g Kongde BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Kongde BZCFUG are Chutro (Berberis insignis), Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Jhyau (Parmelia sp), Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Jangali gulab (Rosa macrophylla), Ruis (Cotoneaster frigidus), Lokta (Daphne bholua) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below: Table 50: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Kongde BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 163 Berberis insignis 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 144 Cotoneaster frigidus 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 155 Daphne bholua 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 156 Dipsacus inermis 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 177 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 188 Gaultheria fragrantissima 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 149 Parmelia sp 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 14

10 Potentilla fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1711 Quercus semecarpifolia 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1412 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1413 Rhododendron lepidotum 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1614 Rosa macrophylla 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1415 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15 3.7.1h Himalaya BZCFUG The most vulnerable NTFP species of Himalaya BZCFUG are Chutro (Berberis asiatica, Berberis insignis), Jhyau (Parmelia sp), Kharsu (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Jangali gulab (Rosa macrophylla), Jhyau (Usnea orientalis), Lokta (Daphne bholua) and Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum). The details are shown in table below:


Table 51: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Himalaya BZCFUG

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Artemisia dubia 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 182 Arundinaria maling 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 163 Berberis asiatica 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 144 Berberis insignis 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 145 Borinda emeryi 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 166 Daphne bholua 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 157 Elsholtzia fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 188 Parmelia sp 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 149 Potentilla fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 17

10 Quercus semecarpifolia 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1411 Rhododendron arboreum 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1412 Rhododendron lepidotum 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1613 Rosa macrophylla 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1414 Usnea orientalis 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1415 Zanthoxylum armatum 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 15 3.7.2 RVA of NTFPs in Namche VDC The most vulnerable NTFP species of Namche VDC are Chimal (Rhododendron cinnabarinum), Chutro (Berberis wallichiana), Jatamansi (Nardostachys grandiflora), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon) and Jangali gulab (Rosa macrophylla and Rosa sericea). The details are shown in table below: Table 52: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Namche VDC

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Berberis wallichiana 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 142 Cotoneaster microphyllus 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 163 Gentiana urnula 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 174 Hippophae tibetana 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 16


5 Juniperus indica 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 156 Juniperus recurva 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 157 Nardostachys grandiflora 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 148 Potentilla fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 179 Rhododendron anthopogon 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 14

10 Rhododendron cinnabarinum 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1311 Rhododendron setosum 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1612 Rosa macrophylla 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1413 Rosa sericea 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1414 Selinum tenuifolium 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1615 Swertia racemosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 17 3.7.3 RVA of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC The most vulnerable NTFP species of Khumjung VDC are Chimal (Rhododendron cinnabarinum), Chutro (Berberis erythroclada and Berberis wallichiana), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon) and Dhupi (Juniperus indica and Juniperus recurva). The details are shown in table below: Table 53: RVA analysis of NTFPs in Khumjung VDC

SN

Criteria⇒

NTFPs ⇓ A

bund

ance

Gro

wth

Rat

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Mod

e of

rep

rodu

ctio

n

Hab

itat

Hab

itat d

iver

sity

Life

form

div

ersi

ty

Hab

it

Part

s use

d

Har

vest

ing

met

hod

Scor

e

1 Berberis erythroclada 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 142 Berberis wallichiana 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 143 Cotoneaster microphyllus 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 164 Ephedra gerardiana 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 175 Gentiana urnula 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 176 Hippophae tibetana 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 167 Juniperus indica 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 158 Juniperus recurva 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 159 Potentilla fruticosa 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 17

10 Rhododendron anthopogon 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1411 Rhododendron cinnabarinum 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1312 Rhododendron setosum 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1613 Rosa macrophylla 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1414 Rosa sericea 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1415 Usnea longissima 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 13


CHAPTER FOUR 4.1 Overview of enterprise modalities to be set up in SNPBZ Forest based enterprises exist in various modalities, which can be outlined in aspects of ownership structure, linkages to raw materials, target markets, seasonality of operation, technological sophistication, management structure, product types and similar characteristics. On the ownership dimension, 5 different modalities can be set up in SNPBZ, they are as follows: a) Sole enterprise, b) BZCFUG/WAG enterprise, c) Consortium of BZCFUGs enterprise, d) Cooperatives and e) Private limited company. In terms of linkages of raw materials, economic and enterprise activities are based on raw materials drawn from buffer zone community forests and forests within the National Park. 4.2 Comparative analysis of enterprise modalities in SNPBZ Using ranking scores at three levels (Good: 3, Fair: 2 and Poor: 1), a comparative analysis of the proposed five enterprise modalities in SNPBZ was done as developed by ANSAB (2000) and Subedi et al. (2002). The analysis revealed that sole ownership is not necessarily the best modality in the forest enterprise sector. Its main weakness lies in the organization for all kinds of issues and without that there are many risks. Companies scored the lowest of the other modalities. This is due to the lack of institutional mechanism, such as with BZCFUGs, to ensure linkages with support services, environmental management and advocacy with National Park. On the other hand, companies scored higher than BZCFUG/WAG enterprises in the area of marketing because they can have better management capacity. Cooperative enterprises also scored less than BZFUG enterprises because they have no institutional mechanism for advocacy with the National Park or for guarantying environmental management. They also scored higher than BZFUG enterprises on marketing and on participation of woman. BZCFUGs enterprise scored less on marketing because of the lack of management capacity for marketing. However, in many other respects, they are at least potentially as strong as the other enterprise modalities. In summary, if conservation of resource is the most important factor, and those criteria are given additional weight, then the BZCFUGs enterprise would score the highest. On the other hand, if woman’s participation is the most important and if this ranking is weighted, then the cooperative modality would come out higher than the others.


Table 54: Comparative analysis of enterprise modalities on market, social, technology and conservation criteria in SNPBZ

Factors Enterprise Modalities Sole Enterprise

BZCFUG Enterprise

BZCFUG Consortium

Cooperative Company

Market a. Price

No bargaining power unless organized into a trade association and even then it’s difficult to guarantee agreement on sale price to buyers

(1)

Potential for own financing and therefore for increased bargaining power, but difficult to reach agreement amongst all members on sale price to buyers

(2)

Potential for own financing and therefore for increased bargaining power, but difficult to reach agreement amongst all members on sale price to buyers

(2)

Potential for own financing and therefore for increased bargaining power, can also achieve agreements amongst members on sale price to buyers

(3)

Potential for own financing and therefore for increased bargaining power and can also easily reach agreement on sale price amongst shareholders

(3) b. Economy of scale

Difficult to achieve

(1)

Can be achieved

(3)

Can be achieved

(3)

Can be achieved

(3)

Can be achieved

(3) c. Access to transport

Difficult to organize

(1)

Easy to organize

(3)

Easy to organize

(3)

Easy to organize (3)

Easy to organize

(3) d. Access to forward linkage and services

Difficult to achieve

(1)

Management capacity is lacking to organize

(2)


(2)


(2)

Better management capacity to achieve

(3) Environment a.Biodiversity

No positive impact can be guaranteed and chances of negative impact are high without peer pressure

(1)

Potential for good impact if participation of all users is ensured and conflicts are resolved

(3)

More difficult to ensure participation but has potential for good impact

(3)

Good impact is only achieved if increased income results in increased awareness of conservation

(2)

Good impact is only achieved if increased income results in increased awareness of conservation

(2) b. Management and Monitoring

Needs good linkage with BZCFUGs and can’t be ensured

(1)

Can easily be organized

(3)

Can easily be organized

(3)

Needs good linkage with BZCFUG in order to be possible and can’t be ensured

(2)

Needs good linkage with BZCFUG in order to be possible and can’t be ensured

(2) Social a. Distribution of income

There is no control over equity

Potential to be equitable if there is transparency and good participation in decision making on BZCFUG funds

Potential to be equitable if there is transparency and good participation in decision making on BZCFUG funds

By law-guarantee, equity and transparency with distribution of dividends but distribution of work opportunities

Equity is only ensured through distribution of shares. Influential share holders can dominate decision


(1)

(2)

(2)

may not always be equitable

(3)

making

(2) b. Participation of women

Potential to be very high if it’s a women owned enterprise or an ethnic group in which women are allowed in decision making

(3)

Potential for it to be high, only if there is support for participation in decision making in BZCFUG committee

(2)

Potential for it to be high, only if there is support for participation in decision making in BZCFUG committee

(2)

Can be very high in the case of a women’s only cooperative

(3)

Potential to be very high in the case of a women’s only company

(3) c. Impact of Policy

No advocacy power with DFO/NP

(1)

Strong advocacy power and potential support from related organizations

(3)

Strong advocacy power and potential support from related organizations

(3)


(1)


(1) Technology a. Access to value addition

Poor access (1)

Good access (3)

Good access (3)

Good access (3)

Good access (3)

b. Sustainability

Very difficult to ensure

(1)

Can be ensured with good management

(3)

Can be ensured with good management

(3)

More difficult to ensure continuing linkages

(2)

More difficult to ensure continuing linkages

(2) Total Score (13) (29) (29) (27) (27) 4.3 Identification of enterprise modalities to be set up in SNPBZ On the basis of the resource availability, processing technology, communities’ willingness and market linkage, the following enterprise modalities are proposed in SNPBZ. Table 55: Sole and BZCFUG/WAG enterprises in Chaurikharka VDC Buffer Zone CFUGs

Enterprise models

Specific product lines Potential species

Sherpa BZCFUG, Chaurikharka-4

a. Sole enterprise 1. Herbal tea Kharsu exudates (Quercus semecarpifolia), Sisnu aerial parts (Urtica dioica), Aerial parts of Pudina (Mentha arvensis), Lali gurans flower (Rhododendron arboreum)

2. Handicraft and basketry

Nigalo (Arundinaria maling, Borinda emeryi and Yushania maling )

3. NTFP cultivation/ plantation

Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Argeli (Edgeworthia gardneri),


Chirayito (Swertia chirayita), Bans

4. Wine making from wild edible fruits

Ainselu (Rubus ellipticus), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Bhui ainselu (Fragaria nubicola), Fruits of Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Thotne (Aconogonum molle)

5. Herbal incense Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa), Titepati (Artemisia dubia)

b. BZCFUG/WAG enterprise

1. Bio briquette Banmara (Eupatorium adenophorum), Titepati (Artemisia dubia)

2. Collective marketing centre

Argeli whiteskin, Timur fruits

3. Himalayan nettle curry Sisnu aerial parts 4. Herbal drink Lali gurans (Rhododendron

arboreum) Muse BZCFUG, Chaurikharka-4

a. Sole enterprise 1. Herbal tea Sisnu aerial parts (Urtica dioica), Lali gurans flower (Rhododendron arboreum), Mael leaves (Pyrus sp)


Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Argeli (Edgeworthia gardneri), Chirayito (Swertia chirayita)


Ainselu (Rubus ellipticus), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Bhui ainselu (Fragaria nubicola), Fruits of Fayang (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Thotne (Aconogonum molle), Mael fruits (Pyrus sp)

4. Herbal incense Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa), Titepati (Artemisia dubia)

b. BZFUG/WAG enterprises

1. Bio briquette Banmara (Eupatorium adenophorum), Titepati (Artemisia dubia)


Argeli whiteskin, Timur fruits

3. Herbal drink Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum)

Red Panda BZCFUG, Chaurikharka- 3

a. Sole enterprises

1. Herbal tea Lali gurans flower (Rhododendron arboreum)


Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Argeli (Edgeworthia gardneri)

3. Handicraft and Nigalo (Arundinaria maling


basketry and Borinda emeryi) b. BZFUG/WAG

enterprises 1. Wine making from wild edible fruits

Ainselu (Rubus ellipticus), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Bhui ainselu (Fragaria nubicola), Thotne (Aconogonum molle), Fayang berry (Gaultheria fragrantissima)

Tongong BZCFUG, Chaurikharka- 2 & 7

a. Sole enterprises


Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum), Argeli (Edgeworthia gardneri)

2. Herbal tea Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum), Kukurpati (Rhododendron lepidotum)



4. Incense making Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Dhupi (Juniperus indica), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon)



Timur fruits

Dudh Kunda BZCFUG, Chaurikharka-6

a. Sole enterprises

1. Cultivation of NTFP Timur, Alu Bakhada (Pyrus sp)

2. Incense making Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa)

3. Wine making from wild edible fruits and Alu Bakhada

Ainselu (Rubus ellipticus), Chutro (Berberis asiatica), Bhui ainselu (Fragaria nubicola), Thotne (Aconogonum molle), Fayang berry (Gaultheria fragrantissima), Alu Bakhada



Timur fruits

2. Household decorative items/interior decorative items from Nigalo

Nigalo (Arundinaria maling, Borinda emeryi)

3. Organic insecticide/pesticides

Timur leaf, Titepati leaves, Angeri leaves (Lyonia ovalifolia), Bulu leaves (Pieris formosa)

Pema Chholing a. Sole 1. Cultivation of NTFP Timur


BZCFUG, Chaurikharka-9

enterprises 2. Herbal tea Padamchaal (Rheum australe), Lali gurans flower (Rhododendron arboreum), Kukurpati (Rhododendron lepidotum)

3. Herbal incense Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Dhupi (Juniperus indica), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon); pine resin as a base

4. Wine making from wild edible plants



1. Collecting marketing centre

Timur fruits (Zanthoxylum armatum), Lokta bark (Daphne bholua)

2. Nursery management of multipurpose herbs and NTFPs

Lauth salla (Taxus wallichiana), Padamchaal (Rheum australe), Satuwa (Paris polyphylla) and others

Kongde BZCFUG, Chaurikharka-5

a. Sole enterprises

1. Herbal tea Kharsu exudates (Quercus semecarpifolia), Lali gurans (Rhododendron arboreum)

2. Herbal incense making Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Dhupi (Juniperus indica), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon); Pine resin (Pinus wallichiana) as a base



Timur fruits (Zanthoxylum armatum) and Lokta bark (Daphne bholua)

2. Interior decoration of house/ basketry

Nigalo (Arundinaria maling)

Himalaya BZCFUG, Chaurikharka-1

a. Sole enterprises

1. Herbal tea Lali gurans flowers (Rhododendron arboreum)

2. Herbal incense making Furmang (Elsholtzia fruticosa), Titepati (Artemisia dubia), Dhupi (Juniperus indica), Sunpati (Rhododendron anthopogon); Pine resin (Pinus wallichiana) as a base

b. 1. Collective marketing Timur fruits (Zanthoxylum


BZCFUG/WAG enterprises

centre armatum) and Lokta bark (Daphne bholua)

2. Interior decoration of house/ basketry

Nigalo (Arundinaria maling and Borinda emeryi)

Table 56: Other enterprise modalities in Chaurikharka VDC Buffer Zone CFUGs Enterprise models Product lines Raw materials/

Potential species Sherpa, Muse, Red Panda and Tongong (Dudh Kunda and Pema Chholing can supply raw materials)

Consortium of BZCFUGs

1. Essential oils (Wintergreen oil and Artemisia oil)

Wintergreen oil from Fayang leaves (Gaultheria fragrantissima) and Artemisia oil from Titepati aerial parts (Artemisia dubia)

Tongong, Pema Chholing, Kongde and Himalaya

Cooperative Collective marketing centre of Timur fruits and Lokta bark

Timur fruits (Zanthoxylum armatum) and Lokta bark (Daphne bholua)

Table 57: Identification of different models of enterprises in Namche VDC Villages Enterprise models Product lines Raw materials/ Potential

species Thamo, Thame Thamboche and Hilajung

a. Sole enterprises 1. Herbal tea Jangali gulab flower (Rosa macrophylla and Rosa sericea), Bhale sunpati leaves (Rhododendron setosum)

2. Herbal incense Sunpati leaves (Rhododendron anthopogon), Dhupi needles (Juniperus indica) and Pangbo rhizomes (Nardostachys grandiflora)

Table 58: Identification of different models of enterprises in Khumjung VDC Villages Enterprise

models Product lines Raw materials/ Potential

species Phortse, Pangboche Dingboche and Pheriche

a. Sole enterprise

1. Herbal tea Jangali gulab flowers (Rosa macrophylla and Rosa sericea), Bhale sunpati leaves (Rhododendron setosum)

2. Herbal incense Sunpati leaves (Rhododendron anthopogon), Dhupi needles (Juniperus indica) and Pangbo rhizomes (Nardostachys grandiflora)

b. BZUGs/WAGs enterprises

1. Juice making Aak sello fruits (Hippophae tibetana)

2. Collective marketing of fodder and grasses

High altitude grasses (Carex sp and Kobresia sp)


4.4 Potential markets of the value added NTFP products The enterprise models and the NTFPs products to be value added are designed with the motive of markets linkage assurance focusing basically at the local level consumption. Table 59: Potential markets for NTFPs products SN Specific products Potential markets 1 Bio briquette Hotels and restaurants in the trekking route 2 Lokta bark and Timur fruits a. Lokta bark: Handmade paper enterprises at Paiya,

Khari Khola (Jubing VDC) and Nunthala (Taksindu VDC) b. Timur fruits: Lukla and Namche market/ Hotels and restaurants in the trekking route

3 Fodder and grasses Jokpe and Yak owners involved in the trekking during trekking season

4 Essential oils (Wintergreen oil and Artemisia oil)

Various essential oils traders/exporters and health care herbal products manufacturers at Kathmandu

5 Handicraft and basketry a. Handicraft: Souvenir tourist shops in the trekking route b. Basketry: Porters involved in trekking

6 Herbal drink (Lali gurans Sorbet) Lukla and Namche markets/ Hotels and restaurants in the trekking route

7 Herbal incense Lukla and Namche markets/ Household level 8 Herbal tea Lukla and Namche markets/ Household level 9 Himalayan nettle curry Lukla and Namche markets/ Household level 10 Household decorative

items/interior decorative items from Nigalo

Hotels and restaurants in trekking route

11 Juice (Seabuckthorn Juice) Hotels and restaurants in trekking route 12 Seedlings and saplings of

multipurpose herbs and NTFPs Other BZCFUGs for plantation/ Household level

13 Organic insecticide/pesticides Farmers/ Household level 14 Wine from wild edible fruits Hotels and restaurants in trekking route/ Household

level 4.5 Requirements for enterprise success The success of the enterprises can be assessed according to the following dimensions: a. Raw material availability A long term biologically sustainable supply of the targeted natural product in sufficient quantities is necessary for the enterprise activity to be financially viable. b. Legal access to and control over the natural resources Collectors should be able to manage natural products harvesting and incorporate the enterprise activity into their overall forest management plans. Enterprise activities must comply with a range of legal requirements.


c. Equitable distribution of benefits If community members do not feel the benefits are being distributed fairly there will be less incentive to protect the natural resources. The overall raw material source could become threatened as well as the commercial activity and ecosystem’s biodiversity. d. Appropriate processing technology Is the technology compatible with the prevailing infrastructure and human resource conditions at the chosen location? Conditions to be considered include: transport and storage facilities; equipment/machinery availability; power or fuel required for the processing activity and technical skills available. e. Good management People with knowledge of, and experience with managing proposed activities should be available to run the enterprise or they should be closely involved in its operations. f. Commercial sustainability Commercial sustainability is a simple concept. Sell the product at a price and volume that covers all the costs associated with the natural product enterprise with enough money left over as profit. g. Access to capital Start up capital and on going working capital is needed for the enterprise. h. Available and accessible market for the products Is there a market for the available quantity and quality of product? Is there adequate demand at the expected selling price? Who will buy the product? 4.6 Challenges for forest based enterprises Marketing barrier is the major identified challenges for the NTFP based enterprises. The specific challenges are as follows: • Limited number of wholesalers and controlled price information. • Less developed market for many products and high price fluctuations. • Many producers with small quantities of products receiving only a small portion of

the total income. • Role and services of brokers and middlemen. • Lack of market information; current marketing channels, amount of each products,

price variation as well as future supply and demand of the products, processed product, development and future price projection etc.

• Most of the traders with an inadequate marketing knowledge and skills. • Limited access to availability of information and technology for product

development. • Lack of marketing infrastructure like storage, transportation, quality testing

laboratory facilities, etc.


• Difficulties in matching market requirements by suppliers due to several uncertainties such as production fluctuation, decreased collection due to unfavorable weather, inconsistent quality of products, lack of quality checking facilities, etc.

4.7 Trade of NTFPs and trading pattern The inhabitants of the study areas depend on hotel and restaurants business, trekking and mountaineering tourism, agriculture and animal husbandry for their livelihood support. Few villagers of Chaurikharka VDC collect NTFPs as an additional source of income in the harvesting season. The major traded NTFPs include Timur (Zanthoxylum armatum) fruits and few baskets (doko) made from Nigalo (Arundinaria maling, Borinda emeryi and Yushania maling) collected from their respective BZCFUGs. Timur fruits are traded to market in Lukla and Namche as well as to the hotel and restaurant owners in the trekking routes. Whereas, baskets (doko) are directly sold to the porters involved in the trekking. 1. Timur fruits: Collectors Local markets (Lukla and Namche/Hotels and restaurants owners) 2. Basketry (Doko from Nigalo): Collectors/Manufacturers Porters involve in trekking No trading of NTFPs in Namche and Khumjung VDCs. Table 60: Marketed NTFPs in Chaurikharka VDC SN Name of user groups NTFPs/Products Market price (Rs) 1 Sherpa BZCFUGs Timur 50-60/Mana

Basket (Doko) 40-50/Pc 2 Muse BZCFUGs Timur 40-50/Mana 3 Red Panda BZCFUGs Timur 40-50/Mana 4 Tongong BZCFUGs Timur 40-60/Mana 5 Dudh Kunda BZCFUGs - - 6 Pema Chholing BZCFUGs Timur 50-60/Mana 7 Kongde BZCFUGs - - 8 Himalaya BZCFUGs Timur 35-50/Mana

4.8 Value addition of NTFPs Value addition techniques at local level includes; cleaning, drying, grading, packaging and improved marketing. Commonly practiced methods of value addition of NTFPs and their techniques are presented below: Table 61: Value addition techniques SN Type of value addition Technique 1 Drying Sun drying and shade drying for aromatic plants 2 Cleaning Cleaning with water for roots/rhizomes, using cloths and

brushes for other parts 3 Grading Grading on the basis of the quality


4 Packaging Packaging in polythene bags ensuring free of moisture 5 Improved trading Adopting collective bargaining 4.8.1 Processing technology Simple and locally available technologies are more sustainable than the imported and more sophisticated ones. Through the technological interventions there is a scope to improve the quality, reduce the loss, increase the efficiency of operation and thereby reduce the cost. Technological improvements can also be made building on the traditional and existing technologies to match the current market requirement. Few processing technology that can be adopted in SNPBZ are as follows: Table 62: Processing technology and application SN Technology Examples of application 1 Drying (traditional sun drying, fire

drying, shade drying and improved solar drier)

All medicinal and aromatic plants

2 Steam distillation Essential oils from aromatic plants (Fayang, Titepati, Sunpati, Dhupi, Timur, Talispatra/ Gobre salla etc.)

3 Extraction of juice Lali gurans, Aak sello, Alu bakhada 4 Grinding and mixing Herbal tea, herbal incense 5 Debarking Lokta bark and Argeli whiteskin 6 Bio briquetting Banmara, Titepati 7 Packaging All raw NTFPs, value added products and

finished products


CHAPTER FIVE 5.1 Biological sustainable harvesting Biological diversity and sustainability occur at several levels: a) genes b) population c) community and d) ecosystem Harvesting can impact all of these levels. Since the effect of harvesting are superimposed on the natural population dynamics, a comparison between natural and harvested populations will provide enough information to assess sustainability. To determine biologically sustainable harvesting levels start by collecting community knowledge on particular species. It is important to know: a) The current level of harvesting b) The area where it is harvested c) The amount traded d) The various harvesting methods e) The season, percentage and parts of plant harvested If the species is traditionally collected, indigenous knowledge provides information on sustainable harvesting levels. Less information on sustainability exists for products that are not traditionally collected. Establish sampling areas for both traditionally collected and non- traditionally collected products. Sampling areas provide biological information on the collected natural products. 5.1.1 Checklist to assess harvesting sustainability of forest products - knowledge on the natural distribution of the species - frequency of occurrence or abundance - population structure (age/size/class distribution) - dynamics of the species (growth and reproduction rates) - variation among habitats - role within the ecosystem 5.2 Harvesting impact on population dynamics Forest product harvesting can have short and long term effects on the plant, ecosystem and overall biodiversity. Harvesting impacts on one population can cause ecologically unsustainable conditions for other species and the ecosystem structure. Sustainability must be viewed holistically. Immediate short-term effects of harvesting may be seen in the growth rate or reproduction capacity of the plant, while ecosystem changes may take longer to materialize. To distinguish short and long term effects of harvesting on population dynamics, monitoring is done at two stages: • rapid assessment of the immediate short term impact of harvesting on current

population structure and • long term change in population dynamics that can be monitored from sampling areas


Harvesting effects on population dynamics vary by the classification of plants (annual or perennial), plant parts that are harvested and how it is harvested. For a rapid assessment, monitoring focuses on the life stage being harvested. Table 63: Rapid assessment of harvesting effects on population dynamics

Life stage harvested

Effect of harvesting Immediate impact

Annual herb before fruiting or seeding

Destruction of reproductive adult

If harvested before fruit/seeds are produced and disseminated then only those plants that escape harvest will supply seeds for next generation

Herbaceous perennial (roots or rhizomes)

May result in destruction of reproductive adult or underground storage tissue

Reproductive capacity severely affected

Woody perennial (leaves) juvenile

If too many leaves are constantly removed, it may not reach reproductive maturity

Lack of seeds and propagation

Woody perennial (leaves) reproductive adults

Increased mortality due to disease as a result of damage

Size distribution, growth, health and reproductive activity may be altered

5.3 Establishing sampling areas Sampling areas provide information on the distribution and abundance of forest products and the impact of harvesting on the plant’s population dynamics. Sampling areas are also an important part of biological monitoring. To determine the long term impact of harvesting on population dynamics, permanent plots must be established. Trials that measure the effect of different harvesting levels and methods are also helpful. Sampling areas must be monitored for years twice at a minimum, to learn how harvesting effects overall biodiversity. Sampling areas help to: - establish rotational harvesting schedules - identify optimal harvesting times and methods - get community members involved in hands on biological monitoring - devise more accurate community resource management plans Table 64: Recommended optimal harvesting practices for sustainable NTFPs product use Species/ Parts harvested

Optimal harvest season

Optimal rotational interval

Optimal % of plants not harvested

Optimal harvesting methods

Rhizomes with roots

July-October 3-5 years At least 20% plants undisturbed

Whole plants pulled from bushy areas and dug out carefully with the tool, kuto, from open grasslands

Fruits July- 1-2 years At least 20% fruits Fruits/fruits with stalks are


September undisturbed detached from stem using sickles or bare hands

Leaves/needles July-October 1 year At least 30% of leaves left on plant

Leaves hand picked or cut with scissors

Flowers May-August 1-2 years At least 30% of flowers left undisturbed

Flowers hand picked or cut with scissors

Barks May-August 3 years At least 75% bark left undisturbed/For debarking Lokta bark and Argeli whiteskin the stem should be cut at least 15-18 cm above the ground

Bark pulled from plants with the help of sickles or knife/khukuri

Aerial parts July- October

2-3 years At least 40% plant left undisturbed

Aerial parts cut with scissor or khukuri

5.4 Developing a raw material sourcing plan After identifying the raw material sources, prepare a sourcing plan to estimate the raw material flow in relation to the enterprise. The sourcing plan should ensure a reliable supply of raw materials. Categories the area in terms of: • ecosystem (forest, pasture) • raw material • legal control (private, community or government owned) • quality • distance from the enterprise • accessibility Prepare a map illustrating the origins of raw materials. Assess potential risks associated with each location. The final estimate should be able to account for potential risks. Consider that labor may not always be available for collection and transportation activities. Assess the seasonal migration situation to minimize any problems resulting from a labor shortage. Likewise, consider the seasonal conditions of the raw material base. It is important to have good relations and communication with respective suppliers. 5.4.1 Check list for raw materials sourcing plan

resource supply areas raw material type and quality quantity by season storage facility legal obligations/ permits transportation arrangements labor supply management


agreements with suppliers risk and strategies working capital requirements

5.5 Need based assessment for enterprise set up in SNPBZ? The chain of steps for the establishment of community based forest enterprises SNPBZ, these include:

Categorization of community forests according to resources availability ↓

Yield estimation of the prioritized NTFPs ↓

Selection of local motivators ↓

Designation and preparation of worksheet for orientation to motivators ↓

Orientation to local motivators ↓

Identification of NTFPs collectors, local traders, and processors ↓

Ranking of local collectors ↓

Formation of collectors group ↓

Group discussion/interaction/motivation among motivators, collectors, traders, processors, members of BZCFUGs, WAGs and BZUCs

↓ Networking among BZCFUGs/individual persons

↓ Capacity building/strengthening the concerned BZCFUGs / WAGs / BZUCs on

institutional development, governance/equity, fund mobilization, financial management, record keeping, benefit sharing mechanism etc.

↓ Training package on NTFPs promotion – time and technique of collection, local

processing technology, storage, quality control, packaging, labeling, cultivation of major NTFPs

↓ Revisions in operational plan (OP) of concerned BZCFUGs-for the inclusion of

enterprise development activities in OP ↓

Coordination with concerned government agencies and I/NGOs ↓

Site selection (accessible site) for the modalities of enterprise other than sole ↓

Assessment of the enterprise modalities – Sole/ BZCFUG owned/ Consortium of BZCFUGs/ Cooperatives/ Private Ltd. Co.


↓ Threat/challenges/risk factor analysis

↓ Visualization of output/expectations

↓ Development of biological sustainable harvesting system – block rotation system

preferable for harvesting/ participatory monitoring system, cultivation of major traded NTFPs

↓ Feasibility study on market, technology, equipments and availability of skill manpower

↓ Identification of the enterprise modalities to be set up

↓ Discussion among network members in different stages/steps (about objective, structure,

regulatory mechanisms, business plan, marketing strategy etc.) ↓

Final meeting to discuss on common consensus and minuting of decisions ↓

Preparation of work plan/division of work ↓

Preparation of enterprise development plan/ business plan ↓

Registration of enterprise in concerned government office ↓

Management and conduction of pilot model enterprise


CHAPTER SIX 6.1 Conclusion The local communities of the study areas are unaware about the use and benefits of NTFPs available in the nearby forests except for fuelwood, fodder and incense. Resource assessment of NTFPs in SNPBZ using the inventory parameters revealed that there are tremendous potentialities for the processing of prioritized NTFPs. The tourism in the region can create the local markets of the value added NTFPs based products. The local communities basically members of WAGs of the off trail routes are more curios for the promotion of NTFPs which would support their livelihood. Enterprises modalities assessment in SNPBZ revealed that, sole enterprises can be set up for the product lines as herbal tea, herbal incense, bio briquette, wine making; BZCFUG/WAG enterprises can be set up for the product lines as herbal drink/juice making, interior decoration/basketry, organic insecticide/pesticide, collective marketing centre of fodder and grasses; consortium of BZCFUG enterprises can be set up for processing essential oils (Artemisia oil and Wintergreen oil) and cooperatives for the collective marketing centre of Timur fruits and Lokta bark. For genesis, operation and growth of forest based enterprise a biologically sustainable harvesting mechanism should be prepared for each buffer zone community forest and forests within National Park. Moreover, some factors that contribute to or hinder the genesis, operation and growth of enterprises should be taken into account. These include: awareness raising, technical assistance, financial support, marketing support, marketing outlets, community characteristics, natural resource base, technology, policy factors, enterprise consequences and natural resource conservation. In conclusion, the communities’ motivation towards entrepreneurship, institutionalization of user groups (BZCFUGs, WAGs, BZUCs) and regulatory mechanisms for sustainable harvesting of NTFPs would definitely create the income generating opportunities and would assist in the conservation of biodiversity in SNPBZ. 6.2 Recommendations The local communities play a crucial role for the conservation and sustainable utilization of NTFP resources in SNP and Buffer Zone. Conservation and sustainable management are the ever raised issues, but why and how to conserve and manage are the big questions challenging ever. Therefore, the following steps are recommended for addressing conservation and livelihood issues of local communities: 1. Awareness programs (workshops, exhibitions, exposure visits, demonstration of the products) on the importance of NTFPs; conservation and sustainable utilization, harvesting at local level need to be conducted.


2. Capacity building/strengthening the concerned BZCFUGs / WAGs / BZUCs on institutional development, governance/equity, fund mobilization, financial management, record keeping, benefit sharing mechanism etc. should be initiated. 3. Training package on NTFPs promotion; time and technique of collection, local processing technology, storage, quality control, packaging, labeling, and cultivation of major NTFPs should be conducted. 4. Development of biological sustainable harvesting system; block rotation system preferable for harvesting/ participatory monitoring system should be prepared for each user groups. 5. Detailed assessment of enterprise modalities to be set up in SNPBZ should be conducted in collaboration with various user groups. 6. Feasibility study on market linkage, technology transfer, equipments and availability of skill manpower should be conducted for each product line. 7. Micro-credit facilities should be provided for the initiation of small scale sole/BZCFUG or/ WAG enterprise and financial and operational support should be provided for the medium scale consortium of BZCFUGs enterprise/ cooperative. 8. Initiation for the management and conduction of pilot model enterprise preferably, herbal tea and herbal incense (sole); juice making from Seabuckthorn fruits and Rhododendron flowers (BZCFUG/WAG model); essential oil production from Fayang and Titepati leaves (consortium of BZCFUGs model) and collective marketing of Timur fruits, Lokta bark and grasses/fodder (cooperative model) in Chaurikharka and / or Khumjung VDCs recommended.


References ANSAB. 2000. Enterprise Development for Natural Products Manual. Asia Network for

Sustainable Agriculture and Bioresources/Enterprise Works Worldwide. Bista, T. and Bista, G., 2005. Himalayan Doctors and Healing Herbs: The Amchi Tradition

and Medicinal Plants of Mustang. Lo-Kunphen Mensikhang, Kathmandu. Cunningham, A. B., 1994. Integrating Local Plant Resources and Habitat Management.

Biodiversity and Conservation. 3. pp 104-115 Cunningham, A. B., 1996 a. People, Park and Plant Use: Recommendations for Multiple Use

Zones and Development Alternatives around Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda. People and Plants Working Paper no 4. UNESCO, Paris. pp 58.

Cunningham, A. B., 2001. Applied Ethnobotany: People, Wild Plant use and Conservation. People and Plants Conservation Manual. Earthscan.

FAO, 1999. Towards a Harmonized Definition of Non Wood Forest Products. Unasylva. 50 (198). pp 63-64.

IUCN, 2004. National Register of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants. IUCN Nepal. Lama, Y. C., Ghimire, S. K. and Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y., 2001. Medicinal Plants of Dolpo:

Amchis Knowledge and Conservation. WWF-Nepal Program, Kathmandu. Polunin, O. and Stainton, A., 1984. Flowers of the Himalaya. Oxford University Press. New

Delhi. Press, J. R., Shrestha, K. K. and Sutton, D. A., 2000. Annotated Checklist of the Flowering

Plants of Nepal. The Natural History Museum, London. Raunkair, C. 1934. The life forms of Plants and Statistical plant geography. Oxford. Shrestha, K., 1998. Dictionary of Nepalese Plant. Mandala Book Point, Nepal. Stainton, A., 1988. Flowers of the Himalaya, A Supplement. Oxford University Press. New

Delhi.

Stainton, J.D.A. 1972. Forests of Nepal. John Murray, London. Subedi, B. P., Ojha, H. R., Nicholson, K. and Binayee, S. B. 2002. Community Based Forest

Enterprises in Nepal: Case Studies, Lessons and Implications. Asia Network for Sustainable Agriculture and Bioresources (ANSAB)/ The Netherlands Development Organization (SNV/Nepal).

TISC/NARMSAP. 2002. Forest and Vegetation Types of Nepal. Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, HMG/N, Natural Resource management Sector Assistance Programme (NARMSAP).

Watts, J., Scott, P. and Mutebi, J., 1996. Forest Assessment and Monitoring for Conservation and Local use: Experience in three Ugandan National Parks. pp 212-243. In; Recent Approaches to Participatory Forest Resource Assessment. Rural Development Forestry Study Guide 2. Carter, J. (ed). ODI, London.

Wong, W. and Jenifer, L.G. 2001. Resources Assessments of Non- Wood Forest Products: Experience and Biometric Principles. Non-Wood Forests Products Series-13. FAO

Yoshida, T., 1994. Portraits of Himalayan Flowers. Heibonsha Limited, Tokyo. Zobel, D. B., Jha, P.K., Behan, M. J. and Yadav, U. K. R. 1987. A Practical Manual for

Ecology. Ratna Book Distributors, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Assessment of NTFP_Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone

Documents

Transcript of Assessment of NTFP_Sagarmatha National Park and Buffer Zone