Special Publication

Wetlands in the
Himalaya: Securing
Services for Livelihoods
About ICIMOD

The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), is a regional knowledge
development and learning centre serving the eight regional member countries of the Hindu Kush
Himalaya – Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan – and
based in Kathmandu, Nepal. Globalisation and climate change have an increasing influence on the
stability of fragile mountain ecosystems and the livelihoods of mountain people. ICIMOD aims to
assist mountain people to understand these changes, adapt to them, and make the most of new
opportunities, while addressing upstream-downstream issues. We support regional transboundary
programmes through partnership with regional partner institutions, facilitate the exchange of
experience, and serve as a regional knowledge hub. We strengthen networking among regional
and global centres of excellence. Overall, we are working to develop an economically and
environmentally sound mountain ecosystem to improve the living standards of mountain populations
and to sustain vital ecosystem services for the billions of people living downstream – now, and for
the future.

About HICAP

The Himalayan Climate Change Adaptation Programme (HICAP), one of the initiatives under
ICIMOD’s Regional Programme on Adaptation to Change, is a six-year research programme
initiated in 2012. It is implemented by ICIMOD in collaboration with CICERO and GRID-Arendal,
with responsibilities for overall research competence and communication and outreach respectively.
With 28 international and regional partners, HICAP carries out basic and applied research as well
as policy engagement to contribute to enhanced resilience to change, particularly climate change,
through improved understanding of vulnerabilities, opportunities, and potentials for adaptation. It
covers five river sub-basins: upper Indus (Pakistan), Koshi (Nepal), upper Brahmaputra (Tibetan
Autonomous Region, China), eastern Brahmaputra (India), and upper Salween-Mekong (China). The
programme is supported by the Governments of Norway and Sweden.

For more information, please visit www.icimod.org/hicap

ICIMOD gratefully acknowledges the support of its core donors: the Governments of
Afghanistan, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal,
Norway, Pakistan, Sweden, and Switzerland.
Special Publication

Wetlands in the Himalaya:

Securing Services for
Livelihoods

Editors
Laxmi Dutt Bhatta, Wu Ning, Erica Udas, Nand Kishor Agrawal, Sunita Ranabhat and
Deepa Basnet

Reviewers
Ram Prasad Chaudhary, Hem Sagar Baral, and Eklabya Sharma

International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, February, 2018

Copyright © 2018
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial, No Derivatives
4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Published by
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD)
GP Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal

ISBN 978 92 9115 577 4 (printed)

978 92 9115 582 8 (electronic)

LCCN 2018–305027

Production team
Shradha Ghale (Consultant editor)
Christopher Butler (Senior editor)
Dharma R Maharjan (Graphic designer)
Asha Kaji Thaku (Editorial assistance)

Photos: Jitendra Raj Bajracharya - cover; Alex Treadway - p1; ICIMOD - p2;
Nasaratullah Jahed - p15; Dhritiman Mukherjee - p40 (a&b);
Neeraj Mahar - p40 (c&d), p42 (b&d); S.A. Hussain - p42 (a&c);
Haiya Zhang - p47; Nabin Baral - p48, 99;
Top B. Khatri - p135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140

Printed and bound in Nepal by

Hill Side Press (P) Ltd., Kathmandu, Nepal

Reproduction
This publication may be produced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or
non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided
acknowledgement of the source is made. ICIMOD would appreciate receiving a copy of any
publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for
resale or for any other commercial purposes whatsoever without express written consent from
ICIMOD.

The views and interpretations in this publication are those of the author(s). They are not
attributable to ICIMOD and do not imply the expression of any opinion concerning the legal
status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers or boundaries, or the endorsement of any product.

This publication is available in electronic form at www.icimod.org/himaldoc

Citation: Bhatta, L.D., Wu, N., Udas, E., Agrawal, N.K., Ranabhat, S., Basnet, D. (eds)
(2018). Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing services for livelihoods. Kathmandu: ICIMOD.
Contents
Foreword v
Acknowledgements vii
Acronyms and Abbreviations viii
Summary xi

PART I – Wetland Management: Drivers of

Change and Impacts 1

Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

– Experiences and Lessons from Northern Mountainous Areas of Pakistan 3
Babar Khan, Farasat Ali, and Fazal Karim

Ecosystem Services and Management of Band-e-Amir National Park 14

Nasaratullah Jahed

Peling-Tso, a Low-Altitude Wetland and Its Management Practices, Southern Bhutan 25

Pema Wangda and Dorji Gyaltshen

Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives 33

Syed Ainul Hussain, Neeraj Mahar, Chongpi Tuboi, and Ruchi Badola

PART II: Wetland Ecosystem Services Valuation,

Livelihoods Interface and Sustainability 47
The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from Cangshan Mountain and
Erhai Lake in Yunnan Province, China 49
Kentaro Yoshida and Ke An

Peatlands Valuation and Livelihoods in Zoige Plateau, China 55

Xiaohong Zhang

Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu

Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal 64
Nakul Chettri, Sunita Chaudhary, Kabir Uddin, Bikash Sharma, Pratikshya Kandel, Top Bahadur Khatri,
Maheshwar Dhakal, Wu Ning, and Eklabya Sharma

Indigenous Knowledge for Wetland Conservation and Resource Utilization: A

Case Study of Ramsar Sites, Nepal 80
Shalu Adhikari and Amir Poudel

iii
PART III: Wetland Policies and Cooperation 91

Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal 93

Maheshwar Dhakal and Bishwa Nath Oli

How Power Can Play a Role in Making an Integrated Wetland Management

Practice to Disintegrate 104
Yang Shuo, Li Zhuoqing and Song Fuqiang

Management and Governance System of Wetlands in Bangladesh: A Case Study

on Co-Management of Tanguar Haor 114
Ishtiaq Uddin Ahmad

Community Involvement in the Management of High-Altitude Wetlands in Nepal: A

Case of Gosaikunda 125
Rajendra Khanal, Bishnu Bhandari, and Sony Baral

Conservation and Sustainable Use of Ghodaghodi Lake Area: Lesson from

CSUWN Wetland Project in Nepal 132
Top B. Khatri

iv
Foreword
The Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) region, which stretches across eight countries in Asia and covers
an area of 3.5 million km2, is home to spectacular lakes, rivers, aquifers and wetlands. They are a
major source of freshwater indispensable to the lives of 230 million people living in the region.
These ecosystems also play a vital role as regulators of water storage and ensure a wide range of
goods and services such as drinking water, irrigation, hydro-energy, food-processing, recreation,
habitats for biodiversity including rare and endemic species, water purification and buffering
floods, among many others. Although these ecosystems provision such important goods and
services, managing them wisely is challenging due to their remoteness and limited accessibility.
Where they are accessible, local communities heavily depend on them for their livelihoods.

Furthermore, the wetlands in the HKH region are steadily declining and undergoing degradation
with substantial impacts on ecosystem services, biodiversity and the livelihoods of people. The
major driving forces, either natural or anthropogenic, include siltation, expansion of agricultural
land, over harvesting of wetland resources, runoff from agriculture and industrial pollution, among
many others.

Given the insufficient documentation of wetlands in the HKH and through witnessing the cascading
effects of climate-glacier-water-livelihoods interface, there is an urgent need to- i) prepare a
detailed wetland inventory underlining the current status, threats and challenges, and ii) explore
future prospects of wetlands from a standpoint of sustainable development. Goal 6 of the 2030
sustainable development agenda stresses the need to “protect and restore water related
ecosystems” and “implement integrated water resources management at all levels, including
through transboundary cooperation”, among the others. Beyond this, there are numerous
inextricable linkages between other sustainable development goals too.

The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) is pleased to join hands
with the Kunming Institute of Botany (KIB) and Chengdu Institute of Biology (CIB) under the Chinese
Academy of Sciences (CAS), the Yunnan Institute of Environmental Science (YIES) and the Ramsar
Convention Secretariat to build a common platform to initiate discussions on existing wetland
policies and frameworks in the HKH region as well as to improve the understanding of the current
status and trend of wetlands for provisioning goods and services to local people and ensuring
sustainable management.

This publication provides a summary of the Regional Expert Symposium on ‘Managing Wetland
Ecosystem in the Hindu Kush Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods’, along with several
scientific papers presented by experts on diverse topics like wetland ecology, status and threats,
economic valuation, policies, benefit sharing mechanisms and traditional knowledge prevalent in

v
the HKH region. The synthesis of the scientific papers clearly indicated that wise management of
wetland ecosystems is essential not only for human health and economic prosperity of the HKH
people, but also for the environmental sustainability.

I hope this will be a valuable addition to the existing literature as it provides insights and updates
on the status of wetlands in the HKH region.

David Molden, PhD

Director General, ICIMOD

vi
Acknowledgements
We extend our gratitude to Dr Lew Young from the Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Ms Zhang
Xiahong from Wetlands International-China, Prof Yanfen Wang, Vice President of the
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (UCAS), Prof Yang Yongping and Dr Fu Yao from
Kunming Institute of Botany (KIB), Dr Li Zhuoqing and Ms Yang Shuo from Yunnan Institute of
Environmental Science (YIES), Dr Sun Geng and Dr Wang Jinniu from Chengdu Institute of
Biology (CIB) for their continuous support and guidance. Thanks also to all the contributors
who have added their knowledge and experience to scrutinize the key wetland challenges and
further explore the future prospects of wetland in the HKH region.

We are very thankful to the reviewers of this special wetland publication, namely Prof Ram
Prasad Chaudhary, Dr Hem Sagar Baral and Dr Eklabya Sharma. Furthermore, we appreciate
all those who directly or indirectly helped us in the preparation of this publication.

vii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
AD Anno Domini
AIGAs Alternative Income Generation Activities
AMS Acute Mountain Sickness
BANP Band-e-Amir National Park
BAPAC Band-e-Amir Protected Area Committee
BCAS Bangladesh Centre for Advance Studies
Ca. Circa
CA/TS Conservation Assured Tiger Standard
CAC Central Ad hoc Committee
CAS Chinese Academy of Sciences
CBAPU Community Based Anti-poaching Unit
CBFM Community Based Fisheries Management
CBOs Community Based Organizations
CBRMP Community Based Resource Management Project
CC Carrying Capacity
CCC Central Co-management Committee
CDCs Community Development Councils
CE Critically Endangered
CEs Choice Experiments
CFUGs Community Forest User Groups
CIB Chengdu Institute of Biology
CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora
CMA Collaborative Management Agreement
CMHA Community Management Hunting Area
CNRS Centre for Natural Resource Studies
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CSUWN Conservation and Sustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal
CVM Contingent Valuation Method
CWBMP Coastal and Wetland Biodiversity Management Project
DEM Digital Elevation Model
DFCC District Forestry Sector Coordination Committee
DFO District Forest Office
DG Director General
DNPWC Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation
DO dissolved oxygen
DoE Department of Environment
DoF Department of Fisheries
DSCWM Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management
ECA Ecologically Critical Area
EN Endangered
ES Ecosystem Services

viii
ETM+ Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
GB Gilgit-Baltistan
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GIZ German Society for International Cooperation
GLA Ghodaghodi Lake Area
GoB Government of Bangladesh
GoN Government of Nepal
ha hectare
HAWs High Altitude Wetlands
HHs Households
HICAP Himalayan Climate Change Adaptation Programme
HKH Hindu Kush Himalaya
HVRA Hazard Vulnerability Risk Assessment
IBA Important Bird Area
ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development
ICS Improved Cooking Stoves
IGSNRR Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research
IK Indigenous knowledge
ILO International Labour Organization
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature
KIB Kunming Institute of Botany
KJ Kilojoules
km kilometre
km² square kilometre
KTWR Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve
LIP Livelihood Improvement Programme
LNP Langtang National Park
LRP Local Resource Person
m metre
m3 cubic metre
MACH Management of Aquatic Ecosystems through Community Husbandry
masl metre above sea level
MEA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
mgL-1 milligrams per litre
mm millimetre
MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest
MoFSC Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation
MoL Ministry of Land
MSF Multi-Stakeholder Forum
MSS Multi-Spectral Scanner
NACOM Nature Conservation Management
NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
NEFEJ Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalist
NEMAP National Environment Management Action Plan

ix
NEPA National Environmental Protection Agency
NFMP New Fisheries Management Policy
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
NPR Nepalese Rupee
NPV Net Present Value
NT Near Threatened
NWC National Wetland Committee
OBIA Object-Based Image Analysis
ºC degree centigrade
PES Payment for Environment Services
PIC Prior Informed Consent
PMSU Project Management and Support Unit
PTT Platform Transmitter Terminal
PWP Pakistan Wetlands Programmes
RIS Ramsar Site Information Sheets
SCM Social Capital Management
SD Standard Deviation
SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
SEMP Sustainable Environment Management Programme
SRTM Shuttle Radar Topography Mission
SWSH Saving Wetlands Sky High
t tonne
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
TM Thematic Mapper
UAC Union-level Ad hoc Committee
UCC Union Co-management Committee
UNDP-GEF United Nations Development Programme-Global Environment Facility
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
USD United States Dollar
VCC Village Co-management Committee
VCGs Village Conservation Groups
VDCs Village Development Committees
VDRMPs Village Disaster Risk Management Plans
VGF Vulnerable Group Feeding
VU Vulnerable
WBRP Wetland Biodiversity Rehabilitation Project
WCS Wildlife Conservation Society
WDCs Wetland Dependent Communities
WII Wildlife Institute of India
WIK Wetland Indigenous Knowledge
WTP Willingness to Pay
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
WWG Wetland Watch Group
YIES Yunnan Institute of Environmental Science
yr Year

x
Summary
Wetlands cover 5–10% of the earth’s terrestrial surface. They are important ecosystems that
supply goods and services for human wellbeing. Despite their rich biodiversity, social and
economic values, wetlands are in immense pressure, and are undergoing constant
degradation due to several anthropogenic forces, such as urban development, expansion of
agricultural land and industrial pollution. The global extent of wetlands in the 20th century is
estimated to have declined by 64–71%, and losses and degradation of wetlands continue
worldwide, which will eventually have significant impacts on the supply of ecosystem services
and affect the livelihoods of people [Ramsar Secretariat 2015: State of the World’s Wetlands
and their Services (Task No. 18)]. In Asia alone, about 5,000 km2 of wetlands vanish each
year, with substantial impacts on ecosystem services, biodiversity and the livelihoods
of people.

In the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) region, there is only limited information available on the
overall status of wetlands and resource exploitation because of the difficult geographic terrain
and harsh climatic conditions. Thus, to generate a better understanding of wetlands in the
region, a common platform was sought to exchange information, learnings and research
findings. ICIMOD, in collaboration with the Kunming Institute of Botany (KIB) and the
Chengdu Institute of Biology (CIB) under Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and the
Yunnan Institute of Environmental Science (YIES), organized a Regional Expert Consultative
Symposium on ‘Managing Wetland Ecosystem in the Hindu Kush Himalaya: Securing Services
for Livelihoods’ in Dali, Yunnan Province of China.

The symposium brought together 63 high-level government delegates, policy makers,

scientists and researchers from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Japan,
Myanmar, Nepal, and Switzerland along with experts from ICIMOD. Altogether 13 scientific
papers were presented at the symposium during three technical sessions, namely:
(i) Sustainable wetland management: Drivers of change and impacts, (ii) Wetland ecosystem
services valuation and livelihoods interface, and (iii) Wetland policies and cooperation.

The scientific papers presented in the first technical session focused on the ecological
significance of wetlands in the HKH region. It provided an overview of the biophysical status
of the wetlands, threats, and conservation measures undertaken in a participatory way. The
development and successful implementation of wetland management plans have not only
reduced illegal harvesting of the wetland resources, but also supported comprehensive
scientific database management and recording of new species. Through a regulated access
and control mechanism, the ecological integrity of wetland ecosystems showed gradual
improvement, which is evident from the increasing wildlife and bird population, including

xi
endemic and rare species. Moreover, wise management of wetlands in the HKH region has
enhanced scientific knowledge that could be used in climate change risk reduction planning
and have greater impacts on the socioeconomic development of the local people.

The second technical session focused on economic valuation of wetland ecosystem services
and people’s dependency on wetland resources for livelihood security. The economic
valuation methods for marketed and non-marketed goods and services revealed that wetlands
are one of the most productive and valuable ecosystems, and people are very much willing to
pay for wetlands restoration activities including ecosystem services they obtained for their
well-being. Further, the valuation of non-marketed wetland services provided a basis for
establishing an ecological compensation mechanism and also prioritized wetland restoration
programmes. Since most of the local people living around wetlands in the HKH region are
highly dependent on wetland resources for their subsistence livelihoods, it also contributed to
local economy and poverty reduction. On the other hand, several local communities used
their traditional knowledge and indigenous practices to ensure sustainable wetlands
management practices. Systematic documentation of such traditional knowledge is crucial to
ensure the flow of wetland ecosystem services. Likewise, a holistic understanding of the
dynamic nature of wetland ecosystems and their services could be highly beneficial for
planning and implementing adaptive management.

The third technical session was related to wetland policies and cooperation between the
partners to ensure sustainable co-management of wetlands and equitable benefit sharing. In
general, wetland policies should address an integrated catchment plan for sustainable
management and conservation of wetlands, but sometimes rigid and inflexible institutional
settings may restrict the participation of relevant stakeholders in implementing an integrated
management practice. In the HKH region, wetland conservation efforts are not adequately
translated into integrated management practice despite the existence of sound policy
instruments. One of the reasons for this could be the overlapping institutional responsibilities
among different implementing agencies, which creates confusion regarding the lead role in
coordinating wetland conservation activities and thus results to lack of a sense of ownership.
To overcome some of these challenges, the jurisdiction of these agencies should be clearly
defined to implement wetland conservation activities. Strong support from national and local
governments as well as active community engagement is further instrumental for long-term
conservation and management of the wetlands. It is thus crucial to identify who participates in
what way and whose knowledge product adds value in the decision making process. Besides,
site-specific conservation plans followed by an effective implementation strategy could also
lead towards sustainable management and wise utilization of wetland resources. A
collaborative approach with multi-stakeholder engagement in Tanguar Haor Lake,
Bangladesh and Gosaikunda and Ghodaghodi lakes, Nepal are the good examples of
cooperation for integrated wetlands management.

xii
Key Challenges
Most of the wetlands in the HKH region are considered to be a common property. In his
famous book The Tragedy of the Commons (1968), Garrett Hardin explained that in the
absence of a stringent regulation, individuals would have a tendency to exploit common
natural resources for his/her own advantage, typically without any limit, eventually depleting
it. Such tragedy of the commons applies to many wetlands in the HKH region where
ownership conflict exists as different institutions or stakeholders claim jurisdiction over the
wetland and its resources, ultimately deteriorating its structure and functions.
Concurrently, despite the fact that wetlands are biodiversity hotspots that provision goods and
services to both upstream and downstream communities, these ecosystems, particularly in the
HKH region, are under-researched. There is limited information even for the wetlands listed as
Ramsar sites of international importance, and the respective countries even do not provide
regular updates on these sites.
Some key challenges to the wetlands in the HKH region are listed below:
ƒƒ A clear data gap on wetlands in the HKH region, especially in the high altitude regions, for
e.g., limited data available on the ecology, hydrological cycle, peatland distribution, and
the possible impacts of climate change on wetlands and wetland resources.
ƒƒ Complexity in integrating research into policy.
ƒƒ Ownership issue with different government institutions claiming jurisdiction over the
wetlands, resulting to lack of coordinated and strategic efforts for wetland management.
ƒƒ Lack of engagement of local people and other stakeholders in the planning and decision
making process.
ƒƒ Poor understanding about the dependency of local communities on weltand resources,
ecosystem dynamics and functions.
ƒƒ Unplanned development activities, unregulated tourism, overharvesting of wetland
resources, waste disposal and sedimentation.

The Way Forward

To address the above challenges and to ensure long-term conservation and sustainable
management of wetlands in the HKH region, the following actions are recommended:
ƒƒ Conduct a complete inventory and mapping of wetlands in the HKH region and integrate
it into national level planning. For inaccessible areas in the HKH region, use of new
technologies like radar, drones and remote sensing could be helpful.
ƒƒ Conduct action research for wetland biodiversity assessment, stock assessment of
commercial wetland commodities, water quality control, vulnerability and risk assessment
for understanding climate change impacts, environmental economics (valuation of
tangible and intangible resources).
ƒƒ Develop a holistic understanding of the dynamic nature of wetland ecosystems for better
planning and implementation of adaptive management.
ƒƒ Design wetland based adaptation measures after modelling climate change impacts in
both upstream and downstream.

xiii
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

ƒƒ Implement integrated watershed management by linking upstream and downstream

communities to protect the wetlands in the HKH region.
ƒƒ Carry out long-term wetland monitoring under the close supervision of interdisciplinary
experts.
ƒƒ Strengthen regional cooperation for regulating wetland ecosystem services and conserving
the transboundary wetlands through an integrated landscape approach and for sharing
both technology and knowledge on wetland management to generate comparable data
between the countries.
ƒƒ Develop a comprehensive and participatory wetland management action plan with clear
institutional arrangements, incorporating the local government’s programmes and plans.
ƒƒ Increase collaboration with local government authority for wetland restoration and
management to upscale best practices.
ƒƒ Encourage co-management efforts by involving local communities and all relevant
stakeholders for sustainable management of wetland and its resources. This would be a
more cost-effective way for sustainable management of wetlands and also creates a sense
of ownership among the stakeholders.
ƒƒ Institutionalize a benefit sharing mechanism e.g., Payment for Ecosystem Services scheme
to incentivize local communities and encourage them to co-manage wetlands.
ƒƒ Use an appropriate economic valuation tool for analysing tradeoffs and synergies between
wetland ecosystem services to understand how the ecosystem value may change in future
climate change scenarios. This will help policy makers to realize the importance of
wetlands and ultimately take optimal management decisions.
ƒƒ Strengthen communication between scientists and policy makers for integrating research
findings into policy formulation.
ƒƒ Undertake systematic documentation of traditional knowledge and/or indigenous/
customary practices and amalgamate it with scientific knowledge to ensure effective
management and design adaptation plans.
ƒƒ Promote outreach and awareness raising activities to encourage local participation.
ƒƒ Revive the “Himalayan Wetland Initiative”.

xiv
 Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

1
Wetland Management:
Drivers of Change and
Impacts

1
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

2
 Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands:

An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls
– Experiences and Lessons from Northern
Mountainous Areas of Pakistan

Babar Khana, Farasat Alia, and Fazal Karima

a
World Wide Fund for Nature - Pakistan
[email protected]

Abstract
Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) is home to freshwater bodies and unique wetlands biodiversity. This study aimed
at documenting the socioeconomic and ecological significance of high altitude wetlands while
discussing the conservation measures undertaken to mange these and their impacts on human
habitation and ecology. In the initial phase of the project, WWF-Pakistan conducted socio-ecological
surveys of 18 sites and developed 6 management plans. WWF-Pakistan established a ‘watch and
ward’ mechanism in project sites and a strong lobbying and advocacy framework in the GB region.
Climate change planning, awareness about wetlands’ importance and pasture management
interventions were other key components of conservation measures in the area. Changes or impacts
of conservation measures were included; project team developed a comprehensive scientific database
for surveyed sites and recorded distribution of new species. In order to conserve natural resources i.e.,
forests and associated resources, various alternative energy sources were provided to the local
communities to overcome pressure faced by these resources. In addition to this, various measures
were taken to reduce human-wildlife conflict by introducing improved cattle sheds, vaccination to
reduce disease transmission and insurance scheme for predation casualties. Wildlife and bird
population showed an increasing trend in project sites after project implementation, and was the main
output of awareness given to locals about wetland functions and services. The government of Gilgit-
Baltistan notified first wetlands based national park (Qurumbar), declared Gahkuch marshlands as a
‘no hunting zone’ and notified Ishkoman valley as a community management hunting area. It is not
easy to distil effectiveness of conservation measures and their impacts from project documents or
reports; however, wetlands conservation measures in Gilgit-Baltistan has great impacts on
socioeconomic conditions, scientific knowledge, awareness, conservation and climate change risk
reduction planning.

Keywords: wetlands, conservation, water birds, livelihood, Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan

Introduction
Wetlands are the most prolific and diverse ecosystems on earth, which offer several ecosystem
services and benefits to people and biodiversity (Ambrose 2000). Although environmental
pollution, illegal hunting, deforestation, overgrazing are some of the existing threats to

3
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

wetlands (Dudgeon 1992; Erwin 2009), climate change is an emerging issue affecting
wetland ecosystems at large (Erwin 2009). The rapid degradation of wetlands directly and
indirectly impacts the health and welfare of resident communities (MEA 2005). Until the recent
past, wetlands were considered to be wastelands, but their socio-ecological services now
justify the need for the protection and management of wetlands around the globe (Ambrose
2000). In this regard, the international community gathered in Ramsar, Iran, in 1971 to join
hands for the conservation of wetlands and waterfowl (Chopra et al. 2001). Conservation of
wetlands is a major challenge in Asia in light of climate change scenarios along with
increasing exploitative activities of the human population due to increased dependency
(WWF-India 2006). Leading conservation organizations like Wetlands International, WWF,
and IUCN have long been active in the region to sensitize local governments and engage
local communities and other relevant stakeholders in the protection and management of
high-altitude wetlands (WWF-Pakistan 2011).

The Indus River is the fourth major flyway (also called Indus Flyway) for bird migration.
High-altitude wetlands of Pakistan in general and of Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) in particular, being
along the Indus Flyway, are ecologically very important. The lakes, marshlands, peatlands and
streams adjacent to the flyway provide habitats, temporary and permanent staging, feeding
and breeding grounds to migratory as well as resident birds. Majority of the winter visitors
enter the subcontinent via the Indus River Valley and its northern tributaries. A significant
number avoid the high mountains, like cranes, snipe and pelicans come by the Kurram River
valley (Roberts 1992). However, of the total bird species recorded from the territorial limits of
Pakistan, about 30% visit for a significant period as long-distance migrants and 28% are
regular winter visitors to Pakistan (Ali 2005; Roberts 1992). Insect life and vegetation cover
become abundant in this area after the monsoon and thus offer rich feeding ground to the
wintering birds. Common wetland birds that visit Pakistan include grebes (Podicipedidae),
ducks and geese (Anatidae), storks (Ciconiidae), pelicans (Pelecanidae), cormorants
(Phalacrocoracidae), herons (Ardeidae), spoonbill (Threskiornithidae), rails and crakes
(Rallidae), cranes (Gruidae), bustard (Otididae), gulls (Laridae), waders (Calidridinae) and
plovers (Charadridae). The Utter, Hundrab, and Shandoor lakes harbor around 230 species
of birds – one of the most diverse populations in the mountain regions of the world. Rare
species like Lammergeier (Gypaetus barbatus) and Golden eagle (Aquila chryseatos) live and
breed here while Demoiselle crane (Grus virgo), Marbled teal (Marmaronetta angustirostris)
and Red-breasted merganser (Mergus serrator) use the lakes for wintering, staging and
feeding (WWF 2011).

Sustainability of fragile high-altitude wetland ecosystems in GB face a number of threats, both

immediate and proximate. These include illegal hunting and poaching of wild ungulates and
shooting of birds mostly for meat and sale; excessive cutting of forests for fuelwood and
timber; overgrazing of pastures by livestock; contamination of waters with chemicals and toxic
wastes; unmanaged tourism; accelerated flash floods; glacial failures; landslides and river
bank erosion. Causative factors include extreme poverty, lack of alternatives, weak

4
 Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

enforcement of law, lack of awareness, education and stewardship, and most prominently, the
changing climatic patterns.

The “Saving Wetlands Sky High” (SWSH) project funded by WWF-Netherlands was initiated in
July 2007 to mitigate some of the key threats to high-altitude wetland (HAW) ecosystems, their
associated biodiversity and livelihoods through involvement of local communities, government
agencies and non-government partners at the grassroots level. This paper is an attempt to
record and share lessons from WWF-led initiatives under the SWSH programme for
conservation and management of high-altitude wetlands in GB.

Material and Methods

Study area
The SWSH project focused on Gilgit-Baltistan Pakistan, which encompasses an area of about
72,696 km2 and is home to 1.8 million people. The area is a transitional zone between South
Asia and Central Asia and offers three great mountains ranges i.e., the Himalaya, Karakoram
and Hindu Kush. GB contains rangelands, peaks, glaciers, wetlands and globally significant
flora and fauna. The SWSH was an extension of the Conservation of High-altitude Wetlands
Project funded by WWF-International from 2004 to 2007. The second phase of the SWSH
programme (2007-2011) focused on the Handrab-Shandoor wetlands complex and Utter
Ishkoman Lake, with funding from WWF-Netherlands. The third phase (2011-2014) covered
the Handrab-Shandoor wetlands complex, Utter Lake, Qurumbar Lake, Gahkuch marshlands,
Deosai wetlands, Jarbaso Lake and the Shiger River, Naltar, Gasho and Rash lakes with
associated biodiversity (Figure 1.1), and was also funded by WWF-Netherlands (WWF-
Pakistan 2011).

Data collection
An extensive literature review of national and international wetland conservation efforts was
carried out. The study also included a detailed review of conservation measures under the
SWSH programme in GB generally and in project sites specifically. The literature included
academic publications such as journals, reports, books, project documents and websites. The
final external evaluation report of SWSH phase III and biannual technical progress, activities
and research reports were investigated in detail to document SWSH conservation measures,
impacts, challenges, lessons learnt and adaptive management strategies in GB and project
sites. Extensive field visits were also conducted to collect data and to determine the ground
reality of each selected area. The final external evaluation report of SWSH phase III only
provides information about SWSH phase III while other reports offered detailed information
about the conservation measures of WWF-Pakistan in GB since 2004.

Results
Several wetland management interventions were implemented in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan
which are elaborated in below paragraphs and also summarized in Table 1.1.

5
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Figure 1.1: Project sites of Saving Wetlands Sky High Programme, Phase III

Source: WWF-Pakistan

Scientific information and new species documentation

In the initial phase of the project, WWF-Pakistan was very much focused on biophysical,
ecological and socioeconomic resources assessment of 18 potential high-altitude wetland
sites and community-based wetlands resource management planning. The primary objective
of these studies was to develop a scientific database of unexplored wetland sites for
management, planning and conservation. Six wetland management plans were developed for
potential sites such as Handrab, Utter, Naltar, Qurumbar, Rama and Gasho Lakes for effective
implementation in collaboration with key stakeholders. Furthermore, during these socio-
ecological studies, the survey team documented the socioeconomic condition of communities
and the status of biodiversity, water, climatic hazards, wetland functions and services, etc. Two
new species recorded in Gahkuch marshland and Qurumbar National Park include Dice
snake (Natrix tessellata) and Chinese pond heron (Ardeola bacchus).

Watch and ward mechanism

The project team, in collaboration with Gilgit-Baltistan Forest Wildlife and Environmental
Department and local community-based organizations of Naltar, Qurumbar, Ishkoman,
Handrab-Shandoor, Gahkuch, Singul, established community-based watch and ward

6
 Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

Table 1.1: A summary of wetland management interventions in Gilgit-Baltistan

Category of Activity Outputs Changes and impacts

measures
Scientific Conducted baseline Developed a database for Scientific wetlands database
information surveys of 18 wetland 18 sites and 6 management developed for the first time and
sites plans two management plans
implemented (Utter and Handrab-
Shandoor)
New species Documentation of Distribution of two new Distribution of dice snake (Natrix
distribution of new species species recorded in tessellatea) added to the list of
Gahkuch marshland and Gahkuch marshland biodiversity
Qurumbar National Park & Chinese pond heron (Ardeola
bacchus) added to the list of
Qurumbar birds
Watch and Watch and ward Established a watch and Illegal hunting and fishing
ward system ward mechanism in projects controlled, water birds and
sites ungulate population increased at
least 5% from baseline
Advocacy and Declaration of a Government declared Trophy hunting introduced in
lobbying Community Management Ishkoman as a CMHA and Ishkoman to generate funds for
Hunting area (CMHA) Qurumbar National Park conservation and socioeconomic
Ishkoman, Gahkuch and Gahkuch marshland as interventions in Ishkoman Valley;
marshlands as a ‘no a no hunting zone government removed Gahkuch
hunting zone’ and marshland from game hunting
declaration of a wetland- areas; and planning for
based national park Qurumbar National Park started
Environmental Celebration of World Project team established By 2014, 50% of communities in
awareness Wetland Day and other natural clubs and celebrated project sites had gained
significant environmental global environmental days awareness about the importance
days of wetlands and associated
biodiversity
Climate Village disaster risk Three VDRMPs developed VDRMPs under consideration by
change management plans for Gahkuch, Qurumbar district government for
planning (VDRMPs) for project sites; and Naltar; three training implementation; communities have
trainings on how to workshops organized for tools and knowledge for
respond to climate change communities in project sites; responding to emergencies; and
hazards; and hazards and three HVRA studies HVRAs provide vital information
vulnerability risk conducted for Gahkuch, for hazard risk management
assessment (HVRA) studies Qurumbar and Naltar planning
Pasture Planting of fast-growing Planted trees on 15 ha of Pressure on pastures reduced by
management multi-purpose trees on 15 land and cultivated fodder at least 25% from baseline
ha of wasteland and on 15 ha of land
fodder cultivated on 15
ha of wasteland

mechanisms to protect birds and wildlife, and monitor their status at the project sites.
Figure 1.2 reveals that only 300 waterfowls were recorded in 2004 in project sites while a
total of 2,205 waterfowls were recorded in 2013 during end line surveys. The baseline surveys
in 2011 at Naltar, Gahkuch, Deosai and Qurumbar Valleys, recorded a total of 58
Himalayan brown bear (Ursus arctos), 864 ungulates including 840 Himalayan ibex (Capra
ibex himalayensis), 24 Astore markhor (Capra falconeri falconeri) and 2 Himalayan musk deer
(Moschus chrysogaster). During end line surveys of 2013, a total of 63 Himalayan brown
bears, 980 ungulates including 935 Himalayan ibex and 42 Astore markhor and 3 musk deer

7
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Figure 1.2: Baseline and end line biodiversity population trend in project sites

2,800
2,600
2,400
2,200
Estimated biodiversity population

2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Basline
waterfowls
population in
2004

Basline brown
bear population
in 2004

Basline ungulates
population in
2004

End line
waterfowls
population in
2013

End line brown

bear population
in 2013

End line
ungulates
population in
2013
Biodiversity population trend in project sites

were recorded from the Naltar, Gahkuch, Singul and Qurumbar valleys (Figure 1.2). The
overall population of birds and wildlife increased, and illegal hunting and fishing in the
project sites was reduced by at least 50% against the baseline.

Advocacy and lobbying

The concerted advocacy and lobbying of the project team in collaboration with community-
based organizations (CBOs) of project sites achieved three major successes during project
period: declaration of a first wetlands-based national park “Qurumbar National Park”,
demarcation of Gahkuch marshland as a “No hunting zone” and declaration of Ishkoman
Valley as a community management hunting area (CMHA). Owing to continuous concerted
efforts of the project team, the government of Gilgit-Baltistan declared Ishkoman Valley as a
CMHA in 2007 to improve the socioeconomic conditions of the area and community-based
conservation efforts in the valley. The provincial government of GB notified some 740 km2 of
Qurumbar Lake and its immediate catchments as the first wetlands-based national park on 2
August 2011, to protect wetlands biodiversity. This was an outcome of the concerted efforts
made by the project team and Pakistan Wetlands Programme (PWP) and CBOs for the
previous two years. As a result of the project’s endeavours, the Secretary of the Department of
Forest, Wildlife and Environment of Gilgit-Baltistan demarcated Gahkuch marshland area on

8
 Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

6 August 2013 (one of the project sites) as a no-hunting zone and restricted all types of
hunting and shooting in the area. WWF-Pakistan in collaboration with the GB’s Department of
Forest, Wildlife and Environment has been active in Qurumbar National Park planning since
2014. Trophy hunting in CMHA Ishkoman has been going on since 2007 and providing
financial resources for conservation and socioeconomic interventions, and the territorial
division forest officer of Gahkuch banned issuing licenses for hunting birds in the Gahkuch
marshland area.

Environmental awareness
The project team continuously observed global environmental days including World Wetland
Day from 2004 to 2014. The project team established natural environmental clubs in project
sites and these clubs are still active in organizing environmental sessions on global
environmental days in Qurumbar, Ishkoman, Shandoor and Gahkuch. These activities
increased communities’ awareness about wetland functions and services in all project sites. In
2004, it was found that people did not recognize wetlands as the most productive ecosystem
and that the local communities and key stakeholders were unaware of the functions and
services of high-altitude wetlands. Continuous efforts of the project team and natural clubs
increased awareness about wetland functions and services, key threats to the wetlands
ecosystem and associated biodiversity of project sites. In 2004, awareness about wetlands
and associated services was found to be only 3–5%; by 2014 it had increased to
approximately 50%.

Climate change planning

Climate change planning is one of the key components of the project. During the initial phase
of the project, the communities in the project sites were trained to cope, mitigate and adapt to
climate change and associated hydrometerological hazards. The project team organized three
trainings on climate change and risk reduction planning in the project sites. The objectives of
the training were to improve understanding of climate change and associated hazards and to
build capacity to cope with, mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change induced
hazards on life, livelihoods, infrastructures and ecosystems. During these training sessions,
village disaster risk management plans of the Gahkuch, Naltar and Qurumbar valleys were
also developed. Furthermore, the project team conducted a detailed hazard vulnerability risk
assessment (HVRA) for Gahkuch, Qurumbar and Naltar to identify prominent natural and
human caused events, assessed and documented vulnerabilities associated with the identified
hazards, documented key capacities within the communities to cope with prevailing risks and
provided viable risk reduction options to disaster risk management departments, decision-
makers and communities in the project sites. The village disaster risk management plans
(VDRMPs) are guidelines for local communities and district governments in the relevant project
sites for coping with and mitigating the impacts of climate change and associated hazards.
These HVRA studies will be really helpful for future climate change and risk reduction
planning.

9
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Pasture management
Pasture management is one of the project outputs for reducing pressures on wetland-
associated pastures and rangelands in project sites. In this regard the project team, in
collaboration with communities in project sites, planted fast-growing multi-purpose trees on
15 ha of wasteland and cultivated fodder trees on 15 ha of wasteland in project sites. Various
activities were carried out to sustain pasture capacity for grazing. Carrying capacity (CC) of
selected pasture areas was determined, as well as species composition and productivity of
pasture was evaluated. After determining carrying capacity, various meetings were held with
communities to introduce a scientific grazing system to combat overgrazing. In addition, 140
kg of alfa-alfa seed was sown on 0.6 ha of communal land to overcome pressure on
pastures. Furthermore, the project team developed pasture zonation maps for Deosai
National Park, the Naltar Wetlands complex and Qurumbar National Park, which were project
sites under SWSH Phase III. The purpose of these maps was to identify pasture areas where all
human activities are restricted and to document pasturelands where grazing is allowed. The
success rate of plantation and fodder in project sites was recorded to be high (approximately
80%) and reduced pressure on pastures was recorded to be at least 25% from baseline.

Conservation of natural forest

Natural forest plays a vital role in maintaining a sustainable ecosystem and provisioning
tangible and intangible resources to human beings. Due to lack of alternative resources,
forests are facing heavy pressure from local dwellers, who use forest resources to meet daily
needs. The project interventions were fruitful in reducing pressure on forests by providing
some alternative sources to communities, like fuelwood plantation at different sites in the
critical watershed catchments over an area of 15 ha and the tree species on communal lands
were poplar (Populus alba), willow (Salix tetrasperma), mulberry (Morus alba), and
seabuckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides). Farmlands that were not in proper use were identified
and local dwellers were engaged in farming cumin seed (Cuminum cyminum) on 1 ha of
farmland – in Naltar (0.25 ha) and Qurumbar (0.75 ha). Alternate energy sources were
provided to locals who were solely dependent on forests for meeting their daily needs. For this
purpose, energy efficient technologies, water warming facilities, fuel efficient stoves and roof
hatch windows were provided to 18 families.

Reducing human-wildlife conflict

In all parts of GB the people mostly depend on livestock to fulfil their household needs. To
graze livestock they move their livestock to pasture areas, where conflict is initiated when
predation occurs. To reduce such conflicts, some initiatives were taken through the project.
Improved corrals were provided in areas where snow leopard predation risk was high, and
local communities appreciated this. Breed improvement campaigns were held at different
selected sites to reduce grazing pressure on pastures, as valuables are kept near the owner’s
house, reducing the risk of predation. Overall 25 successful births were recorded after
breeding campaigns. Livestock vaccination was organized at study sites in order to control
transmission of fatal diseases from livestock to wildlife on shared pastures. A total of 10,101

10
 Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

domestic animals were vaccinated and the results were satisfactory. To prevent hunting of
predators, a livestock insurance scheme was introduced to compensate depredation losses,
which showed fruitful results.

Capacity building of local communities

Various seminars and proper trainings were held to mobilize project communities for the
conservation and management of natural resources. The local herders were trained by the
experts to identify wildlife, build proper wildlife census or data and survey techniques.
Additionally, few survey kits were also provided to them.

Discussion
The socio-ecological surveys were conducted to fill the data gap and collect socio-ecological
information on some unexplored wetland sites. This information will not only be helpful for
developing management plans but also serve as a key database for Ramsar Site Information
Sheet (RIS). Further, it will be useful for documenting the distribution of new species in the
area. Data from these surveys will help in biodiversity conservation planning and habitat
management in other projects and in developing conservation measures. WWF-Pakistan has
implemented only two wetlands management plans (Utter and Handrab-Shandoor) in the GB
region as a demo for other communities, stakeholders and project sites. These participatory
high-altitude wetland models of Handrab and Utter Lake are good examples that other
communities and projects sites could adopt and implement for the protection of wetlands and
associated resources at the GB level (Gujja 2007). The documentation of dice snake (Natrix
tessellatea) and Chinese pond heron (Ardeola bacchus) expanded the inventories of birds and
reptiles of GB and Pakistan. One of the achievement of SWSH programme surveys was the
identification of dice snake in Gahkuch marshland (Mebert et al. 2013).

The increase in wildlife and bird population in project sites was probably due to continuous
and effective monitoring and the curbing of illegal hunting and fishing by the community-
based watch and ward mechanism. However, adequate financial resources and community’s
commitment are required to maintain an effective watch and ward mechanism. The awareness
about the importance of wetlands and associated biodiversity raised by the project team may
be another factor that changed hunters’ behaviour and minimized illegal hunting in
project sites.

Qurumbar National Park was notified in 2011, but the Department of Forest, Wildlife and
Environment of GB is still preparing the management plan. Questions will also arise
regarding financial resources for implementing the management plan because other national
parks in GB are already in need of effective management plans and financial resources.
Trophy hunting in the community-managed hunting area is an important source of income for
Ishkoman community but the allocation of insufficient quotas and lack of proper wildlife
surveys may pose major challenges. The removal of Gahkuch marshland from the hunting
zone is a key achievement of the project team but implementation of the notification will be a
challenge because the marshland is located in an urban area and thus already vulnerable.

11
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

The hazard vulnerability risk assessment studies and village disaster risk management plans
are effective documents but the findings were not seen to be implemented properly in the
Gahkuch, Qurumbar and Naltar valleys due to lack of funding and lack of ownership by local
government and communities. Climate change planning and risk trainings were effective but
providing emergency response kits in each project site was beyond the project capacity.

Pasture management is an important component of the project but the success rate of
multi-purpose trees and fodder plantation depended on availability of water, soil fertility and
proper care of nurseries. The success rate of plantation and fodder cultivation in project sites
was not as high as the target set by the project team due to lack of water and proper care.
Further, restricting the use of protected pasturelands was a key challenge for local community-
based organizations because local herders are highly dependent on pasturelands and it was
not possible to come up with alternatives during the short project period or through limited
interventions of projects. Alternative energy-efficient sources were provided to reduce pressure
on forest, but on a small scale. If provided on a large scale, such energy sources could be an
efficient way to save and conserve our natural resources.

Conclusion
The success of wetland conservation measures and their impacts are difficult to distil from
project reports and documents because their success can only be effectively documented
through ground level assessment or field based studies. Implementing project interventions in
difficult geographic locations and harsh climatic conditions within a limited timeframe is a key
challenge for the project team. However, wetland conservation measures in Gilgit-Baltistan
has great impacts on socioeconomic conditions, scientific knowledge and database,
awareness, conservation and climate change risk reduction planning. Proper scientific
database, hazard vulnerability risk assessment studies, and village disaster management plans
are guiding documents for future management and planning. Controlling hunting in Gahkuch
marshland is still challenging in GB region despite the implementation of VDRMPs, HVRA
studies and development of Qurumbar National Park management plan. The awareness-
raising programme could thus help protect and conserve the wetland project sites, and also
promote other conservation practices. However, awareness-raising activities carried out during
the project period are not sufficient. In addition, multi-purpose trees and fodder plantation are
visible and beneficial interventions in project sites but the success rate of plantation depends
on water availability and commitment from the community. It is therefore recommended that:
ƒƒ Scientific databases are developed under the above wetland conservation projects and
made available in the form of publications (scientific journals and policy briefs).
ƒƒ Gilgit-Baltistan government needs to provide financial resources for Qurumbar National
Park management planning and implementation.
ƒƒ The scale of fodder cultivation and plantation could be increased because this activity was
more visible and beneficial.
ƒƒ Awareness raising activities could be continued with endowment funds; the amount of fund
should be increased for further promotion of activities.

12
 Himalayan High-Altitude Wetlands: An Ecosystem beyond Habitats for Waterfowls

ƒƒ Alternate sources should be provided to local communities, who are solely and wholly
dependent on natural resources for their survival, in order to achieve conservation in a
real sense.

References
Ali, Z. (2005). ‘Ecology, distribution and conservation of migratory birds at Uchali Wetlands
Complex, Punjab, Pakistan’. A thesis submitted to the University of the Punjab in partial
fulfilment of the requirment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Zoology
(unpublished).
Ambrose, R.F. (2000). ‘Wetlands mitigation in the United States: assessing the success of
mitigation policies’. Wetlands Australia Journal 19(1), 0725-0312.
Chopra, R., Verma, V. & Sharma, P. (2001). ‘Mapping, monitoring and conservation of Harike
wetland ecosystem, Punjab, India, through remote sensing’. International Journal of
Remote Sensing 22 (1), 89-98.
Dudgeon, D. (1992). ‘Endangered ecosystems: a review of the conservation status of tropical
Asian rivers’. Hydrobiologia 248(3), 167-191.
Erwin, K. (2009). ‘Wetlands and global climate change: the role of wetland restoration in a
changing world’. Wetlands Ecology and Management 17(1), 71-84.
Gujja, B. (2007). ‘Conservation of High-Altitude Wetlands: Experiences of the WWF
Network’. Mountain Research and Development 27(4), 368-371.
MEA (2005). ‘Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Current State and Assessment’. Island Press,
Washington-DC 20009.
Mebert, K., Masroor, R. & Chaudhry, M.J.I. (2013). ‘The Dice Snake, Natrix tessellata
(Serpentes: Colubridae) in Pakistan: analysis of its range limited to few valleys in the
Western Karakoram’. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 45(2), 395-410.
Roberts, T. J. (1992). ‘The birds of Pakistan’. Vol. 2 Passeriformes. Oxford University Press
WWF (2011). ‘Saving Wetlands Sky High programme’. Country Strategy for Pakistan.
WWF-India (2006). ‘Report of the fourth regional workshop capacity building for high altitude
wetlands conservation and management’. World Wide Fund for Nature-India.
WWF-Pakistan (2011). ‘Saving Wetlands Sky High: A Regional Initiative of the WWF-
Netherlands’. Strategic Plan (2011-2014), World Wide Fund for Nature-Pakistan.

13
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Ecosystem Services and Management

of Band-e-Amir National Park
Nasaratullah Jaheda
a
Wildlife Conservation Society, Afghanistan
[email protected]

Abstract
Band-e-Amir lake, the first national park of Afghanistan, is located in the western Hindu Kush mountains
in Bamyan Province. The Band-e-Amir lakes (ca. 6 km2) are the headwaters of the Band-e-Amir River,
which flows west and then north feeding into the Balkh River. The livelihoods of Band-e-Amir’s people
depend on natural resource use, such as dryland farming for food supply, uprooting the shrubs for
fuelwood and animal grazing on the pasterlands. Due to high dependency of local communities on
natural reosurces, the Band-e-Amir landscape is heavily degraded. Besides, regular flow of tourists
and visitors to the park has resulted in significant threats to the park’s environment and corollary
management challenges.

Afghanistan’s environmental law grants the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA)
authority in all aspects of protected areas. However, NEPA delegated management responsibility to
the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock through signing an Afghan ministerial ordinance
called a tarzulamal. A joint community/government collaborative management body, the Band-e-Amir
Protected Area Committee (BAPAC) was established in 2007 and has been successful in guiding
management of the park. But many challenges still exist which need to be addressed as soon as
possible, including receiving secure government funding for park activities, providing rangers with
legal authority to enforce prohibitions, and channelling park revenue back to communities.

Keywords: Band-e-Amir National Park, Band-e-Amir Protected Area Committee, Bamyan,

ecosystem services, park management

Introduction
The heart of Band-e-Amir National Park, in the Bamyan Province of central Afghanistan, is a
series of six lakes separated by travertine dams located in the westward extension of the Hindu
Kush Mountain of the Hazarajat Plateau. The crystal-blue water of the lakes and the
surrounding rugged mountains provide a stunning sight of a unique natural landscape
(Figure 2.1). Band-e-Amir is also recognized as a place of religious importance and is
regularly visited by thousands of Afghan people. Few international tourists visit the site, but the
destination is very popular among Afghan people who come for recreation and
religious purposes.

14
 Ecosystem Services and Management of Band-e-Amir National Park

Figure 2.1: Band-e-Haibat Lake with the Shrine of Hazrat Ali on the left in
Band-e-Amir National Park, Bamyan Province, Afghanistan, March 2014

Band-e-Amir was declared as the first national park of Afghanistan in 1973 by the Afghan
Tourist Organization (Shank and Larsson 1977), but could not be gazetted officially by the
government because a war began that disrupted the civil institutions of the country for the
following 30 years. In the mid-1970s, international organizations started work to develop
Band-e-Amir as a legally established and well-managed conservation area (Shank and Alavi
2010). Unfortunately, this work remained on hold during the war against the Soviets and
successive civil conflicts. Following a post-conflict mission in 2005 (Shank and Alavi 2010),
conservation efforts initiated by Mag, NEPA and facilitated on the ground by NGOs including
the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) led to the official declaration of the lakes and
surrounding landscape as Afghanistan’s first national park in 2009. A presidential decree
legalized this status on August 2015. Band-e-Amir National Park (BANP) does not exclude
sustainable human activities and natural resource management and aims for “vibrant, healthy
communities living in harmony with, and engaged in maintaining, an intact lake system, an
environment rich in natural beauty, pure water and wildlife that provides high-quality visitor
experiences” (BAPAC 2011). This paper describes the ecological context, management system
and approaches, and challenges associated with the conservation of BANP. It also provides
some details on the physical and social environment of the park.

15
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

The Physical Environment of Band-e-Amir

Geography
Band-e-Amir National Park is 613.3 km2 in size and lies 185 km northwest of Kabul and
55 km west of Bamyan town (Figure 2.2). The lakes are separated by natural travertine dams,
extended east to west across the Band-e-Amir Valley at ca. 2,900 masl. The surrounding
mountains rise up to 3,400 masl (Shank 2011). The six lakes are collectively known as
Band-e-Amir and are named from east to west – Band-e-Zulfiqar, Podina, Panir, Haibat,
Qanbar and Band-e-Ghulaman. The natural travertine dams that separate one lake from
another are formed by mineral deposits, creating a staircase of calcium carbonate which hold
back highly mineralized deep blue water. The park boundary (Figure 2.2) is determined on the
basis of the lakes’ upstream catchment area and downstream areas extending as far as
villages that locals consider to be Band-e-Amir communities.

Climate
There is very little climatic information on BANP, but generally the climate of Band-e Amir is
strongly continental, with low air humidity, high evaporation and wide temperature variations
between summer and winter. There is heavy snowfall during winter and almost no summer
precipitation (Shank and Larsson 1977). WCS installed an air temperature recorder at
Jarukashan (nearest village from Haibat Lake at 2,900 m.) between June 2007 and August

Figure 2.2: Band-e-Amir National Park boundary in Afghanistan (in red line)

16
 Ecosystem Services and Management of Band-e-Amir National Park

2010 (Figure 2.3). The absolute

maximum temperature recorded at Figure 2.3: Monthly average and absolute
values for air temperatures (ºC) measured at
BANP was 33°C in July and August,
Jarukashan, Band-e-Amir, Bamyan Province,
and the absolute minimum temperature between June 2007 and August 2010
was –32°C in January (Shank 2011).
Though the precipitation has not been 40.00
accurately measured, the average
30.00
annual precipitation was estimated at
450 mm with maximum fall in spring 20.00
(March through May) and almost none 10.00
during summer (June through August) 0.00
(Freitag 1971; Dieterle 1973).
-10.00
-20.00
Hydrology
-30.00
The surface streams and groundwater
feeding Band-e-Amir lakes are the -40.00

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
headwaters of the Band-e-Amir River,
which, as it leaves the lakes, flows to
the west and then to the north to join
the Balkh River. The Balkh River Average Average maximum
ultimately disappears into the sands Average minimum Absolute maximum
near the Turkmen border north of Absolute minimum

Mazar-e-Sharif. The surface water

Source: Shank 2011
flowing into the lakes system originates
from numerous small springs within
20 km around the lakes (Shank 2011). Seasonal runoff may also contribute to the surface
inflow of the lakes. There are also numerous springs detected by Terek (1983) flowing under
the lakes, but no research has been done to measure the relative inputs from these two
sources.

The surface and depth of the lakes have been measured by Jux and Kempf (1971). The
deepest and largest lake is Band-e Zulfiqar, with 49 m maximum depth. The lakes’ size,
average depth and volume of water have been given by Jux and Kempf (1971) (Table 2.1).

Social Environment of Band-e-Amir

The population of the 14 communities within Band-e-Amir National Park was estimated to be
about 5,000 in 2010 (Shank 2011). This number has probably increased during the past five
years due to families returning from Iran and neighbouring areas to which they had fled to
avoid conflicts. Also, the national park provides attractive facilities and opportunities for the
local residents. The people of BANP are all Shi’a Muslims and ethnically Hazara. The Hazaras
are Dari speakers and the dominant ethnic group in the Hazarajat Plateau, especially in
Bamyan Province.

17
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Table 2.1: Size, depth and volume of Band-e-Amir lakes

Size Average depth Water volume
(km²) (m) (m³)
Zulfiqar 4.875 28 136,500,000
Haibat 0.870 18 15,600,000
Ghulaman 0.130 2 260,000
Jedachel 0.050 2 95,000
Band-e-Panir 0.045 1 45,000
Small lakes between Jedechel and Zulfiqar 0.015 2 30,000
Total 5.985 152,530,000
Source: Jux and Kempf 1971

Most of BANP residents live in villages near the lakes. Jarukashan village is located near
Haibat Lake and this is the first area visited by tourists entering the park from the main gate. It
provides a major market and visitor facilities, and is the nearest village from the park
headquarters, as well as a religiously important shrine (Shrine of Imam Ali) for Hazara people.

There are nine registered Community Development Councils (CDCs) in BANP. These councils
were created primarily to receive development funds from governmental and non-
governmental organizations. Moreover, there is Band-e-Amir Community Council, a
community association that represents all nine CDCs of BANP. It was established to implement
all projects and development programmes specifically related to national park communities,
and to ensure a fair distribution of benefits among communities, and to make collective
decisions on natural resource management on behalf of its constituent communities. The
Band-e-Amir Protected Area Committee (BAPAC) was established in 2007 to carry out
collaborative management of the park. More details about BAPAC are given in the
management section of this paper.

Ecosystem Services
The livelihoods of most people in BANP depend mainly on livestock and farming with a very
few of them running other businesses in and outside the park. About 1.4% of the BANP areas
were part of irrigated lands, most of which were cultivated with wheat and barley, some
potatoes and animal fodder; and ca. 3.4% of the areas were covered by drylands, e.g.,
non-irrigated, rain-fed (Mohibbi and Cochard 2014). In some areas people depend heavily
on dryland farming to meet their needs of wheat and barley. This is an environmental concern
because it damages the fragile rangelands by reducing plant diversity and soil fertility, and
increasing soil erosion. For this reason, the Afghanistan Pasture Law (Shank 2011) prohibited
the conversion of pastureland to dryland farming. Notwithstanding this, in the past the
government granted licenses allowing dryland farming. Currently, the government accepts
already established dryland farming in order to sustain food security (Shank 2011).

18
 Ecosystem Services and Management of Band-e-Amir National Park

Livestock grazing is a major economic activity in Band-e-Amir. Mohibbi and Cochard (2014)
estimated that free-ranging livestock population in BANP comprises about 19,900 goats,
2,500 cattle and, 2,100 donkeys and horses. Grazing impacts is evident, especially near
villages. All the traditional pasture areas have been divided among the communities, with
each community possessing exclusive grazing rights to certain areas. Heavy grazing pressure
over thousands of years has completely altered the natural plant communities and significantly
reduced the carrying capacity of the rangelands (Shank 2011). However, local people do not
consider overgrazing to be a major environmental issue and it is difficult to convince them
that new grazing management is needed (Bedunah et al. 2010).

Almost all local people uproot shrubs to use mostly as fuelwood for cooking and heating.
Mohibbi and Cochard (2014) reported that families collect ca. 3.1 t of shrubs per year and ≥
0.7% of BANP area was cleared of shrubs annually, and ca. 0.4 t of dried cattle dung is also
collected and used as supplementary fuel for heating. Specific plant species are collected as
winter fodder for livestock. Bedunah et al. (2010) reported that shrub availability had
decreased significantly during recent times. Band-e-Amir residents were once able to collect
shrubs near their village, but now they have to often travel about 7 km to find adequate size
shrubs. The main reason for the decrease of shrubs was overharvesting of shrubs by outsiders
who loaded shrubs into large trucks (Bedunah et al. 2010). This practice has been
dramatically reduced in recent years thanks to more efficient enforcement activities. Bedunah
et al. (2010) considered uprooting and overharvesting of shrubs to be the most critical
rangeland issue as it significantly decreases vegetation cover, retards regeneration, causes soil
erosion through runoff and wind, reduces soil organic matter, removes protection for rare
grasses, and reduces snow retention capacity of the area.

The reeds Phragmites australis along the lakeshores, mainly concentrated in Band-e
Ghulaman and in large wetlands between Deh Abkhana Payeen and Kotak villages in the
main valley, provide excellent habitat for breeding waterfowl and other wildlife. The reeds are
cut in the fall for fuel, fodder and livestock bedding. This is not considered to pose a major
threat to birdlife as most breeding species have already completed their reproduction and
have sometimes already migrated to the south.

Another major economic service of Band-e-Amir National Park is tourism. It has long been the
destination of national and international visitors. Tourism is a revenue generating activity for
the local communities and comprises recreational facilities, food, accommodation, local
businesses, and religious and cultural activities. According to WCS tourist demography survey
in BANP, the number of visitors from April to October 2015 was as high as 131,000. The
maximum tourist influx into the park was during the months of July and August. Since the
establishment of the park, domestic Afghan visitors to BANP have increased significantly. This
is because the road to Band-e-Amir has been paved, security is excellent, and more park
facilities are available in the park. However, very few international travellers visit largely,
because of the generally poor security situation of the country.

19
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

BANP is BirdLife International’s Important Bird Area with 152 species recorded in the
WorldBirds Database (Mohibbi and Cochard 2014, BirdLife International 2015). A transect
bird survey was done by Busuttil and Ayé (2009) at BANP. They found the Saker Falcon (Falco
cherrug), a Globally Threatened species on the IUCN Red List which is threatened by illegal
harvesting for international falconry in Persian Gulf states, and the Cinereous Vulture
(Aegypius monachus), a Near Threatened species, and the Afghan Snowfinch (Pyrgilauda
theresae), a breeding endemic species to central Afghanistan (Figure 2.4). The hunting of
waterfowl and other birds, and fishing was common before 2007, but after the park rangers
were hired, these illegal activities inside the park declined significantly.

The Lake System Services

The lakes are the primary reason for the establishment of the national park. The lakes provide
water for irrigation and household use to downstream villages in Bamyan, Sar-e-Pul and
Balkh Provinces. A hydropower project was constructed in Deh Abkhana village in 2008
along the main Band-e-Amir Valley and provides electricity to three adjacent villages in that
valley (173 households). Another hydroelectric power plant, supplying power to two villages
(227 households), has been constructed upstream of the lakes in Kupruk in 2014, the largest
village east of Zulfiqar Lake. Another economic activity that the locals benefit from is renting
plastic pedal boats to tourists (Figure 2.5). About 50 boats are rented to tourists on summer
weekends for an average of USD 5 per hour.

Figure 2.4: Afghan Snowfinch, a breeding endemic bird of central Afghanistan

20
 Ecosystem Services and Management of Band-e-Amir National Park

Figure 2.5: Plastic pedal boats rented to tourists in Band-e-Haibat Lake,

BANP, Bamyan Province, July 2013

Park Management
Management bodies
According to the Environmental Law of Afghanistan (2007), the National Environmental
Protection Agency (NEPA) is responsible for all aspects of the protected area planning and
management. However, NEPA delegated management responsibility to the Ministry of
Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock through signing the Interim Protected Areas tarzulamal.
One of the three objectives of the protected area system mentioned in Article 38 (3) of the
Environmental Law is to involve the local communities in management of natural resources.
This principle is also stipulated in the tarzulamal, which states that each protected area must
have a Protected Area Committee that includes both government and community
representatives.

The BAPAC was established through consultation with national, provincial and district level
governments in 2007. The community representatives in the 14 communities of BANP were
initially elected through a secret ballot process organized and monitored by WCS and the
Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock, along with representatives from the Governor,
NEPA and the Provincial Council (Shank and Alavi 2010). Unfortunately, in recent year’s
election deviated from the strict procedures initiated in 2007. The government representatives

21
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

in BAPAC are from relevant departments at the provincial level and the Provincial Governor is
the Committee chairperson. In principle the tarzulamal grants communities absolute elective
rights to retain significant influence over the management decisions; however, the ultimate
decision-making authority rests with the collaborative management agreement (CMA).

The BAPAC generally meets once a month. It has an advisory role in park management. It
provides advice to the CMA in order to ensure that management decisions will benefit from
local knowledge and reflect the wishes of local people as well as the Provincial and District
governments. Officially, all decisions made by BAPAC must be approved by the national office
of the CMA. In practice, the CMA tacitly approves all BAPAC decisions (BAPAC 2011).

The park management office is the official representative of the CMA in BAPAC and is
responsible for implementing day-to-day management activities on the ground. The park
management office consists of one park warden and 10 rangers who are responsible for
enforcing the rules and regulations of the national park. All rangers have been hired from the
local communities.

Management plan
In 2008, the Wildlife Conservation Society assisted the BAPAC in developing a Preliminary
Management Plan intended to provide a foundation for the legal establishment of Band-e-
Amir as a provisional protected area. It was approved by the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation
and Livestock and NEPA, and finally, in April 2009, Band-e-Amir was declared a provisional
national park for a period of three years (Shank and Alavi 2010). This management plan was
superseded by the current management plan, which built upon the preliminary management
plan by incorporating the lessons learned during previous three-year period. This
management plan was intended to provide directions to the park management over the next
five years from 2011 to 2015 and to support the formal gazettement of the park (BAPAC
2011). The management plan is being updated for the next five-year period and is to be
finalized in April 2016. These management plans are intended to be practical plans of action
on topics that the plan signatories commit to addressing. The Collaborative Management
Agreement in the Management Plan has been signed by all BAPAC members including
communities, and the CMA and the General Director of NEPA. All the signatories in this
agreement are committed to implement the terms of this Management Plan (BAPAC 2011).

Management successes and failures

The development and management of Band-e-Amir as a national park began in the 1970s.
These efforts were interrupted for almost three decades due to conflicts in the country and
resumed soon after the fall of the Taliban regime in 2001. Since the establishment of Band-e-
Amir as a national park in 2009, there have been significant achievements, but also
challenges facing the management process of the park.

22
 Ecosystem Services and Management of Band-e-Amir National Park

The creation of BAPAC was an important step towards the effective management of the park.
It took many difficult and effective management decisions during plenary sessions, such as a
ban on plowing new drylands by tractor, a ban on leasing of pastureland to non-Band-e-Amir
residents, development and approval of the management plans, bans on fishing and hunting.
A social organization called Band-e-Amir Community Association was officially registered with
the government of Afghanistan in late 2010 as a community organization authorized to
receive contracts from the government to perform paid services such as renting the parking
lot, campsites, etc. and disburse funds among the communities. However, due to various
problems (e.g., unequal community representation, poor financial management), it was
disbanded in late 2013 and superseded by the Band-e-Amir Community Council. The
Band-e-Amir Community Council was created to oversee community projects as well as to
implement national park projects. This is a community-based institution intended to involve all
communities of BANP in the development programme of the national park. It is also an
effective body for making decisions on natural resource management. No system has yet been
established to collect revenue and spend it on park management and the development of
communities. Consultations with relevant stakeholders are ongoing to build a proper system
of revenue collection and its distribution for park management and communities.

Finally, almost 45 years after the start of the process, BANP was officially gazetted as a
national park by a Presidential Decree in August 2015. The park headquarters is currently
being built and 5 permanent community rangers and 15 contracted rangers have been
appointed to record and deter illegal activities and implement management activities on the
ground. Four women rangers have been supported by WCS since 2013. Rangers have been
very effective in stopping waterfowl hunting and fishing, commercial harvest of shrubs by
outsiders and the use of vehicles in restricted areas. Unfortunately, budget constraints at the
government level resulted in reduction of contracted ranger forces in 2014.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Dr Richard Paley, Country Director and Dr Stephane Ostrowski, Scientific
and M&E Advisor, Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), Afghanistan for their review. I am
really grateful to Dr Christopher C. Shank who assisted me in writing this paper and reviewed
it. Special thanks to Mr David Bradfield, Bamyan Project Advisor, and Mr Mohammad Ibrahim
Abrar, Bamyan Project Manager for providing critical inputs.

23
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

References
BAPAC (2011). ‘Band-e-Amir National Park Management Plan’. Band-e-Amir Protected Area
Committee, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock and National Environmental
Protection Agency, 1390 – 1394 (Unpublished).
Bedunah, D.J., Shank, C.C. & Alavi, M.A. (2010). ‘Rangelands of Band-e-Amir National Park
and Ajar Provisional Wildlife Reserve, Afghanistan’. Rangelands 32(5): 41–52.
BirdLife International (2015). ‘Important Bird Areas Factsheet: Band-e-Amir’. BirdLife
International. http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sitefactsheet.php?id=8007 accessed on
13 Oct 2015.
Busuttil, S. & Ayé, R. (2009). ‘Ornithological surveys in Bamiyan Province, Islamic Republic of
Afghanistan’. Sandgrouse 31, 146–159.
Dieterle, A. (1973). ‘Vegetations kundliche untersuchungen im gebiete von Band-e-Amir
(Zentral Afghanistan)’. Inaugural Dissertation, University of München.
Freitag, H. (1971). ‘Studies in the natural vegetation of Afghanistan’. In Davis et al. (eds.)
Plant life of South-West Asia. Edinburgh Royal Botanic Garden, 89-106.
Jux, U. & Kempf, E.K. (1971). ‘Staussen durch Travertineabsatz im zentralafghanische
Hochgebirge’. Zeitschrift fur Geomorphologie, Supplement issues 12, 107-137.
Mohibbi, A.A. & Cochard, R. (2014). ‘Residents’ resource uses and nature conservation in
Band-e-Amir National Park, Afghanistan’. Environmental Development 11, 141–161.
Available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211464514000414
Shank, C.C. (2011). ‘The environment and people of Band-e-Amir’. (Unpublished).
Shank, C.C. & Alavi, M.A. (2010). ‘Establishment of Band-e-Amir National Park, Afghanistan:
History and lessons learned’. Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul. (Unpublished).
Shank, C.C. & Larsson, F.Y. (1977). ‘A strategy for the establishment and development of
Band-e-Amir National Park’. FAO Field Document No. 8, FO: DP/AFG/74/016. Kabul.
Terek, J. (1983). ‘To the knowledge of aquatic fauna of Band-e-Amir Lakes (Afghanistan)’.
Biologia (Bratisl.) 38(2), 167-71.

24
 Peling-Tso, a Low-Altitude Wetland and Its Management Practices, Southern Bhutan

Peling-Tso, a Low-Altitude Wetland

and Its Management Practices,
Southern Bhutan
Pema Wangdaa and Dorji Gyaltshena
a
Watershed Management Division, Department of Forest and Park Services,
Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Royal Government of Bhutan
[email protected] or [email protected]

Abstract
Peling-Tso is a low-altitude wetland at an altitude of 900 masl, in the southern part of the Bhutan
Himalayas, surrounded by hills with the highest ridge of approximately 1,400 masl. The wetland,
which has an area of about 26 ha, is surrounded by low-lying hills covered by evergreen broad-
leaved forest, mainly domi70

nated by Salix tertrasperma. Waterflows from Peling-Tso are used by more than 200 households
clustered in the valley and on the slopes of surrounding hills. This water is mainly used for irrigation
and livestock consumption. As this wetland is not fed by glaicers and snow, the broad-leaved forest
that surrounds the wetland acts as a buffer and slowly filters the surface runoff rainwater and recharges
the groundwater to maintain the hydrological cycle of the wetland as well as the critical ecological
habitat of flora and fauna. A continuous supply of water in the stream even in the lean season is a
result of good management practices, resulting in diverse life forms (endemic and rare species) in the
wetland.

Keywords: buffer-forest, groundwater, Peling-Tso, recharge, wetland

Introduction
The wetlands in the Bhutan Himalayas comprise high-altitude glacial lakes, alpine lakes,
mid-altitude wetland (Phobjikha, khotokha etc), and low-altitude wetland (Peling-Tso)
(Figure 3.1). Consistent with the global trend, wetlands in the Bhutan Himalayas, especially
marshlands along the low-altitude wetlands, are also gradually seen to be shrinking, though
no scientific observations have been conducted. Changes in land use, associated mainly with
commercialization of agriculture and infrastructure development, also cause loses of the
marshlands.

25
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

The main objective of the present study was to understand the impact of human activities on
the sustainability of the wetlands. Specifically, the study was carried out with the following
objectives:
ƒƒ To select two study sites with different land use practices for understanding the impact of
such practices;
ƒƒ To understand the role of different vegetation strata in controlling soil erosion and
recharging groundwater; and
ƒƒ To clarify the importance of maintaining a buffer forest in managing the wetland.

Figure 3.1: Map of the study area

(A) location of Bhutan along the Himalayan range; (B) map of Bhutan showing
20 districts; (C) map of the study site and location of the sampling plots.

26
 Peling-Tso, a Low-Altitude Wetland and Its Management Practices, Southern Bhutan

Materials and Methods

Study site
Peling-Tso wetland is located in Dechenling Gewog (Block) in the lower altitude of the Bhutan
Himalayas. Specifically, the study site is located in Dechiling, under Pemagatshel Dzongkhag
(District), Southern Bhutan (Figure 3.1B). The study site covers cultivated agricultural fields on
the ridge-top, abandoned field, secondary forest of Castanopsis-Lithocarpus along the shifting
cultivation sites, natural evergreen broad-leaved forest along the buffer forest, and finally Salix
tetrasperma forest in the wetland.

Two study sites were selected for investigating the impact of human activities: (1) traditional
land-use practice including shifting cultivation with the buffer forest along the altitudinal
gradient from the ridge-top to the wetland; and (2) the site where farmers intensively used
whole area from the ridge-top to the wetland.

Climate
Temperature and humidity conditions of the study area were downloaded from HOBO Onset
(temperature and relative air humidity) automated digital data loggers installed in 2010. The
average data of three years were analyzed to understand the climatic condition of the study
area. In addition, rainfall data were also collected from the Meteorology Section, Hydromet
Services Division of the Department of Energy. The results of the climatic data showed that a
maximum temperature of 25.9°C was recorded in August and a minimum of 7.6°C in
January. The mean annual temperature was 18.4°C (Figure 3.2B). The mean total annual
rainfall was 3,916.6 mm with the highest rainfall recorded in the month of July (816.7 mm)
and a minimum of 17.5 mm in December (Figure 3.2A).

Figure 3.2: Climatic conditions of the study area: (A) Walter’s climate diagram and
(B) Temperature in the study area
Mean temperature (°C)
Annual rainfall (mm)
Temperature (°C)

(A) Months of the year (B) Months of the year

27
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

The analysis of climate data showed that the study site falls in the warm subtropical type of
climate with relatively higher rainfall compared to other places in Bhutan. The climate
diagram was drawn using Walter and Lieth’s method (Walter and Lieth 1961-1967;
Lieth et al. 1999).

Vegetation survey
Accordingly, the vegetation sampling plots were laid along the two sites to compare the
impacts of land-use practices on the sustainability of the wetland (Figure 3.3A, 3.3B).

Figure 3.3: Location of the study sites along two different land-use practices: (A) along
the subtle (traditional use); (B) along the intensive cultivation sites

Results and Discussion

Environmental conditions
Environmental attributes like soil hardness (kg/cm2), soil moisture content (%), air temperature
(°C) and relative humidity (%) were measured by instruments (Push cone, hydro-sense, Viasala)
that measure the instantaneous attributes of the environment. The soil hardness results
revealed low soil compaction on the ridge-top at both sites. However, soil compaction
increased along the disturbed site and decreased through the buffer forest of the subtle
human use site (Figure 3.4A). Soil moisture content was found to be high at the base of the
hill in the wetland of the disturbed site, indicating a higher runoff rate while the soil moisture
content of the subtle human use site with a proper buffer forest showed a steady increase
(Figure 3.4B). Air temperature measured during the survey was found to be slightly higher
along the disturbed site compared to the site of subtle human use (Figure 3.4C). In contrast,
the relative humidity was found to be slightly higher along the site of subtle human use
compared to the disturbed site, indicating a relatively dry environment (Figure 3.4D).

28
 Peling-Tso, a Low-Altitude Wetland and Its Management Practices, Southern Bhutan

Figure 3.4: Environmental attributes along the two study sites

Soil hardness (kg/cm2)

Subtle (traditional)

Soil moisture (%)

Intensive cultivation

(A) (B)
Temperature (°C)

RH (%)

(C) (D)

Ridge Wetland Ridge Wetland

PLOTS
(A) soil hardness; (B) soil moisture content at 20 cm depth; (C) instant temperature measured;
(D) relative humidity measured during the study period

Vegetation
Floristically the study site is located in the moist climatic habitat and accordingly the study
revealed diverse life forms. The site under intensive cultivation showed more diverse life forms
compared to the site of subtle human use (Figure 3.5). Subtle human use site is dominated by
evergreen broad-leaved shrubs or evergreen broad-leaved trees along the slopes followed by
deciduous broad-leaved trees in the wetland, mainly Salix tetrasperma (Figure 3.5).
Interestingly the buffer forest surrounding the forest was mainly dominated by Altingia excelsa
belonging to Hamamelidaceae, a primitive plant group. In contrast, the intensive cultivation
sites surrounding the wetland (Peling-Tso) were dominated by evergreen and deciduous shrubs
along the slopes followed by Phragmites and other grasses in the core wetland zone with
scattered deciduous and evergreen broad-leaved trees (Figure 3.5).

Structurally the two study sites showed different forest types. Along the subtle human use sites,
the forest structure followed the natural successional pattern from early-seral stage (shrub
dominated), mid-seral stage (pioneer mixed shrubs), late-seral stage to trees (climax forest)
which act as buffer surrounding the wetland (Peling-Tso). Total basal area (biomass equivalent)

29
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

was found to be very high along the subtle human use sites while it was very low along the
intensive cultivation site (Figure 3.6A). In contrast, the floristic diversity was found to be higher
in the intensive cultivation site and relatively lower along the subtle human use site
(Figure 3.6B). The result clearly indicates that intensive cultivation leads to the introduction of
diverse species and vice versa along the subtle human use site. This indicates that subtle
human use helps to conserve the natural diversity of forest.

Figure 3.5: Comparison of life-form distribution of vegetation along the

two sites of Peling-Tso

Figure 3.6: Comparison of vegetation traits in the two study sites

(A) total basal area of the two study sites; (B) species diversity of the two study sites

30
 Peling-Tso, a Low-Altitude Wetland and Its Management Practices, Southern Bhutan

Discussion and Conclusion

Bhutan has diverse wetland types ranging from glacial lakes in the northern High Himalayas,
mid-altitude wetlands along the inner mid-mountain valleys (Bumdeling, Gaytsa, Phobjikha,
Khotokha and Nob-Tsonapata) to low-altitude wetlands (Peling-Tso, Kalikhola Tso, Buli-Tso,
etc). These wetlands exist in the form of marshes. Marsh lakes are facing several challenges
including developmental activities, climate change and pollution. Headlines in national
newspapers, e.g., “Depleting water sources reported in 12 gewogs of Trashigang” (Kuensel
2014) and “Shrinking Kharul Lake saddens locals” (Wangdi 2014) indicated threats to
mid- and low-altitude wetlands in the country.

Similarly, the condition of Peling-Tso wetland faces a similar situation of decreasing water
discharge. The intensive study including social and vegetation investigation was carried out to
understand the cause of sediments in the wetland that led to drying up of the wetland. The
study found that intensive cultivation from the ridge-top to the wetland leads to significant
surface runoff with little or no impact on groundwater recharge through seepage. However,
along the subtle human use of the forest, the finding showed infiltration supported by buffer
forest. This type of land-use practice helped to recharge the wetland by sustaining water
discharge even during the lean season. One of the significant findings of the study was that a
buffer forest acts as a filter during the rainy season, thereby recharging groundwater
(Figure 3.7). The study thus recommends maintaining a 10 m wide buffer forest belt around
the wetland. The buffer forest dominated by deciduous trees like Altingia excelsa, Schima

Figure 3.7: Proposed land-use management of Peling-Tso

A) Peling-Tso before proposed land-use B) proposed land-use showing buffer forest

around Peling-Tso

31
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

wallichii, Lithocarpus fenestratus, Salix tetrasperma and Phragmites (Graminae) along the
Peling-Tso was found to be very important as it acts as a filter during the rainy season and
helps to prevent surface runoff. It was also found that subtle human activities such as grazing
including other traditional farming practices (shifting cultivation) and fuelwood collection may
not have significant impact if a proper buffer forest is in place.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following team members for their contribution during the
field survey – Kezang, Geog Forest Extension Officer, Dechenling, Rebecca Pradhan (RSPN),
Kunzang Om and Kaka (WMD), Karma and Damber K. G. (RDC-Yusipang), Ugyen Tshering
and Ugyen Phuntsho (CNR). The authors would like to acknowledge the critical comments
and advice of Prof Masahiko Ohsawa, University of Tokyo, Japan. The research was
conducted with the financial support of the GEF-SGP programme under the leadership of Mr
Singay Dorji, National Programme Coordinator. Authors would also like to thank Mr Ugyen
Lhendup, RSPN for his participation in the symposium at Dali, Kunming.

References
Kuensel (2014). ‘Depleting water sources reported in 12 gewogs of Trashigang’. Bhutan
National News Paper, 26th December, 2014.
Lieth, H., Berlekamp, J., Fuest, S. & Riediger, S. (1999). ‘Climate Diagram World Atlas’.
Backhuys publishers, Leiden.
Walter, H. & Lieth, H. (1961-1967). ‘Climate Diagram World Atlas’. Jena, Fischer Verlag.
Wangdi, S. (2014). ‘Shrinking Kharul Lake saddens locals’. Bhutan National News Paper, 26th
December, 2014.

32
 Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives

Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas:

Status and Conservation Initiatives
Syed Ainul Hussaina, Neeraj Mahara, Chongpi Tuboia and Ruchi Badolaa
a
Wildlife Institute of India, Uttarakhand, India
[email protected]

Abstract
Globally, wetlands are vital elements of the ecosystems and economies and occur extensively in all
climatic zones. Himalayan wetlands harbour rich biodiversity and numerous ecosystem services.
High-altitude wetlands in the Himalayas include lakes, swamps and seasonal marshes. They are the
source of major rivers like the Indus, Brahmaputra and tributaries of the Ganga. India has a great
diversity of wetlands owing to its location at the junction of three biogeographic realms. The Indian
Himalayas harbour some of the most spectacular and biologically rich wetlands in the world. Some
of these wetlands are extensively explored, but most of them are still unknown. At present, these
wetlands are under immense pressure due to increasing anthropogenic pressure and underlying
natural causes. An assessment on location, characteristics, functions, values, threats and status of
wetlands is necessary to develop fundamental knowledge and sustainable wetland conservation
programme. Current review discusses the conservation status of wetlands in the Indian Himalayas,
particularly the states of Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Sikkim and Arunachal
Pradesh, with the objective to consolidate the status of the Indian Himalayan wetlands for
conservation prioritization.

Keywords: Himalayas, wetlands, conservation, threats, biodiversity

Introduction
The Indian Himalayas harbour some of the most spectacular and biodiversity rich wetlands in
the world. While some of these wetlands have been extensively explored, most of them remain
little known. Wetlands in the Himalayas are the product of climate, precipitation, geology,
geomorphology, drainage and soil condition of the region (Wadia 1960). All the drainage in
the region passes through newly emerged deep gorges that have very little area of inundation
and, consequently, have little riverine marshes, except in large valleys and plateaus. Apart
from lakes, the Himalayan wetland system comprises networks of rivers with associated
floodplain marshes and swamps, glaciers and hot springs, seasonal waterlogged areas and
manmade reservoirs (Upadhyaya et al. 2009). High precipitation in the eastern Himalayas
has produced more extensive seasonal waterlogged areas, marshes and swamps than in the
western Himalayas.

33
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Distribution of Wetlands in the Indian Himalayas

Through a literature review and examination of toposheets from the Department of Survey of
India, we compiled approximately 8,536 wetlands in the Indian Himalayan region, covering
55 administrative districts (NWA 2011). Of these, 3,265 wetlands are in the eastern
Himalayan states of Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim, and 5,271 wetlands are in the western
Himalayan states of Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, and Jammu and Kashmir. Jammu and
Kashmir has the maximum number of wetlands followed by Arunachal Pradesh, and Sikkim
has the minimum (NWA 2011) (Table 4.1). The total area of wetlands covering the five states
of India, including small (<2.25 ha) and large (>2.25 ha) wetlands was 756,501 ha
(Table 4.2). Of these, the wetlands of Jammu and Kashmir covered the maximum area
(391,501 ha) followed by Arunachal Pradesh (155,208 ha), and Sikkim (7,477 ha) has the
minimum area (NWA 2011) (Table 4.2).

Wetland ecosystems such as rivers, lakes, marshes and coastal estuaries provide many
benefits for human well-being. People living in proximity to wetlands depend partially or
entirely on wetland ecosystem services. These include water supply, water purification, flood
regulation, coastal protection and cultural and recreational services (Table 4.3).

Arunachal Pradesh
There are 1,593 wetlands in Arunachal Pradesh with area >2.25 ha, covering a total area of
around 154,609 ha (Tables 4.1 and 4.2). There are around 1,119 wetlands with area
<2.25 ha. Due to lack of data, it is difficult to estimate the exact number of wetlands in the

Table 4.1: Number of wetlands in the Indian Himalayas based on remote sensing data

Jammu & Himachal Arunachal

Types Uttarakhand Sikkim Total Percentage
Kashmir Pradesh Pradesh
NATURAL WETLANDS
Lakes/ponds 36 8 12 1 3 60 0.7
Marshes 1,143 42 29 259 1,231 2,704 31.68
Waterlogged 0 10 1 0 107 118 1.38
Riverine 88 0 0 0 88 176 2.06
River/stream 138 67 81 12 128 426 4.99
MAN MADE WETLANDS
Reservoir 4 13 10 0 4 31 0.36
Tanks/ponds 2 27 21 0 32 82 0.96
Waterlogged 0 3 9 0 12 0.14
Sub Total 1,411 170 163 272 1,593 3,609 42.28
WETLANDS
2,240 471 816 281 1,119 4,927 57.72
(<2.25 ha)
Total 3,651 641 979 553 2,712 8,536 100
Source: NWA 2011

34
 Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives

Table 4.2: Extent of wetlands (ha) in the Indian Himalayas based on remote sensing
data
Types Jammu & Himachal Arunachal Total %
Kashmir Pradesh Uttarakhand Sikkim Pradesh
Lakes/ponds 13,762 52 2,081 15 18 15,928 2.11
Marshes 109,170 387 142 3,050 11,422 124,171 16.43
Waterlogged 0 47 9 0 8,146 8,202 1.09
Seasonally flooded 9,594 0 0 0 0 9,594 1.27
River/stream 231,597 55,558 80,133 4,131 134,244 505,663 66.91
Reservoirs 25,132 41,817 20,319 0 164 87,432 11.57
Tanks/ponds 6 134 108 0 95 343 0.05
Waterlogged 0 30 211 0 241 0.03
Sub Total 389,261 98,025 103,003 7,196 154,089 751,574 99.46
Wetlands
2,240 471 816 281 1119 4927 0.65
(<2.25 ha)
Total (ha) 391,501 98,496 103,819 7,477 155,208 756,501 100
Source: NWA 2011

Table 4.3: Ecosystem service value of the wetlands of Indian Himalayas

Trans Himalayas – Tibetan Plateau, North Sikkim, • Source of water

Northwestern Arunachal Pradesh • Major pasture for domestic & wild ungulates
• Cultural & aesthetic value
Northwestern Himalayas – Jammu and Kashmir • Source of water
• Recharge groundwater
• Cultural & aesthetic value
Western Himalayas – Jammu and Kashmir, • Source of water
Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand • Recharge groundwater
• Flood control and maintain regional stream
• Cultural & aesthetic value
Central Himalayas – Sikkim • Source of water
• Recharge groundwater
• Maintain regional stream
• Cultural & aesthetic value
Eastern Himalayas – Arunachal Pradesh • Source of water
• Recharge groundwater
• Maintain regional stream flow
• Cultural & aesthetic value

state. However, by excluding the wetlands in the Tirap district, which is mostly plains, the
estimated wetlands of the state includes the wetlands in Lohit, East, West and Upper Siang,
and Changlang districts. Of the total wetlands >2.25 ha, majority (1,231) are marshes,
followed by river/stream (128), waterlogged (107) and riverine (88) (Table 4.1).

Arunachal Pradesh is a biodiversity rich state owing to its unique climatic conditions and its
location at the junction of the Afro-tropic, Indo-Chinese and Indo-Malayan realms. As far as
aquatic species are concerned, fish fauna is zoo-geographically rich and connects the
Indo-China, Indo-Malayan and Indian sub-region. Around 200 species of amphibians have

35
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

been reported from the state. Small flocks of endangered black-necked crane (Grus nigricollis)
have also been reported during winter from Sangti Valley in West Kameng district, Zimithang
Valley in Tawang district (Singh 2000), Apatani Valley in Lower Subansiri district (Betts 1954)
and Gandhigram Valley in Changlang district (Neog and Bhatt 1990). The state is also home
to all the three Indian species of otter viz., Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra), smooth-coated otter
(L. perspicillata) and oriental small-clawed otter (Aonyx cinerea). The Brahmaputra River and
its tributaries harbour endangered gharial (Gavialis gangeticus) and river dolphin (Platanista
gangetica) (Chaudhury and Hussain 1992).

Sikkim
There are approximately 272 wetlands >2.25 ha in Sikkim, with an area of around 7,196 ha
(Table 4.2). There are approximately 281 wetlands <2.25 ha in area (Table 4.1). Of the total
553 wetlands identified at present, majority are marshes (259), followed by river/stream (12)
and lakes and ponds (1) (Table 4.1). North Sikkim has the highest number of wetlands
followed by East Sikkim and West Sikkim.

In Sikkim, most of the wetlands are situated at higher altitudes and rugged terrain and are
hence unexplored. Of the identified wetlands, 147 wetlands have rich wildlife, 54 have
religious value, 16 have domestic use value and 7 have recreational value. Of the 123
wetlands in North Sikkim district, 41 have religious value and 96 have wildlife value (Roy and
Thapa 1998). The Lhonak valley in North Sikkim is perhaps one of the richest Trans-
Himalayan biodiversity areas in Sikkim (Lachungpa 1998). There is a good breeding
population of the ruddy shelduck (Tadorana ferruginea) and the common redshank (Tringa
tetanus). The number and frequency of arrival of the small population of less than 10 black-
necked cranes that regularly visited Lhonak Valley dropped down to less than 5 due to
defense-related activities in 1980 (Lachungpa 1998). The lower altitude wetlands are home to
all the 3 species of otters, viz. Eurasian (also occurs at higher altitudes), smooth-coated and
oriental small-clawed otter.

The Trans-Himalayan part of Sikkim is home to herbivore species like Tibetan gazelle
(Procapra picticaudata), southern kiang (Equus kiang polydon), blue sheep (Pseudois nayar),
nayan (Ovis ammon hodgsoni), Royle’s pika (Ochotona royeli) and woolly hare (Lepu
oiostolus). It also harbours carnivores like red fox (Vulpes vulpes montana), wolf (Canis lupus
chanco) and snow leopard (Uncia uncia) (Shah 1994). The streams and marshes harbour the
endemic Himalayan Salamander (Tylototriton verrucosus), found in the eastern Himalayas at
an altitude of 1,500–2,500 m (Roy 1999). Apart from having conservation significance, most
of the lakes are culturally significant as well.

Himachal Pradesh
Of the 641 wetlands in the state, 170 are >2.25 ha with an area of 98,025 ha and 471 are
<2.25 ha (Table 4.1 and Table 4.2). Kullu district has the highest number of wetlands (28)
and most of these lakes freeze during winter. Chamba and Kangra districts have large areas

36
 Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives

under wetlands because of Pong and Govind Sagar reservoirs. Of the 170 wetlands >2.25
ha, most exist in the form of river/stream (67) followed by marshes (42) and manmade tanks
and ponds (27) (Table 4.1).

The Pong reservoir (a Ramsar site) and Govind Sagar have been identified as major waterbird
refuges. Pong Dam harbours a major wintering population of the bar-headed goose (Anser
indicus) in India (Li et al. 2009). Situated at the southern edge of the Tibetan plateau,
wetlands in Lahul and Spiti have Tibetan elements. Little is known about the conservation
value of the wetlands in this district except Chandra Tal. Most of the wetlands in Himachal
Pradesh are small in size with little conservation value with respect to waterbirds but have high
aesthetic value.

Jammu and Kashmir

At present 3,651 wetlands have been identified in the state, of which 1,411 are >2.25 ha
with an area of 389,261 ha and 2,240 are <2.25 ha (Tables 4.1 and Table 4.2). Majority of
the natural wetlands are marshes (1,143) followed by river/stream (138) (Table 4.1).
Previously the Directorate of Environment and Remote Sensing, Government of Jammu and
Kashmir, identified 1,248 wetlands as small as 0.25 ha in the state with an area of 21,880 ha
(Ahmedullah 1997).

The wetlands of the state are important staging grounds for migratory waterbirds; at least 24
species of Anatids are prominent. Around 85 species of waterbirds have been recorded from
the state (Ahmedullah 1997). The Trans-Himalayan wetlands are an oasis of productivity in an
otherwise arid steppe environment and have significant conservation value, particularly as
breeding grounds for the bar-headed goose and the globally threatened black-necked crane.
Other key waterbird species breeding in the area include ruddy shelduck, common redshank,
brown-headed gull (Larus brunnicephalus), lesser sand plover (Charadrius mongolus) and
great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus) (Anon 1997). At least 34 species of birds are using the
wetlands of Ladakh (Humbert-Droz 2000, Hussain and Singh 2001, Hussain and Pandav
2008). The key mammals of the area are snow leopard, Tibetan wolf, bharal and kiang
(Chundawat and Qureshi 1999).

The wetlands in Jammu and Kashmir provide livelihood and play a significant role in the
socioeconomic status of local communities. Catchment areas of many lakes are extensively
used for paddy cultivation and fishery. Trout angling in the riverine wetlands is a major tourist
attraction. Large wetlands like Dal and Wular are part of the local culture and the unusual
and serene landscape of the Changthang region is a popular tourist destination. The lake
basins are grazing grounds for both domestic livestock and wild ungulates such as kiang
(Hussain and Singh 2001).

Realizing the great ecological and aesthetic value of the wetlands, the Department of Wildlife
Protection, Jammu and Kashmir, has identified 15 wetlands across the three regions of the

37
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

state to be protected as Wetland Reserves in accordance with the Jammu & Kashmir Wildlife
(Protection) Act, 1978. The Government of India has notified Wular, Hokersar and Tso Moriri
as wetlands of national importance.

Uttarakhand
The state of Uttarakhand, created in November 2000 from the northern Himalayan region of
the erstwhile Uttar Pradesh state, is bordered by Uttar Pradesh in the south, Himachal Pradesh
in the west, Tibet Autonomous Region of China in the north, and Nepal in the east. A total of
979 wetlands have been identified (NWA 2011), of which 163 are >2.25 ha and 816 are
<2.25 ha. Majority of natural wetlands are river/stream (81) followed by marshes (29)
(Table 4.1). The total area of wetlands >2.25 ha is 1,03,003 ha and that of <2.25 ha is 816
ha (Table 4.2). Of the 13 districts, Chamoli district has the maximum number of lakes; most
of them are glacial in origin and remain frozen from November to March. Nainital district has
nine lakes and most of these lakes are situated in the Lesser Himalayan zones at altitudes
below 2,000 m (Garg et al. 1998).

The wetlands, owing to their smaller size, have little significance for waterbirds. However, there
are reports of sporadic use by waterbirds such as gadwall (Anas stripera) and northern pintail
(Anas acuta) from Deoria Tal (low altitude lake) (Sathyakumar 1994). Three species of Indian
otter have been reported from the lower altitudes of the Garhwal Himalayas, which are
rapidly becoming rare in the state (Hussain 1998). The lakes of the Kumaun Himalayas form
one of the most remarkable and beautiful features of the Lower Himalayas (Atkinson 1882)
and are major tourist destinations.

According to Skanda Purana, all 66 lakes in the Garhwal Himalayas are spiritually and
culturally significant. Some of these lakes have significant hydrologic value i.e., maintenance
of regional stream flow. The wetlands and the streams have significant domestic as well as
medicinal value as local people believe that water from some of these lakes can cure several
diseases.

Biodiversity and Its Changes of the Wetlands in Ladakh

Ladakh represents the Trans-Himalayan region of the Indian Himalayas. The Changthang
region is the extension of the Tibetan Plateau towards the southwest into Ladakh. The area is
characterized by a barren and rugged landscape interspersed with several lakes and marshes
in the upper Indus River valley. The area receives <100 mm of annual rainfall with little snow,
and is therefore recognized as a cold desert. Most of the lakes and streams of Ladakh are of
glacial origin and remain frozen during winter (November-April). Around 13 major lakes and
several marshes are found along the Indus River and its tributaries.

In Ladakh, tourist access is restricted to summer months, which is also the peak period of
breeding season and other biological activities for several avifaunal species. The wetlands of
Ladakh are fragile and various anthropogenic activities resulting from unprecedented human

38
 Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives

population growth, faulty rangeland management, livestock grazing and increased tourism
threaten the wetlands and breeding waterbirds (Geneletti and Dawa 2009).

Water quality
Hussain et al. (2008) examined the physio-chemical properties of water and found significant
variation in seven lakes of Ladakh. Among inorganic non-metal constituents, except dissolved
oxygen (DO), ammonia as a form of nitrogen (NH4-N) and sulfite (SO3-S) differed significantly
(p<0.05). Both the quantified metallic constituents (calcium and magnesium) were found to
differ significantly among the lakes. Based on the Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) concentration
(Tilzer and Serruya 1990) the system of lakes in the Changthang region can be grouped into
three types – first, the fresh water lakes with TDS <2,000 mgL-1, such as Statsapuk Tso, Kyon
Tso-I and II, and Tso Moriri; second, the brackish water lakes with TDS >2,000-20,000
mgL-1, such as Thatsangkaru, and Pangong Tso; and third, the saline lakes with TDS
>20,000-40,000 mgL-1, such as Tso Kar.

Biodiversity value of the lakes and their catchments

Hussain et al. (2008) recorded 16 species of water birds from the Changthang region, of
which 7 species were breeding at Statsapuk Tso, 6 species at Tso Moriri and Tso Kar, 5 species
at Pangong Tso, 4 species at Kyon Tso II, and 2 species at Thatsangkaru (Figure 4.1). The
great-crested grebe and black-necked crane were recorded from Statsapuk Tso and Tso
Moriri, and common merganser (Mergus merganser) was found at Pangong Tso and the Indus
River. Another study by Hussain and Pandav (2008) recorded 44 species of waterbirds, of
which 19 species were breeding in various wetlands of Ladakh.

The encounter rate of six common breeding waterbirds was calculated for various wetlands of
Changthang (Hussain et al. 2008). Bar-headed geese were found to be nesting at all the
lakes except Kyon Tso I. The mean encounter rate of bar-headed goose varied from 3.5 to 17
per km. It was lowest for Thatsangkaru and highest for Kyon Tso II. Previously, Tso Moriri and
Tso Kar had been identified as important breeding grounds for both the bar-headed goose
and the ruddy shelduck, perhaps because of their large size and gentle shelving shorelines.
During the survey, presence of six species of carnivores, seven species of ungulates and three
species of other mammals was recorded based on direct and indirect evidence. The most
common species were snow leopard, Tibetan wolf, bharal, Tibetan argali (Ovis ammon
hodgsonii) and kiang. The other animals of conservation significance were Tibetan antelope
(Pantholopos hodgsoni) and wild yak (Bos gruinniens), which were reported from the
Changchenmo valley (Chundawat and Qureshi 1999).

Movement pattern of flagship waterbird species

Modern satellite tracking techniques can be used to study precise migration paths and
stopover sites. Bar-headed goose is a long-distance migrant to the Indian subcontinent with
major breeding population in China and small breeding population in Ladakh (India).

39
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Figure 4.1: Different breeding waterbird species in high-altitude wetlands

a) Black-necked crane, b) Bar-headed goose, c) Common tern, d) Ruddy shelduck

However, India harbours major wintering population in the states of Jammu and Kashmir,
Uttar Pradesh, Assam and Rajasthan (Ali and Ripley 1987). But there is a lack of information
on the migration pattern of bar-headed goose in India unlike in other central Asian countries
(Mahar et al. 2014). To have a better understanding of their movement pattern and home
range, Mahar et al. (in press) monitored two Platform Transmitter Terminal (PTT) tagged
bar-headed geese in March-August 2012 from the Gharana Conservation Reserve, India. The
origin of the tagged birds, whether from Ladakh or extralimital, could not be ascertained as
both the PTTs functioned only for 5–6 months. The geese, also, did not move to their possible
breeding sites in Ladakh (India) and other central Asian countries during the tacking period.
The PTT fitted geese used the Tawi River floodplains of India and Pakistan in Jammu and
Sialkot districts respectively. Post winter, the two geese used several small wetlands in the Tawi
River floodplains, moving between India and Pakistan intermittently, indicating the need for
transboundary efforts for long-term conservation of the species in this region (Mahar et al.
in press).

40
 Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives

During a further study carried out to generate information on the migration pattern of
waterbirds in Ladakh, four geese were captured at Chushul area of the Changthang Wildlife
Sanctuary using nooses in 2013 (WII 2014). Two of them were fitted with PTT and
conventional neck bands and rings and two were collared with only conventional neck bands
and tagged with tarsus rings. Two black-necked cranes were also fitted with PTT and tarsus
bands. The cranes moved towards the Chinese territory and showed lateral migration, while
PTT fitted bar-headed geese moved towards the Himachal Pradesh border till early winter
(December) and the two geese fitted with only neckband and rings were reported from
Gharana Wetland, Jammu. This study was able to track the migration of bar-headed geese
from breeding site (Ladakh) to wintering site (Gharana wetland) via Himachal Pradesh
(probably Pong Dam) (WII 2014). However, results are preliminary and more telemetry based
studies are needed to track migration route.

Human use and resultant disturbance

The Changthang region has around 41 villages with a population of 9,500 people. They
have approximately 140,000 domestic livestock, 90% of which are sheep and goat and the
remaining 10% are domestic yak, ponies and dzo (hybrid between yak and cattle). People and
livestock depend on the lakes and marshlands of the region for grazing pastures and
associated livelihood options (Hussain et al. 2008). The study also found that the overall
disturbance score was highest for Tso Moriri followed by Tso Kar, Statsapuk Tso and Pangong
Tso. Both Kyon Tso I and II were least disturbed. The human use parameters that pose threats
to the lakes and their catchments are: presence of villages in their vicinity, army camps,
grazing by livestock and unregulated tourism. The resultant impacts are: extraction of biomass
from the catchments, diversion of stream waters for agricultural purposes, problems of solid
waste disposal and increasing pollutant load in the lakes (Figure 4.2).

Discussion
The great geomorphological, climatic and altitudinal variations in the Himalayas has ensured
rich diversity of wetlands such as large and small lakes, seasonally flooded marshes, hot
springs and some of the most important river systems in the Indian subcontinent. Most of these
wetlands have significant conservation values attached to them. Climate change studies have
shown the vulnerability of wetlands to their stochastic changes in recent times. The change in
temperature can affect aquatic ecosystems of high-altitude lakes (Sammaruga-Wograth et al.
1997). There is evidence of shift in range and distribution of waterbirds owing to change in
temperature (Lehikonin et al. 2013). Many changes such as changes in the breeding cycle,
migration timing and population size are visible in the current scenario (Crick 2004).

In recent years, efforts, though minimal, are being made to prepare inventories of these
wetlands for conservation prioritization. Of the 8,536 wetlands in the entire Himalayan
region, only 6 wetlands, 3 each in Jammu and Kashmir (Wular, Tso Moriri, Tsigul Tso) and
Himachal Pradesh (Renuka, Chandra Tal and Pong Dam), have been formally identified as
wetlands of national importance and conservation inputs have been extended. Conservation

41
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Figure 4.2: Different anthropogenic activities in the wetlands of the Himalayas

a) Livestock grazing, b) Free ranging dog in Changthang, c) Resource extraction,

d) Tourist camps near Tso Moriri Wetland

efforts for the Himalayan wetlands have largely been concentrated in the two western
Himalayan states of Jammu and Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh. The eastern Himalayas,
which contains around 38.2% (3,265) of the total Himalayan wetlands, are grossly neglected
though they have equal conservation value as the wetlands of the western Himalayas. These
wetlands are important wildlife habitats and have significant socio-cultural values. Around
83.1% of the wetlands in Arunachal Pradesh and 16.9% in Sikkim warrant immediate
conservation measures. Conservation programmes for the wetlands in the Himalayas should
take into consideration transboundary issues that affect conservation in the border region of
India, Nepal, China and Bhutan. Regional cooperation is essential for effective management
of artificially divided ecological units. The Ramsar Strategic Plan actively supports the
identification of transboundary wetlands of international importance including those with
shared catchment/river basins.

A study by Hussain et al. (2008), which obtained limnological estimates different from those
obtained by Hutchinson (1937), confirmed that the character of the lakes has changed. These
changes may be attributed to human water use in the basins. At the onset of summer, large

42
 Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives

numbers of Rebos (tents) are pitched along the streams and people use stream water for
domestic purposes. These Rebos contribute to the large amount of nitrogenous compounds in
the lakes, resulting in unusually high concentrations of Ammonium-N and Nitrate-N,
particularly in Tso Moriri.

Conservation and development issues in Changthang are primarily due to high population
growth in Ladakh; the population increased by approximately 30% between 1971 and 2001
(Hussain and Badola 2003). It has led to resource crunch leading to conflict between the
indigenous communities and the refugees, and between domestic livestock and wildlife,
especially near wetlands. Large herds of goats and sheep disturb nesting birds and trample
their eggs while shepherd dogs predate eggs, chicks and fledglings (Chandan et al. 2005).
Furthermore, tourist influx to Ladakh, which was predicted to reach 94,762 per annum by the
year 2016 (Kichloo 1997), already crossed this limit in the year 2011 (William-Oerberg
2014). The increasing pressure on camping grounds will lead to further degradation of
catchments and the pastures.

Recognizing the conservation significance of the area, the entire Indian Changthang was
declared a protected area (Chundawat and Qureshi 1999). However, due to lack of
alternatives, local people are forced to depend on the scarce natural resources and the
designated protected area status has been ineffective. From our synthesis we conclude that
instead of developing conservation measures for individual lakes, an integrated landscape
approach is required to conserve the complex system of lakes and marshes in Changthang.
Declaring the area as a Biosphere Reserve would be a welcome step. Studies to assess the
carrying capacity of the proposed Biosphere Reserve in terms of livestock density, biomass
productivity, negative human-wildlife interaction and number of tourists, needs to be
conducted and incorporated in the decisions pertaining to its management. Local level
institutions need to be established to resolve the conflict over resource use between the
communities in the region. Studies on the movement pattern of waterbirds would be helpful
for transboundary collaboration as species like bar-headed goose and black-necked crane
migrate between India and China, and other countries as well (WII 2014; Mahar et al. in
press). Eventually, developmental activities ensconced within conservation ethos is the only
way to secure the long-term conservation of this fragile ecosystem.

Acknowledgements
We thank Dr Eklabya Sharma and Mr Laxmi Dutt Bhatta from ICIMOD, Kathmandu for
extending us an opportunity to present this study. We are grateful to the Director and the
Dean, Wildlife Institute of India for their support and encouragement. We thank Amanat K.
Gill and Aditi Dev for their valuable inputs.

43
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

References
Ahmedullah, M. (1997). ‘Biodiversity of Jammu and Kashmir’. World Wide Fund for Nature –
India. New Delhi.
Ali, S. & Ripley, S.D. (1987). ‘Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan’. Compact edition,
Oxford University Press, Bombay.
Anon (1997). ‘Biodiversity of Jammu and Kashmir - A profile’. WWF-India Publication.
Atkinson, E.T. (1882). ‘The Himalayan districts of the Northwestern Province of India’.
Allahabad. Reprinted in 1996 as the Himalayan Gazetteer, Vol. 2, Part I, Natraj Publishers,
Dehradun, India.
Betts, F.N. (1954). ‘Occurrence of the black-necked cranes in Indian limits’. The Journal of the
Bombay Natural History Society 52, 605-606.
Chandan, P., Chatterjee, A., Gautam, P., Seth, C.M., Takpa, J., Haq, S.U., Tashi, P. & Vidya, S.
(2005) Black-necked Crane -Status, Breeding Productivity and Conservation in Ladakh,
India 2000. WWF-India and Department of Wildlife Protection. Government of Jammu
and Kashmir.
Chaudhury, B.C. & Hussain, S.A. (1992). ‘The distribution and status of Gangetic river
dolphin Platanista gangetica in northeast India’. In proceedings of Seminar on
Conservation of river dolphins of the Indian Subcontinent, New Delhi, India, August 18-19.
Chundawat, R.S. & Qureshi, Q. (1999). ‘Planning wildlife conservation in Leh and Kargil
districts of Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir’. Report submitted to the Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun.
Crick, H.Q.P. (2004). ‘The impact of climate change on birds’. Ibis 146, 48-56.
Garg, R., Singh, T. & Murty, T.V.R. (1998). ‘Wetlands in India’. Ahmedabad: Space Application
Center.
Geneletti, D. & Dawa, D. (2009). ‘Environmental Impact Assessment of mountain tourism in
developing region: A study in Ladakh, Indian Himalaya’. Environmental Impact Assessment
29, 229-242.
Hussain, S. (1998). ‘Status of otter in the Tarai and lower Himalayas of Uttar Pradesh’. In
proceedings of VII International Otter Symposium, Trebon, Czech Republic, 13-19 March,
1998.
Hussain, S.A. & Badola, R. (2003). ‘Vanishing oasis: A case study on wetlands of Indian
Changthang, Ladakh’. In proceedings of Banff Mountain Summit 2003: Mountain as Water
Towers, Banff Centre, Alberta, Canada, November 23-26, 2003.
Hussain, S.A. & Pandav, B. (2008). ‘Status of breeding water birds in Changthang Cold
Desert Sanctuary, Ladakh’. Indian Forester 134 (4), 469-480.
Hussain, S. & Singh, R.K. (2001). ‘Bench mark ecological status of wetlands of Ladakh’. Study
report -2000, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun.
Hussain, S.A., Singh, R.K. & Badola, R. (2008). ‘An ecological survey of the Trans-Himalayan
wetlands of the proposed Changthang Biosphere Reserve, India, for conservation
planning’. Biosphere conservation for nature, wildlife, and humans 9 (1), 53-63.

44
 Wetlands of the Indian Himalayas: Status and Conservation Initiatives

Hutchinson, G.E. (1937). ‘Limnological studies in Indian Tibet’. Internationale Revue der
gesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie 35, 134-177.
Kichloo, N.A. (1997). ‘Unified ecosystem management plan for the Changthang wilderness
area, Ladakh’. Department of Wildlife Protection, Government of Jammu and Kashmir,
India.
Lachungpa, U.G. (1998). ‘Attempted breeding of the black-necked crane Grus nigricollis
Przevalski in north Sikkim’. The Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 95(2), 341.
Lehikoinen, A., Jaatinen, K., Vähätalo, A.V., Clausen, P., Olivia, C., Deceuninck, B., Hearn,
R., Holt, C.A., Hornman, M., Keller, V., Nilsson, L., Langendoen, T., Tománková, I., Wahl,
J. & Fox, A.D. (2013). ‘Rapid climate change driven shifts in wintering distributions of three
common waterbird species’. Global Change Biology 19, 2071-2081.
Li, Z.W.D., Bloem, A., Delany, S., Martakis, G. & Quintero, J.O. (2009). ‘Status of waterbirds
in Asia-Results of the Asian Waterbird Census: 1987-2007’. Wetlands International, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.
Mahar, N., Habib, B., Gopi, G.V., Hussain, S.A., Shawl, T., Suhail, I. & Takpa, J. (2014).
‘Telemetry studies with special reference to Bar-headed Goose: A Review’. In Gopi, G.V.
and Hussain, S.A. (Eds.) Waterbirds of India, ENVIS Bulletin: Wildlife & Protected Areas,
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun 16, 307-313.
Mahar, N., Habib, B., Shawl, T., Gopi, G.V., Suhail, I., Takpa, J. & Hussain, S.A. (In press).
‘Tracking the movement pattern of Bar-headed Goose (Anser indicus) captured from the
Gharana Wetland Conservation Reserve, India’. The Journal of the Bombay Natural
History Society.
NWA (2011). ‘National Wetland Atlas’. SAC/EPSA/ABHG/NWIA/ATLAS/34/2011, Space
Applications Centre (ISRO), Ahmedabad, India.
Neog, R.P. & Bhatt, B.B. (1990). ‘Checklist of the birds of Namdapha Tiger Reserve’.
(Unpublished Mimeo), Arunachal Pradesh.
Roy, B.N. & Thapa, M. (1998). ‘Lakes in Sikkim Himalayas and their conservation’. In Rai
S.C., Sundariyal R.C., and Sharma. E. (Eds.) Perspective for planning and development.
Sikkim Science Society, Sikkim and Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh. Dehra Dun, 189-
217.
Roy, D. (1999). ‘The crocodile Salamanders of the eastern Himalayas’. Himalayan Paryavaran
6, 133-135.
Sammaruga-Wograth, S., Koinig, K.A., Schmidt, R., Sammaruga, R., Tessadri, R. & Psenner, R.
(1997). ‘Temperature effects on the acidity of remote alpine lakes’. Nature 387, 64-67.
Sathyakumar, S. (1994). ‘Habitat ecology of major ungulates in Kedarnath musk deer
Sanctuary, Western Himalayas’. Ph. D. Thesis. Saurashtra Univeristy, Rajkot.
Shah, N. (1994). ‘Status survey of southern kiang (Equus kiang polyodon) in Sikkim’.
Department of Zoology, Maharaja Sayajirao University. Baroda, India.
Singh, D.N. (2000). ‘Status of black-necked cranes in Arunachal Pradesh’. Indian Forester
126(10), 1136-1140.
Tilzer, M.M. & Serruya, C. (1990). ‘Large lakes: ecological structure and function’. Springer-
Verlag, New York, 691.

45
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Upadhyaya, S., Chalise, L. & Pandel, R.P. (2009). ‘High altitude Ramsar sites of Nepal’. The
Initiation 3, 135-148.
Wadia, D.N. (1960). ‘Geology of India’. Tata McGraw Hill Publication, New Delhi.
WII (2014). ‘Capture and tagging of Black-necked Crane (Grus nigricollis) and Bar-headed
Goose (Anser indicus) in Changthang Cold Desert Wildlife Sanctuary, Ladakh’. A report by
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun and Department of Wildlife Protection, Jammu and
Kashmir.
William-Oerberg, E.L. (2014). ‘Young Buddhism: Examining Ladakhi Buddhist Youth
engagements with migration, modernity and morality in India’. Ph.D. dissertation, Arhus
University, Arhus C, Denmark.

46
The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake in Yunnan Province, China

2
Wetland Ecosystem
Services Valuation,
Livelihoods Interface
and Sustainability

47
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

48
 The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake in Yunnan Province, China

The Economic Value of Ecosystem

Services from Cangshan Mountain
and Erhai Lake in Yunnan Province,
China
Kentaro Yoshidaa and Ke Ana
a
Graduate School of Fisheries and Environmental Sciences, Nagasaki University, Japan
[email protected]

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate ecosystem services from Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake
in Yunnan Province. Stated preference approaches, contingent valuation method (CVM) and choice
experiments were applied to elicit individual willingness to pay (WTP) and marginal WTP for
conservation programmes at the area. An entrance fee for a protected area is one of the payments
for the ecosystem services. Also, an ecological compensation programme in China is similar to the
concept of payments for ecosystem services. The programme has been implemented for the restoration
of wetlands and other ecosystems. In this study, an entrance fee for the Cangshan Mountain and Erhai
Lake area, and protected area management and the ecological compensation programme were
valued using two types of stated preference methods.

Keywords: Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake, stated preference, ecological compensation,
payments for ecosystem services

Introduction
The economic valuation of ecosystem services has become an important issue for better
environmental policy making practices. Most of the ecosystem services are not traded in
actual markets, and then they are defined as non-market goods. In order to make their value
visible for policy and business decision making, non-market valuation techniques are often
employed (Ninan 2014). According to de Groot et al. (2012), one of the most common
approaches to value non-market goods is the contingent valuation method (CVM). CVM is
used to elicit an individual willingness to pay (WTP). Choice experiments (CEs) can also elicit
an individual marginal WTP. CEs are a generalization of CVM. A referendum CVM is the
two-alternative format but CEs are a multi-alternative and multi-attribute format. Thus CEs
can elicit marginal WTP in accordance with the change in quantity and quality of ecosystem
services provided.

49
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

One of the advantages of CEs is that it allows us to evaluate and compare a number of
different attributes by one question. On the other hand, CVM can evaluate only one scenario
for these attributes in one questionnaire. Due to this advantage, CEs have been drawing
attention in environmental economics since the mid 1990s. An entrance fee for a protected
area is a typical hypothetical payment vehicle for CVM. However, it is better to value protected
area management and ecological compensation with CEs because of the complex and
multi-attribute nature of services. Since CEs have the advantage of producing per-unit benefit
of policy effects, it makes the connection with cost-benefit analysis easy. In this study, by
conducting CVM and CEs with different hypothetical scenarios, the results of the economic
valuation of Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake are demonstrated in terms of use and
non-use value.

Methods
Stated preference approaches
Environmental valuation techniques are divided into two categories: revealed preference and
stated preference. The revealed preference, like travel cost method and hedonic price
method, is a method for revealing the environmental value reflected in existing market data,
such as travel costs and land prices. The stated preference, as represented by CVM and CEs,
is a method for revealing environmental value based on the valuations stated by beneficiaries
in a questionnaire survey. However, CVM has its limitations. It can evaluate only a
combination of single attributes or levels per question. For example, when evaluating
ecosystem services from wetlands, CVM allows examination of only one kind of scenario, such
as “implementing a programme to restore 10% of wetland vegetation over the next 5 years”.
Therefore, in order to compare different kinds of policy alternatives, it is necessary to develop
several kinds of questionnaires. Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake can be divided into
several attributes, such as wetland restoration, Erhai Lake core zone, and Cangshan core
zone. CEs not only allow direct comparison of various policy alternatives by using only one
questionnaire but also reveal the value of each attribute.

Contingent valuation
In CVM, respondents are directly asked through an interview or questionnaire about their WTP
for environmental improvement. A hypothetical situation is presented to respondents. The
most crucial part in CVM is the design of the hypothetical situation. The following is the main
part of the questionnaire.

“Cangshan Mountain and Erhal Lake are rich in the natural environment. Currently, visitors
enjoy the natural environment without paying an entrance fee. Suppose you are asked to pay
an entrance fee at the gate when you visit there – would you want to enjoy the natural
environment even if you have to pay the fee? Revenues from the entrance fees paid by visitors
are used for the maintenance of recreational facilities and conservation of wildlife and
ecosystems, excluding fees for sightseeing bus and cruising.”

50
 The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake in Yunnan Province, China

Double-bounded dichotomous choice was employed to reveal respondents’ WTP. In a

dichotomous choice questionnaire, the respondent would say yes or no to a value arbitrarily
chosen by the researcher. Respondents encountered two steps of dichotomous choice. This
study adopted a model developed by Hanemann et al. (1991) to estimate individuals’ WTP
from the double-bounded dichotomous choice questionnaire. The logarithm-logistic
distribution was employed as the probability distribution function. Threshold values (bid), i.e.,
amount of a hypothetical entrance fee, ranged from 10 to 150 RMB (USD 1.14 to 21.67).

Choice experiments
CEs involve selecting one alternative from among several kinds of policy alternatives. A profile
design is important in conducting CEs. Attributes and levels should be presented as policy
alternatives to respondents. The CE questions were designed around four attributes: wetland
restoration, Erhai Lake core zone, Cangshan Mountain core zone, and a contribution to a
conservation fund. Respondents are asked to select one policy alternative to conserve the
protected areas.

Wetland restoration and expansion of the core zone in the protected area was a hypothetical
scenario but based on an actual ecological compensation programme and protected area
management. The attribute of wetland restoration indicated the conversion of farmland to
wetland and the expansion of the area. The levels of restored wetlands were status quo
(7 km2), 9, 11, 13, and 15 km2. The levels of the area of Erhai Lake core zone were status
quo (5 km2), 20, 35, 50, 65 km2. The levels of the area of Cangshan Mountain core zone
were status quo (165 km2), 235, 305, 375, and 445 km2. The levels for the amount of
contribution were 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, and 120 RMB (i.e. USD 0, 2.89, 5.78, 8.67,
11.56, 14.45 and 17.34). Table 5.1 shows an example of a choice set presented to
respondents. Different options were presented eight times to each respondent. The
respondents were asked to select only one option for each plan. Combinations of profiles
were determined on the basis of the orthogonal factorial design.

Study area and survey administration

Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake are becoming a popular tourist destination with an
increasing number of visitors. The total area of Erhai Lake is 257 km2, and 251 km2 of the
area is designated as a protected area. About 5 km2 of Erhai Lake is designated as the core
zone of the protected area. In the core zone, visitor access is restricted for wildlife protection.

Table 5.1: Example of a choice set for choice experiments

Attribute Plan 1 Plan 2 Plan 3 Status quo

Wetland restoration 15 km2 15 km2 13 km2 7 km2
Erhai Lake core zone 35 km2 50 km2 50 km2 5 km2
Cangshan Mountain core zone 445 km 2
305 km 2
375 km 2
165 km2
Contribution to a fund 40 RMB 40 RMB 20 RMB 0 RMB

51
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

The total area of Cangshan Mountain is 840 km2, out of which 546 km2 of the area is a
protected area and a total of 165 km2 is designated as the core zone. Since Erhai Lake is
surrounded by sightseeing spots and urban districts, the core zone of lake area is smaller than
that of the mountain area. A variety of species inhabit Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake
natural protected area with a unique and key fauna and flora. There are 2,330 seed plants,
and 15% of them are endemic to Yunnan Province. There are 433 animals, and 23 of them
are protected species. Around Erhai Lake, restoration programmes (ecological compensation)
have been implemented in 7 km2 of the wetland.

We developed a web-based questionnaire survey to gather responses from residents of

Yunnan Province, China. The online survey was carried out in March 2015 in association with
Macromill, Inc. Finally, we obtained 496 responses.

Main demographics are as follows. The gender ratio, male and female, was fixed to 50%
each in advance. A percentage of each age group was 20–29 (27%), 30–39 (29%), 40–49
(24%), 50–59 (10%), and over 60 (10%). Place of residence was Kunming (56%), Dali Bai
Autonomous Prefecture (11%), Lijiang (7%), and others (26%).

Results and Discussion

Table 5.2 is a statistical summary of variables used for CVM. Table 5.3 shows an estimation
result of CVM. It is noteworthy that “Ecotourism abroad” and “Compliance with tourist rules
and regulations” were statistically significant. It means that WTP of respondents who had
ecotourism experience abroad and positive attitude toward compliance with rules and
regulations at natural parks were likely to be higher. It was also demonstrated that

Table 5.2: Statistical summary

Variable Description Mean (SD)

Threshold value (bid amount) Chinese yuan (RMB) –
Age Age (years old) 39.0 (12.5)
Place of residence 1=Dali; 0=others 0.116 (0.321)
Ecotourism abroad experience within a year 1=yes; 0=no 0.495 (0.500)
Use of collected fees for tourist facility 5= very important; 4=important; 4.42 (0.644)
3=neutral; 2=not so important;
1=not important at all
Use of collected fees for wildlife 5= very important; 4=important; 4.55 (0.586)
conservation 3=neutral; 2=not so important;
1=not important at all
Use of collected fees for congestion 5= very important; 4=important; 4.12 (0.847)
alleviation 3=neutral; 2=not so important;
1=not important at all
Compliance with tourist rules and regulations 1=should comply with rules and 0.595 (0.491)
regulations; 0=others
*SD=Standard Deviation

52
 The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake in Yunnan Province, China

respondents who thought enriching and Table 5.3: Estimation results of CVM
maintaining tourism facilities and
promoting wildlife conservation were Variable Coefficient (t value)
important ways to use the collected fees Intercept 2.33 (2.48)

had higher WTP. Log. of threshold value -1.70 (-14.5)

Age -0.00674 (-0.908)
Table 5.4 estimated coefficients and Place of residence -0.375 (-1.24)
marginal WTP of CEs. The result showed Ecotourism abroad 0.757 (3.80)
that each parameter estimation of CEs was Tourist facility 0.595 (3.63)
significant at 1% level. Marginal WTP for Wildlife conservation 0.501 (2.73)
wetland restoration was 11.9 RMB/km2/
Congestion alleviation 0.189 (1.66)
person/annum (USD 1.72 /km2/person/
Tourist rules & regulations 0.557 (2.86)
annum) and the highest. Marginal WTP for
# of observations 481
the expansion of Erhai Lake core zone was
Log likelihood -511.5
1.19 RMB (i.e. USD 0.17) and the
Median WTP (RMB) 143
expansion of Cangshan Mountain core
zone was 0.364 RMB (i.e. USD 0.05). The 90% confidence interval [129 - 162]

amount of WTP may correspond to the Mean WTP (RMB) 276

difference in the size of each attribute. 90% confidence interval [224 - 374]

Table 5.4: Estimation results of choice experiments

Variable Coefficient (t value) Marginal WTP (RMB/km2)
Wetland restoration 0.112 (13.2) 11.9 [10.1 – 13.8]
Erhai Lake core zone 0.0112 (9.93) 1.19 [0.976 – 1.39]
Cangshan Mountain core zone 0.00343 (13.5) 0.364 [0.317 – 0.417]
Contribution to a fund -0.00945 (-12.1) –
# of observations 3,968 –
Log-likelihood -5,107.4 –
Note: Figures in [lower bound – upper bound] are 90% confidence interval.

Conclusion
In this paper, we applied the stated preference approach to elicit WTP and marginal WTP for
ecosystem services from Cangshan Mountain and Erhal Lake in Yunnan Province. The result of
CVM evaluated the use value of recreational and cultural services from Cangshan Mountain
and Erhai Lake. An average respondent was willing to pay RMB 276 (USD 38.64) as an
entrance fee, which is a form of payment for ecosystem services. On the other hand, CEs
evaluated the non-use value of Cangshan Mountain and Erhai Lake, and the surrounding
restored wetlands. Respondents were willing to pay for wetland restoration programme, and
the expansion of core zone for wildlife protection and conservation. CVM result also
suggested that ecotourism experience abroad and positive attitude toward compliance with
rules and regulations were likely to increase individual WTP.

53
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

In China, ecological restoration programmes and payments for ecosystem services have been
drawing attention (Yin and Zhao 2012). This case study of economic valuation will provide
useful information while planning and implementing payments for ecosystem services and
similar schemes for nature conservation.

References
de Groot, R., Brander, L., van der Ploeg, S., Costanza, R., Bernard, F., Braat, L., Christie, M.,
Crossman, N., Ghermandi, A., Heina, L., Hussain, S., Kumar, P., McVittie, A., Portela, R.,
Rodriguez, L.C., ten Brink, P. & van Beukering, P. (2012). ‘Global estimates of the value of
ecosystems and their services in monetary units’. Ecosystem Services 1(1), 50-61.
Hanemann, M., Loomis, J. & Kanninen, B. (1991). ‘Statistical efficiency of double-bounded
dichotomous choice contingent valuation’. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73,
1255-1263.
Ninan, K.N. (2014). ‘Valuing Ecosystem Services: Methodological Issues and Case Studies’.
Edward Elgar, Chentenham, UK.
Yin, R. & Zhao, M. (2012). ‘Ecological restoration programs and payments for ecosystem
services as integrated biophysical and socioeconomic processes - China’s experience as
an example’. Ecological Economics 73, 56-65.

54
 Peatlands Valuation and Livelihoods in Zoige Plateau, China

Peatlands Valuation and Livelihoods

in Zoige Plateau, China
Xiaohong Zhanga
a
Wetlands International-China, Beijing, P.R., China
[email protected]

Abstract
The Earth’s ecosystems are the natural foundation of human civilization. A robust, healthy and
sustainable ecosystem is a prerequisite to social and economic development. Mountain peatlands in
the temperate zone represent a small proportion of the global peatland resource, but play a unique
role in the regional water and biogeochemical cycles; however, their role is not adequately recognized.
Zoige marshes, situated in the east edge of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, straddles Gansu and Sichuan
Provinces, consisting of the world’s largest contiguous peatlands in the high-altitude region. However
they are being degraded by human interventions. As a result, carbon dioxide (CO2) stored in the peat
for thousands of years would release into the atmosphere, causing the temperature to rise. Therefore
it is important to evaluate the functions and services delivered by the peatland ecosystem. This study
will provide a basis for supporting policies or conservation strategies. Market and non-market
monetary methods and a literature review were conducted to assess the values of the ecosystem and
biodiversity based on current data and annual statistical records. The valuation showed that the
regulation function plays a more important role than the provisioning, supporting and cultural
functions. Peatlands conservation or restoration in Zoige Plateau would enhance the provision of
ecosystem services and be beneficial to local livelihoods.

Keywords: ecosystem functions, evaluation, peatland restoration, Zoige Plateau

Introduction
Northern China peatland ecosystems are usually characterized by relatively low soil
temperatures and anoxic soil conditions, as water saturation limits oxygen diffusion throughout
most of the peat profile (Gorham 1991, Turunen et al. 2002). Peatlands cover 3% (some 4
million km2) of the Earth’s land area (Global Peatlands Initiative 2002) and store a large
fraction of the world’s terrestrial carbon resources: up to 528,000 megatonnes (Gorham
1991; Immirzi and Maltby 1992), equivalent to one-third of global soil carbon and to 70
times the current annual global emissions from fossil fuel burning. However, some 80% of the
earth’s surface shows evidence of human intervention (Ellis and Ramankutty 2008). This
implies great losses of biodiversity (Butchart et al. 2010) and of the variety and amount of all
ecosystem services except certain provisioning services (MEA 2005). Ecosystems have been
profoundly degraded over the last 50 years and pressure on them continues unabated. Some

55
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

of the key ecological processes have exceeded their thresholds, which may lead to the
collapse of some vulnerable ecosystems. A large part of such environmental degradation is
due to the expansion of the agricultural frontier in many parts of the world together with
intensification of farming practice (Mulitza et al. 2010; Birdlife International 2008). For
instance, Ellis and Ramankutty (2008) results indicated 14 of the world’s 21 major biome
types related to agricultural use. Predictions suggest that people’s footprint will expand in the
future (Hockley et al. 2008; FAO 2010; Pereira et al. 2010; WWF 2010). History tells us that
failure to understand and appreciate the value of nature leads to the downfall of cultures and
kingdoms. Since the industrial revolution, depletion of natural resources and destruction of the
ecosystems have affected the global environment and resources. Natural disasters including
those caused by global warming and loss of ecosystem services, remind us that the world
needs smarter and more effective strategies to secure our future. Since the release of the
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005, United Nation Environment Programme (UNEP)
has driven a global push to value and account for the services provided by ecosystems natural
capital in development planning. This is essential to build sustainable and resilient economies,
and protect the glorious biodiversity of our planet, by conserving the natural resources upon
which human well-being depends.

The many global initiatives in place have led to an impressive groundswell at the national
level. UNEP now works in 58 countries, including through the Economics of Ecosystems and
Biodiversity (TEEB) and the valuation of ecosystem services and natural capital accounting.
Currently, a number of European Union (EU) member states have already started to
implement TEEB (2010) inspired processes to assess, map and value ecosystem services and
to stimulate related actions to maintain, restore and develop these services. Furthermore, the
European Commission is supporting the implementation of TEEB in a number of developing
countries in line with Target 6 of the Biodiversity Strategy: helping avert global biodiversity
loss. Wealth Accounting and Valuing Ecosystem Services is an initiative of the World Bank to
implement green accounting in a critical mass of countries, both developed and developing.
The partners want to take natural capital accounting, such as timber and minerals to include
ecosystem services and other natural resources that are not traded or marketed and are
therefore harder to measure. That includes the “regulating” services of ecosystems, such as
forests for pollination and wetlands for reducing the impact of floods.

The Chinese government, working with EU, has trailed the TEEB in the selected landscapes
and sites at different levels from the policy making and site test perspective to mainstream
ecosystem valuation into the national natural capital accounting system. Apart from that,
some Chinese national researches have also been undertaken to evaluate marshes and
freshwater lakes, as these wetlands are strategically important for ensuring water supply; they
provide habitats for species and livelihood options; they are vulnerable to natural disasters;
and they face degradation due to development activities. The national wetland economic loss
inventory and assessment (2008) defined by the land reclamations indicated that in 2006 the
economic loss from natural wetlands accounted 0.49% of national gross domestic production.

56
 Peatlands Valuation and Livelihoods in Zoige Plateau, China

The coastal wetland ecosystem services and functions assessment is still under way with an
aim to determine ecosystem evaluation methodology and estimate the total values delivered
by the coastal wetland services.

As part of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, the Zoige Plateau contains the world’s largest high-
altitude peatlands (Chai et al. 1965; Sun et al. 1987) and they are playing an important role
in water regulation, carbon sequestration and biodiversity preservation. Being a major water
source of the Yellow River and functioning as natural sponges through either buffering water
resulting from rainfall and snowmelt events or slowing down the release of water to the
downstream areas (Parish et al. 2008; Zhang and Liu 2009), the Zoige peatlands reduce the
severity of flood and drought in the upper Yellow River watershed, which has millions of
residents, and sustain the unique biodiversity, particularly as a breeding site for black-necked
crane (Grus nigricollis) (Scott 1993; Zhang and Luo 1991), and support some endemic and
endangered Himalayan species (Tsuyuzaki et al. 1990). The local Tibetan pastoralists have
been using the peatlands and the ambient uplands for livestock grazing over thousands of
years, which has become a unique Tibetan cultural heritage.

Methods
This peatlands evaluation study was carried out with an expectation that it would help local
policy makers better understand the value of peatland ecoystem and further take some actions
to protect the remaining intact peatlands and make commitment to restore the degraded
peatlands. The results clearly indicated that the regulation function is significant as peatlands
have a key role in regulating climate, buffering floods and droughts and carbon sequestration
(Zhang et al. 2011). Realizing the problems in the Zoige Plateau, international organizations
working with local government have taken some approaches to halt its further degradation.
Approximately 1,500 ha of degraded peatlands have been rewetted using the damming
approach with very little expense (Zhang et al. 2012). Local government has allocated 0.2%
of each fiscal year budget to continue the restoration of the peatlands.

Results
Peatlands in Zoige Plateau are severely degraded
Peatlands cover an area of 473,348 ha; 23% of them are still in good condition and 77% are
in various stages of degradation (Zhang et al. 2012). Comparison with older satellite images
indicates that the area of degraded peatland has almost doubled in the last 30 years.
Peatland degradation, habitat fragmentation, and land use changes have been attributed to
many factors such as overgrazing, mining, drainage, and logging activities with enormous
social-economic consequences (Joosten et al. 2008) while global climate change may also
play a role. Peatlands degradation would have some negative impacts on their functions and
services they deliver for water supply, productivity, and mitigation of natural disasters. The
provisioning, regulation, supporting and cultural services were evaluated by direct and indirect
pricing.

57
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Livestock population and their value Figure 6.1: Percentage of the

Taking an example from livestock husbandry, different industry in Zoige County
the statistical data indicates 87% of local
people practice grazing. The major income 60
source of these people comes from agriculture 50
which is 57%; and other sectors account only 40
small proportion (Figure 6.1). In terms of local 30
market price of livestock (yak, sheep) and their
20
by-products (fur, dairy products), the annual
10
total value goes up to RMB 6.09×108 (USD
0
0.85×108).

Agriculture

Service
Industry
Value of climate regulation
The value of climate regulation is estimated
Agriculture Industry
based on evaporation of water surface. The
Service
average evaporation was 5.19×109 m3 in the
Data source: Zoige County Annual Book
Zoige Plateau. The total amount of heat
absorbed was 11.7×1015 KJ and the total
value of temperature regulation is estimated
RMB 56.3×1010 (USD 7.88×1010) based on the refrigerator cooling energy consumption and
local electricity price. Likewise, the total value of increased air humidity is estimated RMB
33.7×1010 (USD 4.71 ×1010).

Value of gas regulation

The annual carbon storage is measured according to the biomass and carbon content of the
Zoige Plateau (Tian 2005). Carbon emissions from soils and grazing are calculated based on
the studies of Tian (2005), Wang et al. (2001), Wang and Li (2007). Finally, the economic
values of carbon storage of the Zoige Plateau are calculated based on the carbon tax
method. The total value of carbon storage in the Zoige Plateau amounts to RMB 7.27 billion
(USD 1.01 billion).

Value of water regulation

Water storage capacity of the Zoige Plateau is calculated according to data from the Water
Resources Bureau of the A’ba Prefecture in Sichuan Province, the per unit storage capacity
cost in this area is 1.39 RMB/m3 (USD 0.19/m3). The value of water storage of the Zoige
Plateau is calculated to be RMB 5.164 billion (USD 0.722 billion). Multiplying the water
retention capacity of the Zoige Plateau and the industrial water pricing of Chengdu (1.70
RMB/m3), an estimated value of water of retention is RMB 3.516 billion (USD 0.49 billion).

58
 Peatlands Valuation and Livelihoods in Zoige Plateau, China

Value of tourism industry

The Zoige Plateau as a remote area, it Figure 6.2: The percentage of total
was not accessible in the past. With ecosystem services values in Zoige Plateau
road improvement and people’s
income increasing, tourism has 70
become an emergent and prosperous 60
industry. The Zoige Plateau has 50

(Percentage)
attracted a number of tourists because
40
of its wildness, picturesque landscapes
30
and unique culture and provides
20
several ecosystem services (Figure 6.2).
10
Based on the calculation of travel cost,
a total 847,600 person/time visited the 0

Provision

Supporting

Regulation

Culture
Zoige Plateau in 2011 and the total
recreational value amounted to RMB
730 million (USD 102.2 million) while
the tourism industry has steadily Source: Ruoergai County Annual book
increased. The total value of wetland
ecosystem services provided by the
Zoige ecosystem is estimated to be RMB 9.72 billion (USD 1.36 billion) (Figure 6.3).

Figure 6.3: Annual tourism industry income and numbers of tourists in Zoige Plateau

1,200 100,000
90,000
1,000
80,000 RMB (Ten thousand)
No. Tourists (’000)

800 70,000
60,000
600 50,000
40,000
400
30,000
200 20,000
10,000
0 0
2000

2002

2005

2006

2007

2009

2010

2011

2012

No of tourist Income

59
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Discussion
The different methods for land use and land cover change and the hierarchical structure
model for social welfare weight were used for wetlands valuation in the Zoige Plateau (Li et al.
2010; Zhang and Lu 2010). Final results showed that regulation is significant in valuation
processing.

The livestock population increased sharply in the last century and maintained an increasing
trend (Figure 6.4). But in recent years the numbers of livestock began to decrease slightly
(Figure 6.5), and this implies that the grasslands could not hold such amount of livestock in
this region. However, the tourism income apparently increased. This trend indicates that
herders are aware of the problem caused by overgrazing and they have to change their
income sources. Although overgrazing is a major cause of environmental degradation,
ecological restoration of peatland offers opportunities to reconcile grazing production with
enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services other than production. Restoration has
the potential to enhance livestock production, other ecosystem services and biodiversity at
both the pastureland and landscape scale. Therefore, overgrazing has been restricted to
recover wetlands and grasslands at the local level.

Scientists have been aware of the link between peatlands management and CO2 emissions,
but policy makers and peatland managers are still insufficiently aware of the global
implications of local and national peatlands management strategies and actions. As a result,

Figure 6.4: Livestock population in different periods of time in Zoige Plateau

1,400,000

1,200,000

1,000,000

800,000

600,000

400,000

200,000

0
1959 1969 1979 1989 2009

60
 Peatlands Valuation and Livelihoods in Zoige Plateau, China

Figure 6.5: Livestock population trends in recent year in Zoige Plateau

1,400,000

1,200,000

1,000,000

800,000

600,000

400,000

200,000

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
(Year)

CO2 emissions from the drained peatlands are not yet recognized in the global climate
change debate, and coordinated international action required to support better management
of the peatlands has yet to start.

Conclusion
We need wide expansion of peatlands management based on ecological knowledge:
biodiversity-based practices, learning from traditional grazing practices, highly specific actions
to benefit biodiversity and especially ecosystem services, and conversion of some grassland
into wetland ecosystems. Financial support, public awareness, and education and training,
particularly of herders, are necessary to accomplish such objectives. Restoration actions can
act as an engine of green economy development and a source of livelihood so policy makers
have an extra incentive to restore degraded peatland habitats. The economic valuation could
help provide a basis for establishing an ecological compensation mechanism and prioritizing
wetland restoration programme.

61
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Acknowledgements
Zoige Plateau restoration has been supported by EU-China Biodiversity pogramme
(000577530). The Government of the Netherlands financed the Wetland & Livelihood
Programme for community-based development (NL1200-006). Prof Hans Joosten, Martin
Schumann from Greifswald University, Germany and Prof Cui Lijuan provided valuable
comments and information. I am also grateful to all colleagues and local authorities.

(Note: 1 RMB= USD 0.14)

References
BirdLife International (2008). ‘State of the world’s birds: indicators for our changing world’.
BirdLife International, Cambridge.
Butchart, S.H.M., Walpole M. & Collen, B. (2010). ‘Global biodiversity: indicators of recent
declines’. Science 328, 1164–1168.
Chai, X., Lang, H.Q., Jin, S.R., Zu, W.C., Ma, X.H. & Zhang, Z.Y. (1965). ‘The marsh of the
Zoige Plateau’. Beijing Science Press.
Ellis, E.C. & Ramankutty, N. (2008). ‘Putting people in the map: anthropogenic biomes of the
world’. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6, 439–447.
FAO (2010). ‘The Global Forest Resources Assessment’. FAO, 2010, Rome. Available online
at http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1757e/i1757e.pdf
Global peatlands initiative (2002). ‘The global peatland initiatives’. GPI secretariat, Wetlands
International, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Gorham, E. (1991). ‘Northern peatlands: Role in the carbon cycle and probable response to
climatic warming’. Ecological Applications 1, 182–195.
Hockley, N.J., Jones, J.P.G. & Gibbons, J. (2008). ‘Technological progress must accelerate to
reduce ecological footprint overshoot’. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6,
122–123.
Immirzi, C.P. & Maltby, E. (1992). ‘The Global Status of Peatlands and their Role in Carbon
Cycling’. A report for Friends of the Earth by the Wetland Ecosystems Research Group.
Report 11, Exeter, UK.
Joosten, H., Andreas, H. & Schumann, M. (2008). ‘Degradation and restoration of peatlands
on the Tibetan Plateau’. Peatlands International 1, 31-35.
Li J.C., Wang, W.L., Hu, G.Y. & Wei Z.L. (2010). ‘Changes in ecosystem service values in
Zoige Plateau, China’. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Envrioment 139, 755-770.
Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005). ‘Ecosystems and human-well being: Wetlands
and Water Synthesis’. World Resource Institute, Washingtion, DC.
Mulitza, S., Heslop, D., Pittauerova, D., Fischer, H.W., Meyer, I., Stuut, J.B., Zabel, M.,
Mollenhauer, G., Collins, J.A., Kuhnert, H. & Schulz, M. (2010). ‘Increase in African dust
flux at the onset of commercial agriculture in the Sahel region’. Nature 466, 226–228.

62
 Peatlands Valuation and Livelihoods in Zoige Plateau, China

Parish, F., Sirin, A., Charman, D., Joosten, H. & Minayeva, T. (2008). ‘Assessment on
peatlands, biodiversity and climate change: main report’. Global Environment Centre,
Kula Lumpur and Wetlands International, Wageningen.
Pereira, H.M., Leadley, P.W., Proenc, V., Alkemade, R., Scharlemann, J.P.W. & Fernandez-
Manjarre, J.F. (2010). ‘Scenarios for global biodiversity in the 21st century’. Science 330,
1496–501.
Scott, D.A. (1993). ‘The Black-necked cranes (Grus nigricollis) of Ruoergai Marshes, Sichuan,
China’. Bird Conservation International 3(3), 245-259.
Sun, G.Y., Zheng, W.F., Zhang, J.J. & Luo, J. (1987). ‘A study of ecological environment and
rational exploration of mires in the Zoige Plateau’. Journal of Natural Resources 2(4),
359-367(in Chinese)
TEEB (2010). ‘The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics
of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB’.
Available online at http://www.teebweb.org/
Tian, Y.B. (2005). ‘Vegetation types and their distribution under different habitats of Ruoergai
Marshes’. Journal of Yangtze University (Nature Science Edition) Agricultural Science 25(1),
1-5 (in Chinese).
Tsuyuzaki, S., Urano, S.I. & Tsujii, T. (1990). ‘Vegetation of alpine marshland and its
neighboring areas, Northern Part of Sichuan Province, China’. Plant Ecology 88, 79-86.
Turunen, J., Tomppo, E., Tolonen, K. & Reinikainen, A. (2002). ‘Estimating carbon
accumulation rates of undrained mires in Finland application to boreal and subarctic
regions’. Holocene 12, 69–80.
Wang, G.X., Li, Q. & Cheng, G.D. (2001). ‘Climate change and its impacts the eco-
environment in the source regions of the Yangtze and Yellow rivers in recent 40 years’.
Journal of Glaciolgy and Geocryology 23(4), 346-352 (in Chinese).
Wang, G.X. & Li, Y.S. (2007). ‘Typical Alpine Wetland System Changes on the Qinghai- Tibet
Plateau in Recent 40 Years’. Acta Geographica Sinica 62(5), 481-491.
WWF (2010). ‘Living Planet Report 2010: Biodiversity, biocapacity and development’.
WWF-Gland. http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/all_publications/living_planet_
report/
Zhang, J.J. & Luo, J.J. (1991). ‘Populations of Black-necked cranes distributed in Ruoergai
Marshes’. Sichuan Zoology 10(3), 37-38 (in Chinese).
Zhang, X.H., Liu, H.Y., Gorham, S. & Baker, C. (2012). ‘Restoration approaches used for
degraded peatlands in Ruoergai (Zoige), Tibetan Plateau, China, for sustainable land
management’. Ecological Engineering 38(1), 86-92.
Zhang, X.H., Liu, H.Y. & Xing, Z.S. (2011). ‘Challenges and Solutions for Sustainable Land
Use in Ruoergai - the Highest Altitude Peatlands in Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, China’.
Energy Procedia (EI) 5, 1019-1025.
Zhang, X.H. & Liu, H.Y. (2009). ‘Degradation Features and Ecological Restoration
Approaches of Peatlands in Ruoergai Plateau’. Wetlands Science 7(3), 243-249.
Zhang, X.Y. & Lu, X.G. (2010). ‘Multiple criteria evaluation of ecosystem services for the Zoige
Plateau Marshes in southwest China’. Ecological Economics 69(7), 1463-1470.

63
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Understanding Coupled Human and

Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu
Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in
Nepal
Nakul Chettria, Sunita Chaudharyb, Kabir Uddina, Bikash Sharmaa, Pratikshya Kandela,
Top Bahadur Khatric, Maheshwar Dhakald, Wu Ninga and Eklabya Sharmaa
a
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Kathmandu, Nepal
b
Department of Geography and Planning, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
c
Department of Hydrology and Meteorology, Nepal
d
Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal
[email protected]

Abstract
Despite local, national, and global efforts to mitigate undesirable ecosystem change, anthropogenic
impacts on Earth’s systems are intensifying. However, the understanding of coupling of ecological and
social sciences is limited. Focusing on Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (KTWR) of Nepal, we assessed
biophysical, socio-cultural and economic values to understand the coupling of local inhabitants with
the surrounding ecosystems. We rationalize the importance of KTWR through assessment of biophysical
values as a habitat for 15 globally significant species, socio-cultural values based on dependency on
ecosystem services and economic values of some selective services, related with ongoing land use
and cover change results of the past 34 years. In the matrix analysis, swamps/marshes scored highest
in terms of the number of species (15), followed by forest (14), river and lake (13), grassland (12)
and, finally, agriculture (2). Among the forest services, fuelwood is the topmost product for which 91%
of the local population are dependent for cooking. In addition, wetland is a source of many
commodities such as fish (38%), driftwood (31%) and snails (23%). The overall economic benefit
generated from the selected services was estimated to be approximately USD 16 million per year
(NPR 1.38 billion), equivalent to a net present value (NPV) of around USD 444 million. However, over
the last 34 years, significant changes in land cover and ecosystem types have been observed. The
forest ecosystem was reduced by 94% compared to 1976 whereas the grassland has increased by
79%. It is also interesting to note that rivers/streams, which cover 10% of the total area, and swamps/
marshlands, which cover 5%, provide many important services. Therefore, understanding the values
in both monetary and non-monetary terms, including people’s dependency on the ecosystem services
and the dynamics of the ecosystems, could be important for improving the flow of ecosystem services
and management of the reserve.

Keywords: ecosystem services, values, land use and cover change, coupling, Nepal

64
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

Introduction
Despite local, national, and global efforts to mitigate undesirable ecosystem change (COP
2011), anthropogenic impacts on Earth’s systems are intensifying (MacDougall et al. 2013).
This widespread failure to steer human behaviour has brought with it a growing recognition
that solutions to environmental challenges need to transcend disciplinary boundaries and,
specifically, incorporate social considerations (Mlambo 2012; Hicks et al. 2015). Ecosystem
services are defined as the conditions, processes, and components of the natural environment
that provide both tangible and intangible benefits for sustaining and fulfilling human life (Daily
et al. 2009). They are also considered products of coupled and nested social-ecological
systems and they should be measured in the complex context of those socio-ecological
systems (Fisher et al. 2009; MEA 2005; Reyers et al. 2013). Although there is an explicit focus
on steering human behaviour toward a more sustainable path, the concept of ecosystem
services (ES) has to date largely come from the ecological or economic sciences (e.g.,
Balvanera et al. 2006; Mace et al. 2011; Bateman et al. 2013) and lacked integration with
the broader social science literature about people’s choices and behaviour (Bryan et al.
2010; Milner-Gulland 2012). In response, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA 2005)
endorsed an ES approach that explicitly recognizes the benefits people gain from nature. By
describing how nature is a benefit to people, the ES approach aims to align environmental
sustainability with human well-being and thus build support for conservation and sustainable
resource management (Daw et al. 2011; Hicks et al. 2015). ES depend on the interactions
and feedbacks from multiple social and ecological factors (Scholes et al. 2013). However,
there is limited understanding of coupling of ecological and social sciences (Castro et al.
2014). Therefore, assessments and sustainable management of ES require an understanding
of both supply and demand considering the qualities, quantities, spatial scales and dynamics
that bridge ecological and social systems (Nahlik et al. 2012).

The MEA (2005) conceptual framework states that people’s dependence on an ecosystem is
directly linked to its ability to provide the desired services. A number of ecosystems are
important for local community. Several studies emerging from the Himalayan region suggests
that people have high dependency on wetland (Lamsal et al. 2014; Sharma et al. 2015) and
forest ecosystems (Chettri et al. 2013). These wetland ecosystems are facing numerous threats
such as over extraction of resources, land use change and climate change, to name a few
(Romshoo et al. 2011; Gopal 2013; Rashid et al. 2013; Davidson 2014). It is therefore
necessary to understand the role of ecosystem services to ensure human wellbeing in order to
justify conservation and improve ecosystem management in the region. To rationalize the
value of wetland ecosystem and its services, we conceptualized a research framework to link
natural and social interaction and made an attempt to (a) understand the value of ecosystem
services based on ecological (biophysical), socio-cultural and economic values based on
people’s dependency on various types of ecosystem services; and (b) assess spatial and
temporal changes of ecosystem and its impacts.

65
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Materials and Methods

Study area
Situated between 86° 91’-87° 08’ E and 26° 72’-26° 56’ N, Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve
(KTWR) is one of the most important wildlife reserves of Nepal (Figure 7.1). The reserve, a
protected area established in 1976 under IUCN category IV, spreads over an area of 175 km2
(IUCN 1990). It is the habitat for the last remaining population of Wild Water Buffalo
(Babalus arnee), and was also designated as a wetland of international importance by the
Ramsar Convention in 1987 for its special value in maintaining the genetic and ecological
diversity of the region (Sah 1997). Located in the floodplains of the Sapta Koshi river, KTWR is
a freshwater, natural and permanent river system. The reserve is rich in biodiversity with 670
species of vascular plants (Siwakoti 2006), 21 species of mammals (Chhetry and Pal 2010),
23 species of herpetofauna (Chhetry 2010), 77 species of butterflies (DNPWC 2009), 494
species of birds (BCN 2011) and provides a habitat for a large number of globally and
nationally threatened species (CSUWN 2009). The reserve is also designated as one of the
Important Bird Areas of Nepal and serves as a habitat for a number of threatened bird species
such as Swamp Francolin (Francolinus gularis) and Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis
bengalensis), etc. (Baral and Inskipp 2005). The wetland is also home to Ganges River
Dolphin (Platanista gangetica), Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus) and Smooth-coated Otter
(Lutrogale perspicillata). These globally important species play a vital role in maintaining the
ecological integrity of the area.

Before its declaration as a reserve by the Government of Nepal, the area was accessible to
local communities for fishing, hunting, grazing, livestock, and collecting fodder, fuelwood, and
other resources (CSUWN 2009). However, their access was completely denied with the

Figure 7.1: Protected areas of Nepal and map of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve

Physiographic Protected areas

regions Agriculture
Himalaya National park Forest
Grassland
Mountain Conservation areas Marshes/swamps
MId hills Wildlife reserves River/stream
Siwalik Hunting reserve Sand/gravel
Terai Buffer zones

Source: ICIMOD and MoFSC 2014

66
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

declaration of the reserve, resulting in illegal harvesting of resources (Heinen 1993). To halt
illegal harvesting and meet the basic needs of people, the KTWR established a buffer zone of
173.5 km2, encompassing 16 village development committees (VDCs) from Sunsari, Saptari,
and Udayapur districts with a total population of 93,000 people from 16,280 households
(CSUWN 2009). The overall literacy rate is 44.6% and agriculture is the dominant mode of
production for 87.3% of households. Only 20% of households are food secure. Livestock
density is very high with 1.5 cattle per household. Harvest and use of resources from this
important floodplain has a prominent role in local people’s occupations and way of life.
Besides subsistence farming, livestock rearing is a major economic activity, and income from
livestock contributes a substantial proportion of local household income (Sah 1997; CSUWN
2009). A large proportion of communities still directly or indirectly depend on KTWR for
various goods and services (ICIMOD and MoFSC 2014).

Ecosystem services valuation

It is high time that ecosystem service valuation incorporate the values perceived by those who
benefit from the services and not be limited to economic values (Carpenter et al. 2009). This
is important for decision-makers to assess the full range of ecosystem values including the
socio-cultural, ecological, and intrinsic in addition to utilitarian values (MEA 2003) and to be
informed by analysis of integrated socioeconomic and biophysical data (De Lange et al.
2010). With this realization, we referred to the valuation approach of Castro et al. (2014),
where the values were based on biophysical (biodiversity), socio-cultural (benefits received
from the ecosystems) and economic (monetary) considerations.

Biophysical values
To show the significance of the mosaic of ecosystems of KTWR as a biophysical value
(biodiversity), we considered the IUCN Red List and CITES list and included 19 globally
significant species in terms of their conservation values such as Endangered (EN), Vulnerable
(VU), Critically Endangered (CE) and Near Threatened (NT). We also included the
representative species of migratory birds at KTWR, which is one of the most important habitats
for migratory birds. In the matrix, six broad land cover types or ecosystems such as Grassland,
Swamps/Marshes, Forest, Rivers/Lakes, Sand and Gravel, and Agriculture were considered for
habitat mapping. Based on the habitat preference and use pattern, species were assigned
presence in a particular habitat (+) or absence (-). For instance, if a certain species such as
Wild Water Buffalo uses a certain land cover of ecosystems such as grassland, swamps/
marshes or rivers/lakes, then a point (+) is given to those specific land uses. If a certain land
use (such as gravel and sand) is not used by the Wild Water Buffalo, then (-) is given to that
particular land use or ecosystems. The categorization was then validated through experts’
judgement in a focus group discussion among the experts. At the end, the use and non-use
values were weighted as one (1) for use and zero (0) for non-use and the values of 19 enlisted
species were added. More details on the methodology can be found in Chettri et al. (2013).

67
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Socio-cultural values
The second set of values considered were the socio-cultural values (benefits received by local
people from the ecosystems), which are values assigned to services that support the well-being
of human societies (Chiesura and Groot 2003; Plieninger et al. 2013). To collect the required
information, we relied primarily on a socioeconomic baseline sample survey of 432
households residing in the buffer zone around KTWR commissioned by the Conservation and
Sustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal (CSUWN 2009) project, and was complemented by the
recent economic valuation studies (Sharma et al. 2015; CSUWN 2011); and two research
studies by Rayamajhi (2009) and Joshi (2012). Initially, an exhaustive list of ecosystem services
used by the local people from KTWR was prepared. While preparing the list, emphasis was
placed on the services that are widely used by a higher proportion of communities living in the
buffer zone of the reserve. These services were then quantified and presented (ICIMOD and
MoFSC 2014).

Economic values
The economic valuation was done using market-based and benefit transfer valuation methods
(Wilson and Hoehn 2006) to estimate the economic value of major direct and indirect uses of
the wetland ecosystem services provided by KTWR. The method is based on the underlying
assumption that the economic value of ecosystem goods or services at a study site can be
determined with sufficient accuracy by analyzing existing valuation studies at other sites.
Following the enlisted services, the main ecosystem services considered for valuation included
ten provisioning services (including flood plain agriculture, livestock fodder, fish, domestic
water supply, fuelwood, timber, and non-timber forest products), two regulating services (flood
protection and carbon sequestration), and one cultural service (tourism). Supporting services
were not considered independently for valuation to avoid double-counting, as the literature
suggests that they are either biophysical processes or intermediate benefits which contribute to
the provision of a range of final benefits from the first three categories (Turpie et al. 2010).
The present assessment did not measure the economic value of non-use values and some
components of indirect use (regulating services) such as water purification and micro-climate
stabilization due to lack of information and the fact that transfer of values from other contexts
might not be sufficiently reliable (Sharma et al. 2015).

Land cover change analysis

The Remote Sensing data from 1976
Table 7.1: List of Landsat imagery considered
to 2010 covering the KTWR core area for analysis
were used for the periodic spatio-
temporal land cover change over a Satellite Senior Path Row Acquisition date
period of 34 years (Table 7.1). Landsat MSS 150 42 13 November 1976
Medium spatial resolution Landsat Landsat TM 140 40 17 January 2010
Multi-spectral Scanner (MSS) of 1976; Landsat ETM+ 140 40 28 October 1999
Thematic Mapper (TM) of 1989; Landsat TM 140 40 4 February 2010
Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus

68
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

(ETM+) of 1999 and TM of 2010 was used to generate a land use/land cover map and
change analysis (Table 7.1). Landsat MSS, TM and Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+)
imagery were accessed from http://glovis.usgs.gov/ whereas Shuttle Radar Topography
Mission (SRTM) Digital Elevation Model was accessed from http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org.
eCognition developer software was used for object-based image analysis (OBIA). For details
on the method of land use and cover change analysis, refer to Chettri et al. (2013).

Results
Biophysical values
The land cover/ecosystem and habitat matrix showed that majority of species use a wide
variety of land cover or ecosystems and in many cases they are overlapping. For example,
Rock Python (Python molurus), Red-crowed Roofed Turtle (Kachuga kachuga), Elongated
Tortoise (Indotestudo elongate), Greater Adjutant Stork (Leptoptilos dubius) and Swamp
Francolin were reported from more than three land cover types or ecosystems. On the other
hand, there were many species with narrow habitat choices. Gharial Crocodile and Mugger
Crocodile were restricted to swamps/marshes and river/lakes. Likewise the Wild Water Buffalo
and Bengal Florican showed a narrow habitat choice. In the matrix analysis, swamps/marshes
scored the highest (15) for species number, followed by forest (14), river and lake (13),
grassland (12), agriculture (2), and finally sand/gravel (1). It was observed that forested
ecosystems of KTWR are one of the most important habitats of 15 globally significant species
followed by river and lakes and grassland. These matrix ranking values were then converted to
the raster maps prepared for land cover of 2010 to show their potential richness (number of
species) in each of the ecosystem types defined earlier (Figure 7.2).

Socio-cultural values
The literature review showed high dependency of local people on the ecosystem services of
KTWR. Among the forest products in the reserve, fuelwood is the top product on which 91% of
the local population is dependent. The dependency for thatch is the second highest (82%)
followed by timber (54%), grasses (51%), etc. (Figure 7.3). Likewise, people are also
dependent on wetland ecosystems such as rivers/streams and swamps/marshes for a variety of
goods and services such as fish (38%), driftwood (31%) and snails (23%), etc. The
dependency chart (Figure 7.3) clearly shows how much the local people are dependent on the
products of the reserve. Collection of these products not only contributes to their subsistence
livelihoods, but also to the local economy, thus reducing poverty in the area, as reported by
Rayamajhi as well (2009).

The list of ecosystem goods and services which were categorized into two major types
revealed that swamps and marshes, forest, river/lakes and agriculture are sources of a range
of ecosystem goods and services on which the local people are highly dependent. River/lakes
and swamp/marshes are the most productive ecosystems for provisioning services with a 24%
score each, followed by forest (21%), grassland (13%) and agricultural land (11%)

69
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Figure 7.2: Distribution and habitat use pattern of 20 threatened and

endangered species in KTWR

Source: ICIMOD and MoFSC 2014

Figure 7.3: Dependency on natural resources from KTWR

100
% of population

80
60
40
20
0
Firewood

Thatch

Timber

Grasses

Poles/shafts

Fishes

Driftwood

Pater

Wild edible

Snails

Products

70
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

(Figure 7.4a). It is also interesting to note that the river/lakes, which cover 10% of the total
area of KTWR, and swamp/marshland, which cover 12% of the total land, have high capacity
to provide social services to the people (Figure 7.4a). Similarly, forestland with about 8%
coverage offer equally high capacity of social services compared to other land uses. This
means that the land use with less area coverage faces intense pressure from the people due
to higher dependency as well as due to high production capacity. Similarly, local people’s
dependency on cultural services of the reserve has also been analyzed and similar results were
found, as presented in Figure 7.4b. For the local people, the forested areas, swamps/marshes
and grassland are the most valuable in terms of these services. However, it was observed that
the scores obtained for cultural and supporting services are lower than other services mainly
due to fewer variables used to score these services.

Figure 7.4: Services being provided by each ecosystem of KTWR

30 30
25 25
20 20

27%
15 15
24%

24%

20%

20%
10 10
21%

5 5
11%

13%

11%

13%

9%
Sand 7%

0 0
Agriculture

Grassland

Swamps/marshes

River/lakes

Agriculture

Grassland

Swamps/marshes

River/lakes

Sand
Forest

Forest

Figure 7.4a: Social services Figure 7.4b: Cultural services

Economic values
The overall economic benefit generated from the major types of provisioning, regulating, and
cultural services assessed was estimated to be approximately USD 16 million per year (NPR
1.38 billion) (Table 7.2), equivalent to around USD 959 per household per year (based on a
total of 16,710 households residing in the buffer zone) or about USD 916/ha (based on the
total KTWR area of 17,500 ha). This translates to a NPV of around USD 444 million,
estimated from the future benefit over a period of 60 years at an assumed discount rate of 3%
and constant flow of current benefit (i.e. no degradation and depletion of current benefit). This

71
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Table 7.2: Aggregate economic value of wetland ecosystem services provided by KTWR

Ecosystem services Total value Average value/ Value/ha/yr % share of total

(USD/yr) hh/yr (USD) (USD) ES assessed
1. Provisioning services 13,675,225 818.4 781.4 85.3
3. Regulating services 1,152,003 68.9 65.8 7.2
Flood control/prevention 952,075 57.0 54.4 5.9
Carbon sequestration 199,928 12.0 11.4 1.2
3. Cultural services-ecotourism 1,201,216 71.9 68.6 7.5
Total economic value 16,028,444 959.2 915.9
Source: Sharma et al. 2015.

estimation demonstrated the long-term economic value of KTWR. Clearly, the economic
benefit generated from provisioning services ranks first in terms of contribution to estimated
total economic value (85%), followed by recreational services from tourism (7.5%), and
regulating services from flood control and carbon sequestration (7.2%). The benefits of
different services accrue to different stakeholders. For example, the benefits of provisioning
services accrue entirely to the local people, while the benefit of the regulating services such as
carbon sequestration goes to the global communities. Even though many of the ecosystem
services do not translate directly into household income, the finding that a large part of the
estimated total value of the wetland ecosystem services accrues locally is a clear manifestation
of the vital importance of these wetland ecosystem services for the livelihoods of the local
people. Ensuring a sustainable flow of these ecosystem services is therefore critical for
supporting local livelihoods and maintaining the global significance of KTWR as a Ramsar site.

Land cover change

As per the 2010 data analysis, KTWR showed six major land cover types with some
predominant ecosystems such as grassland, forest, freshwater, marshes, etc. (Figure 7.5). The
time series land use and cover change analyses (1976-2010) brought some interesting facts
about the dynamic ecosystems of KTWR. The first observation was on course change of the
river from west to east (Figure 7.5). During the shift over the last 34 years, significant changes
in the land cover and ecosystem types have been observed. In 2010, the forested ecosystems
have reduced by 94% compared to 1976, covering only 150 ha of its original state
(1,853 ha) whereas the grassland has increased by 79% compared to its original state (1,716
ha). On the basis of total land cover, forests, river and stream, swamp and marshes decreased
by 16%, 14% and 3% respectively over the last 34 years whereas the grassland has increased
by 45%. It is also interesting to note that the river/streams covering 10% of the total area of
KTWR, and swamp/marshlands, which cover 5% of the total land, provides a higher number
of provisioning services to the people. Similarly, forestland with just 1% coverage is also
important for a wide number of goods and services compared to other ecosystems. This
means that the ecosystems with less coverage face intense pressure from the people due to
higher dependency.

72
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

Figure 7.5: Sets of maps showing land use and cover changes in Koshi Tappu Wildlife
Reserve during 1976-2010

A Land cover in KTWR 1976 B Land cover in KTWR 1989

C Land cover in KTWR 1999 D Land cover in KTWR 2010

Source: ICIMOD and MoFSC 2014

Discussion
Today, the rationale for protected area conservation has gained new momentum by linking
biodiversity with ecosystem services and human well-being (MEA 2005; Cardinale et al.
2011) and many of these studies have emphasized the importance of effective conservation
for continuous provision of ecosystem goods and services. Moreover, the momentum has also
enabled scientists from various disciplines to think about integration of ecological, economic,
and social factors by defining dependencies between natural systems and human societies
(Burkhard et al. 2010; Tenberg et al. 2012; Wolff et al. 2015).

73
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

As a wetland of international importance, KTWR has been supporting and protecting natural
systems and processes of the area which is supporting directly and indirectly to the benefit of
local communities. It is evident from this analysis that the reserve offers a wide range of
services to local communities such as fuelwood, fodder and food, as well as irrigation, water
storage, carbon sequestration, pollution control, etc. to the population of the buffer zone. This
is directly contributing to subsistence livelihoods of people living in the buffer zone and
helping reduce poverty (Shrestha and Alavalapati 2006; CSUWN 2009). Past analysis shows
that dependency of the local people on KTWR, particularly on provisioning services and
cultural services, is extremely high (CSUWN 2009; Sharma et al. 2015). A similar situation
was found in Cambodia, where a large proportion of people in rural areas (80–90%) depend
on continued supply of local ecosystem services such as fish, wild foods, timber, wood and
forest biomass and wild crops for primary source of income (Persson et al. 2010). Some of the
African nations (Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, and Zimbabwe)
also reported dependency on ecosystem services for one-quarter to one-third of household
income, especially provisioning services (Shackleton et al. 2008).

In KTWR, sources of socio-cultural services are mostly rivers, swamps and forest ecosystems.
This is obvious as forest and wetland ecosystems are the most productive ecosystems in terms
of providing services (Biswas et al. 2010; Gopal 2013; Lamsal et al. 2014). This is highly
relevant to KTWR as dependency of local people on forest and wetland ecosystems are
substantial as other alternatives for energy and livelihood options are limited (ICIMOD and
MoFSC 2014; Sharma et al. 2015). It is also evident that local people have higher
dependency on wetland ecosystems in any human dominant landscape (Lamsal et al. 2014).

However, the spatio-temporal changes induced by natural and human activities are bringing
various management challenges in the reserve, as also reported by others in the region
(Chettri et al. 2013; Lamsal et al. 2014). The forest ecosystem is strongly linked to wetland
ecosystems and plays an important role as interface (Kollár et al. 2011). It was observed that
some of the critical ecosystems such as forest have significantly changed during the past three
decades. The land use cover change, either through anthropogenic or natural processes,
brings visible changes in ecosystem functions of a given ecosystem, leading to decrease in the
capacity to provide services (Crossmann et al. 2013; Baral et al. 2014). A dynamic and
mosaic of ecosystems area important, but if any of the ecosystems is lost beyond the threshold
level, then it will have irreversible impact on the society that depends on such ecosystems
(Gopal 2013; Davidson 2014). Unfortunately, this is a common challenge that wetland
ecosystem faces in thriving under human use with changing patterns in providing the services
(Yan and Wu 2005; Deka et al. 2011; Romshoo and Rashid 2014). In the context of spatio-
temporal change, geospatial tools have been instrumental in helping us understand the
dynamic nature of ecosystems (e.g. Rebelo et al. 2009; Chettri et al. 2013). Though the
Government of Nepal has been proactively working with the local communities for
participatory conservation and management of KTWR (CSUWN 2009, 2011), the dynamic
nature of ecosystems needs special attention for management interventions. Therefore,

74
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

understanding the values, both monetary and non-monetary, including people’s dependency
on the ecosystem services and the dynamics of the ecosystems itself could be highly useful for
implementing adaptive management measures. This may further improve the flow of
ecosystem services and management of the reserve.

Conclusion
To conclude, change assessment is a primary prerequisite for various management and
planning activities at the regional or global level. It has assumed greater importance in view
of the shrinkage and degradation of wetland ecosystems, which are the last bastion of
biodiversity and human sustenance. Use of remotely sensed data for mapping is a cost-
effective method and Landsat images are capable of identifying wetland cover and its rate of
change. Present study revealed that in the past 34 years, significant loss of important
ecosystems have occurred in KTWR, eastern Nepal due to change in river course, over-
exploitation of resources resulting from poverty and limited alternative options for people
living in the buffer zone of the reserve. Spatio-temporal characteristics of KTWR in terms of
change detection could serve as a guiding tool in conservation and prioritization of ecosystem
management. Considering the change pattern in the area, the study recommends that
planners and managers take urgent and necessary measures for the conservation of KTWR in
order to prevent detrimental consequences for the remaining biodiversity of the reserve.

Acknowledgements
We express our gratitude to Dr David Molden, Director General of ICIMOD, for his inspiration
and for providing the required facilities. We are also thankful to the Ministry of Forests and
Soil Conservation, Government of Nepal, and Conservation and Sustainable Use of Wetlands
of Nepal (CSUWN) for their support and cooperation. Financial support received from
MacArthur Foundation and the German Society for International Cooperation (GIZ) is highly
appreciated.

References
Balvanera, P., Pfisterer, A.B., Buchmann, N., He, J., Nakashizuka, T. & Raffaelli, D.S.B. (2006).
‘Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects onm ecosystem functioning and services’.
Ecology Letters 9, 1146–1156.
Baral, H., Keenan, R.J., Sharma, S.K., Stork, N.E. & Kasel, S. (2014). ‘Economic evaluation of
ecosystem goods and services under different landscape management scenarios’. Land
Use Policy 39, 54-64.
Baral, H.S. & Inskipp, C. (2005). ‘Important bird areas in Nepal: Key sites of conservation’.
Bird Conservation Nepal, Kathamndu, Nepal and Birdlife International, Cambridge, UK.

75
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Bateman, I.J., Harwood, A.R., Mace, G.M., Watson, R.T., Abson, D.J., Andrews, B., Binner, A.,
Crowe, A., Day, B.H., Dugdale, S., Fezzi, C., Foden, J., Hadley, D., Haines-Young, R.,
Hulme, M., Kontoleon, A., Lovett, A.A., Munday, P., Pascual, U., Paterson, J., Perino, G.,
Sen, A., Siriwardena, G., van Soest, D. & Termansen, M. (2013). ‘Bringing ecosystem
services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom’. Science 341,
45– 50.
BCN (2011). ‘Bird check list of the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve’. Bird Conservation
Kathmandu, Nepal.
Biswas, M., Samal, N.R., Roy, P.K. & Mazumdar, A. (2010). ‘Human wetland dependency and
socioeconomic evaluation of wetland functions through participatory approach in rural
India’. Water Science and Engineering 3(4), 467-479.
Bryan, B.A., Raymond, C.M., Crossman, N.D & Macdonald, D.H. (2010). ‘Targeting the
management of ecosystem services based on social values: Where, what, and
how?’ Landscape and Urban Planning 97(2), 111-122.
Burkhard, B., Petrosillo, I & Costanza, R. (2010). ‘Ecosystem services – Bridging ecology,
economy and social sciences’. Ecological Complexity 7, 257–259.
Cardinale, B.J., Matulich, K.L., Hooper, D.U., Byrnes, J.E., Duffy, E., Gamfeldt, L., Balvanera,
P., O’Cornor, M.L. & Gonzalez, A. (2011). ‘The functional role of producer diversity in
ecosystems’. American Journal of Botany 98(3), 572-592.
Carpenter, S.R., Mooney, H.A., Agard, J., Capistrano, D., DeFries, R.S., Diaz, S., Dietz, T.,
Duraiappah, A.K., Oteng-Yeboah, A., Pereira, H.M., Perrings, C., Reid, W.V., Surukhan, J.,
Scholes, R.J. & Whyte, A. (2009). ‘Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the
millennium ecosystem assessment’. PNAS 106(5), 1305- 1312.
Castro, A.J., Verburg, P.H., Martín-López, B., Garcia-Llorente, M., Cabello, J., Vaughn, C.C.
& López, E. (2014). ‘Ecosystem service trade-offs from supply to social demand: A
landscape-scale spatial analysis’. Landscape and Urban Planning 132, 102-110.
Chettri, N., Uddin, K., Chaudhary, S. & Sharma, E. (2013). ‘Linking Spatio-Temporal Land
Cover Change to Biodiversity Conservation in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal’.
Diversity 5, 335-351.
Chhetry, D.T. (2010). ‘Diversity of herpetofauna in and around the Koshi Tappu Wildlife
Reserve’. Bibechana 6, 15-17.
Chhetry, D.T. & Pal, J. (2010). ‘Diversity of Mammals in and around Kosi Tappu Wildlife
Reserve’. Our Nature 8, 254-257.
Chiesura, A. & de Groot, R. (2003). ‘Critical natural capital: a socio-cultural
perspective’. Ecological Economics 44(2), 219-231.
COP (Convention on Biological Diversity) (2011). ‘Report of the tenth meeting of the
conference of the parties to the convention on biological diversity’. UNEP, Nairobi, pp.
353.
Crossman, N.D., Bryan, B.A., de Groot, R., Lin, Y.P. & Minang, P.A. (2013). ‘Land science
contributions to ecosystem services’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5(5),
509-514.
CSUWN (2009). ‘Baseline Survey Report, Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve. Conservation and
Sustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal’. Babar Mahal, Kathmandu, Nepal.

76
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

CSUWN (2011). ‘An Economic Valuation Tool for Wetlands of Nepal’. Conservation and
Sustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal, Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation, Nepal,
Viii+ pp. 62.
Daily, G.C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P., Mooney, H.A., Pechari, L., Ricketts, T.H.,
Salzman, J. & Shallenberger, R. (2009). ‘Ecosystem services in decision making: time to
deliver’. Front Ecological Environment 7(1), 21-28.
Davidson, N.C. (2014). ‘How much wetland has the world lost? Long-term and recent trends
in global wetland area’. Marine and Freshwater Research 65(10), 934-941.
Daw, T., Brown, K., Rosendo, S. & Pomeroy, R. (2011). ‘Applying the ecosystem services
concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being’. Environmental
Conservation 38(04), 370-379.
Deka, J., Tripathi, O.P. & Khan, M.L, (2011). ‘A multi-temporal remote sensing approach for
monitoring changes in spatial extent of freshwater lake of Deepor Beel Ramsar Site, a
major wetland of Assam’. Journal of Wetlands Ecology 5, 40-47.
De Lange, W.J., Wise, R.M., Forsyth, G.G. & Nahman, A. (2010). ‘Integrating socioeconomic
and biophysical data to support water allocations within river basins: an example from the
Inkomati Water Management Area in South Africa’. Environmental Modelling and Software
25, 43-50.
DNPWC (2009). ‘Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve and Buffer Zone Management Plan 2009–
2013’. Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Government of Nepal,
Kathmandu, Nepal.
Fisher, B., Turner, R.K. & Morling, P. (2009). ‘Defining and classifying ecosystem services for
decision making’. Ecological Economics 68, 643–653.
Gopal, B. (2013). ‘Future of wetlands in tropical and subtropical Asia, especially in the face
of climate change’. Aquatic sciences 75(1), 39-61.
Heinen, J.T. (1993). ‘Park–People Relations in Kosi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal: A
Socioeconomic Analysis’. Environmental Conservation 20, 25-34.
Hicks, C.C., Cinner, J.E., Stoeckl, N. & McClanahan, T.R. (2015). ‘Linking ecosystem services
and human-values theory’. Conservation Biology 29(5), 1471-1480.
ICIMOD and MoFSC (2014). ‘An integrated assessment of the effects of natural and human
disturbances on a wetland ecosystem: A retrospective from the Koshi Tappu Wildlife
Reserve, Nepal’. Kathmandu: ICIMOD.
IUCN (1990). ‘Directory of wetlands of international importance’. Ramsar Convention
Bureau, Gland: IUCN’
Joshi, P.P. (2012). ‘Community dependence and their interaction with natural ecosystems: A
case study at Koshi Tappu wildlife reserve, Nepal’. Master’s dissertation submitted to
Department of Natural Resources, TERI University, Delhi, India (Unpublished).
Kollár, S., Vekerdy, Z. & Márkus, B. (2011). ‘Forest habitat change dynamics in a riparian
wetland’. Procedia Environmental Sciences 7, 371-376.
Lamsal, P., Pant, K.P., Kumar, L. & Atreya, K. (2014). ‘Diversity, Uses, and Threats in the
Ghodaghodi Lake Complex, a Ramsar Site in Western Lowland Nepal’. ISRN
Biodiversity, 1-12.

77
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

MacDougall, A.S., McCann, K.S., Gellner G. & Turkington, R. (2013). ‘Diversity loss with
persistent human disturbance increases vulnerability to ecosystem
collapse’. Nature 494(7435), 86-89.
Mace, G.M., Norris, K. & Fitter, A.H. (2011). ‘Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a
multilayered relationship’. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 27, 19–26.
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2003). ‘Ecosystem and human well-being’.
Washington: Island Press.
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005). ‘Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing:
Synthesis’. Island Press, Washington-DC.
Milner-Gulland, E.J. (2012). ‘Interactions between human behaviour and ecological systems’.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367, 270–278.
Mlambo, M.C. (2012). ‘The urgent need for human well-being elements in biodiversity
research’. Biodiversity and Conservation 21(4), 1149-1151.
Nahlik, A.M., Kentula, M.A., Fennessy, M.S. & Landers, D.H. (2012). ‘Where is the
consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice.
Ecological Economics 77, 27–35.
Persson, L., Phirun, N., Ngin, C., Pilgrim, J., Sam, C. & Noel, S. (2010). ‘Ecosystem services
supporting livelihoods in Cambodia’. Project Report-2010. Stockholm Environment
Institute, Sweden.
Plieninger, T., Dijks, S., Oteros-Rozas, E. & Bieling, C. (2013). ‘Assessing, mapping, and
quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level’. Land Use Policy 33, 118-129.
Rashid, I., Farooq, M., Muslim, M. & Romshoo, S.A. (2013). ‘Assessing the impact of
anthropogenic activities on Manasbal Lake in Kashmir Himalayas’. International Journal of
Environmental Sciences 3(6), 2052-2063.
Rayamajhi, B. (2009). ‘Direct use values of wetland resources to inhabitants in the buffer zone
of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal’. Master Thesis, Mahidol University, Thailand.
Rebelo, L.M., Finlayson, C.M. & Nagabhatla, N. (2009). ‘Remote sensing and GIS for
wetland inventory, mapping and change analysis’. Journal of environmental
management 90 (7), 2144-2153.
Reyers, B., Biggs, R., Cumming, G.S., Elmqvist, T., Hejnowicz, A.P. & Polasky, S. (2013).
‘Getting the measure of ecosystem services: a social–ecological approach’. Frontiers in
Ecology and Environment 11, 268–273.
Romshoo, S.A., Ali, N. & Rashid, I. (2011). ‘Geoinformatics for characterizing and
understanding the spatio-temporal dynamics (1969–2008) of Hokarser wetland in
Kashmir Himalayas’. International Journal of Physical Science 6(5), 1026-1038.
Romshoo, S.A. & Rashid, I. (2014). ‘Assessing the impacts of changing land cover and climate
on Hokersar wetland in Indian Himalayas’. Arabian Journal of Geosciences 7(1), 143-
160.
Sah, J.P. (1997). ‘The Koshi Tappu Wetlands: Nepal’s Ramsar site’. Bangkok, IUCN.
Scholes, R.J., Reyers, B., Biggs, R., Spierenburg, M.J. & Duriappah, A. (2013). ‘Multiscale and
cross-scale assessments of social–ecological systems and their ecosystem services’. Current
Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5, 16–25.

78
 Understanding Coupled Human and Natural Systems in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, a Ramsar Site in Nepal

Shackleton, C., Shackleto, S., Gambiza, J., Nel, E., Rowntree, K. & Urquhart, P. (2008). ‘Links
between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: Situation analysis for arid and semi-
arid land in southern Africa’. A report submitted to ESPA. Africa: Consortium on
Ecosystems and Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Sharma, B., Rasul G. & Chettri, N. (2015). ‘The Economic Value of Wetland Ecosystem
Services: Evidence from Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal’. Ecosystem Services 12,
84-93.
Shrestha, R.K. & Alavalapati, J.R.R. (2006). ‘Linking conservation and development: An
analysis of local people’s attitude towardsKoshi Tappu wildlife reserve, Nepal’.
Environment, Development and Sustainability 8, 69–84.
Siwakoti, M. (2006). ‘An overview of floral diversity in wetlands of terai region of Nepal’. Our
Naure 4, 83-90.
Tenberg, A., Fredholm, S., Eliasson, I., Knez, I., Saltzman, K. & Wetterberg, O. (2012).
‘Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: Assessment of heritage values and
identity’. Ecosystem Services 2, 14–26.
Turpie, J., Lannas, K., Scovronick, N. & Louw, A. (2010). ‘Wetland valuation. Volume I –
Wetland ecosystem services and their valuation: A review of current understanding and
practice’. Report to the Water Research Commission (WRC Report No. TT 440/09),
Wetland Health and Importance Research Programme, the Republic of South Africa.
Wilson, M. & Hoehn, J. (2006). ‘Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit
transfer: The state-of-the-art and science’. Ecological Economics 60 (2), 335-342.
Wolff, S., Schulp, C.J.E. & Verburg, P.H. (2015). ‘Mapping ecosystem services demand: A
review of current research and future perspectives’. Ecological Indicators 55, 159-171.
Yan, Z. & Wu, N. (2005). ‘Rangeland privatization and its impacts on the Zoige wetlands on
the Eastern Tibetan Plateau’. Journal of Mountain Science 2(2), 105-115.

79
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Indigenous Knowledge for Wetland

Conservation and Resource
Utilization: A Case Study of Ramsar Sites,
Nepal

Shalu Adhikaria and Amir Poudelb

a
WWF Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal, b NARMA Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., Nepal
[email protected]

Abstract
Wetlands in Nepal support an agrarian socio-economy and form the religious-cultural foundation of
various communities. There are about 21 indigenous communities in the country that depend on
wetland resources for their livelihoods. These communities have been using their traditional knowledge
and practices from time immemorial. However, due to economic changes and rapidly changing
natural environment, their knowledge is becoming lost. An effort was made to document wetland
indigenous knowledge in Ghodaghodi Lake Area (GLA) and Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (KTWR),
Ramsar sites of Nepal in 2012 based on the methodology developed by the Ministry of Forests and
Soil Conservation in terms of resource (plants and animals) utilization and practicing different wetland
management techniques. A total of 44 different wetland products were utilized by Chaudhary/Tharu
communities in GLA while in KTWR, a wide range of products were utilized by five different indigenous
communities. Similarly, 14 and 25 different types of indigenous knowledge contributed to sustainable
wetland management in GLA and KTWR respectively. Most importantly, indigenous communities
conserve the wetlands and some of their resources as religious symbols which significantly contributes
to sustainable wetland management. Indigenous knowledge is largely limited to the older generation,
and the younger generation is less motivated to practice such knowledge. The problem can be
addressed by supporting such communities to derive economic benefits from their knowledge.

Keywords: indigenous community, indigenous knowledge, resource utilization, wetland

management

Introduction
‘Indigenous knowledge’ (IK) has been defined in many ways in literature. It is the accumulated
knowledge and traditional skills and technology of a people, culture, sub-culture (Brokensha
et al. 1980). IK encompasses both technical and non-technical knowledge including
worldviews, social and religious customs and taboos, vegetation, climate, ecology,
communication pattern and music. IK is unique to a particular culture and society (World

80
 Indigenous Knowledge for Wetland Conservation and Resource Utilization: A Case Study of Ramsar Sites, Nepal

Bank 1998). Whereas IK possessed by any indigenous community is unique and different from
the IK possessed by another community with respect to the utilization of even the same
resources (IUCN 2005). The International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention on
Indigenous Knowledge and Tribal People, 1989 (No. 169) provides linkages between
indigenous knowledge and natural resources management. It has also duly recognized the
importance of indigenous knowledge and the rights of the indigenous people to use, manage
and conserve natural resources including wetlands. Long-term sustainable use of biological
resources can only be achieved if the benefits are shared fairly and equitably, and the
knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities is respected (NBS 2002).

In Nepal, there are about 21 indigenous and ethnic communities that are dependent on
wetland resources for their livelihoods (Bhandari 1998). Indigenous communities have been
utilizing wetland resources as part of their livelihood activities for many generations. However,
loss and degradation of these wetlands during the last few years has severely affected those
relationships (GoN/MoFSC 2014). They extract resources such as forage, fuelwood, fibre and
medicinal plants using their indigenous knowledge. Their knowledge is associated with
wetland resource harvesting, utilization and management as well as other social and cultural
beliefs, taboos and religion. On the other hand, local people hesitate to reveal their
knowledge, skill and practices for documentation purposes, and this may be attributed to the
risk of bio-piracy (MoFSC 2006). Therefore, this study particularly aimed to document wetland
indigenous knowledge (WIK) in two Ramsar sites namely Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (KTWR)
and Ghodaghodi Lake Area (GLS) to prevent the loss of knowledge resulting from rapid
changes in the natural environment.

Methods
The study was based on the methods of WIK Documentation Methodology and Application
Guidelines (CSUWN 2011). The documentation was based on two approaches: i) resources
utilization – knowledge associated with utilizing different wetland products as medicine, food,
fibre, fodder, fuelwood, equipment, housing materials, etc.; and ii) wetland management –
knowledge that contributes towards species conservation, reducing wetland degradation,
management of catchment areas, sustainable harvesting, etc. In KTWR, there are indigenous
wetland dependent communities (WDCs) such as Bantar, Jhangad, Musahar, Mallaha and
Chaudhary. KTWR was established in 1976 and spread over three districts of eastern Nepal
along the floodplains of the Koshi River. The reserve is the only remaining habitat of Asian
Wild Water Buffalo (Bubalus arnee) in Nepal. The existing vegetation of the reserve consists of
diverse physiographic types, which harbours 658 species of plants including submerged,
aquatic, floating and tall reed grasslands. In GLA, Chaudhary (Tharu) is the only indigenous
WDC. GLA, situated in the far southwestern Terai, is an association of 20 different freshwater
lakes of various sizes. The lake harbours an estimated 1% of South Asian biogeographic
population of Cotton Pygmy Goose (Nettapus coromandelianus). The lake is surrounded by
subtropical broad-leaved trees including Sal and Saj and other associated species.

81
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Broadly speaking, WIK documentation was carried out in three phases: pre-documentation,
documentation, and post-documentation. The steps of each phase are schematically shown in
Figure 8.1.

Figure 8.1: Schematic presentation of the steps followed for WIK documentation

Wetland selection

Pre-Documentation phase
Identification of WDC

Obtaining PIC approval

Identification of knowledgeable person

Selection of local resource person

Transect walk

Documentation phase
Inventory preparation

Herbarium preparation

Knowledge documentation

Resource utilization Wetland management

Triangulation

Step 1: Identification of wetland sites: Wetland sites for IK documentation were selected
based on their importance, people’s dependency on them, and vulnerable bio-
resources and associated IK.
Step 2: Identification and mapping of WDC: WDC in both sites were selected based on
the dependency level of communities on wetlands, i.e., communities who largely
depend on wetland resources for their livelihood were selected; communities
indigenous to the locality; communities that have successfully preserved their social
and cultural values associated with wetlands; and communities whose occupation is
based on wetland products and services.

82
 Indigenous Knowledge for Wetland Conservation and Resource Utilization: A Case Study of Ramsar Sites, Nepal

Step 3: Obtaining Prior Informed Consent (PIC) approval form: Standard PIC approval
was obtained from the indigenous community members for undertaking the
documentation.
Step 4: Identification of knowledgeable persons: Indigenous community members with
good knowledge of wetland resources and management practices, especially local
healers or elderly people, were selected.
Step 5: Selection of local resource person (LRP): In order to make documentation easier,
local individuals were hired as they were more familiar with the social, cultural and
religious values of the community.
Step 6: Transect walk: Transect walk with LRP and knowledgeable person was done to
collect, identify and record plants and animals found in that particular season.
Documentation can be done in all seasons provided the resources are available.
Step 7: Inventory preparation: An inventory was then prepared to list the products utilized
by the local community for various purposes. It was ensured that the products that
are highly vulnerable to extinction, products with high economic and social values,
and products unique to the particular community were included.
Step 8: Herbarium preparation: In order to prevent the collected samples from decaying
and also to keep a proper record, a herbarium was prepared after the collection of
products.
Step 9: Knowledge documentation: This is one of the important steps in the overall
documentation process. For resource utilization, two different types of forms based
on the WIK documentation methodology were used. The first form was used to
acquire information about the selected wetland site and indigenous community.
Information included the name and area of wetland, adjoining VDCs, name of
dependent communities, major products found in the wetland, threats to the
wetland, land use type etc. Both primary and secondary sources of data were used.
The second form was used to acquire more in-depth information on knowledge
associated with the products collected from the wetland site by the indigenous
community. Information included the name of the bio-resource, its local/common/
scientific name, resource availability status and trend, utilization, processing, usage
and storage technique, economic value of the product and other associated
knowledge, among others. For wetland management, information was acquired
through steps shown in Figure 8.2.
Step 10: Triangulation and reporting: This step belongs to the post-documentation phase
where the collected information is validated through focus group discussion with
other members of the indigenous community. It was noted that information collected
from only one knowledgeable person in the community was validated through
review and interaction with other knowledgeable persons of same indigenous tribe
around the wetland site or from elsewhere.

83
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Figure 8.2: Schematic diagram for WIK related to wetland management

Identification of wetland sites used by a given community

Lakes Rivers Ponds Marshes Agri-land Others

Identification of wetland management practices

Economic benefits Social benefits

Sorting of knowledge (indigenous, local innovations and recently induced one)

Criteria Criteria
Assessing the contribution of indigenous knowledge and local innovations to wise
use of wetlands (separate adverse practices)
Species Water body Catchment area Sustainable
conservation protection management harvesting

Documentation of indigenous knowledge contributing to sustainable wetland

management

Results and Discussion

WIK related to resource utilization
A total of 44 different wetland products were found to be utilized by the Tharu/Chaudhary
community in GLA (Table 8.1, Annex 8.1). In KTWR, the total number of products being
utilized by the different indigenous communities ranged from 32 among the Musahar to 54
among the Sardar community. The Jhangad were found to be utilizing a total of 42 products
while Mallaha were found to be utilizing a total of 41 products (Table 8.2, Annex 8.2). A total
of 40 products were used by the Chaudhary community and a total of 42 products were
common to at least two of the indigenous communities. These products were being used for
various purposes such as food, fodder, fuelwood, medicine, livestock feed, equipment and
poison in both the areas. This paper does not include detailed information on specific
bio-resources (e.g., unique characters, habitat, status of availability, resource availability
trend, uses of parts, processing techniques, harvesting time, methods, harvesting quantity,
economic value, etc.) for either of the sites.

84
 Indigenous Knowledge for Wetland Conservation and Resource Utilization: A Case Study of Ramsar Sites, Nepal

Table 8.1: Total number of products and usage by the Chaudhary community in GLA

No. of Uses
Community
products Food Medicine Livestock feed Equipment Poison Fuelwood
Chaudhary/Tharu 44 22 36 14 22 2 1

Table 8.2: Total number of products and usage by different indigenous communities in
KTWR
Name of the community Total Areas of indigenous usage
products Medicine Food Fodder Equipment
Sardar/Bantar 54 22 23 16 4
Mallah 41 21 22 5 5
Jhangad /Urau 42 13 14 13 6
Musahar 32 8 12 9 4
Chaudhary/Tharu 40 18 12 9 7

WIK related to wetland management

A total of 21 different wetland management practices were collected for different types of
wetlands found in GLA. These types of knowledge were sorted and categorized as
a) indigenous, b) local innovation, and c) recently induced. Out of these 21 types of
knowledge related to wetland management, 14 types of WIK that contributed to sustainable
wetland management were identified in GLA (Table 8.3). Similarly, for KTWR, a total of 25
types of indigenous knowledge related to wetland management were collected (Table 8.4). It
should be noted that much of the indigenous knowledge focused on minimizing over-

Table 8.3: WIK related to sustainable wetland management in GLA

Categories Wetland management practices

Species • ‘Hareri’, a religious day when fishing is prohibited
conservation • ‘Bhaunka Jhar’ is spread on the water surface where fish prefer to lay eggs and take
shelter
• Sacrificing seven pairs of fish before starting paddy plantation during monsoon. This
special variety of fish is not eaten.
• ‘Raini’ fish worshipped as the king of fish
Water body • Diversion of water from streams and rivers into agricultural land
protection • Water flow channels are blocked to retain water for jute cultivation, especially if rainfall is
low
Catchment area • Certain patches of forests along the wetland sites are worshipped, and grazing and felling
management is prohibited in such areas
Sustainable • 7–8 stalks of Jharanga Dhan are tied after they ripen to prevent bending and falling
harvesting • Size of the fishing net has been maintained such that very small fish can escape during
fishing
• Adjustment of harvesting season of Khar
• Collection being carried out by knowledgeable person such that young and tender plants
are not harvested
• Tender parts of ‘Khar’ are protected from livestock grazing
• Change in the type of fishing tool from ‘spear’ to ‘Helka’

85
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Table 8.4: WIK related to sustainable wetland management in KTWR

Categories Wetland management practices

Species • Birds such as ‘Nilkantha’ Indian Roller (Coracias benghalensis), Garud (stork species) are
conservation protected as sacred symbols and not killed.
• Fishing is not done during festivals like Ashare puja, Shivaratri, Chhat parba, Sankranti, Teej,
Jitiya, Ananta Chaturdashi, and Rakshyabandhan.
• Killing of snakes such as ‘Harhara’, Python is prevented.
• ‘Ganguer’ is not killed for religious reasons.
• Most women do not eat fish on Sundays.
• Tortoise is worshipped as a symbol of god Vishnu so it’s not killed.
• A bird named ‘Khadan Chidiya’ is not killed because it has beautiful colours.
• Birds like Koili, Parakeets and Myna are not killed owing to their docile nature.
• Lotus plant is protected as a symbol of god Brahma.
• ‘Kauwa fish’ is not eaten because it is believed to be the messenger of a sacred crow.
• Grass carp helps maintain grass in fish ponds.
• The practice of making ‘Birae’ where different types of plants are collected and laid on the
water surface to clean the water and provide a good place for laying fish eggs.
• Water is allocated in key areas for Chinga fish (‘Hille machha’).
Water body • Some ponds are totally protected for the purpose of worshipping.
protection • Ridges are maintained in agricultural land to prevent soil erosion.
• Millet is planted along the edges of the fish ponds to prevent soil erosion.
• The Koshi river is worshipped during Ashare puja.
• Minimum water is maintained by making dykes for jute cultivation.
• Use of organic manure and compost on agriculture land.
Catchment • Reed and sugarcane are planted along ponds to prevent siltation process.
area • Certain forest patches are protected for religious purposes, thus reducing soil erosion.
management • Grazing of livestock on the banks of fish ponds is prohibited to prevent soil erosion.
Sustainable • Harvest of Pater is sequenced to ensure that the resource can be harvested for the long time.
harvesting • Reduced fishing during egg laying season.

extraction and unsustainable harvesting techniques of wetland resources. Most of the

knowledge contributed to species conservation, mainly for religious reasons. Local
communities regard wetlands and the different plants and animals found in the wetlands as
sacred symbols, which largely contributes to their protection.

Conclusion
It can be concluded that there is a rapid decline of wetland related traditional knowledge
among the indigenous communities. Degradation and loss of wetlands, which is also
accelerated by the effects of climate change, poses a threat to communities whose livelihoods
are derived from wetland-based products. Not all types of indigenous resource harvesting and
wetland management related knowledge are sustainable in the long run. While some
contribute towards over harvesting, those that contribute towards sustainable harvesting and
utilization should be preserved as a source of learning and for future promotion and
development. Moreover, WIK can be preserved if it is utilized in future for economic gains.

86
 Indigenous Knowledge for Wetland Conservation and Resource Utilization: A Case Study of Ramsar Sites, Nepal

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial and technical support provided by the
project ‘Conservation and Sustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal’, a joint undertaking of the
Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Global Environment Facility and the United Nations
Development Programme.

References
Bhandari, B. (1998). ‘An Inventory of Nepal’s Terai Wetlands’. Final Report, IUCN Nepal
Kathmandu, Nepal.
Brokensha, D., Warren, D.M. & Warner, O, (1980), ‘Indigenous Knowledge System and
Development’. University Press of America, Washington-DC.
CSUWN (2011). ‘Wetlands Indigenous Knowledge Documentation Methodology &
Application Guidelines’. Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Nepal.
GoN/MoFSC (2014). ‘Nepal Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2014-2020’. Government
of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal.
IUCN (2005). ‘Review and analysis of secondary information sources on the process and
procedures for documentation and registration of traditional knowledge in Nepal’.
Kathmandu, Nepal.
MoFSC (2006). ‘Third National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity’. His
Majesty’s Government of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu,
Nepal.
NBS (2002). ‘Nepal Biodiversity Strategy’. His Majesty’s Government of Nepal, Ministry of
Forest and Soil Conservation, Supported by Global Environmental Facility and United
Nations Development Program.
World Bank (1998). ‘Indigenous Knowledge for Development – A Framework for Action’.
Knowledge and Learning Center, Africa Region, The World Bank.

87
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Annex 8.1: Details of plants and animals used by the Chaudhary community along with
their usage in GLA
Uses
Local name Nepali name English name Scientific name
F M LF E P FW
Gon Pater Cat-tail Typhaelephantina   √   √    
Teluniya   -   √ √        
Purain Kamal Sacred lotus Nelumbonucifera √ √√√√   √    
Goha Gohi Muggar/Ghariyal Crocodiluspulustris/ √ √        
Gavialisgangeticus
Jal Kumbhi Jal Kumbhi Water hyacinth Eichhorniacrassipes   √        
Jhingua Machha Jhinghe Machha Prawn Paenussp √ √        
Banarapat/ Dabali Jhar - Setariaglauca   √ √      
Bandra
Gyangta Gangato Land crab Potamon sp. √ √        
Rahu Machha Rahu Machha Indian carp Labeorohita √ √        
Karammuwa Sag Karmi Sag Swamp cabbage/ Ipomoea aquatica √ √        
Water spinach
Biriya Jhar -  -  -   √     √  
Mangoor Machha Mangoor Clarias Clariasbatrachus √ √        
Machha
Singayar Singhada Water chestnut Trapabispinosa √          
Khechhuhi Kachhuwa Soft-shelled tortoise Trionyxgangeticus √√ √√√√√        
Machhakul Bird  -       √        
Ajgar Ajingar Indian python Python molurus   √        
Sirish Jhar  - -  -     √ √    
Chatiya Mothe Nut sedge Cyperusiria     √      
Baksa ThuloDubo - Pennisetumclandestinum     √      
Churki Siru Cogon grass Imperatacylindrica     √ √√    
Bhorwa  -  -  -     √ √    
Perra  -  -  - √√          
Bond  -  -  -     √ √    
Besharam Besharam Morning glory Ipomoea carnea   √   √√   √
Bhomara  -  -   √ √ √      
Seuthe  -  -       √      
Ghodtapre Ghodtapre Indian pennywort Centellaasiatica   √        
Jungali Barsim Barsim Egyptian clover Trifoliumalexandrinum     √      
Kansutali  -  -  -   √√        
Guiji  -  -  -     √ √    
Katkuiya  -  - Amaranthusspinosus √          
Sanwa Ghans Sanwa Ghans Barnyard millet Echinochloacolona     √      
Baisa Baisa  - Salix tetrasperma   √ √      
Baj Bojho Sweet flag Acoruscalamus   √√√√     √  
Sutahi Sipi  -   √     √√    
Ghonghi Ghonghi Snails Macrochlamystugurium √ √        
Bet Bet  - Calamustaneus       √√√√√√√    
Karmo Sag Dhodhi Sag Joint vetch Aeschynomeneaspera √          
Lerghut Narkat Common reed Phragmiteskarka       √√√    
Kochiya Sag Nigro  - Diplaziumesculentum √ √        
Jharanga Dhan Jungali Dhan Wild rice Oryzarufipogon √   √      
Machha Machha Fish Pisces √√          
Sedri Machha Sedri   Puntius sp.   √        
Gor Katla  -  -  -   √        
F: Food; M: Medicine; LF: Livestock Feed; E: Equipment; P: Poison; FW: Fuelwood

88
 Indigenous Knowledge for Wetland Conservation and Resource Utilization: A Case Study of Ramsar Sites, Nepal

Annex 8.2: Details of common bio-resources used by the indigenous communities in

KTWR
Uses
Local name Nepali name English name Scientific name
F M LF E P FW
Achheni Bojo Sweet flag Acoruscalamus   √√      
Anai Machha Anahai Eeel fish Mastacembelusarmatus √ √      
Aurighans           √    
Bhangdaiya Bhringaraj   Ecliptaprostrata   √      
Bishnair Bisnar/Pire Joint weed Polygonumbarbatum   √      
Chirkanti Kuro Love Thorn Chrysopoganaciculatus       √  
Dabighans           √ √√ √
Datkira Machha         √      
Dattighans           √    
Dhakiya Sag Nigro   Diplaziumesculentum √        
Doka Doka     √        
Dolphin Dolphin Gangetic Dolphin Platonistagangetica   √      
Gangata Gangato Land crab Potamon sp. √        
Ghonghi Ghonghi Snails Macrochlamystugurium √ √      
Gurulati Gurulati   Tinosporasinensis   √      
Hada           √    
Iodine ghans         √      
Jhila Chara       √        
Kannaghans           √    
Karautighans           √    
Karmi Sag Karmi Sag Swamp cabbage Ipomeaaquatica √        
Kechu Karkalo Co-co Yam Colocasiaesculenta √ √ √    
Khar Khar Thatch grass Saccharumspontaneum     √ √√  
Soft-shelled
Khechuwi Kachhuwa tortoise Trionyxgangeticus √        
Koka/Thuru Kamal Sacred Lotus Nelumbonucifera √        
Lajwanti Jhar Lajwanti Jhar Touch-me-not Mimosa pudica   √      
Machha Machha Fish Pisces √        
Makhan Makhan Gorgon Nut Euryale ferox √        
Motha Motha   Cyperusrotundus     √    
Mothighans Mothi   Cyperuscorymbosa       √√  
Munj Munj   Saccharummunja       √  
Narkat Narkat Common reed Phragmiteskarka       √ √
Pater Pater Cat-tail Typhaangustifolia √     √  
Pudina Pudina   Menthaspicata √ √      
Rahu Machha Rahu Machha Indian Carp Labeorohita √ √      
Samor           √    
Sangohi Sungohoro Barred Monitor Varanusbengalensis       √  
Sarauchiya Sag   Alligator weed Alternantherasessilis √        
Singhada Singhada Water chestnut Trapabispinosa √        
Sinuwar Simali   Vitexnegundo   √      
Situwa Sipi     √        
Telair           √    
F: Food; M: Medicine; LF: Livestock Feed; E: Equipment; P: Poison; FW: Fuelwood

89
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

90
 Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal

3
Wetland Policies
and Cooperation

91
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

92
 Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal

Policy and Practices with Respect to

Wetland Conservation in Nepal
Maheshwar Dhakala and Bishwa Nath Olib
a
Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Nepal,
b
Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Nepal
[email protected]

Abstract
This paper focuses on assessing the wetland conservation efforts, analyzing the underlying causes of
wetland resources degradation and recommending possible options for conservation and wise use of
these resources of Nepal. This assessment is largely based on policy review and direct field
observations. Small to large wetlands, distributed across the country harbour around 25% of biological
diversity in Nepal. These wetlands provide various kinds of goods and ecosystem services that are
instrumental in sustaining plant and animal life. For wise use of wetland resources, the Government of
Nepal formulated the National Wetland Policy in 2003, which was revised in 2012. The National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2002 and its updated version in 2014 have given utmost
importance to the protection of wetlands. Despite the sound policy instruments, wetland conservation
efforts are not adequately translated from policy into practice. Wetlands provide multiple goods and
services but their role in improving the livelihoods of local people is indispensable. However, these
wetlands are severely affected by both anthropogenic and natural threats. The major threats are
siltation, alien invasive species, and conversion to other land use, pollution, drying up and extraction
of wetland resources, mainly by fishing. The institutional responsibilities related to wetland conservation
and management are scattered among different agencies and there is inadequate funding for this
sub-sector. Given the paramount importance of wetlands in Nepal, conservation and wise use of these
resources with active engagement of the local people is needed.

Keywords: wetlands, livelihood, local people, wise use, Nepal

Introduction
Wetlands are the most productive ecosystems, producing both tangible goods and intangible
environmental services (MEA 2003). Wetlands serve as a lifeline for both plants and animals by
maintaining environmental quality and food security on perpetual basis (Shrestha 2011).
Scientists claim that wetlands are a biological supermarket as they produce multiple goods and
services, mainly provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting (MEA 2005). That is why
scientists have come up with a broader definition of wetlands based on their type, size and
nature. Over the past 50 years, humans have brought changes to ecosystems, including wetland
ecosystems, more rapidly and extensively than in any other period in human history, largely to
meet rapidly growing demands for food, freshwater, timber, fibre and fuel (MEA 2005). This has
resulted in substantial and largely irreversible loss of biodiversity of the earth.

93
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

The rate of loss of wetlands is rapidly increasing in developing countries like Nepal owing to
political unrest, urbanization, migration, and over-exploitation of forests; it is believed that
64–70% of wetlands have been lost globally since 1900 (Ramsar 2015). Worldwide,
especially in developing countries, local people who live near the wetlands use the wetland
resources for livelihood, drinking water, irrigation, fishing, and other purposes. The rate of use
and dependency of the poor and marginalized people on wetland resources is comparably
higher as they produce multiple goods and services. Despite the various conservation efforts
of the government, non-government organizations and local people, most of the wetlands
were threatened by various anthropogenic activities. Construction of hydropower dams,
construction of rural roads, deposition of domestic and industrial waste in the river, and use of
pesticides and insecticides have resulted in sedimentation in most of the river basins and
wetlands in Nepal (IUCN 2004). In addition to that, invasion of alien species, over harvesting
of wetland resources, especially fishing, overgrazing, water and industrial pollution, excessive
use of agro-chemicals that flow into nearby streams, and discharge of industrial effluents are
major problems in wetland conservation and management.

In this study, we assessed the wetland conservation and management policies and identified
their gaps with reference to field level implementation in Nepal. The study focused on
wetlands policy and programmes and their importance. This study also assessed wetland
conservation efforts and underlying causes of the degradation of wetland resources, and
recommended possible policy measures.

Wetlands in Nepal
Nepal is rich in wetlands and their resources
Table 9.1: Wetlands in Nepal
though the country is landlocked. Major wetland
types are rivers, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, Wetland types Estimated Coverage
area (ha)
marginal swamps, glacier lakes and irrigated
Rivers 395,000 48.2
paddy fields (Table 9.1). These wetlands cover
Lakes 5,000 0.6
5.6% of the total land area of the country, which
Reservoirs 1,500 0.2
is more or less equal to wetlands of the world.
Ponds 7,277 0.9
Similarly, wetlands harbour 25% of the total
Marginal swamps 12,500 1.5
biodiversity of Nepal (MoFSC 2012). Four major
Irrigated paddy fields 398,000 48.6
river systems (Koshi, Gandaki, Karnali and
Total 819,277 100.0
Mahakali) originate from the High Mountain
Source: GoN 2014
region and their tributaries perform micro
watershed to large watershed functions. Though Nepal is rich in wetlands, their distribution is
not even across the country. Around 45% of wetlands in Nepal are located in the Himalayan
region and another 3% are located in the High Mountains region (Figure 9.1). All rivers and
river systems flow from the upstream Himalayan ranges to downstream lowland and provide
various environmental services, particularly drinking water, irrigation, hydropower generation
and means of transportation. Similarly, around 17% of wetlands are located in the Terai,
Mid-Mountains and Siwalik. These wetlands provide drinking water to the general public and

94
 Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal

irrigation to farmers; fishing and

Figure 9.1: Location of wetlands of Nepal
livelihood support to poor and
marginalized people who live near the
wetlands (GoN 2014). Wetlands not 50 45
45
only provide a habitat to wildlife and
40 35
endemic plants, but also support the 35
livelihood of local communities (Siwakoti 30
2006). 25
20
Wetland Policies in Nepal 15
8 8
10
The National Conservation Strategy 3
5 1
(1988) has emphasized the need for 0

High Himal

High Mountains

Mid-Mountains

Siwalik

Terai

Undetermined
sustainable use of land and natural
resources. The Master Plan for the
Forestry Sector (1989) emphasized the
need to involve people in natural
resources management. Though the
wetlands are perennial sources of water Source: NBSAP 2014
that exist in the form of pond, lake, river,
glacier or costal areas, these policy
documents rarely mention the need to Box 9.1: Wetland related polices and
pay special attention to wetlands international conventions in Nepal
conservation, management and wise use
Acts
of the resources. ƒƒ Constitution of Nepal 2015
ƒƒ National Parks and Wildlife Conservation
The Government of Nepal has Act 1973
ƒƒ Forest Act 1993
promulgated various wetland related
ƒƒ Environmental Act 1997
acts, policies and also signed some ƒƒ Self Governance Act 1999
international treaties related to ƒƒ Soil Conservation and Watershed Act 1982
biodiversity conservation (Box 9.1). ƒƒ Electricity Act 1992
ƒƒ Water Resource Act 1992
However, there is no specific legislative
provision to deal with wetlands and their Policies
resources. Even though water and ƒƒ National Conservation Strategy 1988
wetlands provide healthy wildlife habitats ƒƒ National Wetland Policy 2012
ƒƒ Forest Policy 2015
and ecosystem services, none of the
policy documents pays special attention International treaties and conventions
to wetlands. Wetlands are not defined as ƒƒ Ramsar Convention 1971
ƒƒ United Nations Convention on Biological
a separate category of ecologically
Diversity 1992
important areas in the National Parks ƒƒ United Nations Framework Convention on
and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973 Climate Change 1992
even though wetlands maintain water ƒƒ United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification 1992
quality, its freshness and neutrality.

95
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Wetlands, as part of ecosystem-based adaptation areas, ensure restoration, maintenance and

enhancement of ecosystem values in the face of climate change. Similarly, other acts like the
Aquatic Animal Protection Act 1961, Soil and Watershed Conservation Act 1982, Water
Resources Act 1992, Electricity Act 1992, Forest Act 1993, Environmental Protection Act
1996, Local Self Governance Act 1999 and many other policy documents lack specific
provisions related to wetlands.

The National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973 has emphasized the role of wetlands
in wildlife conservation. Wetlands inside the protected areas are regarded as additional values
for making water available to both fauna and flora and for making the ecosystem functional.
However, the Forest Act 1993 does not spell out the importance of wetlands inside the forest
areas though some of the forest management regimes aim to protect the environment and
generate various environmental services. It is largely believed that wetlands inside the forests
have special significance in terms of combating the effects of climate change.

Wetland Conservation Efforts in Nepal

Though Nepal became a party to Ramsar Convention in 1987, the conservation trend showed
slow progress (Box 9.2). A National Lake Conservation Committee was formed under the
jurisdiction of the Ministry of Tourism and Civil Aviation to promote tourism in and around the
wetlands, but little priority has been given to the wetlands sector even though many Nepalese
people depend on these resources for their lives and livelihoods. Majority of the activities are
focused on awareness generation and capacity building. Lakes and ponds face formidable
threats to their survival because of the conversion of wetlands for other purposes, over-
exploitation of resources, pollution of water, invasion of alien species, encroachment on the
area and sedimentation of the water body (Paudel 2009).

Box 9.2: Trend of wetland conservation in Nepal

1987 - Koshi Tappu Wetland Reserve (KTWR) included in the Ramsar List

1993 - National Workshop on Wetland Management in Nepal
1998 - Revision of Aquatic Life Protection Act of 1961
2003 - Endorsement of the National Wetlands Policy

2003 - Three wetlands (Bishazari Lake, Jagdishpur Lake and Ghodaghodi Lake) designated
as Ramsar sites
2006 - Publication of monographs on high-altitude wetlands

2007 - Four high-altitude wetlands (Gokyo Lake, Gosaikunda Lake, Shey Phoksundo Lake and
Rara Lake) designated as Ramsar sites
2008 - Mai Pokhari designated as the 9th Ramsar site
2012 - Nepal selected as an Alternative Member of the Standing Committee of Ramsar
Convention
2012 - International Wetland Symposium 2012
2013 - Revision of National Wetlands Policy 2012
2015 - Nepal nominated as a Standing Committee member
2016 - Lake Cluster of Pokhara Valley (Phewa, Begnas, Rupa, Dipang, Maidi, Khaste-
Nyureni, Kamal Pokhari and Gunde lakes) designated as Ramsar site

96
 Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal

In order to implement the National Wetland Policy 2003 and its revised version 2012 (MoFSC
2012), the policy envisages a two-tier wetland conservation committee. The central level
committee comprises of 12 members led by the secretary of the Ministry of Forests and Soil
Conservation. The district level committee comprises of more than 16 members and the
District Forestry Sector Coordination Committee (DFCC) is supposed to coordinate all wetland
stakeholders.

Ramsar Sites of Nepal

Though the Ramsar Convention was negotiated in 1971, Nepal became a party to the
Convention in 1987 along with the declaration of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (KTWR) as first
Ramsar site. This is the oldest convention related to the multilateral environmental
agreements. Initially, it was negotiated in the 1960s by countries and non-governmental
organizations concerned about the increasing loss and degradation of wetland habitat for
migratory water birds though it was adopted in the Iranian city of Ramsar in 1971, and came
into force in 1975. This convention has three values namely i) wise use of wetlands, ii) list
internationally important wetlands, and iii) cooperation. The concept of regional initiative has
been initiated and many countries are doing their best on issue and interest basis. An example
of this is the South East Asia Regional Initiative, which coordinates four countries of the
Mekong River, namely Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and Lao PDR.

Ten wetlands of Nepal listed on the Ramsar List cover 60,561 ha, which is about 0.004% of
the country’s total land. The KTWR, first Ramsar Site of Nepal covers an area of 17,500 ha,
the entire protected area is a Ramsar site. The protected area provides habitat to thousands of
migratory and residential birds on one side whereas fishing serve as a means of livelihood to
local communities. The study carried out in Nepal and Bhutan showed that though wetlands
are important for mitigation and adaptation measures to combat climate change effects;
several anthropogenic activities have negative impacts on the productive services of wetland
ecosystem (ICIMOD 2013; ICIMOD 2014). Following the KTWR, the Government of Nepal
listed three more wetlands on the Ramsar List in 2003, namely Bishazari and associated lakes,
Jagdishpur reservoir, and Ghodaghodi and associated lakes. These three lakes are beautiful
bird watching sites and deserve ample ecotourism opportunities (Siwakoti 2006). In 2007, the
Government of Nepal focused on high-altitude wetlands and declared four wetlands as
Ramsar sites, namely Gokyo and associated lakes of Sagarmatha National Park, Gosaikunda
and associated lakes of Langtang National Park, Rara Lake, the largest lake of Nepal, and
Phoksundo Lake of Shey Phoksundo National Park (Table 9.2). However, the Ramsar Site
Information Sheet (RIS) is yet to be updated though it is mandatory that contracting parties
update the RIS every six years.

It is estimated that there are around 5,000 wetlands in Nepal (small to large by size, ox-bow
to river bank by shape and private to public by ownership). Out of ten Ramsar sites, four are
located in the lowland; another four in the High Mountain areas and two are located in the
Mid-Hills (Figure 9.2).

97
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Table 9.2: Ramsar sites in Nepal

Ramsar Name Location Designation Area (ha) Elevation

site No date (masl)
380 Koshi Tappu
 Koshi 17.12.1987 17,500 75–81

1313 Bishazari and associated lakes Chitwan 13.08.2003 3,200 286

1314 Ghodaghodi Lake Area Kailali 13.08.2003 2,563 205

1315 Jagadishpur Reservoir Kapilvastu 13.08.2003 225 197

1692 Gokyo and associated lakes Solukhumbu 23.09.2007 7,770 4,700–5,000

1693 Gosaikunda and associated lakes Rasuwa 23.09.2007 1,030 4,000–4,700

1694 Phoksundo Lake Dolpa 23.09.2007 494 3,612

1695 Rara Lake Mugu 23.09.2007 1,583 2,990

1850 Mai Pokhari Ilam 28.10.2008 90 2,100

2257 Lake cluster of Pokhara valley Kaski 02.02.2016 26,106 622–2,403

Source: https://rsis.ramsar.org/ris-search/?f[0]=regionCountry_en_ss%3ANepal&pagetab=1

Figure 9.2: Location of Ramsar sites of international importance in Nepal

98
 Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal

Wetland and ecosystem services

Though wetlands of Nepal are small in size, they produce all types of ecosystem services
(Figure 9.3). A large number of wetlands are located in high altitudes, far from human
settlements; these wetlands have a more important role in producing regulating and
supporting services than cultural and provisioning goods. Gosaikunda Lake has a special
cultural value as thousands of pilgrims visit this lake during the festival season.

Wetlands Conservation Status in Nepal – A Case of Chitwan

National Park
Chitwan is the oldest national park located in the central lowland of Nepal. The park was
established in 1973 and covers a core area of 932 km2 and a buffer zone area of 751 km2.
The park is rich in biodiversity and popular for some of the iconic and umbrella species
namely tiger, rhino, elephant and gharial crocodile. Because of the unique and important
ecosystems, the park has been designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site, listed in the
Conservation Assured Tiger Standard (CA/TS), and Bishazari and associated lake is
designated as a Ramsar site (CNP 2014). It is believed that abundantly distributed wetlands
are the underlying cause behind the rich biodiversity of the park. An assessment carried out in
2013 revealed that 58 different sized wetlands are found in the park, 38 are located inside
the core areas while the remaining 20 are located in the buffer zone (Table 9.3).

Figure 9.3: Wetland-produced ecosystem services

Ecosystem Services

Food, fuel, fibre, fresh water,

Provision Services
and genetic resources
Wetlands Ecosystems

Primary production, provision of

Support Services habitat, water and nutrient cycling,
soil formation and retention

Spiritual and religious values,

educational and inspiration,
Culture Services
recreation and aesthetic values,
ecotourism

Pollination, invasive retention,

climate regulation, water
Regulate Services
purification, natural hazard
control, pest disease control

Local Communities

99
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Table 9.3: Wetland status of Chitwan National Park

Wetland types Wetlands condition

Location
Ghol Lake Waterhole Other Excellent Good Fair Poor
Buffer Zone 3 16 1 - 2 13 4 2

Core Area 10 14 7 7 3 7 15 12

Total 13 30 8 7 5 20 19 14
Source: CNP 2015

The study found that only five wetlands are in excellent condition and safe from threats, while
20, 19 and 14 wetlands are in good, fair and poor condition respectively. The wetlands that
are fair and poor condition are largely affected by siltation, invasive species, conversion to
other lands, mainly grassland, drying up, pollution and fishing and other extraction problems
(Table 9.4). In general, wetlands in protected areas and buffer zone area are water sources
for animals. The ecosystem-based wetland management could help prevent animals from
extinction, and produce multiple ecosystem services as livelihood sources for local
communities. However, these wetlands are severely affected by anthropogenic and natural
threats and have gradually deteriorated (Table 9.4).

Table 9.4: Major threats to wetlands in Chitwan National Park

Threat types Siltation Invasive Conversion Drying Pollution Fishing and

species to grassland other
extraction
High 36 14 36 34 3 5

Medium 3 8 4 2 3 10

Low 10 26 7 9 1 5

No threat 9 10 11 13 51 38

Source: CNP 2015

Discussion and Conclusion

Though issues related to conservation and management of forests and wildlife resources are
regularly discussed at policy and executive level, wetland issues are rarely discussed and are
overlooked in both national and local policy debates. Policy-makers usually treat wetlands as
part of water resources though the values of wetlands go beyond this. In Nepal, the Forest Act
1993, National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973, and Self Governance Act 1999 do
not emphasize wetland conservation and management or the use of wetland resources even
though these resources have multiple roles in enhancing the livelihood of local communities.
In some instances, wetlands have contributed to both local and national economy through
ecotourism and other uses. Wetlands are also interrelated to agriculture, forestry, wildlife,

100
 Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal

ecotourism, irrigation, drinking water, transportation and livelihood of local communities.

Wetlands can store carbon twice as much as forests worldwide (Ramsar 2015). Therefore, it is
essential to assess the role of wetlands and find a way forward to develop policy that treat
wetlands as a separate unit for conservation and management, so that wetland resources can
be used for the benefit of the local communities and national economy on one hand and for
maintaining the ecological functions on the other.

Once the wetland is designated as a Ramsar site, the Ramsar Site Information Sheet (RIS)
should be updated every six years against the biophysical, socioeconomic and other changes
that have taken place. However, the Government of Nepal has been passive in updating the
RIS though various wetland conservation efforts have been implemented on an annual basis.
The national policy was designed in 2003 and was substantially amended in 2012, but there
has been little progress in terms of policy ownership and implementation. One of the reasons
behind the poor implementation of the policy is that the wetland itself is a crosscutting issue
where multiple agents and actors are interrelated and working concurrently. The National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2014) and Forest Policy 2015 have also placed due
emphasis on wetland conservation and wise use of wetland resources. However, these policy
documents do not mention about any implementing agencies for sustainable management of
the wetlands.

Wetlands are a main source of drinking water for people in Nepal. Natural water spring and
river water are the major sources of water in the Mid-Hills and Mountains while lowland
people mostly depend on underground water. Nepal has a long history of wetland
conservation. Planting seedlings in and around the water source, constructing a pond along
with a resting place (popularly called Chautara) and planting Bar (Ficus begalensis) and Pipal
(Ficus religiosa), cleaning and removing weeds from the lake are some common examples.
Wetlands are also a source of irrigation for paddy fields. Despite this, wetland issues are rarely
reflected in various conservation policies of Nepal.

The Government of Nepal formulated the National Wetland Policy in 2003 and it was revised
in 2012 (MoFSC 2012). This policy aims to involve local people in the conservation and
management of wetland resources and their wise use on perpetual basis. The NBSAP (2014-
2020) emphasized integrated management of wetlands and their international recognition
through Ramsar Site declaration. The Forest Policy 2015 also aims to conserve wetlands as a
micro-watershed and link wetland resources to the upstream and downstream linkages. These
policy documents treat wetlands as a crosscutting issue and call for concerted and
coordinated efforts by agencies concerned. However, there is still confusion among the
implementing agencies regarding the lead role in coordinating wetland conservation activities.
The overall analysis reveals that wetland as a functional ecosystem produces multiple
environmental services. However, these wetlands are largely affected by anthropogenic
activities as well as natural phenomena. Both direct and indirect causes are equally
responsible for the degradation of wetland resources (Table 9.5). The human population and

101
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

rapid migration has created huge demand for wetland resources. Migration has led to an
increase in economic activities, use of wetland products and environmental services. Similarly,
socio-political, technological and socioeconomic changes have also affected wetland
resources indirectly (Table 9.5). Expansion of agricultural land, development infrastructure,
introduction of alien species, use of technology, use of fertilizer and pesticides, over-use of
wetland resources, climate change effects and natural disasters are major reasons behind
wetland degradation and loss.

Table 9.5: Direct and Indirect Drivers of Loss of Wetlands in Nepal

Nature Drivers Impacts

Demographic Population growth and rapid migration and urbanization
Economic Economic growth, trade and consumption pattern
Socio-political Governance/collective action; institutional settings; and gender
Indirect
attitudes
drivers
Science and technology Information technology; technological use in agriculture and rural
development
Cultural/religion Beliefs, consumption choices
Nature Drivers Impacts
Agriculture expansion Lack of demarcation and wetlands mapping, quantity and quality
Development infrastructure Rural road construction affected to fragment the wetlands and
sedimentation. Over usage of wetland resources for irrigation,
transportation and drinking water
Introduction of alien invasive Invasive species like Parthenium (Parthenium hysterophorus) and
species Mikania (Mikania micrantha) severely affected rhino habitats
Direct
Pesticide and insecticide Pesticide use in agriculture, advanced fishing technologies
drivers
leading to depletion of fish stocks, use of pesticides
Over-harvesting of wetland Fishing, extraction of stone, sand and gravel
resources
Climate change Glacial retreat, glacial lake outburst flood (GLOF), change water
cycle and nutrient cycling
Natural disasters Earthquake and desertification, landslides, pest and diseases
Source: ICIMOD 2009

As wetlands produce multiple tangible goods and environmental services, they are a matter of
concern for all segments of the society. Nepal is ecologically diverse and culturally rich and
this is reflected in wetlands across the Terai, Hill and Mountainous regions. But because of
poorly implemented conservation activities, these wetlands are in a critical condition. Due to
continuous human activities on one hand and lack of awareness among local people on the
other, wetlands are losing both their quality and quantity. Clear jurisdiction and institutional
setup are prerequisites for implementing wetland conservation activities on an annual basis.
Moreover, site-specific conservation plans followed by an effective implementation strategy
can lead to sustainable conservation and wise use of wetlands. Wetland policy that provides a
common ground to all segments of the society for initiating wetland conservation is
indispensible for addressing wetland issues and producing desired outcomes.

102
 Policy and Practices with Respect to Wetland Conservation in Nepal

References
CNP (2014). ‘Annual report of fiscal year 2070-2071’. Chitwan National Park, Nepal.
CNP (2015). ‘Status of wetlands and Mugger Crocodile in and around Chitwan National
Park’. Chitwan National Park, Nepal.
GoN (2014). ‘Nepal National Biodiveristy Strategy and Action Plan 2014-2020’.
Government of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Singadurbar,
Kathmandu, Nepal.
ICIMOD (2009). ‘A Manual for an Inventory of Greater Himalayan Wetlands’. Integrated
Center for International Mountain Development, Kathmandu.
ICIMOD (2013). ‘Towards Integrated Ecosystem Management in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife
Reserve’. Integrated Center for International Mountain Development, Kathmandu.
ICIMOD (2014). ‘An integrated assessment of the effects of natural and human disturbances
on a wetland ecosystem: A retrospective from Phobjikha Conservation Area, Bhutan’.
Integrated Center for International Mountain Development, Kathmandu.
IUCN (2004). ‘A review of the status and threats to wetlands in Nepal’. IUCN, Kathmandu.
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2003). ‘Ecosystem and human well-being’.
Washington: Island Press.
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005). ‘Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing:
Synthesis’. Island Press, Washington-DC.
MoFSC (2012). ‘National wetland policy of Nepal’. Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation,
Nepal.
Paudel, B. (2009). ‘Wetland conservation in Nepal: policies, practices, problems and
possibilities’. Banko Janakari especial issue 5-9.
Ramsar (2015). ‘The fourth Ramsar strategic plan 2016 – 2014’. Geneva, Switzerland.
Shrestha, U. (2011). ‘Community participation in wetland conservation in Nepal’. The Journal
of Agriculture and Environment 12, 40-47.
Siwakoti, M. (2006). ‘An Overview of Floral Diversity in Wetlands of Terai Region of Nepal’.
Our Nature 4, 83-90.

103
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

How Power can play a Role in

making an Integrated Wetland
Management Practice to Disintegrate
Yang Shuoa, Li Zhuoqinga and Song Fuqianga
a
Yunnan Institute of Environmental Science, Kunming, China
[email protected]

Abstract
In Lake Erhai catchment, its northern wetlands are playing important roles. The integrated catchment
plan is crucial for the management of resources in it, particularly the wetland. But the merely labelling
the catchment plan as “integrated” is not enough for an integrated management practice. Semi-
structured interviews and focus group discussions were held with key government agencies to find out
what makes an integrated catchment plan lose its meaning. It shows that the rigid and inflexible
institutional settings under the current political system hamper the possibility of social learning, which
is assumed to be an inclusive and deliberative process. In this closed hierarchical system, little space
is opened for the participation of non-government actors in the catchment. In the whole planning
process of the catchment, the produced knowledge is biased and prejudiced due to the lack of a
participatory and consensus-oriented decision-making process, and absence of a skillful facilitator.
Power, as an encoded element in this unbending hierarchical system, entails changing power relations
under different situations. It plays a powerful and cardinal role in the decision-making process, and
decides who participates in what way, and whose knowledge is counted in.

Keywords: catchment, integration, participation, planning, power

Introduction
Wetland conservation in China started in the early 1990s, particularly after China joined the
Ramsar Convention in 1992. The number of Chinese wetlands on the Ramsar List of Wetlands
of International Importance increased from 7 in 1992 to 45 in 2015. Over 40% of the
natural wetlands have been conserved through the establishment of nature reserves and
wetland parks at different levels from the national to local (Wang et al. 2012).

All types of wetlands classified in the Convention are found in China. But there is variation in
their geographical distribution. For example, the riverine wetland is mostly located in the
eastern part of the country, and the swamps and marshes are more common in the northeast
and southwest. Wetlands are less common in the arid northwestern part of China.

104
 How Power Can Play a Role in Making an Integrated Wetland Management Practice to Disintegrate

While we have witnessed great efforts by the Chinese government in wetland conservation, we
also see big challenges confronting the wetland managers and conservationists with rapid
economic development and increasing population. The shrinking of natural wetlands,
ecological degradation, pollution of water and the impact of climate change are often-
addressed common issues faced by the wetlands in China (Wang and Wang 2000; Sun et al.
2006; Yang 2014).

To tackle these problems, the Chinese government has invested a large amount of money in
making and implementing different wetland conservation plans such as the visional
engineering plan, the action plan, and the five-year implementation plan. Under the overall
guidance of the national plan, the local governments make their local plans. These tasks are
the responsibility of the government’s forestry department, which is the major governmental
agency with the authority to manage natural resources.

In view of the lower status of State Forestry Administration compared to the ministries of land,
hydraulics and environmental protection, it is a big challenge to ensure effective coordination
between these administrative actors. It could be more difficult in the absence of a catchment-
wide integrated plan in a real sense. In most cases, the so-called “integrated” is no different
from a “sectoral” plan.

Studies (Lu et al. 2011; Huang et al. 2012; Chen et al. 2014) show that change in the area
and pattern of wetlands is drastic and driven by both natural forces and human activities in
the catchment. It calls for an extended view of the wetland beyond its boundary. Both Yin and
Ni (1998) and Wang et al. (2006) consider that viewing the wetland comprehensively through
the lens of the catchment is crucial as opposed to viewing it in isolation from the network.

If we adopt such a holistic method, we would notice more stakeholders apart from
administrative actors in the management of the catchment and the wetland in it. The current
administrative practice in China of guarding or protecting natural resources like the wetland is
called “command and control” management. Each agency focuses on the achievement of its
working goals or objectives. They are not absolutely mutually exclusive, and some are helpful
for reaching the ultimate goal of nature conservation.

But, these departmental efforts in the catchment are patchy and fragmented due to weak
coordination. As Armitage et al. (2012) pointed out, such efforts involve high social and
environmental costs owing to asymmetric information, incapability and unwillingness to
understand the integral components of the catchment. We would assume that some of the
unnecessary costs would be avoidable if the environmental management is shifted to
environmental governance.

In the new ecological thinking, the environment is non-equilibrium and dynamic product of
complex, nonlinear interactions between humans and nature. Such perspectives require us to
solve environmental issues from a stance beyond the pure functionalist and deterministic way

105
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

of thinking (Scoones 1999). It implies the need for co-production of knowledge from different
sources and even contested views. Different actors, such as state actors, non-state actors, and
other social actors need to be engaged in the decision process to find solutions. This is
particularly important for making an integrated catchment plan.

The participatory and consensus-oriented decision-making process might be the most

distinctive characteristic of environmental governance. But the question is who participates,
who has power, and how the knowledge is produced. They are the defining elements of an
inclusive and transparent process for making a responsive and integrated plan in its essence.

In this article, we are going to use the example of the catchment plan for Lake Erhai
Catchment to analyze whose knowledge is counted in the plan, and how open the planning
process is and the power relations reflected in the plan. In addition, wetland resources are of
significance to the lake catchment however, they are not addressed appropriately in the
catchment plan.

Our attention to above mentioned problems arise from our experiences on co-management
of the wetland in Lake Erhai catchment, the mismatch of the plans in achieving shared goal
for improving the environment of the catchment, and the observation that local conservation
efforts are not well coordinated to attain optimal results and hence, accompanied by conflict
of interests and overlapping investment of limited financial resources.

Methods
Lake Erhai catchment
Lake Erhai is located in Dali Prefecture of Yunnan Province (Figure 10.1). The lake has a
catchment area of 2,565 km2, belonging to the Lancang (Mekong) River system. It is the
second largest freshwater lake on the plateau of Yunnan Province. Since, Lake Erhai acts as a
lifeline for local social and economic development, the local people call it “Mother Lake”.

Local development has led to degradation of water quality of Lake Erhai. In 1996 and 2003,
the “algae bloom” broke out in the lake. The lake is mainly polluted by wastewater from
domestic, agricultural and industrial sources. With the implementation of a series of water
treatment engineering and pollution control measures, the water quality of the lake has been
maintained at Grade III of the National Standards of Surface Water Quality since 2006. But
the current water quality is still lower than the target of Grade II.

Of the 117 rivers flowing into Lake Erhai, three are major rivers, namely the Miju River, Luoshi
River and Yong’an River. Because they are located in the north of the Erhai Lake catchment,
they are called Three North Rivers. Every year, these three rivers carry a huge amount of water
into Lake Erhai, accounting for almost half of its total inflow. Several natural wetlands and two
constructed wetlands are connected directly or indirectly to the Three North Rivers. Nearly all
of them are functional in treating the water quality of the rivers that flow through them.

106
 How Power Can Play a Role in Making an Integrated Wetland Management Practice to Disintegrate

Figure 10.1: Regional location map showing Erhai Lake

Methods used in case study

In this case study, interviews were held with key government agencies involved in the lake
catchment management. These agencies are responsible for environmental protection,
forestry, wetland management, catchment management, agriculture, lake management and
tourism. Further, publications and documents were also collected. Because of the time limit
and the absence of some interviewees, we could not discuss with all of them. But, the key
persons were contacted, and the collected materials provided us a lot of useful information.

Results
From lake management to catchment management
According to the Chronicle of Lake Erhai Management (2006), the descending of Lake Erhai
Management Bureau from the prefectural level to the municipal level in 2004 marked the
transformation of lake protection from the lake boundary to catchment wide. The Lake Erhai
Catchment Protection Bureau of Dali Prefecture was established in 2013. Among its many
coordinative and directive roles, one is to “organize the preparation of Lake Erhai Protection
Master plan, its thematic plans and annual implementation plan to coordinate, guide and
supervise the relative government departments for its implementation.”

107
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

But the stated powerful role of the prefectural catchment bureau is hard to exercise to its full
extent, because it is inhibited by the bureau’s location on the political power line. Ideally, it
might be better if the bureau is at least aligned and levelled with the other administrative
departments at the prefectural level. Unfortunately, it is subordinate to the Environmental
Protection Bureau of Dali Prefecture. This kind of institutional setup would make the catchment
management bureau more dependent on the government’s leadership in fulfilling its
coordinative role.

It is like the embarrassing situation of Eryuan County Wetland Management Bureau, which
made efforts to pull together the actions of different county-level agencies, with its affiliate
relation with the county forestry bureau. From its name, the county wetland bureau seems to
be independent of the county forestry bureau. But the investigation reveals that it is reliant on
the forestry bureau. Some of its official documents must be presented in the name of the
county forestry bureau to the county government. Therefore, the subordination characteristic
of both institutions, the catchment and wetland bureaus, has been built in from their birth.

Interviews revealed that the institutional setup of these two bureaus is not complete. It means
there is only one catchment management bureau at the prefectural level, with the
corresponding set-up missing at the municipal and county levels. But for wetland
management, it merely exists at the county level. Where it is missing, the work is delegated to
the other offices. Forestry officials said they often face inconveniences due to their heavy
workload.

There are also some other problems with these two institutions. One is they are young
compared with the other long-established government departments. Since the strategic
change of Dali Prefectural Government from lake-wise to catchment-wise management in
2004, it has taken almost ten years to devise an administrative body accordingly. The county
wetland bureau was formed in 2014. The other is the composition of staff. Many of them are
not familiar with the new work.

The leadership of the prefectural catchment bureau is mainly composed of officers from the
environmental protection bureau. This partly explains why the 12th Five-Year Water Pollution
Control and Prevention Plan (2011-2015) for Lake Erhai Catchment had a prestige status for
comprehensive catchment management. It did little harm seemingly because the treatment of
the water quality of Lake Erhai was the top environmental concern of the local governments. It
will remain the top agenda of the government in the future, particularly with the visit of
Chairman Xi Jinping to Dali in 2015.

Knowledge production in catchment planning

The prefectural government has identified the overriding goal of lake water protection in the
face of increasing water pollution, and also in response to the national call for an ecological
urban development. The goal-based catchment management reflects the political will and

108
 How Power Can Play a Role in Making an Integrated Wetland Management Practice to Disintegrate

focus on the water quality of Lake Erhai. The whole catchment planning process has been
politicized from the starting point of setting the goal to the step-by-step implementation, as
was evident during the high-level launch workshop held by the prefectural government this
year for developing the 13th Five-Year Catchment Plan.

At such meetings the seats are usually occupied by the heads of important government
agencies or their delegates. The messages are taken and the tasks are broken down based on
the responsibilities of the agencies. Interviews with the staff of the prefectural catchment
bureau showed that after drawing up their own plans, each administrative agency submitted it
to the catchment bureau according to the strict administrative codes. Then the bureau
consolidated them into one so-called integrated report.

Along this hierarchical line of administration, the information is produced, carried up and
down, and processed back and forth. It is a closed circle of powerful actors like politicians,
administrators and government staff. But, one fact that could not be neglected is that
professional experts and scientists are invited to this planning process. They are either
contracted to formulate the report or consulted intermittently. During the process of finding
solutions to the pre-identified environmental issues, these actors largely cooperate with each
other, despite some conflicts among them.

It can’t be denied that mechanically, this is a highly efficient process. The massive
achievements in protecting water quality are updated every year in all sorts of working reports
of the governments. The problems and challenges amount to clichés accompanying the
positive results. The deterioration trend of the lake water quality has been curbed, and the
water quality is kept at Grade III.

But it is questionable that the 12th Five-Year Water Pollution Control and Prevention Plan of
Lake Erhai Catchment has been used as a guideline document for the overall management of
the whole catchment. The study conducted for this report and the Wetland Conservation Plan
of Dali Prefecture (2015-2025) prepared by the forestry bureau revealed the different
perceptions of the wetlands. In the former report, the wetland is seen as a tool for treating
wastewater; but in the latter report, the wetland is treated as a valuable resource to be
conserved and utilized. When asked about the wetland, the tourism department spoke more
about tourism development. No doubt more dissimilar views are held by other interest groups.
But, the guideline document for the lake catchment shows little effort to balance the different
interests as it is supposed to do. Though there is a process of feeding information from
different administrative actors, the contents of the plan are more or less manipulated by the
final producer. In the end, the cacophony of the dissent will be muted down by powerful
actors. Without a participatory and consensus-oriented decision-making process, even the
administrative actors with certain power have an unproductive supply of information. Those
being excluded from this closed circuit can hardly voice their concerns. The experiential
knowledge of the local people is neglected, even though their knowledge is embedded in the
real environment with which they interact in their daily life.

109
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

In this sense, the catchment plan is not an integrated one, but is biased and based on the
knowledge of those who dominate the planning process. In this process, the hard system
approach (Cundill et al. 2011) is adopted; the recipe for solving the environmental issues of
Lake Erhai is overwhelmed with engineering measures.

Power relations
Knowledge production is the result of power struggle among those who are included in the
decision-making process. But their power is not evenly distributed. Some have power over
others. Those at the top of the hierarchy have more power than those at the bottom. The
government holds supreme power, so that it could play an arbitrary role in resolving conflicts.
Non-government actors like experts and other social actors take an advisory role if they are
invited, but without decision-making power.

Generally, there is not much communication among these administrative actors in their
routine work. They exercise their power in parallel; each government agency works within the
boundary of its own administrative sphere. In such circumstances, the prescribed line of
division between them is carefully guarded or defended. In a clearly dichotomous situation,
the dividing line can be easily perceived. But, for complex interrelated natural environments
like- lake catchment and wetland ecosystem, the line is blurred.

There is need for them to communicate and exchange views and information for a holistic
diagnosis of the lake catchment. At this critical point, the lack of a good facilitation process
would mostly likely lead to the prevailing defensive reaction, consciously or unconsciously.
Each is trying to maximize its own benefits in this battlefield.

The prefectural catchment bureau should have played a facilitative role in the negotiation of
different interest groups. But because it is a newly established institution, its institutional
capacity at both organizational and individual levels (Clouting et al. 2014) is not developed
well enough to do so. Far from synchronizing resources and efforts of all the participating
agencies, the existing catchment plan contains a strong accent of the environmental
protection bureau. It is easy to understand this rigid hierarchical system. The prefectural
catchment bureau is subordinate to the environmental protection bureau, but it is the final
producer of the plan.

The conventional procedures for making decisions related to the catchment plan have
generated complaints from some government agencies that were heard during interviews.
They said their interests were not represented or misplaced in the plan. However, there is a
good sign that most of them have shown willingness to cooperate for better catchment
management. In the absence of an enabling institutional environment, they could not talk
openly and bargain with each other for an optimized catchment plan, even though each of
them has a good departmental plan, like the Wetland Conservation Plan of Dali Prefecture
from the prefectural forestry bureau.

110
 How Power Can Play a Role in Making an Integrated Wetland Management Practice to Disintegrate

By now, we could see that the power relation has been encoded in the current institutional
arrangement, with a rigid and inflexible procedure. Experienced actors could even predict the
result of the decision-making process after the calculation of power. In most cases, this
confidence makes them participate in a passive way. Those with seemingly equivalent power
will finally see their power grow or abate, depending on who has the final say on the issue.
Therefore, the outcome of the planning process is predetermined by power relations rather
than being a real struggle of interest groups with different views, conceptions and knowledge.

Discussion
Who participates in the decision making process depends on what type of power the actor has
and the actor’s closeness to the political circle. As discussed earlier, the administrative actors
are nearly all involved in this process of developing the lake catchment plan, no matter how
much power they have in the catchment management. The technocratic group of actors is
allowed in based on the invitation and contract to provide advisory services and technical
assistance. Their contribution to the decision-making process is limited by how much power
they have.

The knowledge in the current catchment plan is partial and prejudiced as it only represents the
most powerful actor(s). Insufficient participation of a diversity of actors in the lake catchment,
and the lack of modulation of various interests and knowledge of all the actors could barely
make the current plan an authentically “integrated” one.

The intention of the catchment management is to manage the different resources in the
catchment in an efficient way. The notion “integrated” clearly indicates that the resources
management should be approached from a broad perspective (Pahl-Wostl 2007), including
all stakeholders, to reach a compromise-based agreement through a deliberative process.

Various interpretations of the issues are possible, because the decision-making process
involves purposeful actions taken by people that are meaningful to them (Checkland and
Poulter 2010). Therefore, it might be problematic to have one goal identified by a single or a
minority of actor(s) and then come up with solutions accordingly.

Studies show that cycles of knowledge sharing and joint action to co-create knowledge (Ensor
and Harvey 2015) in a continued process of social learning among stakeholders at different
scales are needed to develop their capacity and build trust to collaborate, and take collective
actions in the management of natural resources (Mostert et al. 2007, Pahl-Wostl et al. 2007).

Conclusion
An integrated catchment management plan, as its name suggests, is an organic product of a
deliberative process involving different stakeholders in the catchment. As a guideline
document with high authority, it takes into account different actions in the catchment, and
harmonizes various interests and aspirations of the stakeholders.

111
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

The analysis of the case in this article showed that rigid and inflexible institutional settings fail
to provide an open platform for the confrontation, negotiation and dialogue between the
actors in the catchment. Poor integration of the plan is inevitable when the power of the
wetland management bureau is weak, and when there is an absence of a powerful and skillful
facilitator in the decision-making process. Thus, the facilitation role should have been
performed by the prefectural catchment management bureau.

On the other hand, a closed circle of political administrators hampers the possibility of
creating an enabling environment for social learning, because little space is opened for
non-governmental stakeholders. Therefore, the ground does not exist for a reliable integrated
catchment plan.

Acknowledgements
The authors extend their appreciation to ICIMOD for funding the wetland study project in
Dali. We thank Neera Shrestha Pradhan, Su Yufang, Nand Kishor Agrawal and Laxmi Dutt
Bhatta for their helpful comments. Last but not the least, we would like to thank all the local
people who kindly participated in the interviews despite their busy schedules.

Author contributions: All authors listed here contributed equally to the manuscript.
Conflicts of interest: There is no conflict of interest in this manuscript.

References
Armitage, D., de Loe, R. & Plummer, R. (2012). ‘Environmental governance and its
implications for conservation practice’. Conservation Letters 5, 245-255.
Chen, Y., Liu, T., Huang, Y., Yang, J., Li, X. & Xiao, Z. (2014). ‘Remote sensing research of
wetland current status and change in the Yangze river basin’. Resources and Environment
in the Yangtze Basin 23(6), 801-808.
Clouting, H., Douven, W., Ostrovskaya, E., Pataki, E. & Schwartz, K. (2014). ‘Framework for
Analysing Institutional Capacity for Wetland Management: The Case of the Gemenc
Floodplain’. In Albrecht, E., Schmidt, M., Miβler-Behr, M., and Spyra, S.P.N. (Eds.)
Implementing Adaptation Strategies by Legal, Economic and Planning Instruments on
Climate Change, Environmental Protection in the European Union 4, 149-164.
Cundill, G., Cumming, G.S., Biggs, D. & Fabricius, C. (2011). ‘Soft systems thinking and
social learning for adaptive management’. Conservation Biology 26(1), 13-20.
Ensor, J. & Harvey, B. (2015). ‘Social learning and climate change adaptation: evidence for
international development practice’. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 6(5),
509-522.
Huang, C., Liu, G., Wang, X., Ye, Y., Li, Y. & Huang, J. (2012). ‘Monitoring wetlands pattern
in the Yellow River Basin for water resources management using Beijing-1 images’.
Geographical Research 31(10), 1764-1774.

112
 How Power Can Play a Role in Making an Integrated Wetland Management Practice to Disintegrate

Lu, S., Wu, B. & Li, F. (2011). ‘Wetland pattern change in Hai Basin’. Journal of Remote
Sensing 15(2), 349-371.
Mostert, E., Pahl-Wostl, C., Rees, Y., Searle, B., Tabara, D. & Tippett, J. (2007). ‘Social
learning in European river-basin management: barriers and fostering mechanisms from 10
river basins’. Ecology and Society 12(1), 19-35.
Pahl-Wostl, C. (2007). ‘The implications of complexity for integrated resources management’.
Environmental Modelling and Software 22, 561-569.
Pahl-Wostl, C., Craps, M., Dewulf, A., Mostert, E., Tabara, D. & Taillieu, T. (2007). ‘Social
learning and water resources management’. Ecology and Society 12(2), 5-24.
Scoones, I. (1999). ‘New ecology and the social sciences: what prospects for a fruitful
engagement?’ Annual Review of Anthropology 28, 479-507.
Sun, Z., Liu, J. & Li, B. (2006). ‘The actuality, problems and sustainable utilization
countermeasures of wetland resources in China’. Journal of Arid Land Resources and
Environment 20(2), 83-90.
Wang, X., Xu, H. & Cai, S. (2006). ‘Wetland protection and basin management in the middle
and lower reaches of the Yangtze river’. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin
15(5), 564-568.
Wang, R.S. & Wang, Y.Y. (2000). ‘The current situation, problems and countermeasures of
wetland resources in China’. Resources Science 22(1), 9-13.
Wang, Z., Wu, J., Madden, M. & Mao, D. (2012). ‘China’s Wetlands: Conservation Plans and
Policy Impacts’. AMBIO 41, 782-786.
Yang, Y. (2014). ‘Problems existing in wetland protection in China and suggestions for
solution’. Wetland Science & Management 10(4), 26-30.
Yin, K. & Ni, J. (1998). ‘Review of wetland studies’. Acta Ecologic Sinica 18(5), 539-546.

113
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Management and Governance

System of Wetlands in Bangladesh:
A Case Study on Co-management of Tanguar Haor

Ishtiaq Uddin Ahmada

a
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Bangladesh
[email protected]

Abstract
Wetlands, which occupy two-thirds of Bangladesh, have great conservation value along with
ecological, economic and aesthetic importance. With the political transformation, the management of
wetlands has been transferred to a different entity in Bangladesh. When the governance concept in
the field of biodiversity conservation and wetland management became significant and traditional
wetland management failed to find a balance between conservation and development, the Bangladesh
government explored different decentralized, site-specific and community-led approaches. One of
them is community-based sustainable management of Tanguar Haor. The objective of this project is to
conserve biodiversity of the wetland and to ensure the livelihood of people who live around the
wetland. This paper discusses the institutional setup, benefit sharing and community involvement in
effots to build climate resilience in Tanguar Haor, Bangladesh.

Keywords: community-based management, benefit sharing, decentralized, Tanguar Haor

Introduction
The total area of wetlands in Bangladesh has been variously estimated at 7.5 to 7.8 million ha
(Rahman 2005), which is 50% of the total land surface. Currently there are 43 sites identified as
wetlands and protected areas in Bangladesh, and most of them are ecologically sensitive sites
(Figure 11.1) (Talukdar et al. 2008). The greater part of the northeast region of Bangladesh is
taken up by the wetland basin, which comprises the floodplains of the Meghna River tributaries,
and is characterized by the presence of numerous large, deeply flooded depressions, between
the rivers known as haors e.g., Tanguar haor, Hakaluki haor, Hail haor, etc.

Wetlands in Bangladesh have strong seasonality dimensions and hydrological regimes.

Seasonal expansions (flooding) and contractions (dry season) of wetlands promote nonlinear
and dynamic ecosystems that enrich their productivity and biodiversity including aquatic and
terrestrial biotic assemblage. The dynamic and multiple production systems of these wetlands
captivate diverse livelihood options here.

114
 Management and Governance System of Wetlands in Bangladesh: A Case Study on Co-Management of Tanguar Haor

Figure 11.1: Designated wetland areas and their location in Bangladesh

Source: Talukdar et al. 2008

Present Status and Trends of Wetland Resources and Services

Wetlands of Bangladesh have great conservation value along with ecological, economic and
aesthetic importance. Thousands of birds, fish, reptiles and other animals make wetlands of
Bangladesh an ecological goldmine. Moreover, it contains very rich components of
biodiversity of all valuable ecosystems. Many of the wetlands that are partly dry in the lean
season support different types of terrestrial, riparian and aquatic vegetation. According to
Ramsar definition, two-thirds of Bangladesh land area can be classified as wetlands.

About 260 species of freshwater fish are found in the inland water bodies of Bangladesh.
Wetland ecosystem serves as a habitat for a variety of resident and migratory waterfowl and
endangered plus commercially important species of national and international importance.
Around 400 species of migratory birds visited the wetlands in Bangladesh. About 0.96 million
tonnes of inland capture fish contributes 28.19% of the total fish production (3.41 million
tonnes in 2012-13) in the country (FRSS 2014). Wetland serves as main reserve for freshwater
fish brood. Almost 50% of the population of Bangladesh is directly dependent on wetland
resources for food, nutrition and livelihoods.

115
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Moreover, four categories of wetland values have been identified in Bangladesh:

environmental values, economic values (direct, indirect, option, existence, and bequest
values), social and cultural values (Table 11.1). In keeping with these categories, wetlands
ecosystem offers different types of services to the communities.

Table 11.1: Wetland values and ecosystem services

Wetlands values Wetlands ecosystem services

Environmental Hydrological cycle maintenance, water storage and discharge, flood control and
regulation, transport of sediments, reduce salinity intrusion, purification of water, reduce
erosion, soil formation, maintaining food chain and habitat, biodiversity protection, protect
ecosystems, pollution control, maintenance of landscapes and balance of ecology, etc.
Economic
Direct values Agricultural production, forestry, hunting, fishing, production of wild food, grazing field for
livestock, supply of fuel, fodder, honey, fruits and wood (mangrove), supply of raw
materials, and field for primary economic activities.
Indirect values Benefits from improvement of water quality, flood prevention, pollution control, provision of
medicinal plants, land for industrial location, primary economic activities, etc.
Option values Benefits from ensuring options for future use
Existence values Benefits from conserving or willingness to forgo a part of one’s income in order to conserve
a resource, especially natural amenities or species.
Bequest values Benefits from ensuring that certain goods will be preserved for future generations.
Social Navigation and social network, provision of settlement places for the indigenous
community, extension of urbanization, inspiration place for education and research,
employment opportunity for the poor, empowerment of destitute groups, and social events.
Cultural Ecological tourism and recreation, tangible and intangible cultural heritage, cultural values,
natural heritage, aesthetic values, religion values, spiritual values, ethical values, scenic
values, sense of place, cultural landscapes, etc.
Source: Islam 2010

Wetlands shape, influence and mould the existence and philosophy of the community people.
Historically these ecosystems have contributed significantly to livelihoods of the rural people of
Bangladesh by providing various goods and services. Among many other resources, fish and
fisheries are important components of wetland ecosystems. Wetlands are used for rice and
vegetable cultivation, cattle grazing, duck rearing, and fuel collection. Over 70 percent of
households catch fish from floodplains for food and household income. In Bangladesh 10
million people depend on wetland ecosystems for their livelihoods (Nishat 1993). Overall, the
fisheries sector of Bangladesh accounts for 3.47% of GDP, 4.04% foreign exchange earnings
and 58% of animal protein intake (DoF 2009).

Wetland Management in Bangladesh

Historical background
Traditionally, local communities in Bangladesh used to manage wetland resources to secure
their livelihoods with the support of local institutions. With the start of the British colonial
regime, local communities were systematically excluded from taking part in the management
system due to a top-down and command-and-control management system. After

116
 Management and Governance System of Wetlands in Bangladesh: A Case Study on Co-Management of Tanguar Haor

independence, jurisdiction over wetland resources lie with the Land Ministry of Bangladesh,
and access to and control over wetland resources are determined by the existing top-down,
command-and-control, bureaucratic management regimes. Grounded solely in the economic
aspects of wetland resources, the management objective of the government focuses on rent
seeking to maximize revenues and other economic benefits.

Against this backdrop, the modern concept of governance originated worldwide in the late
17th century. Although ensuring governance in the field of natural resource management is the
foremost priority for a developing country like Bangladesh, it has only been 20 years since the
concept of governance started being used in the development sector.

Governance is a key concept in the field of biodiversity conservation and determinant of

wetland resources management. In the context of Bangladesh, it carries more significance as
the traditional wetland management failed to find a balance between conservation and
development, which is the essence of sustainable development. In 1986, the Bangladesh
government began exploring the decentralization of wetland resource ownership to the local
resource-dependent users. This experimental management regime resulted in the first
‘National Fisheries Policy’ in 1998. Although the existing laws in Bangladesh are not specific
to the needs and problems of wetland management and conservation, there are some
sectoral laws that have a bearing on wetland issues. These are: National Water Policy 1999,
National Jalmahal Policy 2009, Bangladesh Environmental Conservation Act 1995, East
Bengal Protection and Conservation of Fish Act 1950, Bangladesh Wildlife (Preservation)
(Amendment) Act 1974 etc.

However, in recent decades there has been a noticeable shift in the governance of wetland
resources in Bangladesh whereby decentralized, site-specific and community-led management
activities are gradually replacing the centralized ‘classical approach’ to governance.
Bangladesh has recently changed policy direction and recognized the need to devise
community-led management approaches to ensure sustainable conservation and development
of forest and wetland biodiversity. Over the last two decades, several initiatives to manage
natural resources have been carried out by government, non-government and community-
based organizations. The conventional top-down approach of governance has increasingly
been replaced by a people-centred management regime in different forms and subsequently
more recognition, support and collaboration have been noticed from the government side.
Over the last two decades, a number of donor-supported Government of Bangladesh (GoB)
projects [viz. Community Based Fisheries Management (CBFM), Management of Aquatic
Ecosystems through Community Husbandry (MACH), Sustainable Environment Management
Programme (SEMP), Coastal and Wetland Biodiversity Management Project (CWBMP),
Community Based Resource Management Project (CBRMP), Tanguar Haor and Wetland
Biodiversity Rehabilitation Project (WBRP)] demonstrated various methods and approaches
towards establishing community based co-management of wetland resources.

117
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

New fisheries management policy (NFMP)

In 1986-87, the Government of Bangladesh began with the ‘Experimental Project for New
and Improved Management of Open Water Fisheries in Bangladesh’, which aimed to
implement the New Fisheries Management Policy (NFMP). The main objectives of the NFMP
are: a) to divert maximum benefits arising out of inland water fisheries to the true fishermen;
and b) to take measures to ensure the sustainability of fish productivity in the inland open
waters. Essentially, leased water bodies (Jalmahals) were handed over from the Ministry of
Land (MoL) to the Department of Fisheries (DoF) for administration. By 1993, more than 150
fisheries had been handed over, and by 1996 this had increased to a total of more than 300
water bodies. Reportedly, however, the deregulatory measures of the NFMP have fallen far
short of the mark, as new middlemen have appeared on the scene, using local fishermen as a
front. In the later instances, fishermen co-operatives have been established as a cover for
commercial companies and exploiters. In practice, all large Jalmahals have remained under
lease to commercial companies, and NFMP is criticised for having been used a political tool
for campaigning purposes.

Community based wetland management initiatives

In 1994-96, the ‘Community based Fisheries Management and Habitat Restoration Project’
was carried out by the Centre for Natural Resource Studies (CNRS), a leading national NGO,
Proshika NGO, and Ford Foundation (private foundation) at Singaharangi Beel in central
Bangladesh. The site was selected on the basis of manageable size (10 ha, 990 households),
local community interest, and the possibility of implementing minor interventions (e.g.,
desilting) to restore the wetland (Rahman et al. 1996). Habitat restoration and establishing
sustainable resource management practices were regarded as successful interventions.

The GEF-funded ‘Bangladesh Coastal and Wetland Biodiversity Management Project’ began
in 1999 in Hakaluki Haor and was managed by the Department of Environment (DoE)-UNDP.
It aims to restore local involvement in the management of important fisheries, and has a
capacity-building programme to achieve this. At the same time, it seeks an interim solution to
management, to bridge the gap between commercial exploitation and community-based
management.

Community based Haor resources management under Sustainable

Environment Management Programme
The Sustainable Environment Management Programme (SEMP) is the first follow-up activity in
the implementation of the National Environment Management Action Plan (NEMAP). It was
executed by the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) from October 1998 and
completed in December 2006. The objectives of SEMP were to build and strengthen capacity
for environmental management at the community level, to prevent and reverse the present
trend of environmental degradation, and to promote sustainable development and reduce
existing poverty and raise the quality of life.

118
 Management and Governance System of Wetlands in Bangladesh: A Case Study on Co-Management of Tanguar Haor

Community based Haor and Floodplain Resource Management Projects, under the broader
theme of participatory ecosystem management, officially comprising SEMP components, have
been implemented by IUCN’s Bangladesh country office with support from the MoEF and
UNDP from 1998 to 2006. The CNRS worked for Haor, while Nature Conservation
Management (NACOM) and Bangladesh Centre for Advance Studies (BCAS) worked for
Padma-Jamuna, Brahmaputra-Sitalakha floodplains and the Madhumati floodplains
respectively.

Community based fisheries management including fish sanctuary, swamp forest plantation,
and green funding mechanism were developed under the project. The project aimed to
reverse the deteriorating tend of floodplain ecology as well as to ensure sustainable use of
wetland resources, which include water, soil, rainfall, fish, wildlife and plants.

Management of aquatic ecosystems through community husbandry (MACH)

Management of Aquatic Ecosystems through Community Husbandry (MACH) is a Government
of Bangladesh project supported by USAID. MACH’s goal is the promotion of ecologically
sound management of floodplain resources for a sustainable supply of food to the poor of
Bangladesh. The project has established community based co-management and helped
restore and increase sustainable productivity in three large wetland ecosystems: Hail Haor in
Sreemongal, the Turag-Bangshi River and wetlands in Kaliakoir and the Kangsha-Malijee
basin in Sherpur. The project was implemented by Winrock International, USA, BCAS and
CARITAS Bangladesh (a national NGO). The partners have worked closely with the
department of fisheries since 1989. The project included realistic activity packages covering
household level livelihood planning and intervention, training needs assessment, awareness
and institution building, habitat rehabilitation, afforestation, wise use of fish and other wetland
resources, establishment of sanctuaries, community development and local level institution
building and social and biological monitoring.

Community based fisheries management (CBFM)

The Community Based Fisheries Management (CBFM) project was implemented from 1996 to
2006 by the international research organization the WorldFish Centre, in partnership with the
Department of Fisheries (DoF), Government of Bangladesh, and local NGOs, in an action
research project which has developed a series of community based fisheries management
approaches (fisher-led, community led and women-led) for ensuring equitable access to
fisheries resources for community based management groups. Over a ten-year period, the
CBFM project established community control over 116 water bodies. Over 130 officially
recognized, poverty-focused community based organizations (CBOs) were involved in the
management of these water bodies. One of the main actions of CBFM-2 was to establish fish
sanctuaries – no fishing zones where a proportion of fish in the water body are allowed to stay
safely even when the surrounding water levels are at their lowest.

119
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Coastal and wetland biodiversity management project (CWBMP)

The Coastal and Wetland Biodiversity Management Project (CWBMP) aims to implement the
ECA (Ecologically Critical Area) legislation through the participation of local community and
alternative livelihood options. The project has been implemented since 2006 in Hakaluki
Haor, Cox’s Bazar Beach, Sonadia Island and St. Martin’s Island. Village Conservation
Groups (VCGs) formed to fulfil the objectives of the project implement different activities
including alternative income generation, swamp plantation, mangrove plantation, no fishing
zone, etc.

Tanguar Haor and community based sustainable management project – A

case study on co-management
Tanguar Haor is a wetland ecosystem covering an area of 9,727 ha and located at the
northeastern district of Sunamganj close to the Indian border in the Meghalaya hill region.
Due to its designation as an ECA in 1999 and a Ramsar site in 2000, the government,
represented by the MoEF, put in place a project titled ‘Community Based Sustainable
Management of Tanguar Haor’, to which IUCN’s Bangladesh country office is assigned to
provide technical support. The project is funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and
Cooperation (SDC). The project was designed with three phases, namely preparatory (2006-
2009), development (2009-2012) and consolidated phase (2012-2015).

This unique project was implemented to conserve the biodiversity of the wetland and to ensure
the livelihood of people around the wetland. Different institutions have been established with
clear mandates, to ensure that people’s opinions are reflected in development initiatives.
Representatives from communities have been included in committees at all levels and a
bottom-up approach has been followed in decision making, thus ensuring participation and
transparency in all kinds of decision making. To ensure equity, engagement of women and
other professionals have been guaranteed in all level of decision making. To share the benefit
from fish harvesting, a benefit sharing mechanism has been established through consultation
with community and other stakeholders where 40% of the money from fish sale goes to
fishermen, 36% goes to Central Co-management Committee (a community based committee)
for the development of the community and 24% goes to government. Representatives from
different committees have been selected through a democratic process where community
people have chosen their representatives through election. Democratically elected
representatives are accountable to the community in taking any decision.

Natural resource governance

During the three consecutive phases, the initial mechanisms for communities and government
for managing and controlling the natural resources of Tanguar Haor were put in place
(Figure 11.2). At the national level, formation of the Project Steering Committee assures
general oversight and provides the necessary policy environment and political support to the
project. The building blocks of a co-management system are being put in place. The first of

120
 Management and Governance System of Wetlands in Bangladesh: A Case Study on Co-Management of Tanguar Haor

Figure 11.2: Tanguar Haor: An example of natural resource governance establishment

Tanguar Haor Co-management Model

National Scientific Body for Tangular Haor

Civil Society Forum at Upazila and District Level

Government Tanguar Haor Community

these is a structured system for community participation in different co-management bodies in

the form of community based committees in village, union and upazila levels. The Tanguar
Haor Management Committee at the district level was formed and is operating under the
chairmanship of the Deputy Commissioner, Sunamganj to coordinate technical, law
enforcement and community initiatives under the new, still developing, co-management
scheme. At the union level a Central Ad hoc Committee (CAC), which was later christened the
Central Co-management Committee (CCC), was formed with elected union leaders who
review the progress of the project activities. A union level ad hoc committee (UAC), whic was
later named the union co-management committee (UCC), was formed to make decisions on
resource acquisition at Tanguar Haor.

Completing the recipe for the governing dish, there are 48 village organizations called the
Village Co-management Committee (VCC) and elected representatives from 88 villages that
have a strong voice in the co-management regime. IUCN Bangladesh through its Project
Management and Support Unit (PMSU) coaches and brings in local NGOs that are relevant
to the management process. Starting from the national level to the community level, there is
dissemination and sharing of opinions and information in a pyramidal framework with a set

121
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

hierarchical standing. This intricate governance structure has made major headway in the
management of Tanguar Haor. The formation of committees at the village level encourages
the participation of locals in the co-management of the Haor.

Considerable effort has been made by the District Administration in explaining the long-term
objective of sharing the benefits of management with concerned communities, with special
attention to the needs of the marginalised, landless and women-headed households.
However, the communities developed capacity to negotiate, manage and use the natural
resources for better livelihoods.

The communities widely accepted the traditional non-commercial fishing practices to secure
their fishing rights and to ensure sustainable fish harvesting in this wetland for a specific
period of the year. The income generating activities, which have reduced stress on the Haor,
include small businesses, agriculture, poultry, livestock and handicrafts. Among small
businesses, men dominate the fishing and fishing boat related activities while women
dominate the grocery shops. Moreover, various activities like plantation of native tree saplings
to restore fish habitat and reed land, establishment of five fish and two bird sanctuaries have
been carried out for the rehabilitation of the Tanguar Haor ecosystem. The district
administration is providing political and operational support to Tanguar Haor through
Tanguar Haor Management Committee and such measures as the reinforcement of the Law
Enforcing Officers.

Community engagement and social benefits

The maximum benefits are received by Tanguar Haor communities through their engagement
in different types of project activities. These activities include commercial and non-commercial
fishing where they receive a percentage through the benefit-sharing mechanism; active
involvement in various plantation, restoration and conservation activities; receive supports
from the Livelihood Improvement Programme (LIP), Social Capital Management (SCM),
Alternative Income Generation Activities (AIGAs), receive Vulnerable Group Feeding (VGF) for
poor fishermen during the fishing ban period; participate in different training year around;
appoint a number of community guards with monthly wages for wetland resource protection;
and arrange training for eco-tour guides to develop tourism and generate income.

Resilience against climatic disaster

The community of Tanguar Haor has been extensively involved in climate resilient activities.
These may include ecosystem-based village protection, introduction of high yield early crop
varieties, crop-dam maintenance, large-scale Barringtonia acutangula (Hijal) and Pongamia
pinnata (Koroch) plantation, homestead fruit species plantation, floating gardening,
awareness raising on disaster risk reduction.

The governance system for Tanguar Haor natural resources still stands as a big challenge to
maintaining its ecological services and values. Observations from existing co-management

122
 Management and Governance System of Wetlands in Bangladesh: A Case Study on Co-Management of Tanguar Haor

system for natural resources management in Bangladesh show that the elite class dominates
the decision making process and the voice of the primary target group gets less attention. In
the case of Tanguar Haor, there is a gap of inclusiveness in the lower tiers of the structure that
affects natural resources governance. With the institutional setup at the local level, the
grassroots community members have been organized and have regained usufruct access to
natural resources. However, expert opinions emphasize the engagement of potential civil
society members, professionals and local government institutions in the structure for attaining
the outcomes of the co-management system in Tanguar Haor resources management.

Conclusion
The union level administration helped to set-up the beel (water bodies in the Haor) based
fishing practices as well as no fishing zones to help the ecosystem recover. The community
administration initiated an outreach programme to increase community involvement and
set-up alternative modes of income generation, and was in direct control of the Tanguar Haor
resources. The national level administration was in favour of ‘wise use’ Ramsar principles and
aided the project through nationwide support. Every single tier in the governing system was
instrumental in the management of the Haor. True to its word the project is a great example of
how to create a co-management system of natural resource governance.

It is common knowledge that highly diversified ecosystems are more resilient to stochastic
events. The sheer size of the governing body is necessary to adapt the unforeseen problems
and build resilience for long-term wetland management. The problems related to corruption
at lower tiers of the system will have to be monitored with greater vigilance in future.
Moreover, the livelihoods of the people were improved and, through the access control
mechanism, the overall ecological integrity of the fragile system experienced gradual
improvement.

The daunting size and diversity of the project requires that the management responsibility be
shared among different stakeholders. The governing system established at the site has had
many successes but further effort is required to fill the remaining gaps in management. The
governance system is sound and will hopefully persist in the future to preserve one of
Bangladesh’s most significant natural resources, a biodiversity hotspot for fish and birds.

References
DoF (Department of Fisheries) (2009). ‘Fishery Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh 2008-
2009’. Fisheries Resources Survey System, Department of Fisheries, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
FRSS (2014). ‘Fisheries Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh’. Fisheries Resources Survey System
(FRSS), Department of Fisheries, Bangladesh 30, 52.
Islam, S.N. (2010). ‘Threatened wetlands and ecologically sensitive ecosystems management
in Bangladesh’. Front. Earth Science China 4(4), 438-448.

123
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Nishat, A. (1993). ‘Freshwater wetlands in Bangladesh: status and issues’. In: Nishat, A, et
al. (Eds.) Freshwater wetlands in Bangladesh: issues and approaches for management.
Published by IUCN-The World Conservation Union, Dhaka.
Rahman, A.K.A. (2005). ‘Freshwater Fishes of Bangladesh’. 2nd Edition. Dhaka: Zoological
Society, Bangladesh.
Rahman, M., Halder, S. & Capistrano, D. (1996). ‘Community-based Wetland Habitat
Restoration and Management: Experiences and Insights from Bangladesh’. Paper
presented at the Sixth Annual Conference of International Association for the Study of
Common Property, Berkeley, California, U.S.A, 5-8 June 1996.
Talukdar, B., Nakagoshi, N. & Rashid, M.S. (2008). ‘State and management of wetlands in
Bangladesh’. Landscape Ecology Engineering 5(1), 81–90.

124
 Community Involvement in the Management of High -Altitude Wetlands in Nepal: A Case of Gosaikunda

Community Involvement in the

Management of High-Altitude
Wetlands in Nepal: A Case of Gosaikunda
Rajendra Khanala, Bishnu Bhandarib, and Sony Barala
a
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Nepal, b Nepal Wetlands Society, Nepal
[email protected]

Abstract
Wetlands that lie above 3,000 masl in the Himalayas are generally known as high-altitude wetlands
in Nepal. Many people, particularly Hindus, attach high religious significance to these wetlands
because of their high religious and spiritual values. Gosaikunda is a high-altitude Ramsar site where
more than 35,000 pilgrims come to pay their tribute to, and worship, Lord Shiva by bathing in the
holy lake, specifically on the full moon days of June and August. However, pollution has been a major
environmental problem due to the large number of pilgrims. Solid waste management and destruction
of the natural environment are the main causes of pollution. In this context, the study explores how
local communities are managing pollution around the lake during the time of heavy pilgrimage.
Langtang National Park has been supporting religious tourism with the help of local communities. A
local NGO, Gosaikunda Area Development Committee, has been formed with the responsibility of
managing and developing the wetlands. The Committee not only provides services to pilgrims to help
control pollution, but also provides opportunities to local communities for generating additional
income and local employment. Since the lake is within a protected area, the local communities are
only allowed to build temporary, makeshift camps for the pilgrims. The Committee repairs and
maintains the trails, builds temporary toilets and provides drinking water to the pilgrims. First aid and
emergency services including rescue operation, especially for the treatment of people suffering from
high-altitude sickness, are provided during the high season for pilgrimage. Special arrangements are
also made to manage rites and ritual activities at the lake. Local people are managing the pressures
and problems created by excessive religious tourism. The involvement of local communities, including
representatives from local governments and other organizations, have provided support not only in
controlling pollution, but also in securing the livelihoods of local communities.

Keywords: communities, high-altitude wetlands, Gosaikunda, livelihoods, pilgrimage

Introduction
High Altitude Wetlands (HAWs) occur approximately at or above 3,000 masl In Nepal they
occur in the high Himalayan region. These Himalayan wetlands play an important role in the
hydrological, ecological and socioeconomic security of the entire region and therefore they
demand special emphasis in conservation planning and management (Trisal and Kumar

125
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

2008). These HAWs are not only spectacular in their scenery, but are also sacred to Hindus
and Buddhists alike. People attach great values to these wetlands and go on pilgrimage to
these sacred spaces on certain occasions of the year, especially in the monsoon season. The
biological diversity of these wetlands is immense as they are the habitats of many globally
threatened species of flora and fauna. Apart from being rich in biological resources, HAWs
also have immense cultural significance as people attach great spiritual significance to both
the Himalayas and their wetlands.

Most mountain lakes are sacred. People go on pilgrimage to such lakes for a variety of
activities (bathing in sacred waters, worshipping, completing a circuit and the Darshan of
Hindu deities and Lord Shiva in the case of Gosiakunda). However, during these trips, pilgrims
often litter the lake and its surroundings with human waste. The water is polluted through their
bathing rituals and offering of rice, flowers, oil-immersed wicks, fruits, vermillion powder,
incense, etc. Pasture runoff also ultimately pollutes the waters of the lake.

Using the case study of the Gosaikunda area, a high-altitude wetland of Nepal, this paper
seeks to explain how communities have initiated activities to manage the impacts of
environmental, biological and cultural stressors in this high-altitude wetland while supporting
the livelihoods in the Himalayan region of Nepal. This paper also discusses how local people
have established a non-governmental organization (NGO) to oversee the overall development
of the area and the efforts initiated by the committee to clean up the area (such as its lakes,
shores and trails) after the festivals of Ganga Dashahara and Janai Purnima, and how they
prevent the further degradation of water quality. Finally, the paper makes some practical
recommendations for both HAWs in general, and Gosaikunda in particular, with a view to
promoting the sustainable management of such areas while supporting local livelihoods.

Methodology
Study area
Gosaikunda, a sacred lake in Nepal, lies inside Langtang National Park in Rasuwa district. It
covers an area of about 13 ha with the altitude of 4,380 m at its water surface. Its mean
depth is about 26 m. Physiographically, the lake is in the high Himalayan region of Nepal with
the latitude of 28˚05’ 21.3” N and longitude of 85˚ 24’ 96” E. The lake is more or less in
the U-shaped valley in the lap of Mount Gosainthan. Therefore, the area is also called
Gosainthan. It is surrounded by naked mountains and rock cliffs.

Gosaikunda is believed to have been created by Lord Shiva as his residence and a site of
meditation of his consort, Gauri. According to religious scriptures, a person can earn a
thousand times more Punya (merits) by taking a holy bath in Gosaikunda Lake than by
bathing in all other sacred sites such as Badrinath, Kedarnath, Gaya, Haridwar, etc. in India.
That is why many Hindus and Buddhists make at least one pilgrimage to Gosaithan during
their lifetime (Bhandari 2005; Bhandari and Joo 2007a & 2007b).

126
 Community Involvement in the Management of High -Altitude Wetlands in Nepal: A Case of Gosaikunda

Study methods
This paper is based on a review of documents, stakeholder consultations and the in-depth
knowledge of the authors about the site. The study reviewed available secondary sources of
information to gain a better understanding about Gosaikunda, such as the times of visitor
influx and its importance to local livelihoods as well as the impact of such pilgrimage tourism
on the surrounding wetlands. The study draws on information from different sources including
observations and reflections of local residents, local NGOs, group discussion with producers
and surveys of pilgrims. Apart from different case studies, consultations with experts who were
working in that area were also carried out. The study team also conducted assessments at
different time intervals through consultations with the local communities as well as local
organizations that are responsible for the management of the lake.

Results
Pilgrimage and its impact
The Gosaikunda Lake is considered sacred as it was created by Lord Shiva to suppress the
excruciating pain he experienced after swallowing ‘Kalkut Bish’, a fatal poison that was
created after a collaboration between deities and demons in the Golden Era. Shamans also
make an annual trip to the sites to reinvigorate their strength and energy.

Thousands of people gather at Gosaikunda on full moon days, particularly on the days of
Ganga Dashara in June and Janai Purnima in August. The Janai Purnima festival is bigger
than Ganga Dashahara; over 25,000 pilgrims gather to have a sacred bath in the lake on
Janai Purnima. Shamans from around the area come to worship the lake, to see the sleeping
posture of Lord Shiva, and to regain their inner strength and energy. Besides, tourists also use
the route to make a circuit of the Kathmandu-Dhunche-Gosaikunda-Thulo Ghopte and
Kathmandu trail.

In addition to the pilgrimages and tourism, local communities also use the water of the lake
for drinking purposes, running their water mills downstream, grazing their animals and
collecting herbs and aromatic plants. All these activities might bring about: (1) pollution of the
lake; (2) accumulation of solid waste; and (3) heavy pressures on lake resources.

The arrival of a huge number of pilgrims to Gosaikunda causes enormous pressure on the
valuable fauna and flora. Major damages due to pilgrimage are (LNP 2013):
ƒƒ Large-scale littering of non-degradable wastes, causing various kinds of pollution.
ƒƒ Collection of threatened plants by pilgrims to offer to Lord Shiva during Janai Purnima
festival.
ƒƒ Cutting of poles for erecting temporary sheds by vendors.
ƒƒ Horses/juppa kept around Gosaikunda Lake.
ƒƒ Improper physical construction in Gosaikunda areas; pressure for devotees to construct
Chhapro/Paati (temporary shelter) and other monuments in memory of their ancestors.

127
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

ƒƒ Overcrowding of tourists in limited space.

ƒƒ Low level of participation of indigenous people and marginal communities in tourism
related activities.

People’s dependency
Existing hotels and lodge facilities are too small to accommodate all pilgrims during the Janai
Purnima festival. The park administration allows construction of more than 300 temporary
sheds in different places from Ghatekhola to Gosaikunda and Ghopte-Maginigoth areas.
These temporary sheds produce a lot of garbage during the festival and the park has the
onerous task of clearing the garbage along the trekking route (LNP 2013). The park has
declared Gosaikunda Valley as a protected religious site and killing animals and keeping
horses and Juppas are banned, because killing animals in sacred areas is considered
sacrilegious in Tamang culture. There is pressure from outsiders to construct Paati (small
houses where pilgrims can take rest and shelter). There is no possibility of constructing Paati
for all pilgrims on Janai Purnima. The park should take the initiative to provide tents and other
temporary shelters around Gosaikunda through the Gosaikunda Chhetra Bikas Samiti
(Gosaikunda Area Development Committee). Allocating land for construction of pilgrims’
shelters will cause degradation of the sacred landscape (LNP 2013).

Tourism has created a local niche market for herders, small farmers, vegetable producers,
apple producers, curio vendors and cheese factories. Cheese from Lantang is very popular
among trekkers, and is also supplied to the Kathmandu and Tibetan markets. However, due to
limited kitchen gardening and fruit orchards, most of the vegetables are imported from
Kathmandu (LNP 2013).

Waste accumulation is another problem created by tourism activities. The problem is severe in
Kyangjin Valley, Gosaikunda and Langtang Village. Now the park has registered the
Gosaikunda and Langtang Kyangjin Hotel as well as the Lodge Management Sub-
committees, which are now fully responsible for maintaining and cleaning the trekking route
(LNP 2013).

The widened socioeconomic schism between tourism-exposed areas and tourism-shadowed

areas is another important matter of discussion for biodiversity conservation and
socioeconomic development of local communities (LNP 2013). Extreme seasonality of visitors
has created the problem of overcrowding and a lack of smooth flow of income for local
communities, making the potential economic benefits difficult to fully realize (LNP 2013).

Emergence of local community organization

The gravity of these problems has created a unique opportunity for local communities to come
together in order to manage the region’s pilgrimage tourism and to keep the lake as clean
and free from solid waste as possible. As a result, local stakeholders established an NGO

128
 Community Involvement in the Management of High -Altitude Wetlands in Nepal: A Case of Gosaikunda

named Gosaikunda Area Development Committee, which is entrusted with the responsibility
of managing the overall development of Gosaithan along with well-informed, active and
responsible participation of local communities and relevant partners in festival management.
This Committee was officially registered with the Chief District Office in 2001.

Community involvement
Major activities of the Committee for the management of the festivals as well the development
of the area are summarized as follows.

Health camp
The Committee organizes health camps during the festivals (both Ganga Dashahara as well
as Janai Purnima) in cooperation with stakeholders such as the Nepal Army, Nepal Red Cross
Society, District Health Office and Himalayan Rescue Operation. Camps that are set-up at
strategic locations along the trail provide first aid medication and advice to the pilgrims, if
necessary. The pilgrims are also advised not to walk fast, yet some continue to ascend too
quickly and, as a result, may suffer from acute mountain sickness (AMS). A makeshift first aid
clinic is set-up near the lake to provide emergency services to those who require immediate
medical attention, including oxygen. Also volunteers are assigned to manage rescue services.
Volunteers are on “stand-by” to help people who require immediate evacuation. This service
has helped save the lives of some people suffering from AMS.

Management of amenities and public utility

For the pilgrims, makeshift camps (called Tharpu in the Tamang language) are temporarily
constructed along the trail for their accommodation; food is also provided at these camps at
a reasonable price. Porters, horses and palanquins are provided for physically challenged
people to go to the lake and have sacred baths. Kerosene is made available for pilgrims to
cook their food. Safety and comfort of the pilgrims is overseen by volunteers. Special police
forces are deployed to prevent and immediately stop any kind of disturbances in the area.
Special arrangements are made around the temple for entertainment, chanting and singing at
night. Dances such as Shey-Gompa and Syaphru are quite common among local people,
mainly the Tamangs and Sherpas respectively. These dances, which are inclusive of both
males and females, are performed in a wide circle.

Management of solid waste

Special groups of park staff and volunteers stand on the shore of the lake with long staffs and
remove any solid waste or floating garbage from the lake. Even flowers and garlands are
collected and put into waste-baskets. Likewise, solid waste on the banks of the lake is
collected and put into waste-baskets. Waste baskets are also placed in strategic locations for
pilgrims along the trail. Billboards are erected to advertise where pilgrims may put the plastic
waste and other trash.

129
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Conclusion
Arrival of a huge number of pilgrims to Gosaikunda puts enormous pressure on the valuable
fauna and flora. Major damages caused by these pilgrims include large scale littering of
non-degradable wastes, causing various kinds of pollution; collection of threatened plants by
pilgrims to offer to Lord Shiva during Janai Purnima festival; cutting of poles for erecting
temporary sheds by vendors; overcrowding of tourists in limited space; and low levels of
participation of indigenous people and marginal communities in tourism related activities.
However, the gravity of these problems has opened an empowering opportunity for local
communities to come together to manage these pilgrimages and keep the lake as clean and
free from solid waste as possible. As a result, the local stakeholders established an NGO
named Gosaikunda Area Development Committee, which is entrusted with the responsibility
of managing the overall development of Gosaikunda along with well-informed, active and
responsible participation of local communities and relevant partners in festival management.

Local people have been actively engaged in the management of religious tourism under the
general guidance of Langtang National Park. The involvement of local communities, including
representatives from local governments and other agencies, presents an example of how
pollution can be prevented or mitigated immediately. Through the local NGO Gosaikunda
Area Development Committee is managing the lake area and trying to balance pressures and
problems created by excessive religious tourism. The Committee mobilizes resources to
provide services to the pilgrims and provides opportunity for local communities to generate
additional income. The local communities are allowed to build temporary makeshift camps
for the pilgrims during the pilgrimage.

Way Forward
The Himalayas are the “water tower” of Asia. They play an important role in maintaining the
hydrological cycle of the region. Any change in its ecosystem impacts not only the
environment of the region but also the livelihoods of millions of people living downstream
along the rivers and their floodplains and catchment areas. Therefore, regardless of their
inaccessibility and constraints, they are on the priority list of any management and
conservation activities. Based on the experiences and lessons drawn from the management of
Gosaikunda, the following are put forward for the wise use of the Himalayan wetlands and
their resources in Nepal.
ƒƒ Special efforts should be made for raising the profile of HAWs, not only in Nepal but also
in the region impacted by the Himalayas and the rivers emanating from them.
ƒƒ There is a great need for documenting best practices and indigenous knowledge in the
Himalayan region and disseminating them as much as possible to other areas and
synergies of efforts to catalyse the sustainable development of the Himalayas and
Himalayan people.
ƒƒ Concerning Gosaikunda, an autonomous full-fledged Gosaikunda Development
Committee should be established and support should be given to the Committee to build

130
 Community Involvement in the Management of High -Altitude Wetlands in Nepal: A Case of Gosaikunda

their overall capacity for managing the lakes and their resources for both festival-related
as well as long-term development. Social marketing as well as participatory action
research should be simultaneously promoted, strengthened and implemented at the
grass-roots level.
ƒƒ Any activities undertaken now will have long-term impact on the resources, not only in and
around the lake but also in its vicinity, such as its watershed. Therefore, the foremost
priority is to develop a master plan for the lake complex involving all the relevant
stakeholders, including local communities, and to receive the endorsement of the local
communities so that any activity that is undertaken in the area is meaningful for, and
owned by, the local community for its sustainability and their unconditional support in the
future.

References
Bhandari, B. (2005). ‘High Altitude Wetlands of Nepal: Views and Reviews on Conservation’.
Forum for Ecosystem Management, Kathmandu.
Bhandari, B. & Joo, G.J. (2007a). ‘Gosainthan: A Sacred Wetland in Nepal’. Nepal Wetlands
Society, Kathmandu.
Bhandari, B. & Joo, G.J. (2007b). ‘Himalayan Wetlands: Risks, Challenges and
Opportunities’. Ramsar Wetlands Center Korea, Changwon.
LNP (2013). ‘Management Plan of Langtang National Park and Buffer zone Management
Plan (2013-2018)’ Draft, Langtang National Park, Kathmandu.
Trisal, C.L. & Kumar, R. (2008). ‘Integration of High Altitude Wetlands into River Basin
Management in the Hindu Kush Himalayas: Capacity Building Needs Assessment for Policy
and Technical Support’. Wetlands International- South Asia, New Delhi.

131
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Conservation and Sustainable Use

of Ghodaghodi Lake Area: Lesson from
CSUWN Wetland Project in Nepal

Top B. Khatria
a
Community Based Flood and Glacial Lake Outburst Risk Reduction Project (CFGORRP),
Department of Hydrology and Meteorology, Nepal
[email protected]

Abstract
Ghodaghodi Lake Area (GLA), a Ramsar site of international importance, was chosen as one of the
project demonstration sites based on its ecological, biological, economic and cultural values. In the
last few years, government agencies, conservation partners and local communities jointly felt the need
to extend the GLA beyond the lake boundary and manage it through an integrated and holistic
approach at the catchment level. A host of interventions ranging from livelihood promotion to
collaborative management of wetlands were undertaken during the five-year period from 2008-2013.
Since wetland conservation is a crosscutting sector and thus requires a collaborative approach, a
multi-stakeholder forum was launched for the very first time in GLA to promote multi-stakeholder
engagement for the conservation and management of wetland resources. A catchment level
management plan was also developed to address contemporary issues related to wetland conservation
and wise use of local resources.

Keywords: livelihood interventions, collaborative management, multi-stakeholder forum,

wetland restoration, payment of ecosystem services, biological monitoring.

Introduction
The Conservation and Sustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal (CSUWN) was a joint
undertaking of the Government of Nepal/Ministry of Forests & Soil Conservation (MoFSC)
and the United Nations Development Programme-Global Environment Facility (UNDP-GEF).
The project was executed by the MoFSC. The Department of National Parks and Wildlife
Conservation and the Department of Forests were the main partners. The project started in
January 2008 and ended in July 2013. Two Ramsar sites, Ghodaghodi Lake Area (GLA) and
Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (KTWR), were the project demonstrations sites. The project was
designed to address the root causes of wetland degradation and loss of wetland habitats by
integrating wetland management and conservation issues into national policies and plans;
and to strengthen the capacity by linking national actions with the activities. The project was
the first of its kind in the area of wetland conservation in Nepal, which has provided support
to the Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation to create an enabling policy environment and

132
 Conservation and Sustainable Use of Ghodaghodi Lake Area: Lesson from CSUWN Wetland Project in Nepal

to achieve enhanced technical, economic and institutional capacity so that all relevant sectors
recognize the values and importance of wetlands. The project was designed to address policy
gaps, build capacity (both human and technical resources) and promote collaborative
management of wetlands, ensuring continuous provision of environmental goods and services
for improved local livelihoods.

Case Study Site – Ghodaghodi Lake

Ghodaghodi Lake is the largest natural freshwater lake of the Terai region of Nepal. With an
area of 2,727 ha, Ghodaghodi Lake Area (GLA) is spread over Darakh, Ramshikarjhala and
Sandepani Village Development Committees (VDCs) of Kailali district at an altitude of 205
masl in western Nepal (Figure 13.1). The GLA extends over two physiographic regions: the
Siwaliks and the Terai. There are 20 interconnected lakes within the catchment area. A total of
57,064 people directly depend on the local resources of Ghodaghodi Lake. Of the total
population, 34% are local indigenous Tharus who make up totally Wetland Dependent
Communities (WDCs). Hill Brahmin and Chhetri comprise about 37% of the total population
followed by hill Dalits 11.4%, hill Janajatis 2.8%, Muslims 0.2% and others 13.6%. The land
cover type of the area includes forests 52.5%, degraded forest 3%, grassland 1.8%,
agricultural land 34.5%, sand/riverbed 1.6% and lakes 6.1%. The area hosts a rich array of
floral and faunal diversity. A total of 450 plants, 226 birds, 29 fish, 32 butterflies, 10
amphibians, 34 mammals and 6 species of tortoises have been recorded.

Figure 13.1: Previous area covered by GLA 2,726 Ha. (Left),

Current catchment level area by GLA 9,650 Ha. (Right)

133
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Major Interventions and Outcomes

Key issues related to conservation and wise use of resources in GLA include: land
encroachment, over-extraction of natural resources, overgrazing by livestock, siltation,
eutrophication, poaching, inadequate conservation awareness, upstream-downstream
interaction, multi-jurisdictional issues and lack of livelihood opportunities.

Major interventions undertaken to address the above issues to promote collaborative

management include: building institutional and personal capacity; raising conservation
awareness and outreach; strengthening habitat management and restoration, biological
monitoring and soil conservation; developing eco-tourism and alternative energy; improving
livelihood, community-based anti-poaching unit (CBAPU) and payment for environment
services (PES). Some outcomes have been archieved after the implementation of CSUWN.

Institutional strengthening
CSUWN provided support to the District Forest Office (DFO) through the construction of a site
office at Sukhad. The office, which was initially housed in a temporary shed, is now a full-
fledged office with a compound wall. Likewise, through DFO, support was provided to
Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs). A total of 38 CFUGs were formed out of which 18
are exclusively managed by women. The total coverage of community forest is 1,385 ha with
3,245 households. The total number of beneficiaries is 20,737. The project also supported
the CFGUs to construct 13 community halls (Figure 13.2) and provided sustainability funds to
4 CFUGs to give continuity to their regular work. The biggest milestone was the preparation
of the Catchment Level Management Plan for GLA, which would provide technical guidance
for long-term management of the catchment.

Capacity enhancement
Under the institutional capacity development component, the project provided support to
conduct training in the areas of forest management, account/bookkeeping, leadership,
gender and social inclusion, wetland management and forest fire control. A total of 984
members, mostly women, have been trained on the above themes and their capacities
enhanced. Thirteen local resource persons (LRPs) have been developed.

Conservation awareness and outreach

A total of 15 school wetland clubs including 2 school teacher networks were formed to
spearhead conservation education and outreach tasks across the GLA. Likewise, FM radio/
jingles, street drama, event celebration were widely used to educate and raise the awareness
of local people on the importance of wetlands (Figure 13.3). Seventy-six episodes of Simsar
Sandesh were aired through local FMs.

134
Conservation and Sustainable Use of Ghodaghodi Lake Area: Lesson from CSUWN Wetland Project in Nepal

Figure 13.2: Sukhad Forest Range Post

Figure 13.3: Street Drama for Wetland Awareness

135
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Habitat management and restoration

Five critical wetlands sites – Ghogaghodi, Nakhrodi, Tendi, Tengna and Tinchatiya
(Figure 13.4) – were identified, mapped and restored through the construction of four earthen
bunds, five sluice gates, weeding and cleaning of alien invasive species, construction of eight
basking sites and maintenance of floating islands for migratory birds and crocodiles. Due to
habitat management, breeding of Asian cotton pigmy goose (Nettapus coromandelianus) was
recorded in 2009. Likewise, breeding of common Moorhen (Gallinula chlropus) was recorded
in 2010 for the first time in Nepal (Figure 13.5).

Figure 13.4: Habitat management and restoration

Figure 13.5: Breeding of Common Moorhen recorded at GLA in 2010 (Left),

Breeding of Asian Cotton Pigmy Goose recorded in GLA in 2009 (Right)

136
 Conservation and Sustainable Use of Ghodaghodi Lake Area: Lesson from CSUWN Wetland Project in Nepal

Biological monitoring
GLA is an Important Bird Area (IBA) as it provides a unique habitat for birds, including for a
number of threatened species. Three species, cotton pygmy goose (Nettapus
coromandelianus), wild rice (Oryza rufipogon) and crocodile (Crocodylus palustris), were
chosen to represent GLA for biological monitoring and annual monitoring of key indicator
species was were carried out to keep track of the population trend (Table 13.1). Limnologic
monitoring was also undertaken on a fortnightly basis. A local bird watching club was formed
and supported with monitoring equipment. There has been a marked increase in the
population of indicator species in GLA.

Soil conservation measures

Soil conservation measures (Figure 13.6) in five CFUGs covering 25 ha of erosion-prone land
were carried out with the river training (spurs and embankments) and reinforced by vegetative
measures. Reforestation and afforestation activities were carried out by mobilizing the school
wetland clubs and community forestry user groups.

Table 13.1: Population of key indicator species increased

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Species
W S W S W S W S W S
Cotton pigmy goose 139 188 135 243 175 290 254 300
Marsh mugger 3 12 12 13 15
Wild rice ha. 3.6 12.42 15.27 14.07

Figure 13.6: Soil Conservation work at Kawa Khola

137
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Eco-tourism promotion
Promotion of local tourism was carried out extensively by mobilizing the local forest user
group so that revenue generated would be circulated for the maintenance and upkeep of the
infrastructure developed. Project supported the construction of a stretch of 1.5 km of foot trails
interspersed with five vantage points for bird observation along the lake area. A permanent
view tower (Figure 13.7) was also built close to the entry point of the lake. Specific areas were
designated picnic spots and signage/information boards were put up. A small Tharu museum
housing local artifacts and costume were put on display.

Figure 13.7: View tower for eco-tourism promotion

Alternative energy
As local people were extracting forest resources for fuelwood needs, alternative energy such
as biogas and Improved Cooking Stoves (ICS) were introduced to needy people. A total of
200 units of biogas plants (Figure 13.8) and 1000 ICS were provided to reduce dependency
on forests, which also contributed to carbon offsets.

Livelihood improvement
As majority of the local Tharu people were wetland dependent, 215 households (HHs) of poor
WDCs were tagged to provide targeted livelihood interventions to increase household
income. Fisheries (387 HHs), goattery (162 HHs), piggery (24 HHs), leaf plate making
(86 HHs, Figure 13.9), fibre based (22 HHs) and technical skill enhancement (25 HHs)

138
 Conservation and Sustainable Use of Ghodaghodi Lake Area: Lesson from CSUWN Wetland Project in Nepal

Figure 13.8: Bio-gas with attached toilet

Figure 13.9: Leaf plate making machine

support was provided to increase household income by at least 15% from their baseline
income by the end of project tenure.

Community Based Anti-Poaching Unit (CBAPU)

A total of 30 Community Based Anti-Poaching Units comprising 430 members were formed
for surveillance and monitoring of wildlife across GLA. As a result a drastic reduction in
poaching incidences was reported (Figure 13.10).

Payment for environment services (PES)

As a pilot to educate and build awareness on the role of forest ecosystem in providing goods
and services, six CFUGs representing upstream and downstream were mobilized. Two
orientation and sensitization meetings were held to appraise them. After much discussion and
deliberation, it was agreed that downstream communities would pay a small fee for using
Ghodaghodi Lake.

139
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

Figure 13.10: Confiscated poaching materials (Left), Community Based

Anti-Poaching Unit’s meeting (Right)

Institutional mechanism for collaborative management

A Multi-Stakeholder Forum (MSF) for inter-sectoral coordination and collaborative
management of wetland resources at the local level has been operational at GLA. The MSF is
chaired by the Local Development Officer. It is an eleven-member body representing district
line agencies; irrigation, agriculture, fisheries, teachers’ network, students’ wetland clubs,
CFUGs, community-based organizations, Village Development Committees–chairperson,
Water User Association and the District Forest Officer. The DFO serves as the member
secretary of the Forum. This body is responsible for overall coordination and collaboration for
the conservation and wise use of GLA. This mechanism was formed and launched in January
2011. Major achievements of GLA include:
ƒƒ Formation and launch of an MSF to promote collaborative management of GLA.
ƒƒ Creation of five capitals (natural, physical, human, financial and social) for institutional
sustainability.
ƒƒ Preparation and rolling out of a Catchment Level Management Plan for GLA covering an
area of 9,650 ha to address contemporary issues. The plan has been approved by the
Department of Forests.
ƒƒ 13 Local Resource Persons (LRPs) on wetland conservation and management have been
developed.
ƒƒ A new checklist of birds for GLA was prepared. A dedicated local bird watching club was
established.

140
 Conservation and Sustainable Use of Ghodaghodi Lake Area: Lesson from CSUWN Wetland Project in Nepal

Conclusion
The overall achievements of CSUWN project include:
ƒƒ A National Wetland Committee (NWC), an eleven-member apex body for inter-sectoral
coordination and collaboration, formed and operational.
ƒƒ Revised National Wetland Policy, 2012.
ƒƒ Draft of a new Wetland Bill.
ƒƒ A total of 15 technical knowledge based products have been developed and disseminated.

More than 4,500 individuals received institutional and capacity development training.
Seventy-three wetland related sensitization programmes were organized for various
stakeholders. Thirty government planning officials were trained on Economic Valuation, and
Wetland Inventory and Monitoring Assessment Tool. A total of 350 government officials were
sensitized on wetland related issues under various ministries. Likewise, 28 wetland related
international exposure visits were organized for government and partner institutions. The
Wetland Watch Group (WWG) at the Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (NEFEJ) has
been formed as a dedicated group of journalists to deal with wetland issues at the central
level. International Wetland Symposium 2012 was organized as a knowledge sharing event
for the first time in Nepal.

Few lessons were learnt from the implementation, including:

ƒƒ Building community capacity for conservation and sustainable livelihoods is a long-term
process. Hence, long-term commitment is required for this to happen in a sustainable
manner.
ƒƒ Creating alternative and environmentally sustainable economic opportunities is critical for
long-term resource conservation.
ƒƒ The most urgent action required is to take inventory, identify and map wetlands and
wetland species that are at risk from climate change within a locality or a particular region,
and then prioritize wetlands for their management and adaptation to prevent further loss
and degradation of wetlands through a right mix of management prescriptions.
ƒƒ Demonstration projects are an essential way to test new approaches (technical and
institutional). The broader impacts of these demonstrations occur when such models are
extended to other regions in a sustainable manner and when they influence national
policies.
ƒƒ Operating at macro and micro levels lends credibility to policy recommendations. Working
at the meso level means we can create sustainable institutions to implement national
policies.
ƒƒ Integrating crosscutting issues such as gender equality, poverty alleviation, capacity
building and governance in all programming leads to more sustainable and equitable
development.
ƒƒ Effective social change requires the right balance between diversity and uniformity while
the project introduced valuable tools to implement its activities, produced useful guidelines
and conducted various training and orientation programmes.

141
Wetlands in the Himalaya: Securing Services for Livelihoods

ƒƒ It is a challenge to demonstrate the effects of positive economic and social change in the
course of a short-term project. Therefore, it is very important that processes and
procedures get institutionalized to ensure that short-term programme results do not get lost
or diluted.
ƒƒ Enabling local stakeholders to take on as much responsibility as possible increases their
sense of ownership of the programme and results in greater accountability.

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank MoFSC, UNDP-GEF and its two partners (Department of
Forests and Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation) for their kind support
and cooperation extended throughout the project period. I am grateful to all the National
Project Directors for their guidance and stewardship in realizing the project objectives. I would
also like to extend special thanks to ICIMOD for inviting me to present my CSUWN paper at
the Dali Conference.

142
International Centre for Integrated © ICIMOD 2018. All rights reserved
Mountain Development ISBN 978 92 9115 577 4
GPO Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal
This publication is available in electronic form at
Tel +977 1 5275222 Fax +977 1 5275238 www.icimod.org/himaldoc
Email [email protected] Web www.icimod.org