Thanks, Gurinder ji, for deep insights. On 22 Feb 2017 6:48 p.m., "gurinder goraya" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dears, > > > The debate about assigning red-list categories to some taxa assessed to be > facing one or the other category of threat on account of excessive/ > destructive removals from their natural habitats or loss/ degradation of > the natural habitats is likely to continue forever. Protagonists for both > the sides are aplenty. In my experience on the subject of over more than > twenty years, I treat this debate as a typical case of tussle between the > taxonomists and the conservationists. In many cases, both the parties seem > to be far away from the ground reality as there usually is a wide time > lapse between the time of actual field surveys and the time of making the > threat assessment. Threat *per se* is sure a matter of perception. One > person records a good grove of an otherwise uncommon tree species and > records it as common. The other person observes the same grove and records > it as endangered due to paucity of regeneration. The major issue is whether > the species under consideration is continuing to occupy the areas in its > natural range of occurrence it was occupying say twenty/ thirty years > back! If the area under such occupation is reduced over time and/ or > regeneration seems to be a problem, then there sure is an issue. > Red-listing only flags such issues and brings such species under management > focus. > > > I concede to Mr. Chadwell's point to the extent that more serious surveys > are required to assign a threat status to a species. The issue has, > however, long been settled and personally I agree to it. The reigning > principle now is to assign a red-list status to a species on the basis of > whatever recent knowledge about the population status and threats is > available. This red-list categorisation is then followed by extensive field > surveys and PHVA (population and habitat viability analysis). The species > is again taken up for threat evaluation on the basis of field surveys and > red-list category could be changed/ reversed based on the information. > Thus, threat categorisation/ red-listing is, thus, a preemptive measure to > save the genetic range of a species perceived to be under threat. > > > I cite the typical case of *Colchicum luteum* from Lahaul valley. The > species has not been reported from the area in the district floras. > However, during one threat assessment exercise a local person from > Lahaul insisted that the species is present in the area and that extent of > its occurrence has drastically shrunk over the years. I thereafter mounted > a survey for the species in Lahaul and recorded the occurrence of species > at various locations around Kukumseri (Udaipur). Now a 3 hectare plot > containing about 300 plants of this species has been closed as *in situ* > reserve. > > > Coming specifically to Karu (*Picrorhiza kurroa)*, the species has fairly > vast range of occurrence and makes dense mats wherever it occurs. The cause > of worry is the rising commercial demand of the rhizomes of this species > that has grown to more than 1000 metric tonne (dry weight) now. To meet > this demand, the wild gatherers have now taken to camping at higher > altitudes for months together and uproot the entire colonies of this > species from a location. I have, during my field visits over time, have > noticed the Karu colonies vanish at many places. It is correct that the > leftover rootstock will help the colonies spring back, but it will happen > only if the the area is left unexploited for 2-3 years. Alas, it is not > happening! Wild populations of *Picrorhiza kurroa* have taken a good > beating over the past about 20 years. At many places the dug up areas have > been taken over by *Phlomis* sp., *Cirsium *sp., *Rumex* sp., etc. > leaving no space for re-establishment of Karu. > > > In as far as the sustainable harvest practices are concerned, India has > some very old traditions of cyclic sustainable harvest. The most common > one linked to harvest of underground parts of temperate and alpine herbs is > to start such harvest only from *bees bhadon* (twentieth of the Indian > month of Bhadon, usually corresponding to the first week of September) > after paying obeisance to the local deity. It was considered that by this > time the roots would have accumulated the required alkaloids and the seeds > would have fallen ensuring regeneration. There are also > forest-wise management prescriptions in place for rotational harvest under > which an area opens up for harvesting once in 4 years. The question is not > about the systems, but it is about the implementation of these systems. In > a situation where the harvest of medicinal herbs forms one of the key > opportunities of cash income, it is rather difficult to implement the > prescriptions. It is sad but true. The issue gets compounded with > increasing grazing pressure in these areas. With no other means of > sustaining livelihoods, grazing in these areas is not a matter of choice. > It is a compulsion. > > > Various programs are nevertheless going on to involve the local > communities, including graziers, in management of wild resources, including > Karu, with various degrees of success. I am hopeful that these efforts will > bear fruit and such species would be managed more professionally. > > > My above discourse is only to create wider appreciation about the issue > and not to thrust any opinion. > > > Regards, > > > Dr. G S Goraya, IFS > Deputy Director General (Research), > Indian Council of Forestry Research & Education, > New Forest P.O., Dehradun - 248006. > (Uttarakhand, India) > Tel. (+91-941-802-5036) > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> > on behalf of J.M. Garg <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:41 AM > *To:* efloraofindia > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [efloraofindia:264287] Fwd: Picrorhiza kurrooa cultivated in > botanical garden in Kashmir - plus a method of SUSTAINABLE collection in > the wild > > Thanks, Chadwell ji > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "C CHADWELL" <[email protected]> > Date: 21 Feb 2017 2:12 a.m. > Subject: Picrorhiza kurrooa cultivated in botanical garden in Kashmir - > plus a method of SUSTAINABLE collection in the wild > To: "J.M. Garg" <[email protected]> > Cc: > > A couple of images of P.kurrooa growing well in the Nehru Botanical > Garden, Kashmir. > > I have seen this growing abundantly in a botanical garden in Norway and > there are images of > it growing well in another Indian botanical garden on eFI. All this > suggests the plant is adaptable > and can readily be cultivated. Very much a CURIOSITY in ornamental > terms, rather than outstanding i.e. > would be of NO interest to the vast majority of gardeners in the West and > even specialist rock gardeners > would only rate it as of moderate interest. > > I DISAGREE with the listing of this plant under Appendix of CITES. > > Simply because a plant has medicinal uses and is collected does NOT > automatically mean it is > THREATENED let alone ENDANGERED. > > Stewart knew this as a COMMON species on alpine meadows in Kashmir (it was > collected at that time). > > Unless one regularly visits said locations in Kashmir (and also H.P.) and > MONITORS populations, they > CANNOT judge accurately the status of this species in the wild. During my > travels in the Kashmir Valley > and Himachal Pradesh with an understanding of the distribution of this > species (which exceeds that of > any Indian botanist), I see no reason why this plant is seriously > endangered. Quite a number of colonies/populations > of this species are in places beyond the reach of Indian botanists AND > local collectors! > > But fundamentally, unless the more accessible meadows are visited, how can > anyone actually judge? Abundance > or rarity cannot be determined in an office or even a herbarium. > > Furthermore, as this plant is found in colonies close to the Pakistan > border (as well as well away from > the border), as access has been restricted (incl. a REDUCTION in grazing > pressure) by patrols of the > Indian Army (I can cite the situation on Mt. Aphawat) this could well have > INCREASED the size of > such colonies in recent decades..... > > Koelz noted from local amchis in Lahaul that this was known as 'Wanglen' > in Tibetan. Commenting that > the roots were an old Indian remedy for fever & colds. At that time (the > 1930s), MANY people, usually Tibetans and > Rampuris made a business of collecting the herb for sale wherever it grew > in the high mountains (THOUGH > I REPEAT I HAVE SEEN PLENTY OF TERRITORY TOO STEEP FOR NON-ROCK CLIMBERS) > with their > encampments being seen amongst the peaks in summer months. > > More recently one should consider 'Tibetan Medicinal Plants' Kletter & > Kriechbaum (2001). According to the authors, > translated from ancient Greek 'picros rhiza' means bitter root. > > Specimens of 'hong len' collected on the Rohtang Pass were both Picrorhiza > kurrooa AND Lagotis cashmeriana (which it > seems is considered as an adulterant of 'Kukti' (Picrorhiza kurrooa). > Samples of 'hong len' collected in Nepal were Neopicrorhiza > scrophularifolia) whilst another sample from Ladakh was Lagotis > kunawurensis (neither Picrorhiza nor Lagotis cashmeriana > grow in Ladakh). > > According to Singh et al. P.kurrooa has been cultivated in Western Nepal > but as this is well beyond its range, more likely to be > N.scrophulariifolia. When I began work as a consultant to The Royal > Government of Nepal on the 'Cultivation of Medicinal > Plants for Traditional Medicine Project' in the 1990s, 'hong len' in > Bhutan had been identified as P.kurrooa - a misidentification for > N.scrophulariifolia. > > The authors of 'Tibetan Medicinal Plants' observe that the drug derived > from P.kurrooa is very important, not only in Tibetan Medicine, but > particularly in Ayuvedic medicine. Its importance and the big market for > the plant become clear when one browsed the internet (presumably > this is still the case), where several sites displayed products prepared > from Picrorhiza. Concern had been expressed by naturalists, > claiming it was "Extensively exploited by local people for sale". *But > this has no doubt been going on for a century or more.* There > is a claim that large-scale exploitation may lead to its extinction. > Incorrect. > > *I STRONGLY DISAGREE. THE WORST THAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT POPULATIONS WILL > BE REDUCED BUT EVEN IF * > *SEVERELY (AND WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM), SUFFICIENT > COLONIES WILL CONTINUE TO * > *INHABIT INACCESSIBLE SPOTS, ENSURING ITS SURVIVAL.* > > *SURELY, THE QUESTION IS EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE SUSTAINABLE > COLLECTION - IF IT IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT* > *PLANT.* > > *KLETTER & KREICHBAUM STATE THAT THIS WOULD NOT BE AT ALL THAT DIFFICULT > IF THE HARVESTING OF PLANTS* > *WERE REGULATED BY THE GOVERNMENT AND CONTROLLED BY THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES > (as is the case for gentians in* > *the alps): THE GOVERNMENT PROTECTS THE SPECIES BY LAW, GIVING SPECIAL > PERMITS ONLY TO LOCAL FAMILIES, * > *WHICH ARE CONTROLLED BY THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES OR GROUPS ON THEIR OWN, AND > SELL THEIR HARVEST TO * > *TRADERS. THE LOCAL COLLECTION AREA IS DIVIDED INTO SEVERAL PARTS WHICH > ARE EXPLOITED IN A ROTATION * > *SYSTEM. THE HARVEST TAKES PLACE IN ONE OF THESE SUBAREAS ONLY, AND ONLY > PART OF THE PLANT POPULATION* > *IS COLLECTED, ABOUT ONE THIRD REMAINS AS "SEED PLANTS" FOR REGENERATION, > WHICH TAKES PLACE FOR* > *SEVERAL YEARS DURING WHICH THE AREA IS NOT TO BE TOUCHED. THUS, > HARVESTING CAN TAKE PLACE EVEY YEAR,* > *BUT ALWAYS ROTATING TO ANOTHER AREA, AND NEVER TAKING ALL PLANTS FROM A > SINGLE POPULATION.* > > I realise the above example is from Switzerland and surrounding > countries and not India but why cannot India and Indians follow an example > which works? This could be applied to other medicinal plants where > 'concerns' exist (valid or otherwise). Strikes me as a much better way > of operating, rather than repeated rather sensationalist 'claims' of > species being 'Critically Endangered' (the PROPER definition of which > needs to be understood i.e. AT SERIOUS RISK OF EXTINCTION. > > > > > Best Wishes, > > > Chris Chadwell > > > 81 Parlaunt Road > SLOUGH > SL3 8BE > UK > > www.shpa.org.uk > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "efloraofindia" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "efloraofindia" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "efloraofindia" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
