Himalayan grasslands

We drive past slopes covered with pines, over and over again, whenever we are in the lower Himalayas or the Siwaliks below them. We hardly ever stop to walk into them. I now realize that I was brainwashed by old and false certainties. The false statements are the following: forests of Himalayan Chir pine (Pinus roxburghii) are ecologically barren. We bought into popular but false ecological lore which extends this into statements about pine forests encroaching into productive oak forests because of deadly human interventions involving fire. These assumptions are at best questionable, and at worst completely wrong.

The new understanding is that these are not forests but savannahs, grasslands which are protected by the longleaf pines. These chir pines secrete terpins which drip into the ground and by changing the chemistry of the soil make it inhospitable to some species. The grasslands are not barren. Recent biodiversity counts show that the Himalayan pine savannahs support more species of flora (mainly grasses and herbs) than oak forests. Worldwide, the biodiversity of animal life in forests is dominated by insects, and these counts are missing in Himalayan ecology. Apparently, the biodiversity of grasslands is always undercounted: for example, they are often full of ants, and someone really should count them in pine savannahs here. I have clambered up a pine covered slope once to look at griffons resting in this habitat, so I have first hand evidence that they are not barren.

Chir pines (Pinus roxburghii, also called longleaf pines) are easy to recognize. They have the distinction of having the longest needles among all pines. Although they are evergreens, they shed needles copiously in April and October-November. November is usually very wet in the hills, but April is dry. Locals and seasoned travelers told us that late April and May are known as the fire season in these parts. This year the winter was very dry, and apparently the fires started in October and have smouldered since then.

Ratnam and her co-authors, in their impressive paper on tropical grasslands, present a closely argued case that the role of fire in the management of Himalayan grasslands has been misunderstood since the 19th century. As a result, fire prevention was written into the law in the 1940s. However, worldwide, fires are an intrinsic part of savannah ecologies, and terminology like “prescribed burns” is a common part of forestry practices elsewhere. The argument is expanded on in a separate paperwhich makes the case in more detail, where they relate this understanding to the degradation of all types of grasslands in India. One consequence of this that most bird-watchers are aware of is the tragic collapse of the population of the Great Indian Bustards (Ardeotis nigriceps) in the grasslands of the Indian plains.

Chir pines are adapted to alternation of fire and shade. The seeds germinate faster in red light, which is abundant on the forest floor, after sunlight filters through the trees. The growth habits of seedlings are also fire adapted, as are the grown trees themselves. Studies of the effect of fire on the ecology of chir pine savannah have also been published. It seems that biodiversity is highest on patches which have been burnt more than once. This could be why the traditional fire management methods evolved.

I have spent a lot of time walking in oak forests, and mixed forests on these lower slopes of the Himalayas. They are full of birds and animals (including exotica like the Himalayan red giant flying squirrel, which has the distinction of having the most adjectives preceding its generic name). But I have spent almost no time in pine savannahs. It is time to restore the balance, and see for myself what animal life I can find in them.

By I. J. Khanewala

I travel on work. When that gets too tiring then I relax by travelling for holidays. The holidays are pretty hectic, so I need to unwind by getting back home. But that means work.

24 comments

  1. Yes they are serious problem most of the low elevated grasslands are encroached by pine trees now leading to frequent forest fires, the frequency of forest fires is heavily increased by these pine trees, and this is not a part of ecological cycle in himalayan states. Most of the places you have seen as pine forest was once a grassland which was used by the livestock of himalayan people.
    And this new understanding which you are talking about is I think was presumed by some scientists writing content in some dark rooms without ever going to these places. I don’t know where do you got this piece of info, but this whole article is enough to destroy the life of himalayan people who are already surviving these frequent forest fires, climate change, etc.
    Sorry for any harsh word but being a person from a himalayan state I can’t tolerate people to misguide others. Because this small article is enough for some fools of government to halt our hard work to revive our old grasslands and jungles on the name of science.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You have made snap judgements about people and processes. You will be surprised to know that the people you rant about work in the field. I do not always agree with every paper I read, but I appreciate their authors since, to my personal knowledge at least, they accept and think about facts which contradict their models. I also think that you have exaggerated some facts and neglected others.

      Even today I see the pine grasslands in Uttarakhand being used by livestock. I see that the grass has adapted to herbivores by the fact that they have burrs which stick on my trousers and shoes when I walk through them. In addition I understand that grasslands across the world have a fire ecology, and I do not see any special circumstance in these grasslands which would have made it an exception.

      I welcome comments on the blog, but I draw a line at ad hominem attacks. Rants have their place, but perhaps you could place them in your own blog. I close any discussion in this thread, but I welcome you to make thoughtful comments on any other post you wish to read.

      Like

  2. Fascinating. I think of fire differently than I used to and I wonder about the Brits who settled the world believing passionately and fervently that their world was “normal” and the standard by which all other places should be defined and to which they should conform even when nature had designed them differently and native people knew it.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. My whole world view and understanding of history changed in Milan when I saw a knife grinding machine made to look like Satan. It was made 200 years before any European came to the Americas. It looked like people from two of the Native American tribes on the East Coast. After that, I looked at as many medieval European representations of Satan as I could find. Ignorant, superstitious people arriving on ships from Europe who had never had the chance to see a Native American person, what would they think? How would they feel? Just blew everything I’d been programed to think right out of the water and I felt sorry for everybody. I still do.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Yes. It’s in one of the rooms in the Sforza Castle. When the knife grinder worked the pedal with his foot, the devil — painted red — growled, his big, white eyeballs with black centers spun around, and smoke came out of his mouth. It was amazing. I just stood there and wept. So many Native American tribes use red ochre as their preferred face paint.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Fascinating, IJ. I’m impressed with your understanding of grasslands, flora and fauna. Yes, certainly, we need to better understand the science behind preserving and conserving these lands and species. Your images of the pines are beautiful!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Very interesting IJ. I think there is much about preserving nature that we have misunderstood and scientists are only now beginning to understand – especially when it comes to forestry management. Your subject this week is an excellent example.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks. That’s one of the things about science; it teaches us that we can always look again at something. The botanists of the 19th century were good, but they made mistakes too

      Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.