Natural Forage Production, Utilization, Constraints and Improvement
Potential of High Altitude Alpine Pastures, Saif-ul-Maluk (NWFP), Pakistan
Muhammad Rafique Sardar,
Pakistan Forest Institute, Peshawar, Pakistan
Introduction
Saif-ul-Maluk, a high altitude alpine pasture, is located in the northern mountains of
Pakistan in Kaghan valley, Hazara Division, North West Frontier Province (NWFP). The
nomadic and semi-nomadic graziers graze this pasture for short periods during each summer. All
kinds of livestock are driven up, mostly during the month of June, each year and grazing
continues till late autumn. This uncontrolled heavy seasonal grazing is one of the major causes of
degradation and retrogression of this pasture. The pasture deterioration is proceeding unchecked
as no technical inputs are being provided by any agency. There is need to reverse the degradation
processes and to improve the pasture according to its potential productivity. This is possible if
the planners, policy makers and resource managers know basic facts about this natural renewable
resource.
The pasture area is located approximately 10 km south –east of Naran Town in the Kaghan
valley. Its elevation varies from 3300 to 5490 m above sea level. Most of the area has steep
slopes and exposed peaks. Some of the peaks remain covered with glaciers and provide meltwater throughout the year. The side slopes of the main valley are heavily dissected and hence all
the expositions/ aspects are found in the pasture. The ground moraines composed of stratified
drift are also found. In addition, end –moraines and lateral moraines are also met with.
The side valleys and peaks/ ridges have residual shallow soil cover. Some pockets of the side
valleys and foothills have deep stratified tills. The colour of the soil is brown to dark-brown and
its texture is sandy loam. The soil pH value ranges between 7.0 to 7.7. The soil has adequate
organic matter, Phosphorus, Potassium and safe limit of soluble salts. The pasture area has been
classified as dry alpine which receives snowfall in the winter. The summers are mild and
pleasant and winters are very cold. The area may receive more than 760-cm annual precipitation.
The average monthly temperature varies form – 6.9OC to 12.2OC. August is the hottest month
having mean temperature of 12.2OC and January is the coldest month with mean temperature of
–6.9OC. Five months (November to may remain below –0OC). Accordingly grazing season is
very short and consist of about 77 to 99 days.
23
This research study entitled " Indigenous Production and Utilization System in the High Altitude
Alpine Pasture, Saif-ul-Maluk (NWFP), Pakistan " was initiated in June 1996 with the financial
and technical support of the Temperate Asia Pasture and Fodder Sub-Regional Working Group,
FAO, Rome, Italy. The study area was visited during the last week of the June 1996 when it was
observed that 80 percent to its area was covered with snow. It was planned to conduct the
preliminary vegetation survey in July 1996. Similarly, the forage production and utilization
experiment was laid out in the middle of July 1996 and was continued till mid October 1997.
The major objectives of the study were:
I.
To study the pasture production and utilization systems and identify the constraints/
problems and opportunities.
II.
To study the socio-economical parameters relevant to the high altitude pastoral system.
Material and Methods
The information regarding the forage production and conventional grazing was explored using
the caged-paired plots of 1.0 x 0.5 meters size. Before laying-out this experiment a preliminary
resource inventory was conducted to explore the important parameters of soil, topography and
vegetation. The step-toe method was applied for this inventory.
For resource inventory step-toe method was carried out in July 1996 to know different
characteristics of the natural vegetation and other ecological factors. To collect data the study
area was stratified into 4 sample units, more or less homogeneous, based on topographical
features. It was planned to lay out 4 transect lines, one each in the representative topographic
unit, along the contour. The transect lines were aligned to run, more or less, though the centers of
the units. The technician, after every 10th step on the transect lines collected data ocularly on
different vegetation and ecological parameters. In this exercise the names of the species touching
the designated-toe were recorded. The individual plants of the grass/forb species were clipped at
2.5 cm. above ground level. Similarly the current year's growth of the shrub species, if found,
was also clipped. The fresh weight of the clipped material was recorded and its air-dried weight
was used to estimate the percent species composition on weight basis. Further ocular vegetation
conditions (good, fair, poor, very poor) was also recorded around the sample point. The soil
protective cover (plant base, litter, cryptogams, rock pavement and bare soil) was recorded. The
soil factors (colour, deep, shallow, rocky) and slopes (gentle, steep, precipitous) around sample
points were recorded for general description.
Twelve caged paired plots of 0.5 sq. m. size, each, covering all the representative grazing lots in
the pasture were laid out. One plot was fenced and one was kept open in each pair/ set randomly
for estimation of monthly production and utilization. Data on forage production and utilization
including other important aspects of the vegetation and soil protective cover were collected
during middle of each month of the growing season (15 June to 15 September) for 2 seasons. The
24
grasses and Forbes were clipped at 2.5 cm above ground level in both the fenced and unfenced
plots. Current year's growth of shrubs, where available, was also clipped. After recording fresh
weight, separately for each from of vegetation, the clipped material was put in paper bags, was
labeled and dried in the open air for about 7 days to record their air dried (AD) weight. Specieswise cover percent with ocular observation in all the plots was also recorded. Similarly the soil
protective cover values (plant base, litter, rock pavement and crypogams) were also collected
ocularly.
The air-dried forage (herbage + browse) production in kg per ha was estimated by converting the
average production values in grams/ sq. m of the plots. Similarly, cumulative forage production
for the growing season was estimated. The monthly and seasonal percent forage utilization were
estimated using the formula:
Forage production in the fenced plots-forage production in unfenced plot
Utilization (%) =
X 100
Forage production in fenced plots
All other values of the species cover; soil protective cover, species frequency and composition
were calculated as arithmetic means. No complex Statistical Analysis was carried out for this
study.
Results and Discussion
Grasses/ sedges, Forbes and shrubs are commonly found having different groups, scale of
patterns, frequency, cover and composition. The micro-topographical features, morphological
and physiological characteristics of the vegetation have given rise to the different scale of
patterns. These patterns vary in size and are found intermittently. For example junipers
communis has prostrate habit of spreading aerial parts so its compact patches are located all over
the pasture particularly on rocky ridges. Similarly Salix spp. occupies depressions on cooler
aspects. Further the species of Polygonum have extensive rhizome system and hence several
patterns are usually visible in the pasture. Iris species and Potentilla species have also, more or
less, compact patches distributed all over the pasture. Nine grasses/ sedges, 46 Forbes and 10
shrub species were recorded / identified, most of them were very rare ( Table–I ). It is evident
that some of the species are at the risk of disappearance due to heavy grazing pressure. Those,
which are locally, abundant, are performing well due to their better morphological and
physiological characteristics.
A large number (65) of plant species indicates the richness of the floral diversity in the pasture.
The prevailing conditions suggest that the decreaser species (more palatable one) have
25
disappeared due to heavy grazing pressure. The list of species reveals that a majority (17 species)
of Forbes has poor palatability (increaser species). Two non-palatable, poisonous, species were
also found. Similarly, majority of shrubs species were not browsable. However, woody species
were good source of fuelwood and thatching materials for the grazeirs. Dry branches/ stems of
Junipers communis and Salix spp. were collected for fuel wood. Following plant species were
recorded from the pasture.
Grasses/ Sedges:
Agrostis gigantea, Carex spp., Cyperus spp., Chrysopogon echinulatus, Dactylis
glomerata, Pennisetum, Phleum alpinum, Poa annua and Poa alpina.
Forbes:
Acallia mosegeria, Aenomone spica, Allium rubellum, Anaphalis controta, Astragalus
leucocephalus, Bupleurum longicaule, Cerastium cerastioides, Cynoglassum spp., Cynoglossum
lanceolatum, Dracocephalum nutans, Echinops nivetis, Fern spp., Frageria vesca, Galium
aregustie, Gentiana sp., Geranium collinum, Irish hookerianan, Lindelofia longiflora, Lotus
corniculatus, Medicago lupulina, Merteusia echoides, Myosotis stricta, Nepeta podostachys,
Nepeta spicata, Origanum vaulgare, Oxyria digyna, Phlomis bracteosa, Plantago ovata,
Podophyllum emodi, Polygonum aviculare, Polygonum affine, Polygonum amplexicaule,
potentialla argyrophylla, Potentilla gelida, Potentilla geradiana, Potentialla sibbaldi, Ranuculus
equatalis, Ranuculus lactus, Rumex nepalensis, Sambucus nitiana, Saxifraga ciliata, Sercio
chrysanthemoides, Taraxacum officinale, Thymus serpyllum, Trifolium repens and Tulip spp.
Chrysanthemoides, Taraxacum officinale, Thymus serpyllum, Trifolium repens and Tulip spp.
Shrubs:
Artemisia laciniata, Astragalus candolleanus, Berberis sp. , Cotoneaster sp., Junipers
communis, Lonicera obovata, Plectranthus rugosus, Rosa webbiana, Rosa ecae and Salix spp.
The study has revealed that Potentilla-Sibbaldia-Astragalus, Leucocephalus-Taraxacum
officinale-Polygonum amplexicaule-Poa alpina associations exit in the alpine pasture. It appears
that this type of vegetation was not a stable or climax form because protection caused changes in
the species composition and species frequencies (Table 4).
The cumulative cover percent (foliage density) of different vegetation forms of the unfenced
plots was very low. However, in the fenced plots the cover percent had increased to 60.4. The
26
cover percent under grasses was 8.0 as compared to Forbes, which was highest (55.8) of all other
forms (Table 1).
Table 1: Percent cover of different vegetation forms during growing season at Saif-ulMaluk Pasture.
(Average for 2 Seasons)
Vegetation Forms
Month of
the season
Grasses
Forbes
Shrubs
Cumulative
Fenced
(F)
Unfenced
(UF)
Fenced
(F)
Unfenced
(UF)
Fenced
(F)
Unfenced
(UF)
Fenced
(F)
Unfenced
(UF)
June
6.4
5.5
37.3
34.7
0.4
0.6
44.1
40.8
July
7.7
6.2
48.5
38.7
0.6
1.0
56.7
45.8
August
8.9
5.8
63.6
39.6
0.8
0.8
73.3
46.1
September
9.0
5.7
57.9
37.0
0.8
0.5
67.6
43.2
8.0
5.8
51.8
37.5
0.7
0.7
60.4
44.0
In the unfenced plots (free grazing) the cover percent values remained almost at June's level.
This indicates that the vegetation turf was in stable condition though foliage cover remained very
low due to heavy grazing. The data showed that controlled grazing is imperative to improve the
vegetation cover, as it was evident from protection for 2 years/seasons.
The species-wise cover percent values (Table – 4) have revealed that highest cover (405%)
among the grass species was that of Poa alpina in the fenced plots and 1.7% in the unfenced
plots during the growing season of 1997. Similarly the highest cover percent (20.5) was provided
by Potentilla-Sibbaldi which was in the fenced plot and 12.5% in the unfenced plot for the same
period. Among the shrubs Lonicera obovata had 0.5% cover in the fenced plot. The study
revealed that all the species had responded well to the protection. This indicates that pasture
needs rest for rehabilitation of vegetal cover.
Monthly Forage Production:
The monthly clippings have revealed that the highest average forage production of 1913 kg/ ha
(DM) was produced by the Forbes. The grasses contributed only 184 kg/ ha under the fenced
27
(protected) conditions. The cumulative production was 2141 kg/ ha. This production is quite low
which indicates that heavy grazing and poor vegetation cover are the main causes for low
production. The month-wise forage production during the growing season is presented in the
Table -2. The result indicate that maximum production of 1040 kg/ha (DM) can be obtained
during August which is the peak growing period in the summer growing season. This was
followed by 639 kg/ ha (DM) during the month of July.
Table 2:
Monthly forage production during growing season at Saif-ul-Maluk season
Grasses
Month of
the season
Forbes
Shrubs
Total
F
UF
F
UF
F
UF
F
UF
June*
20
13
110
98
6
6
136
117
July
62
16
560
101
17
5
639
122
August
64
23
961
104
15
6
1040
133
September
58
29
392
77
12
6
462
112
Total for
the season
184
68
1913
282
44
17
2141
367
* June's data not included in the total value for the season.
Monthly Forage Utilization:
The forage utilization was estimated by actual weight or clipping method. The utilization has
been calculated and is expressed as percent utilization of the forage in the fenced plots. The
results in the table 3 indicate that the highest utilization was 88% for the month of August
followed by 81% for the month of July. The cumulative forage utilization was 83% for Forbes,
62% each for grasses and shrubs. This estimated utilization was much higher than the
recommended 50% utilization for most of the ranges in Pakistan. The cumulative utilization for
any growing season must remain within the limit of 50% utiliztion so that there is enough stubble
for carry over effect as well as for soil protection and soil amelioration purposes.
28
Table 3:
Monthly pasture utilization at Saif-ul-Maluk
(Average values for the season)
Grasses
Forbes
Shrubs
Cumulative
Month of
the season
F
F
F
F
June*
35
11
0
14
July
75
80
68
81
August
63
89
63
88
September
50
80
55
75
Average
62
83
62
81
* June, data not included in the average figures.
Resource Constraints
The analysis of pasture production and utilization indicates a number of constraints related to the
resource, its management and plant growth. The salient among them is as under:
1. Land Tenure: The ownership of the pasture rests with one community and its use (grazing)
with other. This state encourages its over use as the owners seem interested to enhance their
revenue while the users/ buyers want to maximize its seasonal use. Hence none of the groups
make any inputs for its proper management.
2. Inadequate knowledge of the users: Almost all the graziers lack knowledge and skills for
proper pasture use. They practice free ranging. Further they bring their animal as early as
June when soil is infirm due to enough moisture from snow melt. Or snow cover is already
there; hence they do not follow the concept of range readiness.
3. Unconducive topographic factors: High altitudes, steep slopes, severely dissected and deep
gorges, barren mountain peaks and varying micro-aspects are non-conductive to adequate
forage production, proper animal distribution and hence proper use.
29
4. Inadequate moisture: Poor distribution of seasonal rain particularly during the growing
season causes moisture stress and poor plant growth.
5. Temperature stress: Very low temperature prevailing in the areas cause stress and retard
vegetation growth. Growing period is very small.
6. Soil erosion: Glacial processes cause all types of erosion, which include deep gullies, soil
slips, debris flows, rock falls and rock disintegration. In turn the vegetation on valley floor is
covered and damaged.
7. Shallow soils: Most of area has shallow residual soils, which have low water infiltration and
moisture retention capacity. The soil fertility may not be a problem as all the required major
nutrients are reasonably enough for good growth.
8. Patchy distribution of vegetation: The pasture area consists of different vegetation patterns
of different scales. Generally the individual plants of less palatable species have big patches.
They have rendered most of the area less productive as for as forage production or grazing
values of the pasture is concerned. Their elimination, to give space to desirable species, may
not be economically and environmentally feasible.
Improvement Potential
1. Forages: The clipping study has indicated that control grazing treatment for one year has
increased the forage production. This is indicative of not only the existing high grazing
pressure on the natural pasture but also reasonably high potential for pasture productivity
under improved management approaches.
2. Watershed values: The watershed values will improve with improvement in the physical
environmental factors. The pasture has the potential to produce good quality and quantity
water for downstream consumption as well as for trout fish production in the system.
3. Bio-diversity values: A large number of species are still growing under unconducive
conditions. The area has the potential to grow more species, which have disappeared due to
the over use. Proper management will increase its floristic diversity.
4. Aesthetic values: Good management practice will rehabilitate its vegetal cover. It will add
more colour to existing diversified vegetation and will attract more tourists for eco-tourism.
30
Table 4: Plant Frequency % age of fenced and unfenced plots of high altitude pasture at
Saif-ul-Maluk.
September 1996
September 1997
Name of Species
Fenced
Unfenced
Fenced
Unfenced
Agrostis gigantea
Carex spp
50
58
42
50
50
75
42
50
Cyperus spp
Chrysopogon echinulatus
Dactylis glomerata
Poa annua
Poa alpina
B- Forbes
Astragalus leucocephalus
Anaphalis controta
Acallia mosegeria
Bupleurum longicaule
Cerastium cerastioides
Cynoglassum spp
Frageria vesca
Fern spp
Geranium collinum
Irish hookerianan
Lotus corniculatus
Medicago lupulina
Plantago ovata
Potentialla sibbald
Potentilla gelida
Phlomis bracteosa
Polygonum amplexicaule
Polygonum aviculare
Rumex nepalensis
Sercio chrysanthemoides
Taraxacum officinal
Thymus serpyllum
Tulip spp
C- Shrubs
Lonicera obovata
Salix spp
17
8
8
92
17
17
8
8
83
17
17
8
92
17
17
8
8
83
58
8
8
3
17
42
8
8
33
42
17
25
75
17
8
67
8
3
83
50
-
33
8
8
17
8
17
8
17
17
42
17
8
83
8
25
67
8
8
75
75
-
58
8
17
8
25
42
8
17
33
50
17
25
75
17
8
75
6
8
17
92
50
-
33
8
8
17
8
17
8
17
17
42
17
8
83
25
75
67
8
8
75
75
-
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
A – Grass and grass like
31