Environment, Development and Sustainability (2020) 22:1617–1632

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0245-5

CASE STUDY

Assessment of fuelwood resource preference

in representative watershed of west Himalaya, India:
conservation and management implications

Bhaskar Ch. Joshi1 · Ranbeer S. Rawal1 · K. Chandra Sekar1 · Ashish Tewari2

Received: 9 March 2018 / Accepted: 30 August 2018 / Published online: 4 September 2018
© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Abstract
In the Himalayan hills, woody plant species form a major source of fuelwood. This practice
often leads to degradation of forests and raises several management issues. However, lack
of adequate information about use patterns and species-level trends of utilization results
in gaps in management planning and interventions. Realizing this, a detailed species-level
quantification of annual extraction of fuelwood was conducted in Hat-Kalika watershed
that represents west Himalayan conditions in India. Across nine surveyed villages, a total
of 30 plants (26 trees, 4 shrubs) were being collected for fuel purpose by the inhabitants.
Mean fuelwood collection by households ranged from 2916.4 (kg hh−1 year−1) in high-
altitude villages to 1256.6 (kg hh−1 year−1) in low altitude. Among used species, prob-
ability of use was maximum for Pinus roxburghii (0.79 high-altitude, 0.89 mid-altitude and
0.82 low-altitude zone). Broadly, the tree species contributed 93.3% (low altitude) to 97.3%
(high altitude) of annual fuelwood requirement of households. The quantum of collection
was considerably higher from the native species compared to the non-natives. Study brings
out the possible management implications of present trends of fuelwood collection in the
study watershed in particular and mid-Himalaya watersheds of west Himalaya in general.

Keywords Fuelwood · Diversity · Native · Management · Himalaya

1 Introduction

Globally, about 2 billion people in rural and remote areas depend on forest goods (i.e.,
fruits, fibers and fuelwood) to meet their basic needs (FAO 2011; World Bank 2016). How-
ever, the synergy of fuelwood consumption and biodiversity maintenance is poorly under-
stood, but negative impacts of consumption are widely reported (Chettri and Sharma 2009;
Bouget et al. 2012; Daioglou et al. 2012; Bhatt et al. 2016; Rahut et al. 2016; Negi et al.

* K. Chandra Sekar
kcsekar1312@rediffmail.com
1
Centre for Biodiversity Conservation and Management, G.B. Pant National Institute of Himalayan
Environment and Sustainable Development, Kosi‑Katarmal, Almora, Uttarakhand 263 643, India
2
Department of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, Kumaun University, Nainital,
Uttarakhand 263 002, India

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
1618 B. C. Joshi et al.

2018). In developing countries, with large rural population, harvesting of forest resource as
leaf fodder, leaf litter, firewood and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) remains the most
realized service from forests (Angelsen and Wunder 2003; Babulo et al. 2009; Chettri and
Sharma 2009; Kumar and Sharma 2009; Rawat et al. 2009; Singh et al. 2010; Angelsen
et al. 2014; Rahut et al. 2015; Dash et al. 2016; Negi and Maikhuri 2016; Negi et al. 2018;
Ali and Rahut 2018).
As consumption of fuelwood accounts for over 54% of total annual global wood harvest,
it plays direct role in forest degradation (Osei 1993; Chettri and Sharma 2009; Negi and
Maikhuri 2016). Global studies have indicated that the consumption of fuelwood with inef-
fective forest management has led to large-scale deforestation and degradation (Köhl et al.
2015; Specht et al. 2015) particularly in developing countries (Koopmans 2005; Negi et al.
2018).
In India, nearly 75% of rural energy need is met from fuelwood and about 95% of it goes
in household uses (Pandey 2010). This need is often met by the fuelwood collection from
the forests and nearby sites, which results in removal of nearly 50 million tons of wood
every year (Dhanai et al. 2014). The Himalaya is predominantly rural landscape, and there-
fore, the need for fuelwood is high. In Uttarakhand, west Himalaya, with nearly 70% of the
total population as rural (Anonymous 2011), dependence on fuelwood for daily household
energy needs is obviously very high. During the last two decades, a lot of work have been
done on fuelwood consumption pattern (Maikhuri and Gangwar 1991; Samant et al. 2000;
Bhatt and Sachan 2004; Bhatt et al. 2016; Rawat et al. 2009; Kumar and Sharma 2009;
Sharma et al. 2009; Khuman et al. 2011; Sharma and Samant 2014; Dhanai et al. 2014;
Kumar and Kumar 2015; Negi and Maikhuri 2016; Hussain et al. 2016) from various parts
of India Himalayan Region (IHR). However, species-level extraction trends, diversity and
quantum collection of fuelwood resources and management implication that could become
part of policy planning found missing in all these studies.
As elsewhere in the Himalaya (Rai et al. 2002), the communities in the west Himalayan
region have developed an age-old tradition of selectively using fuelwood resources, based
on quality of wood and availability of species. In general, the information available on fuel
resources, availability and conservation implications in the region is scattered (Samant
et al. 2000; Singh and Sundriyal 2009; Rana et al. 2012; Kumar and Kumar 2015; Negi
et al. 2018). The issues related to fuelwood consumption in different locations have been
investigated to limited extent (Hussain et al. 2017). However, a comprehensive understand-
ing of availability, quantum of extraction and inhabitants’ preferences is poorly developed.
This understanding is, however, needed to effectively address issues of forest resource
management and also to ensure sustainable harvesting. Recognizing this need, the present
study was undertaken in a representative watershed of mid-hills is west Himalaya to: (1)
analyze the diversity and extraction patterns of fuelwood species, (2) assess availability of
these species in target area, and (3) explore management implications of fuelwood collec-
tion patterns.

2 Study area

The study targets a representative watershed namely, Hat-Kalika in mid-Himalayan zone of

west Himalaya (latitude 29°39″ 22.99′N and longitude 80°03″ 38.93′E) in district Pithora-
garh, Uttarakhand (Fig. 1). The watershed, with a total of 45 villages, covers an area of
approximately 37 km2 with an altitude range of 600–2100 m. The watershed has a total

13
Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative… 1619

Fig. 1  Location map of the Hat-Kalika Watershed, Pithoragarh (Uttarakhand), India

human population of 13,465 (male 48% and female 52%) (Anonymous 2011). The literacy
rate in the watershed villages is 61.6% (female 52.15% and male 70.30%). Nearly 33%
watershed people belong to 25–45 age group and maximum are unemployment (Table 1).
Agriculture is the main occupation, which is practiced on terraced farms. Most of the peo-
ple’s dependent on agriculture and forest resources for their income source. The forest veg-
etation ranges from subtropical Sal (Shorea robusta) to temperate Banj-oak (Quercus leu-
cotrichophora) forests with a number of intermixing types of forests. As per the land cover
assessment, nearly 54.5% (20.59 km2) area of watershed is under forests. Agriculture land
covers 4.4 km2 (11%) of watershed. The inhabitants largely depend on forest for fuelwood,
fodder and leaf litter, etc.

3 Materials and methods

3.1 Trends of fuelwood collection

As reported earlier (Samant et al. 2000) and also observed by us while in the field, the
fuelwood collection in the region is made during four winter months (November–Febru-
ary). The family head and/or elderly member of each family of the identified villages (more
than 60% of families of a village) were selected for individual interviews. They were asked
about the details of family size, fuelwood resources, fuelwood collection and consump-
tion and other related information following Samant et al. (2000), Rawat et al. (2009).

13
1620 B. C. Joshi et al.

Table 1  Socioeconomic pattern Socioeconomic pattern of Hat-Kalika watershed Percentage (%)

of Hat-Kalika watershed
Villages 45
Population 13,645 –
Average household size 2.2–5.4 –
Education level 61.60
Male 70.30
Female 52.15
Age Up to 25 years 27
25–45 years 33
45–65 years 29
Above 65 years 11
Income level/month – –
i.e., below Rs 3500 30
Rs 3500–5500 37.6
Rs 5500–7500 21
Rs 7500 and above 11.4
Employment Pattern Government Job 9
Private Jobs 34
Business 21
Agriculture 36

Information on fuelwood collection and consumption was collected on the basis of family
size and later converted into per household fuelwood consumption. Individual interviews
using well-developed questionnaire on collection and consumption pattern of fuelwood
were carried out, and same was followed by group discussion for validation of informa-
tion. Based on these surveys, we understand that on an average one person per household
­(hh−1) invests a total of 4 days in a week for fuelwood collection thereby making a total of
64 days hh−1 year−1 of fuelwood collection number of total households in a village repre-
sented total population responsible (TPR) for fuelwood collection.
The target watershed was divided into three altitude zones [low altitude < 1200 m), mid-
altitude (1200–1600 m) and high-altitude zone (> 1600 m)]. In each zone, three villages
were identified randomly. Thus, a total of nine villages were investigated (Table 2). As a
general practice, fuelwood collected from forests is brought to the villages in bundles (head
loads). Ten such head loads were randomly selected in each village for three consecutive
days. The wood in bundles segregated by local names of the species, and the collection
(weight) for each species was recorded using spring balance (Fig. 2). The data by spe-
cies were pooled for each village and mean collection for individual species calculated.
The fuelwood species identified by local names were further authenticated for scientific
names with the help of herbarium records, photographs and relevant publications (Osmas-
ton 1927; Samant 1987; Pangtey et al. 1988; Purohit and Samant 1995).

13
Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative… 1621

Table 2  General information of surveyed villages in Hat-Kalika watershed

Altitude range masl Name of village Total population Population responsi- Alternative
ble for collection Source (LPG)
(hh)
CTPRday−1 (%)

Low (< 1200) Kanara 243 52 80

Jarmal gaon 414 95 85
Bhandari gaon 391 99 88
Mid (1200–1600) Kothera 785 183 80
Simalkot 270 66 92
Jajut 180 40 90
High (> 1600) Chitgal 983 209 88
Futsil 619 136 85
Uprada 785 200 96

Fig. 2  a Measuring fuelwood bundles by using spring balance. b Separating collection by species, c Meas-
uring weight for each species. d Local villagers storing fuelwood

3.2 Data analysis

The information generated from sample surveys was pooled for each village. For each of the
species, mean collection (kg s­ ample−1 day −1; kg hh−1 day−1; kg hh−1 year−1) was used to cal-
culate probability of use (PU), and resource use index (RUI) following Samant et al. (2000):

13
1622 B. C. Joshi et al.

T
Mean collection (kg) of a species in each sample, A= (1)
N
where T = total collection of species in all samples and N = total number of samples
∑n=10
ATPRi
Mean collection sample day , Cs = ∑i=1
−1 −1
n=10 (2)
i=1
TPRi

where A = mean collection of the species and T ­ PRi = total population responsible for col-
lection in the ith village;
Mean collection kg hh−1 year−1 kg hh−1 year−1 , Cy = 64 Cs (3)
( )

where 64 days were the total collection days per year;

∑n=10
Fi Pi
Probability of use, PU = ∑i=1
n=10 (4)
i=1
Pi

where Fi = frequency of collection of a species in the ith village and Pi = population respon-
sible for collection in the ith village.
Resource use index, RUI = Cy PU (5)
where Cy = mean annual collection (kg hh−1 year−1).

3.3 Species availability assessment

Following rapid assessment, samplings extensive field surveys were carried out in different
forests nearby the survey villages. This provided information to define patterns of fuel-
wood species availability. In representative forests of each altitude zone, three 50 × 50 m
plots were laid systematically. Each plot consisted of ten (10 × 10 m) randomly placed
quadrats for enumerating tree species. Each 10 × 10 m quadrat was further subdivided into
two quadrats of 5 × 5 m for enumeration of shrubs and sapling density and five quadrat of
1 × 1 m for seedling density. The density of species was calculated following, Misra (1968),
Muller-Dombois and Ellenberg (1974). In case of tree species, individuals with > 31.5 cm
cbh (circumference at breast height) were considered as trees, 10–31 cm as sapling and
< 10 cm as seedling.

4 Results

4.1 Fuelwood species diversity and collection trends

The inhabitants across nine surveyed villages collect a total of 30 (26 trees, 4 shrubs) plant
species in 18 families for fuelwood purpose. The maximum diversity of harvested fuelwood
species was recorded in high-altitude zone (23 spp.) followed by middle altitude (15 spp.)
and lower altitude zone (11 spp.) (Table 4). On an average, total wood collection ranged
from 2916.4 kg hh−1 year−1 in high-altitude villages to 1256.6 kg hh−1 year−1 in low alti-
tude. The trends of household wood collection clearly indicated that the total collection of
fuelwood increases considerably with increasing altitude; high-altitude households collect

13
Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative… 1623

over 2.3 times more fuelwood as compared in lower altitude zone. It was also revealing that
the shrub species contribute very less of the total collection (3.7–7.7%), with the highest
contribution of shrubs in lower altitude zone (Table 3).

4.2 Preferred fuelwood species

People’s preference for species varied considerably. In high-altitude zone, Pinus rox-
burghii (mean collection of 875.4 kg hh−1 year−1) was highly preferred species. This spe-
cies accounts for (31%) total collection in this zone. Quercus leucotrichophora (16%)
and Myrica esculenta (9.3%) were other major contributing species. These three species
together contribute for > 56% of total household collection of wood in high-altitude zone.
Similarly in mid- and low-altitude zones P. roxburghii remained most preferred fuel-
wood species, contributing 57.59% and 53% of the total collection, respectively. Q. leu-
cotrichophora (12.6%) and Pyrus pashia (6%) in middle altitude zone and S. robusta (12%)
and Syzygium cumini (8%) in low-altitude zone were other major contributors (Table 3).
Accordingly in all altitude zones probability of use (PU) ranked high for P. roxburghii
[0.79 high-altitude, 0.89 mid-altitude and 0.82 low-altitude zone]. PU for other species in
different zones is presented (Table 3). It was revealed that most of the species being used as
fuelwood are having PU < 0.30 (high altitude—70% trees, middle altitude—73% and low
altitude—67%). The RUI varied from 1.72 (Ficus roxburghii) to 691.56 (P. roxburghii) in

Table 3  Mean household collection and contribution of preferred fuelwood species in different altitude
zones of the watershed
Altitude range(masl) zone Mean collection Contribution of fuelwood species
(kg hh−1 year−1)

High (> 1600) 2916.4 Tree (97.3%)

Pinus roxburghii (31%)
Quercus leucotrichophora (16%)
Myrica esculenta (9.3%)
Shrub (3.7%)
Rhus parviflora (1.9%)
Pyracantha crenulata (1.5%)
Mid (1200–1600) 1868.0 Tree (95.2%)
Pinus roxburghii (57.5%)
Quercus leucotrichophora (12.6%)
Pyrus pashia (6%)
Shrub (5.8%)
Rhus parviflora (4.0%)
Woodfordia fruticosa (1.1%)
Low (< 1200) 1256.6 Tree (93.3%)
Pinus roxburghii (53%)
Shorea robusta (12%)
Syzygium cumini (8%)
Shrub (7.7%)
Rhus parviflora (6%)
Woodfordia fruticosa (1%)

13
1624 B. C. Joshi et al.

high-altitude zone, 1.0 (F. roxburghii) to 957 (P. roxburghii) in middle zone and from 0.09
(Ougeinia oojeinensis) to 553.8 (P. roxburghii).

4.3 Availability of preferred fuelwood species

The availability of preferred fuelwood species varied considerably. In high-altitude

zone, with a total of 23 species being used as fuelwood (20 trees and 3 shrubs), Q. leu-
cotrichophora with second highest pressure (PU-0.60) has maximum density (tree—587,
sapling—123, seedling—535 indiv. ­ha−1). The species with high use pressure (i.e., P. rox-
burghii) exhibits low availability (density of tree—45, sapling—62, seedling—98 indiv.
­ha−1). Similarly M. esculenta (density of tree—37, sapling—75, seedling—114 indiv. ­ha−1)
showed poor availability. In middle altitude zone, where 15 species (11 trees and 4 shrubs)
are used as fuel, P. roxburghii was having maximum PU (0.89) and had highest density
(trees—975, saplings—130, and seedlings—135 indiv.ha−1). Other preferred species M.
esculenta (trees—18, saplings—30, seedlings—121 indiv. ­ha−1), Quercus glauca (trees—
59, saplings—54 and seedlings—86 indiv. ­ha−1) are not available in adequate abundance.
In lower altitude zone, among 11 fuelwood species (9 trees, 2 shrubs), S. robusta with sec-
ond highest PU (0.40) exhibits maximum density (tree—379, sapling—150, seedling—546
indiv.ha−1). In this zone, the most preferred species P. roxburghii (PU-0.82) is not available
abundantly (density tree—30, sapling—40, seedling 110—indiv.ha−1). Likewise, other pre-
ferred species S. cumini also remains low in availability (density tree—20, sapling—38,
seedling—57 indiv.ha−1). Considering shrubs, Pyracantha crenulata (density 532 indiv.
­ha−1) in high altitude, Rhus parviflora (density 276 indiv.ha−1 mid-altitude, 325 indiv.ha−1
low altitude) were the most abundant fuelwood species (Table 4).

5 Discussion

Of the total 30 fuelwood species that contribute to meeting the fuelwood needs in target
watershed only 13 (43.3%) are Himalayan natives. This suggests local communities over
the years have shown tendency for diversifying the use among non-Himalaya species. How-
ever, the most preferred species across the altitude zones remained the Himalaya natives,
which meet over 75% fuelwood needs of high and mid-altitude zones. Although native spe-
cies contribution to fuel species richness was 56.5% (high-altitude zone) and 53.3% (mid-
altitude zone) only. In low-altitude zone, with only 18.2% contribution to fuel species pool
diversity of natives contribute 56.7% of annual fuelwood collection. It is well understood
that the preference for use of fuel species depends on the wood quality, availability and
also the traditional factors (Singh et al. 1988). Broadly the large contribution (93.3–97.3%)
of trees to annual fuelwood requirement of households points toward potential scope of
diversification of fuel collection over shrub species. In particular, people in the lower alti-
tude zone can be diverted toward shrubs for meeting their fuelwood needs, as shrubs in
this zone have reasonably better availability. Also, the requirement of fuelwood h­ h−1 is
relatively low. Total household fuelwood collection (1256.6–2916.4 kg hh−1 year−1) in the
present case is comparatively lower than the reports of other studies in west Himalaya.
For instance, Sharma and Samant (2014) reported total collection range between 5124 and
7992 kg hh−1 year−1 in Himachal Pradesh. Likewise, Rana et al. (2012) reported a total
collection between 6237 and 6498 kg hh−1 year−1 in Manali Wildlife Sanctuary of Kullu
District in Himachal Pradesh. This difference of wood collection in west Himalaya can

13
 Table 4  Fuelwood collection, probability of use (PU), Resources Use Index (RUI) and availability in the study site
Name of species Family Local name Bio-geographic affinity Resource use Density Indiv.ha−1
kg hh−1 year−1 PU RUI TR SA SD

High altitude (> 1600 masl)

Acacia dealbata Link Fabaceae Acacia Austr 32.0 0.10 3.2 4 0 12
Alnus nepalensis D.Don Betulaceae Outees Reg. Himal. 31.6 0.21 6.6 10 2 20
Bauhinia variegata L. Fabaceae Kweral Ind. Or, Burma, China. 31.0 0.13 4.0 8 0 0
Cedrus deodara (Roxb. ex D.Don) G. Don Pinaceae Deodara Reg Himal. 53.6 0.20 10.7 14 16 170
Celtis australis L. Cannabaceae Kharik Europe, Austr. 28.4 0.10 2.8 5 12 10
Debregeasia longifolia (Burm. f.) Wedd. Urticaceae Tushari Ind. Or. 25.0 0.20 5.0 10 6 5
Ficus palmata Forssk. Moraceae Beru Afr. Trop, Arab 19.2 0.14 2.6 5 0 0
F. roxburghii (Roxb. and Buch.-Ham. ex Sm.) Steud. Moraceae Timil Reg Himal., Burma. 17.0 0.10 1.7 3 0 0
Grewia optiva Drumm. ex Burret Malvaceae Bhimal Reg.Himal. 25.6 0.30 7.6 16 9 14
Lyonia ovalifolia (Wall.) Drude Ericaceae Ayar Reg. Himal., Japan 155.2 0.30 46.5 21 33 30
Myrica esculenta Buch.-Ham. ex D. Don Myricaceae Kafal As Trop et Subtrop. 262.4 0.50 131.2 37 75 114
Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative…

Persea duthiei (King) Kosterm. Lauraceae Kaul Reg. Himal. 121.6 0.10 12.1 12 5 23
Pinus roxburghii Sarg. Pinaceae Chir Reg Himal. 875.4 0.79 691.5 45 62 98
Pyrus pashia Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don Rosaceae Mehal Reg Himal. 192.0 0.20 38.4 8 4 28
Quercus glauca Thunb. Fagaceae Falyat Reg Himal Japan 115.2 0.22 25.3 29 32 125
Q. lanuginosa Beck Fagaceae Latuwa Banj Reg. Himal. 25.6 0.05 22.5 28 80 58
Q. leucotrichophora A.Camus Fagaceae Banj Reg Himal. 466.4 0.60 279.8 587 123 535
Rhododendron arboreum Sm. Ericaceae Buransh Reg. Himal., Ceylon 172.8 0.40 69.1 20 27 37
Symplocos chinensis (Lour.) Druce. Symplocaceae Lodh Burma,China,Japan 134.4 0.10 13.4 6 14 20
Toona ciliata M. Roem. Meliaceae Tun Malaya, Austr. 25.2 0.20 5.04 6 0 10
Total 2809.6
Shrub
Berberis aristata DC. Berberidaceae Kilmora Ind. Or. 6.4 0.30 1.92 98
1625

13
 Table 4  (continued)
1626

Name of species Family Local name Bio-geographic affinity Resource use Density Indiv.ha−1
kg hh−1 year−1 PU RUI TR SA SD

13
Pyracantha crenulata (D. Don) M. Roem. Rosaceae Ghingaru Reg. Himal. 44.4 0.40 17.76 532
Rhus parviflora Roxb. Anacardiaceae Tang As.et Austr., Trop 56.0 0.50 28 184
Total 106.8
Middle attitude (1200–1600 masl)
Alnus nepalensis D.Don Betulaceae Utis Reg. Himal. 11.6 0.11 1.2 3 0 0
Debregeasia longifolia (Burm. f.) Wedd. Urticaceae Tusari Ind Or. 15.3 0.20 3.0 12 8 20
Ficus palmata Forssk. Moraceae Beru Afr Trop, Arab 29.5 0.08 2.3 3 0 0
F. roxburghii (Roxb. and Buch.-Ham. ex Sm.) Steud. Moraceae Timil Reg Himal, Burma. 12.2 0.09 1.0 4 0 0
Myrica esculenta Buch.-Ham. ex D. Don Myricaceae Kafal As Trop et Subtrop. 62.4 0.30 18.7 18 30 121
Pinus roxburghii Sarg. Pinaceae Chir Reg Himal. 1075.4 0.89 957.1 975 130 135
Pyrus pashia Buch.—Ham. ex D. Don Rosaceae Mehal Reg Himal. 112.0 0.21 23.5 9 12 07
Quercus glauca Thunb. Fagaceae Falyat Reg Himal., Japan 95.1 0.26 24.7 59 54 86
Q. leucotrichophora A.Camus Fagaceae Banj Reg Himal. 236.3 0.30 70.8 43 0 36
Rhododendron arboreum Sm. Ericaceae Buransh Reg. Himal. Ceylon 71.8 0.11 7.8 10 40 90
Toona ciliata M. Roem. Meliaceae Tun Malaya, Austr. 35.6 0.10 3.5 6 0 0
Total 1757.2
Shrub
Berberis aristata DC. Berberidaceae Kilmora Ind. Or. 2.4 0.30 1.94 91
Pyracantha crenulata (D. Don) M. Roem. Rosaceae Ghingaru Reg. Himal. 14.4 0.40 17.76 35
Rhus parviflora Roxb. Anacardiaceae Tang As.et Austr, Trop 75.0 0.50 48 276
Woodfordia fruticosa (L.) Kurz Lythraceae Dhula As.et.Afr.Trop. 19.0 0.50 9.5 116
Total 110.8
Lower altitude zone (> 1200 masl)
Bauhinia variegata L. Fabaceae Kweral Ind.Or., Burma, China. 52.0 0.24 12.4 7 6 16
B. C. Joshi et al.
 Table 4  (continued)
Name of species Family Local name Bio-geographic affinity Resource use Density Indiv.ha−1
kg hh−1 year−1 PU RUI TR SA SD

Phyllanthus emblica L. Phyllanthaceae Awla As. Trop. 8.8 0.09 0.7 3 0 16

Ficus palmata Forssk. Moraceae Beru Afr Trop, Arab 29.8 0.19 5.6 7 0 0
F. roxburghii (Roxb. and Buch.-Ham. ex Sm.) Steud. Moraceae Timil Reg Himal, Burma. 37.2 0.10 3.7 10 0 0
Mallotus philippensis (Lam.) Müll.Arg. Euphorbiaceae Rohni As. et Austr. Trop. 78.4 0.18 14.1 30 20 50
Ougeinia oojeinensis Hochr. Fabaceae Sanan Ind. Or. 21.2 0.09 1.9 6 15 12
Pinus roxburghii Sarg. Pinaceae Chir Reg Himal. 675.4 0.82 553.8 30 40 110
Shorea robusta Gaertn. Dipterocarpaceae Sal As.Trop. 152.0 0.40 60.8 379 150 546
Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels Myrtaceae Jamun As. et. Austr.Trop. 104.8 0.32 33.5 20 38 57
Total 1159.6
Shrub
Rhus parviflora Roxb. Anacardiaceae Tang As.et Austr.Trop 79.0 0.50 48.0 325
Woodfordia fruticosa (L.) Kurz Lythraceae Dhula As.et.Afr.Trop. 18.0 0.50 9.0 109
Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative…

Total 97.0

Kg hh−1 year−1 kilogram per household per year, PU probability of use, RUI resource use index, Afr Africa, As Asia, Austr Australia, TC total collection, Ind. Or. Indian ori-
ental, Reg Himal Himalayan region, Subtrop subtropical, Trop tropical, Ind India, et And, TR tree, SA sapling and SD seedling
1627

13
1628 B. C. Joshi et al.

be explained on account of severity of cold, which increases from Uttarakhand (east) to

Himachal Pradesh (west). Also, relatively lower household collection of fuelwood in the
present case can also be attributed to increased availability of alternative source of cook-
ing energy (i.e., LPG) in recent years. In the studied villages, 80–96% households have
this facility. However, it is important to note that the hill villages, even having substantial
availability of alternate source of energy (i.e. LPG), still require fuelwood. As fuelwood
remains a necessity in Himalayan hills for many other heating purposes than cooking, we
assume this practice of fuelwood collection will continue.
Many of the preferred and high-quality fuelwood species remain under high pressure,
thereby suggesting possible changes in species composition and forest succession patterns
(Chettri et al. 2002; Negi and Maikhuri 2016; Negi et al. 2018). The PU and RUI of spe-
cies depend on the frequency of collection and, therefore, species with high PU and RUI
face high collection pressure (Samant et al. 2000). RUI reflects the relative importance of
species as a fuel resource and includes both pressure (quantity collected) and preferences.
Invariably, across the altitude zones, RUI of P. roxburghii remained very high. This signi-
fies the importance of this species as fuelwood. Earlier Samant et al. (2000), while inves-
tigating fuelwood collection patterns in the region, also described this species as high RUI
species. Among others, Q. leucotrichophora (RUI-279.8), M. esculenta (RUI-131.2) in
high-altitude zone were important species facing high extraction pressure. While compar-
ing with earlier study, it was noticed that Samant et al. (2000) found Woodfordia fruticosa
(a shrub) as most preferred fuelwood species. However, this species, despite its presence,
remained low priority species in the present study site. This supports our earlier argument
that there exists possibility for diversifying attention of people to other potential species
especially the shrubs.

5.1 Conservation and management imperatives

The difference in intensity and patterns of fuelwood resource collection in the present
study, as compared to other studies from west Himalaya region, follows the argument that
the various societies utilize their natural resource base in accordance with their percep-
tions, experience and response to pattern of resource use (Gadgil 1991; Samant and Dhar
1997; Samant et al. 2000). The trend of fuelwood collection in the present case are indica-
tive that inhabitants have placed very high priority to one single species (P. roxburghii),
which accounts for 31% (high altitude) to 58% (mid-altitude) of mean household annual
fuelwood collection. The pressure on this species is, therefore, evident. However, as per the
availability data the species is adequately available (density of tree 975 indiv.ha−1) only in
mid-altitude zone. Notwithstanding the fact that P. roxburghii is considered as abundantly
available and frequently regenerating species in the west Himalaya (Singh and Singh 1992;
Dhar et al. 1997; Airi and Rawal 2017), under prevailing scenario of extraction pressure
and availability the species is likely to face problems on long term.
Considering other preferred species, Q. leucotrichophora in high-altitude zone appears
to have adequate number of adult trees, which may sustain the current pressure. However,
certain management inputs are required to improve the availability of individuals is sap-
ling/seedling stage. We noticed people find saplings of this species easily accessible and
often harvest the entire pole. This practice can be curbed through appropriate awareness
and education among inhabitants, especially women folks who are responsible for large
part of wood collection. The other important species of high-altitude zone M. esculenta,
with poor availability trends, is certainly be facing problem if current level of extraction

13
Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative… 1629

continues. Our data indicate possibility of diverting this pressure of selected tree species to
commonly available shrub species of this zone (i.e., P. crenulata, R. parviflora). Both Q.
leucotrichophora and M. esculenta also do not have very promising availability situation
in mid-altitude zone. Therefore, diverting pressure for fuelwood collection to shrubs like
R. parviflora and W. fruticosa in this zone can be suggested as an immediate management
intervention. In lower altitude zone the scenario is relatively better for S. robusta (second
most preferred species), which has relatively less pressure of use than P. roxburghii (first
preference).
As indicated earlier, despite that inhabitants are using 43.5 (high altitude) to 81.80%
(low altitude) fuelwood species among non-natives, the collection intensities of these spe-
cies (non-natives) largely remains much lower compared to native species. This way the
non-natives, despite having potential of use as fuelwood, get protected from extensive
removal. Samant et al. (2000) also reported similar trends of lower extraction pressure on
non-native species. Such trends of native harvesting and non-native protection are usually
considered to lead to changes in ecosystem processes over a long period (Vitousek 1986;
Ramakrishnan and Vitousek 1989; Samant et al. 2000).
Assuming that the annual household collection reported in earlier study from the region
(Samant et al. 2000; Negi et al. 2018) reflects mean collection for an area devoid of alterna-
tive energy (i.e., LPG), our study watershed with almost LPG prevalent villages (80–96%
household) represents nearly LPG saturated watershed. In general, the proportion of house-
holds depending primarily on traditional biomass for cooking has decreased from 62% in
1980 to 41% in 2010 worldwide. In a study, Negi et al. 2018 revealed that adoption of
cleaner energy over fuelwood energy has also been reported from different countries as an
influence of awareness, education and government programmes. Likewise, the collection
of fuelwood in these villages is much lower (nearly 50%) due to access to cleaner energy
for cooking. However, the trends of collection are indicative of continuing requirement of
fuelwood in substantial amount. This further suggests that in west Himalayan hills even
after supply of alternate energy, demand for fuelwood continues, albeit in reduced amount.
This continued demand and proven preference of inhabitants for selected species calls for
management intervention.

6 Conclusion

The present study results supported the theoretical hypothesis that indicates direct destruc-
tive impacts of fuelwood harvesting on forest composition and structural attributes of pre-
ferred fuelwood species. The result also suggests that the tree species are given larger use
priority over potential fuelwood shrubs. This implies despite adequate availability of cer-
tain shrub species the inhabitants of watershed are traditionally leaned toward use of tree
species. It is, therefore, imperative to make people more aware of benefits of diversifying
their use attention on shrubs so as to reduce pressure from preferred tree fuelwood. Based
on this study, we suggest the following as possible interventions:

1. Widening the base of species choice for fuelwood by way of shifting pressure from trees
to shrubs; frequently used to less used species; and, from native to non-native species.
2. Promoting awareness and education among inhabitants w.r.t. potential fuelwood species,
availability of their stock, scientific and sustainable harvest practices, and less wasteful
fuelwood consumption practices.

13
1630 B. C. Joshi et al.

3. Strengthening of traditional community forestry institutions (e.g., Van Panchayats) by

way of building their capacity in management and sustainable use of forest resources
using modern tools and techniques; and empowering them under the existing national/
international instruments for participatory forest management.
4. Effective use of information available on fuelwood collection/requirement, peoples pref-
erence and availability of species in use for designing appropriate management strategies
for augmenting degraded forests and wastelands with suitable species plantation.

Acknowledgements The authors are thankful to the Director, G.B. Pant, National Institute of Himalayan
Environment and Sustainable Development, Kosi-Katarmal, Almora, for providing facilities and encourage-
ment to undertake this work. The authors acknowledge partial funding for study under In-House Project-7
funded by the institute and the Kailash Sacred Landscape Conservation and Development Initiative (spon-
sored by GIZ-ICIMOD).

References
Airi, S., & Rawal, R. S. (2017). Patterns of vegetation composition across levels of canopy disturbance in
temperate forests of west Himalaya, India. Biodiversity Research and Conservation, 45(1), 27–33.
Ali, A., & Rahut, D. B. (2018). Forest-based livelihoods, income, and poverty: Empirical evidence from the
Himalayan region of rural Pakistan. Journal of Rural Studies, 57, 44–54.
Angelsen, A., Jagger, P., Babigumira, R., Belcher, B., Hogarth, N. J., Bauch, S., et al. (2014). Environmental
income and rural livelihoods: a global-comparative analysis. World Development, 64, S12–S28.
Angelsen, A., & Wunder, S. (2003). Exploring the forest—Poverty link. CIFOR Occasional Paper, 40,
1–20.
Anonymous. (2011). Directorate of census operation. New Delhi: Anonymous.
Babulo, B., Muys, B., Nega, F., Tollens, E., Nyssen, J., Deckers, J., et al. (2009). The economic contribution
of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics,
11, 109–117.
Bhatt, B. P., Rathore, S. S., Lemtur, M., & Sarkar, B. (2016). Fuelwood energy pattern and biomass
resources in Eastern Himalaya. Renewable Energy, 94, 410–417.
Bhatt, B. P., & Sachan, M. S. (2004). Firewood consumption pattern of different tribal communities in
Northeast India. Energy Policy, 32(1), 1–6.
Bouget, C., Lassauce, A., & Jonsell, M. (2012). Effects of fuelwood harvesting on biodiversity—A review
focused on the situation in Europe. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 42(8), 1421–1432.
Chettri, N., & Sharma, E. (2009). A scientific assessment of traditional knowledge on firewood and fodder
values in Sikkim, India. Forest Ecology and Management, 257(10), 2073–2078.
Chettri, N., Sharma, E., Deb, D. C., & Sundriyal, R. C. (2002). Impact of firewood extraction on tree struc-
ture, regeneration and woody biomass productivity in a trekking corridor of the Sikkim Himalaya.
Mountain Research and Development, 22(2), 150–158.
Daioglou, V., Van Ruijven, B. J., & Van Vuuren, D. P. (2012). Model projections for household energy use
in developing countries. Energy, 37(1), 601–615.
Dash, M., Behera, B., & Rahut, D. B. (2016). Determinants of household collection of non-timber forest
products (NTFPs) and alternative livelihood activities in Similipal Tiger Reserve, India. Forest Policy
and Economics, 73, 215–228.
Dhanai, R., Negi, R. S., Parmar, M. K., & Singh, S. (2014). Fuelwood & fodder consumption pattern in
Uttarakhand Himalayan watershed. International Journal of Environmental Biology, 4(1), 35–40.
Dhar, U., Samant, S. S., Rawal, R. S., & Sharma, S. (1997). Studies on biota and resource use pattern of the
natives within Askot Wildlife Sanctuary of Kumaun Himalaya. Tigerpaper (FAO).
FAO. (2011). State of the world’s forests (9th ed.). Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
States.
Gadgil, M. (1991). Traditional resource management systems. Resource Management and Optimization,
8(3–4), 127–141.
Hussain, A., Dasgupta, S., & Bargali, H. S. (2017). Fuelwood consumption patterns by semi-nomadic pasto-
ralist community and its implication on conservation of Corbett Tiger Reserve, India. Energy, Ecology
and Environment, 2(1), 49–59.

13
Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative… 1631

Hussain, A., Negi, A. K., Singh, R. K., Aziem, S., Iqbal, K., & Pala, N. A. (2016). Comparative study of
fuelwood consumption by semi-nomadic pastoral community and adjacent villagers around Corbett
Tiger Reserve, India. Indian Forester, 142(6), 574–581.
Khuman, Y. S. C., Pandey, R., & Rao, K. S. (2011). Fuelwood consumption patterns in Fakot watershed
Garhwal Himalaya Uttarakhand. Energy, 36(47), 69–76.
Köhl, M., Lasco, R., Cifuentes, M., Jonsson, Ö., Korhonen, K., Mundhenk, P., et al. (2015). Changes
in forest production, biomass and carbon: Results from the 2015 UN FAO Global Forest Resource
Assessment. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 21–34.
Koopmans, A. (2005). Biomass energy demand and supply for South and South-East Asia—Assessing
the resource base. Biomass and Bioenergy, 28(2), 133–150.
Kumar, M., & Sharma, C. M. (2009). Fuelwood consumption pattern at different altitudes in rural areas
of Garhwal Himalaya. Biomass and Bioenergy, 33(10), 1413–1418.
Kumar, S., & Kumar, M. (2015). Fuelwood Consumption in Takoli Gad Watershed of TehriGarhwal in
Garhwal Himalaya, India. Forest Research, 4(138), 2.
Maikhuri, R. K., & Gangwar, A. K. (1991). Fuelwood use by different tribal and non‐tribal communities
in north‐east India. In Natural resources forum (Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 162–165). Oxford, UK: Black-
well Publishing Ltd.
Misra, R. (1968). Ecology workbook (pp. 1–244). Calcutta: Oxford and India House Book Publishing
(IBH), New Delhi.
Muller-Dombois, D., & Ellenberg, E. (1974). Aims and methods of vegetation ecology (p. 547). New
York: Wiley.
Negi, V. S., Joshi, B. C., Pathak, R., Rawal, R. S., & Sekar, K. C. (2018). Assessment of fuelwood diver-
sity and consumption patterns in cold desert part of Indian Himalaya: implication for conservation
and quality of life. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 23–31.
Negi, V. S., & Maikhuri, R. K. (2016). Forest resources consumption pattern in Govind Wildlife Sanc-
tuary, Western Himalaya, India. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 60(7),
1235–1252.
Osei, W. Y. (1993). Woodfuel and deforestation—Answers for a sustainable environment. Journal of
Environmental Management, 37(1), 51–62.
Osmaston, A. E. (1927). A forest flora for Kumaun (pp. 1–605). Dehradun: International Book Distribu-
tors, India.
Pandey, D. (2010). Wood fuel development and climate change mitigation in India. In: Woodfuels and
climate change mitigation. Forest and climate change working paper 6: FAO, Rome (pp. 25–40).
Pangtey, Y. P. S., Samant, S. S., & Rawat, G. S. (1988). Contribution to the flora of Pithoragarh district,
Kumaun Himalaya. Himalayan Research and Development, 7, 24–46.
Purohit, K., & Samant, S. S. (1995). Fodder trees and Shrubs of Central Himalaya (pp. 1–116). Nainital:
Gyanodaya Prakashan.
Rahut, D. B., Ali, A., & Behera, B. (2015). Household participation and effects of community forest
management on income and poverty levels: Empirical evidence from Bhutan. Forest Policy and
Economics, 61, 20–29.
Rahut, D. B., Behera, B., & Ali, A. (2016). Do forest resources help increase rural household income
and alleviate rural poverty? Empirical evidence from Bhutan. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 25(3),
187–198.
Rai, Y. K., Chettri, N., & Sharma, E. (2002). Fuelwood value index of woody tree species from Mamlay
watershed in South Sikkim, India. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 12(3), 209–219.
Ramakrishnan, P. S., & Vitousek, P. M. (1989). Ecosystem level processes and the consequences of
biological invaision. In J. A. Darke, H. A. Mooney, F. di Castri, R. H. Groves, F. J. Kruger, M.
Rejmanek, & M. Williamson (Eds.), Biological invasions: A global perspective. SCOPE 37 (pp.
281–300). New York: Wiley.
Rana, M. S., Rana, S. B., & Samant, S. S. (2012). Extraction, utilization pattern and prioritization of
fuel resources for conservation in Manali Wildlife Sanctuary, Northwestern Himalaya. Journal of
Mountain Science, 9(4), 580–588.
Rawat, Y. S., Vishvakarma, S. C., & Todaria, N. P. (2009). Fuelwood consumption pattern of tribal com-
munities in cold desert of the Lahaul valley, North-Western Himalaya, India. Biomass and Bioen-
ergy, 33(11), 1547–1557.
Samant, S. S. (1987). Flora of Central and South Eastern Parts of Pithoragarh District. Ph.D. Thesis.
Nainital: Kumaun University.
Samant, S. S., & Dhar, U. (1997). Diversity, endemism and economic potential of wild edible plants of
Indian Himalaya. The International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 4(3),
179–191.

13
1632 B. C. Joshi et al.

Samant, S. S., Dhar, U., & Rawal, R. S. (2000). Assessment of fuel resource diversity and utilization pat-
terns in Askot Wildlife Sanctuary in Kumaun Himalaya, India, for conservation and management.
Environmental Conservation, 27(1), 5–13.
Sharma, C. M., Gairola, S., Kumar, M., Rawat, Y. S., & Bagwari, H. K. (2009). Resource utilization in vil-
lage ecosystem of temperate zone of Garhwal Himalaya. Indian Journal Agro forestry, 11(2), 94–100.
Sharma, P., & Samant, S. S. (2014). Assessment of fuel resource diversity and utilization pattern in Nargu
Wildlife Sanctuary of Himachal Pradesh, NW Himalaya. International Journal of Biodiversity and
Conservation, 6(1), 17–27.
Singh, G., Rawat, G. S., & Verma, D. (2010). Comparative study of fuelwood consumption by villagers and
seasonal “Dhaba owners” in the tourist affected regions of Garhwal Himalaya, India. Energy Policy,
38(4), 1895–1899.
Singh, J. S., & Singh, S. P. (1992). Forests of the Himalaya: Structure, functioning and impact of man (pp.
1–294). Nainital: Gyanodaya Prakashan.
Singh, J. S., Singh, S. P., & Ram, J. (1988). Fodder and Fuelwood resources of Central Himalaya: problems
and solutions. Project report, planning commission, GoI New Delhi (p. 159).
Singh, N., & Sundriyal, R. C. (2009). Fuelwood, fodder consumption and deficit pattern in central Himala-
yan village. Nature and Science, 7(4), 85–88.
Specht, M. J., Pinto, S. R. R., Albuquerque, U. P., Tabarelli, M., & Melo, F. P. (2015). Burning biodiversity:
Fuelwood harvesting causes forest degradation in human-dominated tropical landscapes. Global Ecol-
ogy and Conservation, 3, 200–209.
Vitousek, P. M. (1986). Biological invasions and ecosystem properties: Can species make a difference?. In
Ecology of biological invasions of North America and Hawaii (pp. 163–176). New York, NY: Springer.
World Bank. (2016). Washington (DC): World Bank Rural Population Indicators C2016.

13