Jhe 33-3-147-11-2176-bhasin-v-tt
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Jhe 33-3-147-11-2176-bhasin-v-tt

on

  • 1,092 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,092
Views on SlideShare
1,092
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Jhe 33-3-147-11-2176-bhasin-v-tt Jhe 33-3-147-11-2176-bhasin-v-tt Document Transcript

  • © Kamla-Raj 2011 J Hum Ecol, 33(3): 147-177 (2011) Pastoralists of Himalayas Veena Bhasin Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi, Delhi 110 007, IndiaKEYWORDS Ecology. Adaptation. Settlement. Animal Husbandry. Transhumant. Tribal Groups. Gaddis. Changpas.Bhutias. Sikkim. Ladakh. Chamba. Socio-economic Organisation. Property RightsABSTRACT Pastoral societies have revived strong and renewed interest among the anthropologist. Pastoralism is asubsistence pattern in which people make their living by domesticating large herds of animals. The pastoral subsistenceeconomy provides an adaptation to such conditions since it promotes the conversion of the low quality plantresources into portable, high quality animal foods. However, the overall low level of energy availability necessitateslow population density and high mobility among pastoral population. Within a pastoral society the ecosystemdiversity does not only means the variety of ecological zones or habitats, but, it encompass cultural diversity andecological processes related to different pastoral production systems as well. Therefore, biodiversity provides afundamental base to pastoralism and to the overall economic systems. Sheep and goat pastoralism is a constantfeature of traditional mountain societies. It is rare that any pastoral group lives exclusively with the products of theirherds. All pastoralists have to look for supplementary forms of economic activity. The pastoral communities ofHimalayas make use of resources like high mountain pastures by three different ways by characteristic mobilitypatterns, socio-economic organisation and property rights. The study deals with three pastoral groups of Himalayaswho inhabit Ladakh, Sikkim and Himachal Pradesh. Changpas nomads of Changthang raise herds of sheep andpashmina goats, yaks and horses. Gaddis of Bharmour are agro-pastoralists and raise large flocks of sheep and goats.Bhutias of North Sikkim are agro-pastoralists and raise local cows and ox, yaks, sheep, goats and ponies. Thesesocieties use animals as providers of food, fuel, fiber, draught power and transportation. However, nomadic, semi-nomadic and transhumant pastoralist societies have lifestyles that revolve mainly around their livestock. Thetranshumant pastoral societies inhabiting the high Himalayan areas exploit the seasonal abundance of grazing areas.As social and ecological conditions change, pastoralists adjust accordingly. Pastoralists play an important role in theecology of India. Their production of organic manure contributes to the maintenance of soil fertility. Their grazingcontrols invasive exotic species. Contrary to their reputation, pastoralists have traditional practices for conservingvegetation by rotational grazing. Pastoralists make a significant contribution to India’s economy in terms of foodsecurity (milk), provision of draft animal power, as well as foreign exchange earnings (meat, fibre e.g. pashminawool). Since pastoralists do not own land, their produce is generated by dependence on communally and state-ownedgrazing land. Currently, the trend towards globalization of the market, with pastoral lands increasingly beingcommercialised and/or turned in to national parks has created problems for the pastoralists. Due to neglect byofficials and policy makers, pastoralists face deprivation from their traditional and customary rights to these grazingareas. The political marginalisation of pastoral communities paved the way for forcible eviction from their land and/or restriction of their movements. In Ladakh, protection of wildlife has proceeded at the expense of the availabilityof grass biomass for the herds of the pastoralists. Since Independence of India, the pastoralists of Himalayas havefaced a series of significant changes from external political and economic changes. These structural alterations havebrought adjustments in many aspects of the traditional pastoral system, including migratory cycle, local economy andsocial organisation. Many of them left their traditional transhumant way of life and settled along valleys. Some havesettled in urban areas others stick to the pastoral activities by changing the composition of livestock by increasingnumber of goats and decreasing number of yaks. State policies regarding forests, agriculture, irrigation, fodder, famine,pastoral rights and migration are some of the mechanisms that contribute to the alteration of pastoral life-style.Development of animal husbandry is a major government goal. All pastoral groups in Himalaya face the similarconstraints and stimuli. Natural exigencies- extreme weather conditions, drought, epidemics and predators result inreduction of animals. Likewise, social crisis, such as phases in domestic developmental cycle and work force shortagein herding groups cause concern in the community INTRODUCTION conditions since it promotes the conversion of the low quality plant resources into portable, high Pastoral societies have revived strong and quality animal foods. However, the overall lowrenewed interest among anthropologists. level of energy availability necessitates lowPastoralism is a subsistence pattern in which population density and high mobility amongpeople make their living by domesticating large pastoral population. They inhabit different areasherds of animals. Pastoralism is an effective means across the world associated with specific ‘core’of exploiting marginal environments. The survival animals and different methods of subsistence.of pastoralism is interlinked with many aspects Within a pastoral society the ecosystem diversityof sustainable land use. The pastoral subsistence does not only means the variety of ecologicaleconomy provides an adaptation to such zones or habitats, but, it encompass cultural
  • 148 VEENA BHASINdiversity and ecological processes related to However, there are limited possibilities fordifferent pastoral production systems as well. innovations in the pastoral economic system. TheTherefore, biodiversity provides a fundamental survival of pastoralists in ecologically fragile areasbase to pastoralism and to the overall economic depend on the diversity of the ecosystems.systems. In the mountainous regions of South- Therefore, biodiversity provides a fundamentalwest Asia, it is mainly sheep, goats and yaks. base to pastoralism and to overall economic Pastoralism is a successful strategy to systems. In pastoral nomadism once its formationsupport a population with the limited resources is complete, the simple reproduction of highlyof land. All forms of pastoralism can be considered specialised forms of same type prevail. This doesas different methods of economic adaptations, not make nomadism as a highly specialised blindthe parameters of which are determined by alley. It is just that in the wider sense nomadismecology and level of technological development. cannot be fully acknowledged with pastoralPastoral nomadism is specialised, both from economy, although the later forms the basis ofeconomic and cultural point of view. It is a nomadism. On the other hand, specialisationsuccessful way of food production in marginal restricts prospects for economic growth. How-environment. It is only through pastoral ever, a specialised pastoral economy in it selfnomadism that man is able to exploit all potential cannot take care of instantaneous necessities ofresources of vast ecological zones. Low nomads. All pastoralists have to look forpopulation density, mobility and multifarious supplementary forms of economic activity.information systems are important mechanisms The earlier studies focused on environmentalof pastoral adaptation. The pastoral system is context of the livestock husbandry. Krader (1959)dynamic as pre-planned actions of pastoralists described nomadism as an, “extreme case of aare constantly attuned to changing conditions. human society’s adaptation to an unfriendlyThere is misconception that all pastoralists exist natural environment”. The further studies wereat basic subsistence level. There are pastoral related to the problems of balance betweengroups who have accumulated wealth through availability of natural resources (water andtheir economic activities having exchange fodder), livestock number and population sizerelationships with other groups. It is rare that any (Barth 1961; Sweet 1965; Swidler 1973); commonpastoral group lives exclusively with the products land use and its regulation (McCay and Achesonof their herds. Pastoralism is most often an 1987; Brombley 1992); changing environmentaladaptation to semi-arid open country or high conditions, particularly due to environmentalaltitude dry land where farming is not feasible. degradation resulting from development andPastoralism is more productive than hunting and pastoralists response to droughts and othergathering. Hunters do not try to increase the environmental hazards. The impact of changingnumber of animals or use the products of animals market conditions on herding practices was anwhile they are still living. Pastoralists invest in important topic of research. Later studiesbreeding and caring for their animals and so observed that pastoralists are not dependent onincrease their reproduction and survival rates. livestock rearing only, but they practice “multi-Pastoralists are concerned with the production resource nomadism” (Salzman 1971). It has beenof milk, hair, hide, blood or wool or with traction, shown that pastoral nomads diversify theirusing animals as vehicles or source of work resources in order to survive in harsh andenergy. By investing human labour in the pro- unpredictable weather conditions. Pastoralduction of milk and wool than meat, pastoralists societies, once thought to be independent entitiesmake more profit. The animals need not be killed are now seen as maintaining stable and permanentto be valuable. This makes pastoralism the most relationship with sedentary peasant and urbanefficient way of using resources in dry land and population (Gellner 1973). The latest studies aremarginal areas. A pastoral production system considering the political relationships of therarely focuses on a single product, but makes pastoralists and the sedentary population (Ironsuse rather of both “continuing” (calves, lambs, 1971) and with state policies and state politicsand kids; milk, butter and cheese; transport and (Dahl and Hjort 1980). In the study of nomadictraction; manure; hair and wool; and occasionally pastoralists, it was thought that the pastoralblood) and “final” (meat; hides and skins) societies are essentially egalitarian. Studies areproducts (Horowitz and Jowkar 1992). being carried out on the subject of gender
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 149inequality and impact of changing division of technology. The association between pastoralismlabour assignments in pastoral societies, and presence of grasslands is always there, butparticularly related to gender (Human Ecology, there are many types of grassland withoutSpecial Issue 1996). Human ecologists are pastoralists.concerned with the problems of common landpastures. The ‘tragedy of commons’ apparently PASTORALISM IN INDIAarises when a group of resource users havecommon access to single resource. Recent There are more than 200 tribes comprising sixstudies have examined the systems that regulate per cent of the country’s population engaged inaccess to and use of common property such as pastoralism. (Source: Pastoralism in India: apastures to show how some pastoral groups have scoping study by Vijay Paul Sharma, Ilse Kohler-done well traditionally while others failed, and Rollefson and John Morton 2003). Indianthe circumstances that led to success or failure pastoralists can be divided into groups thatof the pastoral groups (Hardin and Baden 1977; practice horizontal movement and verticalMcCay and Acheson 1987; Brombley 1992). Barth movement like in the mountainous regions.(1961) studied the role of chiefs in nomadic Nomadic pastoralism is prevalent in the dry landspastoral society who synchronised the migrations of western India, the Deccan Plateau and in theof pastoral groups as well as liaisons with mountainous regions of Himalayas. India has onesedentary populations. Studies have been carried of the largest livestock populations in the world.among pastoral groups of high altitude areas, Livestock contributes about 25 per cent of India’swhere nomads’ movements are in frontier areas. agricultural GDP. Livestock provides local peopleCentral governments have sought to control the in isolated areas with milk, meat and wool.movements of nomadic pastoralists throughout Pastoralists use marginal, otherwise uncultivabletheir existence, in part because they are often land, increasing the amount of land available toregarded as threat along a frontier (Lattimore an already expanding population. They also rear1940). However, in modern times, government indigenous animal breeds, retaining rich geneticinterventions are intended as well for delivering variety.services such as health and education (Gardus, India is home to a large number of pastoral1985) and for overall development of the livestock groups – which include Golla and Kuruma ofas well as pastoral population. Some pastoral Andhra Pradesh, who move with their cattle andgroups have settled in response to political turmoil sheep respectively; Rabari and Bharwad fromand civil war. Several studies report negative Gujarat, who raise flocks of sheep and goat andsocial and health consequences of pastoral cattle and small stock respectively; Kuruba andsedentarisation, including poorer nutrition, Dhangar from Karnataka both raise sheep flocks;inadequate housing, lack of clean drinking water, Raika/ Rabari and Gujjars from Rajasthan andand the higher rates of infectious diseases. For Gaddi, Gujjar and Bakarwals of Himalayas movingthe past ten years a cultural anthropologist, an with their camel, sheep and goats and buffaloanthropological demographer and a physician- and sheep respectively; Raika / Rabari are thehave engaged in a longitudinal research examining most numerous pastoral groups in the westernthe biosocial concomitants of sedentrism for part of India. Inspite of being in such a largeAriaal and Rendille pastoralists of northern Kenya number, these pastoral communities have very(Fratkin 1991, 1998; Fratkin and Roth 1990; Fratkin low public and political profile. Scientists pointand Smith 1995). fingers at them for adhering to an obsolete form of production, despite their large contribution toClassification of Pastoralism the national economy in terms of production of milk, meat, wool, leather etc. The important pastoral strategies can beclassified: by species; by management system; PASTORALISTS OF THE HIMALAYASby geography; and by ecology. Apart from these,there is broad distinction between the developed Sheep and goat pastoralism is a constantand developing countries. In Australia and North feature of traditional mountain societies. Gaddis,America, extensive livestock production is accom- Gujjars, Bakarwals, Kinnauras, Kaulis andplished with scientific methods and improved Kanets of the north Indian Himalayas, Bhotias of
  • 150 VEENA BHASINGarhwal Himalayas, Bhotias and Sherpas of parameters of which are determined by ecologyKhumbu valley of Nepal, Kirats of eastern Nepal, and level of technological development. ThisMonpa yak breeders of Arunachal Pradesh, makes pastoralism a special adaptation, both fromBhutias of Lachen and Lachung, Sikkim and economic and cultural point of view. It is specialChangpas of Changthang, Ladakh are some of because it manages the conditions dictated bythe known pastoral communities of Himalayas. environment.The pastoral communities of Himalayas make use Natural resource use is influenced by theof resources like high mountain pastures in three history and cultural system of a human populationdifferent ways by characteristic mobility patterns, as well as by the availability of resources. Thesocio-economic organisation and property rights. distinctive physical environment of the moun-There are nomads like Changpa of Changthang tains restricts economic processes. The ‘multi-in Ladakh, whose economy is predominantly resource economy’ that Salzman (1972) describesbased on animal husbandry; there are agro- in relation to nomads in Baluchistan and Africapastoralist groups like Gaddis of Bharmour, also characterises most pastoralists in India.Himachal Pradesh and Bhutias of Lachen and Human populations settled in mountainousLachung in Sikkim, who practice marginal environments have developed diverse strategiesagriculture and raise herds of sheep and goats of natural resource use associated with water andand yaks (Bhasin 1988, 1989, 1996). The land limitations, although its practice dependsinteraction of altitude, climate and soil fertility on the technological and socio-culturalset upper limits on agriculture and pastoralism characterstics of the population. Pastoralism isand within the range of agriculture, upper limits an age-old livelihood option for number ofon types of crops (Troll 1968, 1972; Uhlig 1976; communities and ethnic groups in the mountains.Dollfus 1981). Transhumance with or without Pastoralism is a system of production devoted toagriculture becomes profitable where high gaining a livelihood from the care of large herdspastures are available. Transhumant that migrate of animals. This is a form of adaptation of natural resource management, which requires maintainingfrom summer pastures to winter pastures with their an ecological balance between pastures, livestockflocks have some sort of living arrangement at and people. The technology of the pastoralistboth the places and use tents as shelters during requires that the life-practices of the people beascending or descending. Each household grazes adjusted to the requisites of the animals whichtheir own animals but with the increase in size of are movement to pasture, water, salt as requiredflock, the professional shepherding comes up as and protection from predators. Some immediatean economic necessity. Where people have regul- confluences of pastoralism are that the peoplear summer and winter pastures, to supplement must remain mobile, they cannot invest heavilytheir resources they start growing grains or vege- in personal goods, in houses or in land. Theytables at or near the winter or summer pastures. protect and share the permanent and essentialAmong the agro-pastoral Gaddis of Bharmour, sources for animals. The social structure, socialHimachal Pradesh, India, although agriculture organisation and community life of pastoralistsprovides the bulk of staple food, Gaddis them- that traverse the difficult terrains year-long isselves give major importance to the care and value bound to have specific needs, which social andof the sheep and, goat. From animals they obtain functional groups fulfill. The pattern of social,additional food in the form of meat and milk, wool functional and administrative groups in thefor clothing and cash for buying other transhumant way of life has emerged out of thenecessities. Transhumance of this type is needs that meet the demands of a migratory modepracticed in mountainous regions of many parts of production. Some studies have treated theof the world. These studies point to the lack of pastoralists as a people who resisted changetransparency in defining and classifying because of tradition or because they reactednomadism and pastoralism. Several authors have passively to the vagaries of nature. Other scho-carried out studies on these pastoralist groups lars feel that pastoralists as an occupational group(Newell 1967; Khatana 1976a, 1976b; Nitzberg are open to continuous change. No culture is1987; Goldstein and Masserschmidt 1980; Kango static and pastoralists are no exception. Culturaland Dhar 1981; Rao and Casimir 1982, Bhasin borrowing and adaptation in time and space has1988, 1989, 1996). All forms of pastoralism may be been a continuous process, yet pastoralists haveregarded as different forms of adaptation, the preserved their culture in form and structure.
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 151Alpwirtschaft exploit the seasonal abundance of grazing areas. The demarcation between the nomads and In the Alpine region, a peculiar strategy is transhumant is not a permanent divide. As socialbased on agro-pastoral transhumance, each and ecological conditions change, pastoralistssegment of which is intricately intermeshed with adjust accordingly. A traditionally nomadicproductive areas only during the growing season society or few families can become more or lessfrom spring to early fall, has been described as transhumant in their migratory patterns ifAlpwirtschaft (Rhoades and Thompson 1975, p. opportunity arises.537). It is associated with the movement of peopleand animals in vertical and horizontal space, Transhumancecommunal control of pastures combined withindividual control of plots and haying fields and Transhumance is the regular movement ofa social institution that schedule the complex herds between fixed points to exploit seasonalmovement in space and time (Rhoades and availability of pastures. In hills, the transhumantThompson 1975; Vincze 1980). pastoralists follow a cyclical migratory pattern The concept of Alpwirtschaft shows how a from cool highland valleys in summer to warmercultural adaptation, response to a particular set lowland valleys in winter. In the terms of eco-of environmental constraints leads to patterned logical adaptations, the two most significantsocial and political relationships. This Eurocentric factors for transhumance are seasonal severityview of pastoral practices in mountain region of winters, associated with presence of territorialbecame a role model for text books published use of highland and lowland pastures. Transhu-afterwards. However, the limitations of the mant agro-pastoralist have regular encampmentsconcept are broad range of agropastoralism and or stable villages with permanent houses. Theysecondly, many of its correlates, including vertical often practice subsistence level agriculture at oneand horizontal movement and com-munal or the other destinations in summer. They tradeinstitutions to facilitate scheduling and inte- their animals and animal products in town marketsgration are found in other agricultural commu- for grains and other necessities of life, which theynities. As a result, the conflicting demands on do not produce themselves.household time and labour and the necessity for Ethnic groups in transhumant category arecontinuous vertical movement among zones few and are of low population density in relationcreate complex scheduling problems solved to the total land mass. There is low margin ofthrough communal institutions. surplus because of low level of technology, little In the Himalayan mountain milieu, we find a occupational specialisation, high participation offull range of mobile practices, in livestock keeping women in the economy and highly flexiblefrom mountain nomadism through transhumance residence. The emergent pattern of social struc-to combined mountain agriculture (Alpwirts- ture has kinship and functional groups that helpschaft). Several studies have been carried out on in meeting the demands of a migratory mode ofpastoral groups in different parts of the Western production. As all follow the same mode ofHimalayas (Singh 1964; Newell 1967; Khatana production, there is little variation in economic1976b; Nitzberg 1970, 1978; Goldstein and level and behaviour from one household toMassers-chmidt 1980; Kango and Dhar 1981; Rao another. The relations of economic control, whichand Casimir 1982; Bhasin 1988, 1989, 1996) mainly are legally manifested as property ownership arefocusing on nomadic routes, regular seasonal absent in transhumant societies. Amongmovements in a typical landscape, agriculture and transhumants, the community governs access tohuman settlements. Some of these studies show the common resources, therefore, it demands athe changing importance of animal husbandry in strong village organisation. The base of local-combined mountain agriculture. All societies use level leadership or prestige is not economic poweranimals as providers of food, fuel, fiber, draught or capacity to coerce but the charismatic perso-power and transportation. However, nomadic, nality, mediation ability and social work attitude.semi-nomadic and transhumant pastoralist In transhumant societies, the ecologicalsocieties have lifestyles that revolve mainly conditions constitute a significant factor in thearound their livestock. The transhumant pastoral socio-cultural systems. Social relations, techno-societies inhabiting the high Himalayan areas logy and environment are variables, which are
  • 152 VEENA BHASINpart of a system. The three variables are interre- lifestyles and means of subsistence but alsolated and interdependent and the functioning of various types of social organisation. Patterns ofthe system may change in response to a change social organisation they develop depend on theirin any one of above variables e.g. an economic specific ecological, cultural, political or historicalchange could have an effect on environment as circumstances. Pastoral populations arewell as social relations. organised into so-called descent groups (tribes, The Himalayan region is a social and cultural clans and lineages). It is acknowledged that socialinterface, (Fisher 1987) a contact zone. In the organisation of pastoral nomads is based onHimalayas, the northern-most, high-altitude kinship. However, it is not only nomadic societies,regions are heavily Tibetan throughout their where kinship and pseudo-kinship form thelength and the southern-most, low altitude structural basis of social organisation, many otherregions are Hindu dominated. societies with different economic systems also have kinship base. The mobility of nomads and PASTORAL NOMADS the permanent instability of pastoral economy give rise to a fluid social organisation, which is There are over 200 hundred million nomadic capable of change and which has the requisitepeople in the world today. They follow a segmentary means with which to accomplish this.productive way of life in the marginal regions they Flexible social organisation means that nomadslive in. This associates the availability of forage a have not only one secure support network ofnecessity for pastoral way of life. The timing and people but have a more fluid and changingdestinations of migrations are determined support network within a community. People oftenprimarily by the needs of the animals of the herd go to people for help who are readily available, orfor fodder and water. They inhabit economically, who have the resources at that particular time.socially and politically marginal lands on the According to Spooner (1973), units of lower levelsperiphery of settled societies. The mobility of of segmentation, which, primarily, are connectednomads enables them to exploit meager resources with social, economic and more narrowlyof these marginal lands in a way not possible to productive needs, rely on kin and contractualsettled societies. They do not feed any specially relations (pp. 25-26). Kinship regulates relationssown fodder plants or grains to their livestock, within a relatively small group of people; itand their animals survive exclusively by grazing mediates the individual’s position in a system ofon forage. Pastoral nomads are livestock horizontal ties by superseding the discreteproducers who grow no crops and simply depend character of different descent groups. Theon the sale or exchange of animals and their nomads inhabiting different ecological zones makeproducts to obtain foodstuffs and other different movements depending on the physio-necessities. They are dependent on their livestock graphic conditions of the area and availability offor food, status and cultural practices. pastures in time and space. Pasture is often Nomadism is viable in the extreme hot and sporadic and connected by routes of access;cold. In the hot dry deserts of Arabia, Sahara, villages are mobile and maintain themselves asEast Africa, South Iran and Baluchistan, camel distinctive entities whether they are in temporarydomestication is prevalent. In the lush savannah camps, besides pastures or permanent villages.grasslands of Central Africa and Sudan belt, cattle The scheduling and destinations are pre-is the main animal. The temperate mountains and determined according to the availability and needsthe valleys of Southwest Asia and the Mediterra- of the animals for water and fodder. Mobility ofnean Borderlands, support large populations of pastoral nomads requires an annual pattern ofsheep, goat, yak and horse. In the extreme climate decision-making about directions of movements,of Central Asia steppes and mountains horses, places of encampments and duration of stay. TheBactrian camel, sheep and goats are preferential nomadic pastoralists do not invest heavily inand in Sub-Arctic tundra of northwest Eurasia, material goods. They do not have permanentthe inhabitants herd only reindeer. According to settlements or build houses but live in portableSpooner (1973) there are no features of cultural dwellings in encampments near the resources. Itor social organisation common to all nomads or is necessary for them to have knowledge of theireven that occur exclusively among nomads. pasture, water resources, rainfall, snowfall,Pastoral nomads present not only different disease, political insecurity and national bound-
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 153aries with access to markets and infrastructure. and Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung, Sikkim at anThey follow established migration routes and altitude of 3,000 metres follow Alpwirtscaft typeoften develop long-standing exchange arrange- of strategy, associated with the movement ofments with families to make use of crop residue peoples and animals in vertical space, communalor to trade goods. control of pastures, combined with individual Pastoral nomads are usually self-sufficient in control of plots and haying fields and socialterms of food and most other necessities. The institutions that schedule the complex movementpastoral nomads rarely kill their animals for family in space and time. The third group is of Changpas,use only. Whenever they kill an animal, they who inhabit the cold desert of Changthang,distribute the flesh among relatives and neigh- Ladakh at 3,500 to 4,500 metres. Unlike the otherbours. The distribution not only insures that no two groups, who happens to be agropastoralistsspoilage takes place but it also creates number of in varying degrees, Changpas are nomads. Gaddisreciprocal obligations within the community. It raise flocks of sheep, goats while Bhutias ofsponsors mutual aid and commonality. Culturally Sikkim domesticate herds of yak and flocks ofnomads are among the vulnerable communities sheep and Changpas of Changthang raise herdsthat the international community has given of yak and flocks of sheep and pashmina goats.priority to protecting. Nomadism has been seen However, their animals are not raised on anyas a survival strategy for the pastoralists. Never- cultivated fodder crops but survive exclusivelytheless, it is not only the pastoral nomads and on natural pastures. Their complete reliance ontheir flocks who survive by migrating; transhu- natural pastures creates difficulties for year roundmance is a way of making nature survive. There sustenance. In the high altitude areas of Chang-has been a body of evidence to show that in most thang, natural grasses stop growing in mid-nomadic cultures and societies, nomads have September. The grasses start rejuvenating in latesuccessfully managed their rangelands with a high April or early May. In the beginning of May, thedegree of diversity (Scholz 1995; Wu 1997). quantity is meager and is not sufficient for the Barefield (1993) used anthropological sustenance of livestock. Changpa pastoral cyclemethods to examine the realities of life among is striking as there are few areas where anythingdifferent groups of pastoral nomads. According grows in winter. Unlike Gaddis and Bhutias,to him, while nomads live apart from sedentary Changpas have no reason to migrate to far offsociety, there are bonds of association to the latter places.that affect the nomads. He has discussed genera- Changthang nomads represent one of the lastlities about certain themes like ecological base of great examples of nomadic pastoral way of lifenomads, how do they organise themselves once common in many regions of the worldeconomically and how do they form and maintain (Goldstein and Beall 1990). Changpas aretheir political and social structure. He mentioned pastoralists like Masai and Bedawlb Beja amongsome criterion that defines the key animals for others. Pastoral way of lifestyle involves per-nomads. The animal must be adapted to the petual mobility in extreme conditions in remoteregional ecological conditions and it must be a areas. A pastoral nomadic lifestyle is an adaptationnecessary component of everyone’s herd. to dry, cold rangelands with extremely harshAccording to Salzman (2004), nomadic move- environment that are non-arable and limited inments are “highly purposeful, oriented towards their production capacity. Their way of lifeachieving specific production rules.” Nomads prevents living in permanent settlements.deploy nomadic strategy to meet main challenges: Therefore, their pattern of migrations differs fromwhich is maintaining their main animal. Yak Gaddis of Bharmour, Himachal Pradesh andbreeders in Tibet transport salt to sell in distant Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung, Sikkim who havemarkets. The Basseri of Fars sells sheep offspring permanent houses at middle altitude. Gaddis andmilk and wool in local markets. Bhutias move with their flocks to high altitude in The analysis of three tribes inhabiting summer and to lower altitude in winter (Bhasindifferent parts of the Himalayas with variations 1988, 1989, 1996). Changpas of Changthangin their topography draw together some of the change places all over the year according to themajor features of the pastoralists of Himalayas. availability of pasture, water and needs of theOut of three tribes, Gaddis of Bharmour, (District livestock. The highlands of Rupshu-Kharnak inChamba, Himachal Pradesh) at the height of 2100 Changthang, besides having an arid environment,
  • 154 VEENA BHASINsupport a large number of livestock population- of the most important components of pastoralgoats, sheep, yaks and horses. The tent-dwelling adaptation. Mobility allows pastoralists to exploitChangpas traverse with their livestock across the more than one environment simultaneously, thusChangthang. The nomadic groups of Chang- creating the possibility for marginal regions tothang are politically distinct with traditional support human life. Rather than adapting thegrazing rights and well-defined boundaries. environment to suit the “food production sys-Traditionally, the rangeland of Changthang was tem” (Bates 1998: 104), pastoralists successfullystate-owned and individuals had usufruct rights. managed their environment with a high degree ofThey migrate to different valleys for summer and diversity. In order to adapt to harsh climate, thewinter grazing of their herds. During summer and indigenous people migrate to different locationsautumn, the Changpas generally live together as having a combination of seasonal and ecologicalone encampment. variables in the location of pasture and water. Agroastoralists employ different strategies to Consequently, for appropriate economic andadapt to variations in the environmental, social ecological land use, mobility is essential. It is theand political risks they confront. Their actions basis for survival strategy in the environmentscontradict the common representation of of herders. According to Janzen (1993), mobilepastoralists as illogical, capricious and politically livestock keeping is a best active human adap-submissive migratory people. Instead, many tation to the harsh environment and is probablystudies (Bhasin 1988, 1989, 1996) show them as the only way of putting the pastures to economicconsciously pursuing specialised strategies for use without a huge expenditure of capital. In viewmaking a living, dealing with states and marketing of biodiversity conservation, exploiting eco-their products. Pastoralists enter into contracts system diversity is another ecological reason ofwith state agencies and cultivators where they nomadic movement. It is certain that mobilitypay for their animals to graze and at other times allows pastoralists to take advantage of resourcesare welcomed for the manure of their animals. Like with low productivity and irregular spatialpeople everywhere, pastoralists follow economic distribution but markets are important as well instrategies that are set by physical, social and permitting them to exchange their special goodseconomic conditions at the local, regional and for grains and other necessities of life.national levels. Together, these conditions cha- Besides owning animals in large numbers,racterise the community’s ability to adapt, survive which necessitates transhumance, two out of theand even prosper in relatively harsh and marginal three tribes of Himalayas under considerationenvironment. Though all pastoralist societies are have additional reasons for adopting a transhu-feeling the currents of change and consequently mant way of life. There are Gaddi families intheir economies are also varying. This happens Bharmour who do not have enough land or domainly with an increase in national and inter- not rear enough sheep and goats to meet theirnational tourism and the availability of govern- economic needs throughout the year. Apart fromment and non-government salaried positions. this wool and woollen products need some wayHowever, agropastoralism continues to play a key of disposal, which is not possible if they arerole in household economic strategies. This is stagnant locally as the area lacks market network.important because tourism is particularly sensitive Likewise, for Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung,to economic, political and other fluctuations, animal husbandry was not sufficient to sustainbeyond the control of local people. By resorting the population, so they indulged in marginalto variety of ecological, social and market niches, trading activities with the Tibetans across thepastoralists minimise the risks that are part of life border. For centuries, Bhutias of Lachen andin constraint environments. Lachung in North Sikkim had grazed their herds of yak and flocks of sheep in Khama Dzong PASTORAL ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES section of the Pahari district of Tibet during summer and fall months. In these areas marginalMobility agriculture and animal husbandry was not suffi- cient to sustain the Bhutia population. Conse- Physical conditions in a region, especially quently, the Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung wereclimate cannot be altered but the human activities trading with Tibetans across the border. The barterin the region can be manipulated. Mobility is one of timber, wood, dyestuffs and dairy products of
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 155North Sikkim for Tibetan salt and wool formed pastures of the middle hills; and alpine pasturesthe basis of this trade. The Bhutias of Lachen of the high hills. Some Gaddis, who accompanyand Lachung pursued it as an occupation the flocks of sheep and goat, take turns monthsintimately interwoven with their pastoral activities. at a time, in shepherding and in cultivation with brothers, cousins, uncles and sons. In KangraDiversity of Pastoral Systems district these areas (kandi dhars or ban) are claimed by Gaddis as warisi (inheritance).There A large variety of pastoral systems classified Gaddis allow their flocks to pasture on fields andby the degree of mobility from pure nomadic to receive payments from the land-owner becausetranshumant to agropastoral is found in the the flocks provide natural manure to the fields.Himalayas. With increasing altitude, mobility Winter pastures are poor but extensive. Gaddisincreases and reaches the extreme in the are in touch with the people of lower hills whileopportunistic migratory pastoralism which utilise grazing their sheep and goats. During the samethe most marginal areas. In some areas, farmers period, their families are working in the homes ofalso domesticate animals for work as well as to the people in the Kangra hills. Migration towardstrade animal products. Pastoralists are flexible by summer pastures starts in April- May.nature and can switch over to another way of For spring and autumn grazing, the flocks aremanaging the living, if need and opportunity brought back to the village in April to manurearises. A traditional nomadic society or some fields. Pastures exist in patches along the valleysfamilies within it become more or less transhumant where Gaddi camp during the summer. In thein their migratory mode of production if oppor- beginning of September, shepherds travel downtunity arises or vice-versa. slowly the valley below Kugti to Bharmour, and In the high altitude areas, like Changthang in flocks return to trakar pastures (village fields).Ladakh, Changpa nomads divide the season in- When flocks are in the trakar pastures, the Gaddisto two parts and they refer to their pastures as join in the various activities of the season of the‘winter pasture’ and ‘summer pasture’. They use year. Migration towards summer pastures startsthese pastures in rotational grazing system, in May. Gaddis walk to different pastures at differ-namely two season grazing system. Livestock ing altitudes to graze their herds on nutritiousgrazing in the Changthang could survive through grass of Lahoul and Spiti, even to the border ofthe centuries because of the indigenous practices Ladakh and Tibet. The collection of medicinalwhich maintain the livestock ratio and to avoid plants from the alpine pastures and distanceoveruse of some pastures or low use of others forests is combined with grazing of animals. Gaddis(confining grazing of horses and yaks to separate collect medicinal plants mostly for marketingpastures, herding sheep and goats together and however they keep part of it for self-consumptionavoiding simultaneous disturbance of pastures). as well.Their production system involves raising yaks, Among agropastoral Gaddis of Bharmour,sheep, goats and horses; harvesting their Himachal Pradesh, ecological conditions of theproducts; paying a portion to gompa as taxes; area necessitate their winter migration to lowerconsuming a portion and bartering yet another hills in and around Kangra hills. Land holdingsportion along with salt to obtain grain and other are small and often the different fields belongingnecessities like tea. As environment is not to a family are widely scattered. Excessive snow,conducive to any other form of land use, no severe winters and presence of dhars (grasslands)grazing land is irrigated, fertilised or sown. in the region facilitates transhumant adaptations. On the contrary, the areas with varied Upper ranges of these mountains are noteworthytopography have three season grazing system, for their large, lush meadows and other summerwhich include a transitional belt between winter grazing. However, these pasture are seasonal,pasture and summer pasture to support the Gaddis cannot rely on them for year-round sus-grazing activities in spring or autumn. The Gaddis tenance. Consequently pattern of transhumanceof Bharmour, Himachal Pradesh, follow three is developed to utilise the productive mountainseason grazing system. Among the Gaddis, the area in its productive season- migrating in summergrazing area is spread over three ecological zones, to Bharmour upper ranges and in winter to Kangrawith distinct pasture types: subtropical grazing hills (Bhasin 1988, 1996). Prior to the establishmentof the lower hills; sub temperate-temperate of the profitable timber trade in the Indian state
  • 156 VEENA BHASINof Himachal Pradesh, local kings encouraged societies, land belongs to a group or family thatherding for raising revenue for the state. Like is linked by descent or cultural affiliation. RightsGaddis, other pastoralists of Himachal Pradesh, of access to resources are highly limited and tendUttar Pradesh, Haryana, Gujarat and Madhya to be allocated through inheritance, sibling co-Pradesh in the plains, pay taxes to government operation and marriage. Because of politicalagencies or cultivators pay money for manure marginalisation of pastoralists, unfavourable landtheir fields. tenure reforms and the alienation of pastoralists Total travelling is around six hundred from their lands, traditional mechanisms andkilometers. Migration towards summer pastures customary methods of negotiations, arbitrationstarts in May. In March, traders come to the Gaddis and adjudication over land issues are breakingand strike deals for the purchase of animals; down. Pastoralists follow established migrationduring downward move-ment, the traders arrive routes and often develop long-standing exchangeagain in September. arrangements with families to make use of crop residue or to trade goods. These people holdWater and Fodder property rights in herds, pastures and routes between the pastures. Their legal arrangements Balance between availability of natural include the means for control over the pasture,resources, as water and fodders are indispensable identification of herds, regulation of access toto pastoralists. Pastoralists mostly depend on routes, regulation of disputes over property rights,natural resources, particularly for fuel, fodder and marriage disputes and other social problems. Thewater. Their dependence on natural resources is failure of state-ownership and statutory legislationinstitutionalised through a variety of social and to achieve better resource management hascultural mechanism such as religion, folklore and fostered new interests favouring communitytraditions. Pastoralists mostly depend on natural control and management and customary tenure-resources, particularly for fuel, fodder and water. systems (Jodha 1991; Blaikie 2001). The capacityTheir dependence on natural resources is insti- of pastoral institutions is based on availability oftutionalised through a variety of social and cultural resources both at local level as well as in themechanism such as religion, folklore and broader vicinity, where they serve as accesstraditions. options. Spatial mobility is required to achieve a balance between man, animals and pastures. PROPERTY RIGHTS There is a great variability in herd management strategies, social organisation and degree of Property rights systems institutes’ relation- mobility. Descent regulates relations betweenship between people, not between people and different groups and at the same time establishesbelongings. Property rights systems are part of the individual’s membership in a given society ascommunities’ law and as such are the foundation a whole and in specific subdivision of it; thisessentials that differentiate communities. Property membership involves both corresponding rightsrights simply do not define and grant rights; rather and commitments and some times even socialthey establish the rights and responsibilities of position. Kinship establishes the position ofthe system participant’s vis-à-vis each other. individual in the society; descent legitimises itPastoral societies cannot perform without access (cf. Marx 1976). Each geographical region has itsto grazing lands. There are state-owned pastures, own unique pattern of development and inter-crop-residue and institutional arrangements made action with the sedentary societies. Pastoralist’swith other communities to have access to their economic dependence on their domesticatedpastures and purchased feeds. The majorities of herds in varying degrees is the only feature thatpastoral land resources are held under a controll- all pastoralists share in common. Where herdersed access system that is communal in form. lack proprietary rights to specific grazing‘Communal’ land tenure relates to that system of grounds, they use labour, capital or kin networkstenure in which the tribe or clan or a group has to exchange resources.access to land. Tenure is thus a social institution: Unlike much of Central Asia, where commanda relationship between individuals and groups economies over-ride traditional access rights, theconsisting of a series of rights and duties with Bhutias and Changpas have communal pasture-respect to the use of land. Traditionally, in pastoral land with strong community regulation of land
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 157usage. Among Goddis Historically speaking, all strong community regulation of land usage.the land belonged to the Rajah (King) of Chamba Changpas follow the traditional system of grazingwho would rent out small fields to different wherein the headman- the goba decides areas forfamilies. The lush mountainous meadows and animal grazing. A unique feature of the traditionalgrazing grounds in the area facilitated the raising pastoral system is the complex administrativeof sheep and goat. They were given property system of pasture allocation and reallocation byrights in the Alpine pastures and customary goba. The Changthang is divided into a numberrights or contracts with residents in low hills for of named pastures of varying size, each withgrazing. Gaddis spend the summer in their delimited borders recorded in register book.permanent homes in Bharmour and cultivate their Changpa households can use only their assignedlands and in winter, they migrate to lower hills of pastures. Each pasture is painstakingly suitableKangra valley with their sheep and goats. In winter for a fixed number of animals calculated locallymigrations, their families also accompany them. on their own system. Thus, access to pastureWhile men go with animals, women and children with particular characterstics is allotted to awork as labourers and house help. The proprietor particular household with some combination offarmers provide shelter and grazing on their fields animals, totalling to a specified number. Eachafter harvest or on meadows. In return, the farmers pasture is expected to sustain only what isget manure for their fields. In summer migrations, considered an appropriate number of livestock.when agricultural activities demand attention, the Triennial censuses of adult animals determineGaddis engage puhal (shepherd) on wages to each household’s herd size and its allocation oflook after the flocks. The year-round migration in pastures and taxes. Additional pastures aresearch of pastures between upper and lower hills allocated to household whose herds haveis independent of other economic activities of increased and are taken from those whose herdsthe flock owner (malhundi) (Bhasin 1988, 1996). have decreased. The whole area under his controlAll customary institutions relating to transhu- is divided in to two zones—one for gompamance are based on reciprocity; the underlying (monastary) animal grazing and the other forprinciple of this practice is coordination between community animal grazing. Every year threenomadic pastoral groups and communities of families selected by goba in rotation take gompacultivators on the way and the foot-hills. Survival animals with their own herds to allotted pasturesof the pastoralists and their livestock calls for (lungrung). The community and gompa animalscomplementarity, rather than competition, graze at pastures, which are far off from each other.between arable and pastoral demands on In addition, one selected family has to take allresources at different altitude. There should be community as well as gompa horses for grazing.provision for economies of scale for both arable The gompa animals graze on the best pasturesand pastoral land-use pattern. and so do the animals of the caretaker families. Changpas have neither crop-residue option The families who look after gompa animals are innor any institutional arrangement with other an advantageous position as their animals havecommunities for grazing their animals. They have good graze, along with gompa animals.only access to their traditional grazing in different Like Changpas, Bhutias of Lachen andvalleys in summer and winter. Single resource Lachung have also preserved their traditional formcompetitors always have framework to overcome of dzumsha (village council) and phipunscarcity and conflicts due to internal pressures (headman) administration, which control the land(population growth, growth in herd size and distribution. The Lachen and Lachung area has achange of activity) and external pressures (climate special status with regard to settlement, landchanges and environmental degradation) as their revenue and local administration. The Bhutias ofresources are limited. The organisation of spatial Lachen and Lachung have communal forest/movements is important in pastoral communities. pastures and agricultural land with familyAmong Changpas, these movements are regular ownership of land but with strong communityand cyclic between the areas of summer pastures regulation of the land usage. The village is anand winter pastures. The orbit of routes and important land-holding unit. The whole systempastures, the routine, direction and schedules of of land distribution is sago. In this form of landmigration are fixed. tenure, the communal authority overrides any Changpas have communal pastureland with claim the state might extend on internal
  • 158 VEENA BHASINsovereignty or state landlordism. In Lachung, as well as for transportation of goods and humanthere are three types of land: (1) land in apple beings. Changpas domesticate a mix of yaks,belt; (2) land in maize, wheat and millet belt and goats, sheep and horses. These animals fulfill their(3) temporary belt. Land in apple and grains belts many needs. Yak, goat and sheep provide themis permanent. Each family, which is a member of with wool needed for ropes, tents, clothingthe dzumsha and fulfills his duties as a member is beddings, milk, meat and transportation.entitled to spcified portion of land. Community Composition of Changpa herd is not random butmembership entails mandatory participation in a is an adaptive response to environment, whichnumber of domestic rituals, as well as ceremonies they inhabit and the resources available to them.of territorial and ancestral deities. These rituals The herd of different animals takes full advantagehelp ensure the health, fertility and prosperity of of the use of vegetation in the same pasture asthe individual, the land and the household (Bhasin different animals graze on different plants making1993). efficient use of resources. Different animals also provide diversified products for self-consumption COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES or sale. “ Maintaining diverse herd composition is also a strategy employed by nomads to minimize Hardin’s Tragedy of commons (1968) described the risk of losses from disease or harsh winters,how common resources, such as the land shared since a mix of different species provide someby pastoralists, ultimately become ruined (Hardin insurance that not all animals will be lost and1968). Private property proponents have erred in herds can be rebuild again” (Miller 2004). Meat isbelieving that common property necessarily rather a by product of the necessary process ofresults in resource degradation. Blaiki and slaughtering animals from the flock, which takesBrookfield (1987) define common property place before the winter, so as to avoid wastingresources as resources that are “subject to scarce fodder on animals which have outlivedindividual use but not to individual possession”, their usefulness. The domestic goats of Chang-has a limited number of users with independent thang produce the finest cashmere wool oruse rights, and have users organised as a pashmina. Rupshu has highest livestock popu-“collectivity and together have the right to exclude lation and consists on an average 300 animalsothers who are not members of the collectivity”. per family. The household depends for its sub-Many studies have shown that people can work sistence on the animals owned by its members.together to manage common-property resources Changpa’s flock must include sheep and goatssustainably (Brombley 1992; McCay and Acheson as producers, yaks to transport the belongings1987). As can be seen among Changpas and on the migrations and a dog to guard for the herdBhutias, shared rights can lead to a more equitable and tent.distribution of scarce or dispersed resources and Gaddis domesticate two types of animals, non-reduce risk in the face of environmental migratory and migratory. Gaddis keep the non-uncertainty (Bhasin 1994, 1996). migratory domestic animals - bulls and cows in Most ‘common - property ’ studies, neglect the permanent villages of the middle hills. Thethe importance of production strategies and cattle subsist on wild fodder, which they forageresource access options used by pastoral and that which is gathered for them comes fromcommunities to evade risks associated with forest trees, brush and grassland. No fodder cropsenvironmental variability and other external are grown, although chaff, stocks and occa-pressures and thus maintain their pastoral system. sionally grains, are fed to them. During winter‘Access options’ are bundles of options available months when most of the families depart, a smallto individuals and communities for securing their percentage of the population is left behind to looklivelihoods and production in response to the after the cattle (that subsist mainly on corn stalks),constraints they face. fields and spinning and weaving of the woolens. The migratory flocks of Gaddis consist of HERD DIVERSIFICATION sheep and goats, whose survival depends largely on transhumant herding. Sheep are raised mostly Pastoralists raise mixed herds of sheep and for their wool, which is sheared thrice a year togoats for animals and animal products, and provide the coarse wool, which is woven intodomesticate yaks, horses etc. for their products rain resistant blankets and the snowshoes for the
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 159shepherds. Gaddis raise goats for their milk and nomads. Wealth is tied to the ownership of ani-meat. Milk is the staple of the shepherd’s diet on mals rather than the ownership of land. Themigration. Of greatest financial value is the meat. number of animal heads they possess determinesTo maintain the size of the flock, about 40 percent the prosperity of pastoral households. Theof the goats are sold during winter. Although household depends for its subsistence on thesheep produce more wool, they as compared to animals owned by its members.goats are less hardy and give less milk and meat. According to Salzman (1980), “they also seeGoats are able to survive on poorer pastures than their herds as banking and investment devices,sheep but at the same time tend to destroy the so that they will try, for example, to keep somepasture after they have grazed for a certain length small stock as relatively liquid assets or ‘smallof time, as their sharp hooves cut the turf, exposing change’ for consumption purposes, or will con-the top soil, which is blown away by the wind vert downward to small stock from their remaining(Bhasin 1988). large stock after a drought to take advantage of Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung raise yaks, higher growth rates and lower per-unit riskdzow (a breed of yak and common cow) sheep, factors” (Salzman 1980: p. 177). Importance ofhorses and mules. They obtain milk, meat and non-economic goals in pastoral societies revealswool from the animals. Bhutias rely on yaks, many interesting aspects. Their economicsponies and mules for transportation (Bhasin requires distinguishable strategies for short-term1989). productivity and longer-term insurance. CONCEPT OF WEALTH Pastoral societies are not often homogenous, but are discernible by household variation in An accumulation of material goods beyond a wealth and livestock ownership. Livestock, unlikecertain point restricts the pastoralist’s freedom land, constitute fluid capital for a pastoralist,of movement, thus reducing his ability to care for which they use as a productive resource, ahis herds and intimidating his livelihood. The marketable surplus and a form of stored wealth.pastoral nomad’s economy is not organised for Livestock are subject to both natural increasessustained production even in normal times. and catastrophic losses, and amassing wealth inAccording to Lattimore, “the pure nomad is poor pastoral society has been described as volatilenomad” (cf. Salzman 1980: p. 34). However, there where the fortunes rise or fall (Barth 1966). Fratkinis emphasis on accumulation of more animals. and Roth (1990) examined the effects of 1984Having a large herd is cultural goal of most drought upon household wealth differences in aherders; prestige and status are defined by having community of Ariaal pastoralists of northernlarger herds than one’s fellows. Work is organised Kenya. Their analysis confirmed the hypothesisby “non-economic” relations in the conventional that the drought resulted in increase householdsense, belonging rather to the general organisa- wealth inequalities.tion of society. In nomadic pastoralist society, Among all the three tribes, ownership of herdinequality is more the organisation of economic is the key determined of a man’s wealth and status.equality and one secures or maintains high Number of animals in herd is always moreposition by generosity. important than quality. Animals are also the only The economic structure of a society become form of inherited wealth, since access to pasturesvisible from the interaction of the general forces is acquired by lineage affiliation and is notwith the specific thoughts, habits, culture and personally owned.patterns of social organisation and institutions The members of the three groups use theirexisting in the society. Even as pastoral nomads animals to acquire prestige and influence in theirshow a variety of social organisation, they are societies. Loaning of milk animals to needy,generally simple in nature and frequently accumulation of impressive dowry, gift giving,dominated by kinship relations. An economic commitment of resources are not strictly under-sense for these pastoralists means an efficient standable on an economic grounds alone. Theway to exploit natural grassland resources. increasing of animal numbers is not a projectionAccording to Barfield, “the economics of pasto- of prestige or an indicator of only social status. Itralism is based on the type of animal raised and is as an insurance against constraint events,what is done with the products” (Barfield 1993: p. herders have to struggle to increase stock num-12). Concept of wealth is different among pastoral bers, in order to provide security in case of losses,
  • 160 VEENA BHASINto leave a remainder of feasible size, to rebuild its later to Thanggu area to sow potatoes. From Mayherd. to September, they stay in higher region and engage themselves in different activities like agriculture, SETTLEMENT PATTERN pasturing, trade and collecting minor forest produce. Thanggu is the meeting place of migrating The scattered and constantly shifting herding Lachenpas as they have a yak-tent gompa and aunits of the pastoralists are truly the primary communal tent kitchen for feast. Dzumsha meetingcommunities of pastoral society. They correspond takes place twice a month at Thanggu.to hamlets among sedentary people. The members Among Lachungpas there are no encamp-of a herding unit make up a socially bounded ments as the families do not migrate seasonally.group. Unlike a sedentary community, which The three busties (hamlets) of Lachung revenuepersists unless the members abandon their house block have cultivable lands at Khedum, Leemaand land and depart, a herding unit of nomads and Lothen. All these places are nearby and totalcan only persist through continuous reaffir- cultivable land is about 16 hectares. During themation by all its members. The coordination of months of November-December, male members gocomponents of economically independent herd- with animals beyond these places. While grazinging units is essential to make it a viable unit. The they collect grasses and firewood. In May they takeconsent of the members of the herding unit their animals to high altitude pastures halting atregarding such decision is important for the Yumthang (3,660 metres), Yume Samdong (4,880maintenance of a herding unit as a social unit. In metres) and Chholhamo. Thus, Lachungpas migratesome areas, the transhumants live in tents and six kilometres up the Lachung to Chholhamo andmove with their animals and families on fixed six kilometres down Lachung to Khedum, Leemaroutes. When routes are fixed between the Lothen. Two phipun (headman) look after the affairssummer and winter pasture, they may construct of these encampments, which are primary commu-huts at both the places. In such cases, tents are nities of Bhutia society. The members of encamp- ment make up a clearly bounded social group, theirused only during migrations. Gaddis at mid- relations to each other as continuing neighboursaltitude own permanent houses and agricultural are relatively constant while other links areland. Some Gaddis also own houses and fields at governed by chance. Members of the encamp-their winter pastures. Gaddis do not use tents in ment must agree in their decisions on the vitalany of their migrations. They like to travel lightly. questions economic strategies, such as divisionThey obtain products from animals and use them of cultivable land at different places, grazing land,directly. When they pass agricultural areas, they migratory schedules and other social matters.Abarter animal products for grain and other phipun holds his encampment together by exerci-necessities. When pastoralists have regular sing his influence in establishing and formulatingsummer and winter pastures, they start growing unanimous agreement within the encampmentsmillet, barley or vegetables near them, as Bhutias on dates of migration and beginnings ofand Gaddis do. The grain is for the human agricultural activities (Bhasin 1989, 1996).population and left-over of arable farming as Among Changpas, though places offorage for animals. migration and routes are fixed but they have many Like Gaddis, Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung reasons of not building permanent houses. Thehave houses at their permanent villages but they pastures are assigned only for three years for aalso use byah (tents) made of yak hair during particular group. This rotation and lack of buildingmigrations to high altitude pastures. Lachenpas material restricts Changpas from buildingmigrate seasonally and have encampments at permanent houses at any altitude. They live in adifferent places. Lachenpas inhabit Lachen from black tent (rebo) with designs, suited to localmiddle of February to middle of May and then move economy and availability of raw materials in thetowards Menshithang. As a rule, young people vicinity. These tents are woven and made byaccompany their herds to grazing area but some Changpas themselves. These tents are strongLachenpas do take their families along as they have enough to last many generations. The tent isbuilt Kachcha houses there. Besides grazing animals, water-proof because of natural greasiness of thethey collect firewood and grasses. After April, only hair and the oily smoke of yak dung burned insideyoung men and women migrate to higher villages in the hearth. These tents withstand heavyof Zemu, Tallum, Samdong, Yakhang and Kalep and snowfall and strong winds.
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 161 Almost all nomads have a base, usually in a also various types of social organisation. Pastoraltraditional winter village from where they make well- populations are organised into so-called descentestablished moves with their livestock to seasonal groups (tribes, clans and lineages). The socialpasture. The number of moves from winter to structure, social organisation and community lifeseasonal pastures depends upon the availability of pastoralists emerges out of the needs of itsof water and fodder. The Changthang nomads individuals and social groups.move along with their livestock annually between The role of Indigenous Institutions in thesummer and winter encampments with associated Pastoral Communities is very important. Thepastures. The migration sequence enables the indigenous institutions play the role of governingnomads to utilise the different pastures in their the behaviour of individual member of the society.growing period. Often, households move parts of The indigenous institutions are organised totheir herds, say, male and non-lactating sheep and serve the social, economic, security and develop-goats to a secondary satellite camps at other ment needs of its members. They also have thepastures and in a different season pregnant responsibilities of decision-making and enforce-females are moved to another satellite camp, ment of resource use rules through politicaldepending on availability of pastures and labour authority.to do so. This system applies only to sheep and Majority of pastoral groups in the world aregoats. Yaks are moved according to different patrilineal. The pattern of social, functional andsequence. They leave male yaks unsupervised in administrative groups in the nomadic pastoralthe mountains throughout the year until they are societies have emerged out of the needs to meetneeded for transportation. In autumn, the female the demands of a migratory mode of production.yaks are herded daily and move with the sheep Resulting organisation of labour and socialand goats. In winter, the female yaks are moved organisation is complex and variable. Flexibilityto mountain slopes to forage there. According to is required to manage herd movement, informationChangpas, their traditional system has allowed sharing, risk pooling, aggregation and dispersalthem to survive on Changthang Plateau for of herders across the region. Formal institutionscenturies without destroying their resource base are necessary to control ownership and transferprecisely because it fostered a balance between of property as well as adjudicate conflicts.their highly adapted herds and the harsh environ- Among Bhutias and Changpas, the encamp-ment. This also justifies the individual herd ment is a level of social organisation, which is anmanagement strategy. Changpas have permanent administrative and jural unit. It remains the moststone and mud houses in winter villages, where inclusive level of political activity. The Bhutia andparents settle after retirement from transhumant Changpa polity is characterised not by a hierarchylife. but by equality among its members. Power and The Changpa economy is labour intensive authority is diffused among members. Bhutiasand the labour resources of a household set an have their own local government organisation,upper limit on the number of animals they can dzumsha, an assembly composed of the heads ofcare for. Changpa household consists of either the separate households. The dzumsha is thenuclear families or polyandrous households. most powerful traditional system governing natur-These domestic units are stable in composition, al resources. In Bhutia system, laws regardingbut camp groups, herding groups and groups that livestock production involve range-land andmigrate together are very unstable in composition. water resources management as core componentsThese groups tend to change in composition with of the indigenous institutional system, which stillevery season as households make temporary strives to be adhered to. Management of theseagreements based primarily on economic resources are closely bound to the pastoralconsiderations. Households are grouped into livelihood and strictly observed by the society.shallow agnatic lineages based on known Every member of the society is required to respectgenealogy and there (Bhasin 1996). customary laws. Under the general assembly, dzumsha, phi-phun has the highest authority in SOCIAL ORGANISATION the system. He has two gyapons, who work as his helpers and acts as constables and messen- Pastoral nomads present not only different gers as well. Village elders gen-me assist phi-phunliving lifestyles and means of subsistence but in the effective working of village administration.
  • 162 VEENA BHASINThe institutional structure extends to community the meetings; and collects funds. He is not partand village levels where the actual administrations of the judiciary but acts as messenger.and management of resources take place. Village Bhutia and Changpa societies are largelyelders reinforce co-operation and social solidarity unstratified. The indigenous system of prestigebetween people through shared rituals and and power among Changpas is based on relativeresource sharing. egalitarianism. This system differs from “kinship Among Changpas there is one official head societies” as there are no divisive characteristicsgoba and Members (ghansum) number of which of a kinship system overpowering the socio-depends on the size of the camp. Like Bhutia’s’ political system. There are no social classes andphipun, goba holds Changpa encampments the whole population carries out the same kind oftogether and unites into unit. In this democratic economic activities.form of government, the village council (chogdus) Gaddis of Bharmour have small compactselects goba (Headman). The village council villages or hamlets. The members of these villagesconsists of all the male heads of the separate make up a clearly bounded social group; theirhouseholds. Membership and affiliation in village relation to each other as continuing neighbourscouncil is founded on the formal recognition of are relatively constant, while all other contactsboth descent and residence rules. Changpas allow are passing, ephemeral and governed by chance.a fellow villager to attend village council, if he Like all Hindu communities, Gaddis are dividedhas fulfilled his duties as a member of the society. into endogamous groups called castes. The casteSelection of the goba is by consensus. This ties stretch outside the village to unite people ofconsensus is arrived by finding the person with the same caste. The village, which appears as apositive qualities of simplicity, honesty, truth- unit from outside, reveals clear social divisions.fulness, social status, reputation and dealing The division of a village into number of castesability. A sound economic background is not an plays a part in actual social interaction becauseessential factor but it is an added qualification. social interaction is limited by membership ofOccasionally, a situation of discord arises for the different castes. Members of different castes areselection of goba. In case of discord, religious expected to behave differently and to havebigwigs have the final say. The life and culture of different values and ideas. These differences areChangpa is strongly religion-ridden. Religion is a sanctioned by religion. In Bharmour villages, theredominant force manifested in all aspects of is major division between high castes and lowChangpa life. Ecological conditions in the area castes, with only minor hiearchical distinctionsmake religion and religious dignitaries an impor- within each level. Most of these castes recognisetant part of their life. Gompa men, Chhog Jot and large categories of caste mates united by a mythKushok (head Lama) have final say in the that they were related by a patrilineal descentselection of goba. In turn goba selects Members from a common ancestor. Each of these categories(ghansum), sangcho (camp heads) and kotwal. is denoted by its own name and its members are The goba regularly exercises his authority in found in several villages. These groups areallotting pastures and coordinating the migra- known as gotras. These gotras are further sub-tions and settling the disputes. District Commi- divided into many khinds, als and jaths. A gotrassioner and other members of the administration forms a kind of corporate group sharing territorialanticipate his co-operation in all sorts of econo- lands; it makes demands on the loyalties of itsmic, social and educational schemes and develop- constituent members, each member beingment programmes. responsible to and for the whole group. It is also Sangcho, camp head, who is responsible for especially useful as landholding entity, servingthe management in his section to the goba, as a broad basis for recognising and protectingmanages the scattered tent camps and in his turn, land rights. Al- association is a form of co-goba is responsible for the whole group. Goba’s operation and mutual insurance, and through it,mandatory registration with the tehsildar and a man maintains a large range of significantMember’s registration with National Congress interpersonal relations within a wider society inOffice in Leh link the village council to wider politi- which he lives. Because of ecological conditionscal party. Each section has a kotwal appointed and resultant economic pursuits, the ties ofby goba who act as constable, messenger and common residence, daily cooperation and face-odd job man. Kotwal informs the people about to-face relations in local neighbourhood always
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 163keep on changing. A person may not see his al They participate in all village ceremonies andassociates for lengthy periods as they are fulfill their barton (obligatory assistance))scattered widely and arbitrarily over a large area, obligations. Failure to fulfill this obligation breaksand both his and their locations change the barton and creates great ill-will. The fieldfrequently. The relationship of al-associates dwellings are regarded as the extension of thetherefore consists primarily in mutual assistance village, occupied in order to take advantage ofon the more important occasions of individual the cultivated fields. The allocation of the peoplesocial life during the months of concentration. to these field dwellings “is a significant socialFor much of the time, these relations remain strategy in local demography, with importantdormant, being reactivated as occasion requires. implications for social ecology. It facilitatesOccasional pastoral co-operation may occur optimal land use and maintenance of suitablebetween al-associates. The obligation of support ratios of people to land” (Berreman 1978: p. 351).in judicial affairs also exists and these are more Every village is headed by an elder known asimportant as most disputes are settled in the Pradhan and everybody abides by his decisions.traditional biradari courts. The patrilineage is A group of villages is organised into a Panchayat,divided into the khinds named after the ancestors the local governing body. Local disputes arewhere the split is supposed to have taken place. settled at the level of Pradhan, whereas the localA khind consists of number of tols. Each tol Panchayat settles disputes between villagesconsists of two-three generations in depth and (Bhasin 1988).may consist of one or more brothers and share a Studies have shown that decision-makingcommon hearth. Though physically and econo- organisation and pastoral nomads’ camp-sizemically divided, a family remains nevertheless a depicts variation. It is suggested on both theore-part of tol or extended family. Frequently, all the tical and empirical grounds that tendency andfamilies of a tol keep their flock together under maximum potential range of variation in camp sizethe supervision of two hired shepherds and two among nomads groups is heavily constrained bytol members (belonging to any family who can limitations on the ability of individuals and smallspare two male members at that time for reason). groups to monitor and process information inIn addition to these kins, Gaddis have help of decision contents (Johnson 1981).dharam - bhai (pledge brothers). Dharam-bhais Social organisation of pastoral groups isare associates whose ties are not coincident with based on kinship. However, it is not only pastoralkinship, but which, by virtue of reciprocal rights societies, where kinship, pseudo-kinship form theand duties have a pseudo-kinship quality. An structural basis of social organisation, otherunderlying theme of Gaddi social organisation is societies following different economic systemsthe general difficulty of group activity on any also has a kinship base. Transhumant way of lifelarge scale because of widespread dispersal of necessitates relation beyond the limits of a village.population together with diverse and frequent The quality of social relationships in which,movement. Practically every household is a transhumant engage: their form and meaning, thefarming and pastoral unit. In Gaddi community way they are initiated and sustained, is similar.where agricultural labour cannot be purchased, However, despite the apparent likeness, there arethey have assured a stable labour supply through cultural differences. All the three-transhumantbarton (obligatory assistance) and co-operation groups have bond brotherhood type of relations.between families. At the same time, the barton Widespread and diffused social ties havegroup exercises an enormous amount of control ecological and herd maintenance advantages forover society. The barton relationships are, a broad variety of nomadic peoples regardless oftherefore internal regulators of Gaddi society, local or the particular species herded (Pastnerwhich bind relationships and castes organisation. 1971).In the cases where fields of the family are It has been reported by Lanchester anddispersed and far apart, then the few members of Lanchester (1999) that among nomads of Arab,the family or one nuclear family may reside in all activities have both subsistence and surplusfield dwelling. A large extended family may own aspects. With a choice of conduits like gifts,three or four field dwellings at different places. exchange, hospitality and taxation surplus is dis-The residents of the field dwellings are consi- tributed. Among nomads, the social relationshipsdered as being members of the village community. supported mainly by generosity imply much more
  • 164 VEENA BHASINsignificance than mere material wealth. According of the father but now these are the primary unitsto Lancaster, Arab nomads see social relationship of inheritance and will be nuclear family of eachas the practical base of their flexibility, which is son. The establishment of each nuclear familythe key of their survival. They see their socio- frequently coincides with at least informal divisioneconomic system as more sustainable than that of property. The widow mother and unmarriedof the state systems, because former is based on sibling stay in the father’s house. If a father hasstrict morality lacking in state system. one wife, the property is divided among the male Among Changpas through the law of children called mundawand (munda-boy, wand-primogeniture, the eldest son inherits the division). If father has more than one wife, theproperty of the parents including rebo (tent). After property is divided among the number of wivesthe wedding of his eldest son and birth of his one has. Later on wives divide their share amongoffspring, father hand down his tent to his eldest their sons (Bhasin 1988).son and move to a reb-chung. They leave their Among Bhutias, Changpas and Gaddis themigratory life and settle in traditional winter household is the smallest and most important unitvillages of their sections. In traditional winter of production and consumption. However, invillages, they have a small house, little piece of cases of need, group structures-larger than theland and few animals sufficient for the support of household and smaller than the villages arethe several fathers, the mother and unmarried accessible. These are the mutual aid groups basedyounger sisters. The eldest son or daughter in on reciprocity, consisting of neighbours and/orcase of no sons acquires the remaining, larger relatives, mostly on residential and customaryportion. The children do not abandon their lines. Though these are informal groups, violationparents and regularly visits them, especially on of its rules may lead it to formal level.festivals and other social occasions. Traditionally, The three groups practice different form ofChangpa practiced polyandry. However, now all marriage. Gaddis practice monogamy, whiletypes of marriage are prevalent. The polyandrous Bhutias and Changpas practice polyandrous,marriage provides the required labour to set polygamous or monogamous form of marriage.themselves as an economically independent and Under extreme environmental conditions, certainviable household unit (Bhasin 1996, 2009 in social structures like polyandrous marriage arepress). important as an ecologically conditioned social Among Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung, the and economic structure.component households are economically Transhumant Gaddis of Bharmour, Himachalindependent. Each house has its own animals, Pradesh are agro-pastoralists, who own perma-land and grazing rights by virtue of his dzumsha nent houses, land and practice agriculture at mid-membership. All sons inherit equally. Though the altitude. They rear large flocks of sheep and goat.herd of a household is administered and utilised In winter, they move to lower altitudes with theiras a unit, individual members of the household flocks and family, where men pasture their flocksusually hold separate title to the animals. When and women and children work in the houses ofthings are going good, fathers frequently give a local people. In summer, they go to high altitudefew animals to their sons and daughters. In cases, pastures with their flocks, while the familywhere there are no sons, female inheritance is manages the agriculture. For all these diversecommon. Like Changpas, after the birth of a child, economic activities, they do not resort tothe couple establish themselves in a separate polyandry but manage with the nuclear family.house. Bhutia society make arrangements where- They do have institutional support to addby productive property in the form of land, herds members to their family. Gaddis have provisionand equipment and additional labour force are for supplementing work force in these patrilocalprovided to secure the viability of newly esta- families by marriage, birth/adoption andblished incomplete elementary families (Bhasin incorporation. In case, wife is infertile, polygyny1989). is a mean to seek a heir; when a woman is widowed, The household units of Gaddis are based on polygyny (through the mechanisms of levirate,nuclear families. With the death of the father, the i.e. fraternal widow inheritance) is a means toauthoritarian unity of his nuclear family ceases provide her a husband within the family, retainingand it breaks into a number of independent her labour and avoiding her separation from hergroups. These groups still comprise the ‘family’ children she has produced from a previous
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 165marriage. Incorporation of young male relations lower in pastoral groups. In all the three groupsand ghar-jawantari (a typical form of marriage) traditional rules and regulations form theare the means to supplement work force of the foundation of women’s position which is reflectedfamily. In this form of marriage, the boy has to in the traditional practices. The tools of pro-work, as a helping hand in the house of his would duction are owned by men as are the forces ofbe father-in –law for a specified period decided production –animals and pasture rights. Limitedearlier (Bhasin 1988). right of girls’ access to education, lack of access While considering the exchange pattern of to control resources and the associated rightsany society, anthropologists analyse three and benefits of their roles in community affairs,fundamental forms of exchange-reciprocity, decision-making, labour division etc. In all theredistribution and market exchange. Among three societies under study, women power doespastoralists, the three fundamental forms of not extend to societal or political spheres. Theexchange are practiced in different combinations. economic power of the women in the household The use of surplus time and resources is is not translated in to corresponding communitysocially, culturally economically specific. Bhutias, authority. Men’s work in public sphere has usuallyChangpas and Gaddis practice the three funda- enjoyed higher status than women’s domesticmental forms of exchange-reciprocity, redis- work. Women supremacy is restricted within thetribution and market exchange in different combi- family domain and does not extend to social ornations. Food sharing beyond the domestic unit political spheres. The main obstacle to haveis uncommon. Rights of access to pastoral equality in status of women and men is theproducts lie within the domestic sphere and are women’s lesser ability to perform work other thannot generally shared beyond the household. domestic work. By convention every villageRelationships beyond the family or corporate Panchayat has a female member, the lady nevergroups tend to be based on balanced reciprocity take any active interest in the proceedings ofand animals are used in many pastoral groups as Panchayat. Bhutias have a tradition of collectivea basis for creating social debt or obligation but decision making by communities through thegenerally within constraints of access to institution of dzumsha. However traditionalresources. All the three groups practice redistri- institutions do not witness a significant role forbution in various forms. As stated by Crapo (1995), women and dzumsha is constituted of males only.that generally, the ‘gift’ constitutes the basic In the absence of a male member, a female cantheme of reciprocity. Carpo (1995) elucidates represent her family unit. If a male head is absentreciprocity as “the system of exchange in goods from dzumsha meeting, he is fined, however ifor services are passed from one individual or represented by female head, she is liable to paygroup to another as gifts without the need for half the amount for her absence. This shows thatexplicit contracting for specific payment” holds women have a secondary importance in publicgood for the three groups under discussion. As affairs and community decision-making. Womenstated by Friedl (1976) that redistribution “entails are generally bypassed and marginalised eitherthe collection of goods by central authority and because they lack the requisite skills or becausethen the reallocation of those goods according women’s heavy and unending domesticto some principle to the members of the society” responsibilities makes attending meetings and(p.319), the Bhutias, Changpas and Gaddis, collect participating in decision-making difficult (Chaptermaterials and redistribute by arranging a feast. 14 in the present Volume).The feasts are sponsored either by rotation or byan individual in lieu of crime committed against PERCEPTION OF RELIGIONthe society in all the three groups. A sexual division of labour is common in The perception of religious phenomenonpastoral societies, but the role of women’s labour among pastoral nomads is different from settledstands in sharp contrast to that of women in societies. The gather together habitat of the winterforaging societies. In pastoral groups women contrasts with scattered habitat of the summerhave limited rights to dispose of the products of season, with its mobility and the splitting of thepastoral production, which tend to be controlled group into families in the narrowest sense of theby men. Though women labour is important to world. There are two ways of occupying land andsocietal reproduction, the status of women is two ways of thinking as well. This contrast
  • 166 VEENA BHASINbetween life in winter and summer is reflected not Hindus. Gaddis are staunch Shaivites and believeonly in rituals, festivals and ceremonies of all sorts, that Lord Shiva resides at Mani-Mahesh for abut it also deeply affects ideas, collective repre- period of six months and migrates to Piyalpuri,sentation, in a word, the whole mentality of the the nether land, during the winter months. Thegroup. In summer, the life is somewhat secularis- migratory period of the Gaddis coincides with theed. The ecological constraints to which the group migratory pattern of their main deity, Lord Shiva.is subject make mobility necessary and group’s Gaddis’ eco-socio-cultural configurations arerequirements come to restricts religious thought conceptually derived from this upward-downwardand practice. The mobility that characterises movement of Lord Shiva. The Gaddi annualpastoral societies is indeed the central feature of calendar of activities is accordingly divided intotheir organisation. When they come to winter two halves and represents two distinct modes ofvillages, they have more time and their thought life during the summer months at Bharmour andprocess is different. Among transhumant, social the high passes of the Dhauladhar and winterrelations become activated through changes of months in the valley of Kangra. The up and downplaces-proximity and distances are not relevant, movement is cyclical and follows nature’s rhythm.and space is in a sense negated. Among the When Shiva migrates to Piyalpuri, he takes awayBasseri, pastoral nomads of Iran, the paucity of with him all the living creatures, so the Gaddi tooritual activity is striking. The central rite of society migrates. This upward-downward movement is sois migration itself. The movement leads nomads important to the Gaddi that it is reflected in hisinto closer recognition of the one constant in their more sedentary existence as well, namely in thelife, the environment and its life-giving qualities. construction of his houses, which stand as if on aUnder such conditions of flux where group and vertical pole and the life within the house, whicheven family relations are brittle and fragmentary, also follows this movement. Despite being Hindus,the environment in general and ones’ own they worship many spirits and supernaturals.encampment and grazing lands become for each The Bhutias of Lachen and Lachung areindividual the one reliable and rewarding focus Buddhists and believe in the basic principles ofof his attention, his loyalty and his devotion. The merit and sin. They also believe in a vast array ofnomad does not have the impression of inhabiting gods and spirits whom they propitiate ata fabricated world but is in direct contact with the appropriate time for the general welfare of society.nature. He is controlled by nature and not by The Bhutias place great emphasis on coercivepersons. The domestic animals whose inter- rites of exorcising and destroying demons. Theventions he exploits the wild objects, serve only execution is in the hands of trained specialiststo mediate this relationship with nature. Mobility pau, nejohum and lamas. Bhutia nunneriesand fluidity of groups and within groups, affect (manilkhang) are geographically separated fromthe ideology of nomads and that may be reflective the gompas and nuns do not perform rituals andin collective representations in rituals. Nomadism funeral rites for people. There are frequent servicesand its underlying ideology is a “certain type of in busti (village) gompa, conducted by the localbehaviour” rather than a mode of economic pro- lamas on different occasions at specified timesduction or as a variable determined by environ- throughout the year. Such services entail thement. This particular attitude in the face of construction of complex altar arrangementssupernatural and the symbolic world is governed (destroyed at the completion of the event) andby nomadic way of thinking (Spooner 1973; readings of religious texts, but every serviceBarfield 1993). Legitimating of the social structure culminates with a distribution of food, for whichis the primary purpose of the religion. Whenever all Bhutias come. Each family contributes to thepeople gather into groups that are in general ceremonies performed at the busti gompa.concordance with one another- such as religious Compulsory work and contributions are expectedservices and ceremonies-the existing social when festivals are held and rituals performed tostructure is maintained because balance has been ward off evil spirits and natural calamities. Bhutiaspreserved. Religion of Changpas may include are very particular about these services and haveworship of their animals and becomes so meaning- built a gompa in a tent at Thanggu, the summerful that the ceremonies and rituals surrounding it grazing area. In addition to public gompa events,have become apotheosized. Both Bhutias and Bhutia religion also consists of privately sponsor-Changpas are Buddhists, while Gaddis are ed services, usually held in sponsor’s home, on
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 167birth, marriage, illness and death. A household and goats of the gompa. Changpas make regularmay sponsor a ceremony in the absence of any offerings to the dedicated animals in the herd.life crises, simply for the purpose of gaining merit, They neither kill nor sell these committed animalsgood luck, protection or all three for the house- in any circumstances. Eventually, after their death,hold. All religious ceremonies have a broadly young ones replace them.common base, centering on offerings and In addition, each family keeps some animalspetitions to god, and offerings and threats to the from each type of either gender for the welfare ofdemons and closing with a ritual food to all the family members. Head of the family select thesepresent. And finally, village religion includes the animals. To select tshe-thar, he throws prayerprimordial tradition of shamanism (Bhasin 1989). beads in the air and on which animal’s body the Changpas worship inside the tent as well as beads fall are the chosen ones. Then a lama comesoutside in the herds. Changpas worldview is that and blesses these animals. These animals elevaterelation between animals and humans is based suffering of the family and take away sin or evil.on link or association rather than a clear boundary All these selected animals get preferred treatment.between them. The belief is that both humans They do not carry weights. Changpas do not rideand animals exist as subjects within the same over dedicated or selected horses. However, theyworld and have a relationship of mutual shear dedicated sheep and remove pashmina fromdependency. Buddhist pantheon represents a the goats. After the shearing of livestock,three-tier division of the world. Gods inhabit the Changpas hold a large prayer ceremony and inviteuppermost level, klu (spirits of aquatic and the Rinpoche of Dubbock to preside over thesubterranean world) dwell in the lowest and the prayers. It is for the welfare of the community aspeople and btsan (demonic deities) occupy the well as the livestock.middle level. Among pastoralists, animals are a The cultural interpretation of pastoralism isvital link between man and the gods. It is important not separate from its practice but is more importantto understand that the expressed relationship for the outcome than the procedure. Changpasbetween living beings is not the general love for consider sheep as sacred and receive blessingsanimals as such. Some animals are of importance through these. The perception of sheep as sacredfor people’s subsistence become icon of worship implies that animals possess magical or super-in a culture, as the sheep among Changpa. Among human qualities, well thought-out for practicingChangpas, sheep are the focal point of this successful pastoralism. The lamas of the gompasentreaty of gods, btsan (demonic deities) and klu are very important even if they do not participate(spirits that inhabit aquatic and subterranean physically in herding animals. The festivals, ritualsworlds) and have to be constantly appeased. and associated taboos are all important. “TheThrough sheep, the Changpas receive blessings. reciprocity between humans and animals wasHowever, the correlation between ‘worship’ and conceived of as an agreement between partnerssubsistence value of an animal is not applicable which prevented human beings from taking moreto all pastoralists or hunters. Changpas herds than he or she needed” (Vecsey 1980: p. 20).consist of sheep of different colours. From each Ceremonial life of Changpas consists ofherd, five male sheep with specified colour individual rites involving the family members.combination are dedicated to different gods. Some ceremonies include people outside theChangpas keep few sheep for expelling curses family, the Pha-spun members. Other ceremoniesand bad luck. These are not dedicated to any involve feasts and other entertainments whereparticular god. In case of evil eye or when another all the members of pha-spun are present. Thecurses a person, Changpas offer incense and inter-pha-spun participation include activities likerecite prayers over such a sheep to ensure the joining a procession, the tent god (phug-la), thebreaking of spell. They do not sacrifice these tutelary of each pha-spun, represented throughsheep but keep them simply for worship. Some the sacred arrow, is housed in the upper mostfamilies dedicate goats for worship too. Changpas part of the tent (Bhasin 2009, in press).commit male yaks and horses as well. These Rappaport (1968) pointed out that religion andhorses and yaks are property of the gompa. rituals had advantages for humankind when itChangpas worship these yaks and horses comes to building sustainable and reliableannually, at the beginning of the annual gompa systems for society and in the long run, thefestival along with the other dedicated male sheep environment. People invest emotions and their
  • 168 VEENA BHASINdeep-rooted traditional ecological knowledge in Amdo and brought significant changes to theperforming rituals. Since rituals are social events, pastoral economy. However, the nomads’the entire society becomes involved. According narratives of continuity reflect the persistence ofto Anderson, rituals regulate the egoistic and an essential model of tribal organization (Piriewasteful behaviour and embed the message of 2005). To avoid this, it is extremely important thatresponsibility in a more efficient way than do mere planners understand the traditional livestocksecular ways. Traditional societies encode their management system.resource system in rituals. All traditional societies Recent research points to the fluidity withinthat have succeeded in resource management certain pastoral groups and the fact that indi-have done so partly by embedding their praxis in viduals move in and out of herding, in responsereligion and rituals (Anderson 1973). to a wide variety of factors-market conditions that may alter the profitability of herding, the availa- RELATIONS BETWEEN STATE AND bility of alternative options including agriculture PASTORAL GROUPS and jobs in existing place or return to pastoral groups. All pastoral groups in Himalaya face the The relationship between states and pastoral similar constraints and stimuli. Natural exigencies-nomads has been the subject of many studies extreme weather conditions, drought, epidemics(Klute 1996; Lenhart and Casimir 2001). State and predators result in reduction of animals.policies regarding forests, agriculture, irrigation, Likewise, social crisis, such as phases in domesticfodder, famine, pastoral rights and migration are developmental cycle and work force shortage insome of the mechanisms that contribute to the herding groups cause concern in the community.alteration of pastoral life style. Some policies The presence of diffused web of social ties-influence pastoralists directly and others have consanguineal, affinal or pseudo kins coupledan effect on even if these were not aimed at with their physical mobility enables pastoralistsherders. The pastoralists have been affected by to overcome such pressures. They utilise suchthe events that took place outside their own ties periodically for replenishing depleted stock,territory. Particularly, environment society gaining access to an ally’s pasture in time of localrelationship has been altered pervasively and dearth or realigning personnel for herdingconsiderably, an important feature being the efficacy. The pastoralists have managed toexpanding linkages with other production survive because of their position in the exchangesystems and a number of development interven- system. Pastoralism is an important economictions for the betterment of humans and livestock. activity in the Himalayas, where ecologicalDevelopment of animal husbandry is a major constraints restrict agriculture. It was through thegovernment goal. The impetus to increase domestication of numerous herds and flocks thatlivestock productivity by scientific methods is the resources of distant pastures could bestrong. However, intervening in fragile environ- converted into wealth. The physical environmentments with complex ecological systems is a of the region has created a way of life, wheredifficult undertaking. Many pastoral progra- groups of people along with their livestock aremmes in other areas of world have resulted not in on move and are involved in regional transactionsprogress, but rather in destruction of the way of at different levels. These nomads are an essentiallife of the inhabitants and an environment in part of the larger socio-economic system of thepoorer condition than before (Sandford 1983; region. Before the closing of the border, they usedSwift and Maliki 1984). It has been observed from pastures on both sides of the border. Along withdevelopment activities in pastoral communities their pastoral activities, they carried on borderin arid environments in inner Asia as well as from trade. Despite the ecological constraints, pasto-Africa and the Middle East, where external factors ralists were managing their environment forhad detrimental effects on the traditional making a living without outside intervention.pastoralism and the sustainability of the natural There is chain of adverse conditions, whichresources (Nimir-Fuller 1999). are forcing Changpas to abandon their nomadic Tibetan nomads have been the subject of lives, their traditions and total loss of their identityChinese reforms. The advent of Chinese state, and culture. The key factors are harsh wintercollectivisation, reform and economic develop- periods with temperatures reaching -40 degreesment have swept away old forms of leadership in Celsius. During these six months, they remain cut
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 169off from outside world. They survive on the food Sikkim, reducing pasturelands to their minimumcollected during summer and completely depend levels. Chinese annexation stimulated the Tibetanon tsampa, lentils, rice, milk, butter and dry migration to Changthang. Many of them settledcheese. This results in high levels of malnutrition in Changthang, creating social and economicand micronutrient deficiency. During the harsh problems. Changpas have long histories ofwinters, children do not attend school, as there cultural and religious homogeneity with theare no heating arrangements. Even teachers are Tibetan refugees. Nevertheless, the additionalnot willing to teach under such conditions. There human and animals’ population in the areaare no shelters for animals. Many perish under created a tremendous pressure on the carryingheavy snow. During winter, medical help is not capacity of the land. Shortage of feed and fodderavailable to the human as well as the animal resulted in the death of a number of animals. Thepopulation. It is not that Changpas have not been loss of trade and the winter pasture led to drasticconfronting such conditions from centuries. Both changes in their life-style. There is increasinganimals and humans are highly adapted to the commercialisation of livestock values, competitionecological peculiarities of the region. The patterns with other pastoralists, diminished self-sufficiencyof living and rearing specific animals are based through local dependence on local market,on the tested experience of centuries. However, encapsulation by regional administration, de-due to recent changes in the area brought in by creased mobility and increasing social diffe-the closure of Tibetan border and Changpas rentiation and inequalities in wealth and degreedespair has increased. Weakened by lack of food, of economic security. Many Changpas left theiranimals had given births to dead lambs and kids traditional transhumant way of life and settledin winter. In 2007, 124,530 sheep and goats and along valleys. Some have settled in urban areas10,390 yaks were directly affected by pasture near Leh, others stick to the pastoral activities byscarcity caused by the desert locust attack (Sub- changing the composition of livestock by increas-Division Report of Changthang 2008). The ing number of goats and decreasing number ofalready overgrazed pastures were subject to yaks.locust attack resulting total loss of pasture. Over The development process in Leh has increas-centuries, they have evolved an indigenous ed opportunities of waged labour. This hasrangeland management system in which they encouraged the out-migration of many Changpas.reserve certain pastures to be used in winter when According to a household survey data carriedit snows in higher grazing areas. When other out between 1962 and 2001, 306 Changpas leftpastures were grazed or covered with snow, the Rupshu-Kharnak to settle near Leh town. Al-Changpa used these ‘emergency pastures’. though small in number, this constitutes roughlyDuring this period, the shepherds split the herds one-third of the original population of Rupshu-intosmaller units. Stronger animals were taken to Kharnak. Over the past two decades, out-pastures higher up. In 2008, because of bad migration has reduced the number of Kharnakweather conditions and poor pasturage, herding Changpas. The Kharnak Changpas have esta-groups shifted to spring pasture in January and blished a permanent settlement about ten kilo-February, one-and-a-half to two months ahead of metres from Leh town. The clustering of migrantstime. There is scarcity of fodder and the traditional at one destination has facilitated additionalsystem of ‘winter reserved pasture’ is under strain. migrants there, creating a ‘chain migration’, by Since the Independence of India, the reducing the associated costs and risks for sub-pastoralists of the Himalayas have faced a series sequent migrants (Hugo 1981, cf. Goodhall 2004).of significant changes from external political and The advent of reforms and economiceconomic changes. These structural alterations development has brought significant changes tohave brought adjustments in many aspects of the pastoral economy. Introduction of Publicthe traditional pastoral system, including Distribution System (PDS) in 1983 has broughtmigratory cycle, local economy and social organi- rations to their door steps at subsidised rates.sation. Many important changes have taken place However, this has increased the need for cash inin the region due to Indo-China war in 1962. China the local economy and has exposed householdscaptured a lion’s portion of the Indian territory in to the risk and uncertainty of price fluctuations.many border areas, including Changthang sub- Traditional trade relationships with lowlanddivision and Lachen and Lachung area in North agricultural communities have declined in impor-
  • 170 VEENA BHASINtance. Local availability of grains has encouraged Bhutia population. Consequently, the Bhutias ofa shift in Korzok away from the cultivation of Lachen and Lachung were trading with Tibetanssubsistence crops towards a focus on pastoral across the border. The barter of timber, wood,production, which is far more lucrative (LNP 1995). dyestuffs and dairy products of North Sikkim for Changpas rationally make use of their Tibetan salt and wool formed the basis of thisresources and are perceptive and practical people. trade. The Bhutias of Lachen and LachungTheir dependence on natural resources is pursued it as an occupation intimately interwoveninstitutionalised through a variety of social and with their pastoral activities. Thus, as long ascultural mechanism such as religion, folklore and trade was unhampered by political restrictions, ittraditions. When government assumes control enabled them to remain economically inde-of natural resources, these mechanisms become pendent. However, with the closing of the Tibetandefunct and a radical reorientation of existing border in 1962, life changed for these people. Itpatterns of resources take place, including a deprived them of their livelihood and had antransition from collective to individual use of adverse effect on their traditional crafts. As longresources. The results are protests, social as Tibetan wool was imported in large quantities,movements and the violation of official laws, along weaving flourished and they produced variety ofwith an erosion of social bonds that formerly woven articles. The Bhutias were sufferers inregulated the customary use of resources. They another way too because of the closure of border.are open to change when they perceive new The Chinese seized many of their herds of yaksoptions to be appropriate to their way of life and and flocks of sheep in 1962 during their seasonalcultural value. For example, they have started migration under the traditional trans-borderusing trucks for transportation and many have pasturing using arrangement. Their economybought radio and cassette players during the past received a setback and underwent a number offew years. Variety of manufactured goods is changes. Military encampments, supply basespopular. and defense posts were set up in the Northern The local conditions in Changthang keep on Border area. Bhutias reallocated from pastoral andchanging, consequently development and trading economy to agriculture, small-scaleconservation decisions must be based on micro- horticulture and wage-earning economy. Becauselevel data. of the scarcity of arable land near permanent The question of the future prospects of high village, the Bhutias of Lachen move to other areasmountain pastoralism within a framework of along river valleys for agriculture and collectionsustainable development is complex. The fate of of grasses and firewood. During the rainy season,high mountain pastoralism within Changthang all Lachenpas move to Thanggue area (3900Plateau has revealed that socio-economic trans- metres) where they have their agricultural andformations are reflected in all sectors of pasto- pastoral land. The growth of barley, maize andralism. buckwheat is restricted up to 2,745 metres but Nomadism has been undergoing regular root crops like reddish and potatoes grow wellchanges, modifications and adjustments. In up to 3,660 metres as a summer crop. From Juneparticular their transforming socio-political to September, they stay in their farmhouses orenvironment and their incorporation within a yak huts on the Thanggu plateau. Lachenpasregional market structure. Adaptation and move back after harvesting the crops, potato,modification are influenced to a greater extend radish and cabbage and some of them make aby political and social developments than by second move to down south to Chungthang orchanging environmental conditions in the region Mangan to sell the crops and dairy products. Onwhere these practices are applied. Consequently, the other hand, Lachungpas practice rain-fedpastoral practices and the use of pastures will agriculture on the fields near the village. Theycontinue to play an economic role in Changpas grow wheat, barley, potatoes and cabbage.life. Surplus production and export of potatoes and Like Changpas of Changthang, Bhutias of cabbage has brought prosperity to the village,Lachen and Lachung were also victims of especially after the introduction of road andChinese’s aggression in 1962. Traditionally, in vehicular traffic. Until 1903, agriculture wasthese areas marginal agriculture and animal practically unknown and the people devotedhusbandry was not sufficient to sustain the themselves to their yaks and cattle. In 1903, there
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 171were 400 yaks, 40 cows, 100 ponies and 30 goats. forests. The settlement earmarked grazing areasHowever, they grew potatoes, turnips and a little for each Gaddi family and herd size was fixed, asbuckwheat (Freshfield 1903: p. 94). The alpine were the migration routes for each family and itpastures in and around Lachung facilitate animal was stipulated that each flock would move at leastgrazing. Pastoralism is still a major economic five miles daily, spending one night at eachstrategy, however, agricultural activities contri- stopover. The Gaddis did not appreciate thesebute to subsistence. They raise yak, dzow, sheep, controls. Goats were identified as a major threatgoats, horses and mules. They move above and and in 1915 herders were asked to pay a higherbelow the river valleys and exploit the grazing herding fee for goats than for sheep, evenlands and arable land for cultivation along the sedentary stock came under this regulation. Later,valleys and surrounding areas. The seasonal the deterioration of the forests was the subject ofmigration emerges as an activity organised by discussion and evaluation by many experts andfamily and community structure. In recent years, acting on a 1920 report on the degradation ofLachung has gained prominence as one of the pastures in Kullu, the local forest settlement, amajor tourist attractions. As a result there is ban was proposed on grazing by local flocks butprofusion of lodges and hotels in and around migratory flocks were exempted from the ban.Lachung. This has facilitated infrastructural After Independence, two Himachal Pradeshdevelopment in the village bringing affluence to Commissions on Gaddis reported in 1959 and 1970.the Lachenpas who ventured into tourism The second recommended a freeze on flock size.industry as lodge owners, taxi owners and tour In 1972, the State Government again issued ordersoperators. The newfound prosperity has improv- regulating flock size but due to political pressure,ed the way of life. Unlike Lachung, Lachen does these decisions have never been implementednot attract many tourists because the village strictly. Continued and uncontrolled grazing haswears somewhat dilapidated look as Lachenpas resulted in severe degradation of the productivedo not inhabit it year around. However, some pastures. The livestock trends suggests selectiveLachenpas have started building guesthouses at grazing and overstocking along grazing routesLachen and Thanggu. Lachenpas have benefited as the main reason for decline in pastures withfrom the army headquarters of 112 Mountain hazards like soil erosion and weed invasion inBrigade and avail amenities like electricity, water Himalayas (Tyagi and Shankar 1988). Due to highsupply, transport etc. Many of them pursue multi- grazing pressure, palatable grasses and legumesoccupations as agro-pastoralists-cum-traders- do not get sufficient time for seed setting andcum-transport operators. The Bhutias of Lachen dispersal. Meanwhile undesirable plant species,and Lachung have adapted culturally to diverse which are not grazed, get conducive conditionsnatural landscape and have established settle- to thrive and set seed. The unchecked growth ofment patterns and production activities tailored weeds has led to their dominance in most of theto the limitation imposed by the region. (For details pastures (Shankar and Singh 1996).see Bhasin 1989, 1993, 1996, 1997). Developments in plains, including reservoirs, War of 1962, did not affect the Gaddis of irrigated agriculture, urban expansion and intensi-Bharmour like the Bhutias and the Changpas, but fication of cash cropping have reduced access tothey are under stress because of the curb on their winter pastures. At high altitudes, where she-movements and restriction on the number of pherds take their herds for summer grazing,livestock. Transhumant Gaddis population of serious over-grazing is taking place. At the sameHimachal Pradesh are under great pressure time, the herder’s payment for winter in the form(Chakravarty 1998). Before the mid-nineteenth of providing organic manure during the processcentury there was no legislation on the use of of grazing has become obsolete as a number offorests and grazing land but as increasing pre- permanent agriculturalists are applying chemicalssure became a threat to their existence, a national fertilizers. Thus, the early movement of the herdsForest Law was passed in 1865, giving the up through the forest belt must begin progre-government powers to regulate most of the forests ssively earlier because of restricted winter pasture,and pastures. Land settlement, carried out in yet movement on the alpine pasture is restrictedKangra between 1865 and 1872, led to the by the season. The enforced delay in the upwardpromulgation of the 1878 Forest Law, which transfer of the herds adds to the grazing impactintroduced a system of reserved and protected on the intermediate forests. Finally summer
  • 172 VEENA BHASINgrazing is prolonged as long as possible which in based wisdom of pastoralists will lead to tremen-turn is leading to the over-grazing of the alpine dous loss of social capitol and destroy a systemmeadows. This is leading to a break down of the of self-managed livelihoods.traditional arrangement between the herder and The process of sedentarisation begins whenthe permanently settled cultivators. This is detri- a fully transhumant household begins to bemental to both the groups as well as to the alpine rooted in land at any locality on the migrationpasture, the winter grazing area at low altitude route or nearby town either due to enrichment orand the forests along the migratory routes. improvishment. The typological separation of theOfficials identify herding as the main cause for pastoral from the agricultural mode of life of theerosion of the north-west Himalayas. Gaddis are transhumant from the settled mode is not rigid.facing a double challenge: shrinking low altitude The two modes of production, pastoral andpastoral areas in the Siwaliks and rapidly eroding agriculture exist side by side within the sameclaims to whatever is left. Three dams constructed household. Those who have settled and practicein the foothills of the Siwalik Hills have forced agriculture support pastoralists by growing foodGaddis to change their migration patterns with for them. Social intercourse between the two isharmful effects for themselves and the environ- common.ment. Pastoral resources are related to reserva- The sedentary adaptation requires an entirelytions and risks, which shepherds put up with. different organisation of society. The principalGaddis practice transhumance because they sources of food among pastoralists (their herds)cannot make their living by staying at one place are mobile and demand transhumant patterns ofthroughout the year. With given simple techno- settlements and social relations. Both agriculturelogy, rugged terrain, steep slopes, small fields, and pastoralism involve the domestication of ani-absence of irrigation make agriculture insufficient mals but the use of draft animals to draw ploughsby itself as a subsistence base. They compensate denotes an entirely different strategy of adapta-for agriculture deficit, by utilizing grazing grounds tion than herding. The stability of a pastoralin the area by rearing sheep and goats. The high population depends on the maintenance of aaltitude combined with higher precipitation balance between pastures, animal population andresults in a greater accumulation of snow. It tends human population. Changpas worldview is thatto accumulate through winter and it remains at the relation between animals and humans is basedsome places in region up to March and April. The on connection rather than a clear boundaryshorter season and absence of irrigation elimi- between them. The belief is that both humansnates rice (most productive per land unit) as a and animals exist as subjects within the samefood crop. These features serve to restrict the world and have a relationship of mutual depen-agricultural production and the number of animals dency. The interplay between pastoralists andthat can be kept during the winter season as the their environment is set up on required need fulfill-draft animals that are left behind have to be ment rather than exploitation.provided with stored fodder throughout the Pastoralists mostly depend on naturalmonths of winter. No parallel restrictions limit the resources, particularly for fuel, fodder and water.possibility for summer grazing. Upper ranges of Their dependence on natural resources is insti-these mountains are noteworthy for their large, tutionalised through a variety of social andlush meadows and other good summer grazing. cultural mechanism such as religion, folklore andHowever, these pastures are only seasonal; traditions. When government assumes controlGaddis cannot rely on them for year round sus- of natural resources, these mechanisms becometenance. Now-a-days, the forest department defunct and a radical reorientation of existinggrants permits for grazing to individuals, not patterns of resources take place, including acommunities; in some, cases, based on rights transition from collective to individual use ofgranted in the last century. Gaddis are transient resources. Goldstein and Beall (1990) in their studycommunity bound together briefly; in summer by of Tibetan nomads demonstrated that traditionala stake in the Alpine common and not by blood pastoral systems of Tibetan nomads successfullyties. Rights in the Alpine commons are communal maintain their high-altitude grassland systems.and are different from ‘rights of way’, which are In contrast, the modern strategies proposed byindividual. Transhumance tied nomadic grazing the Chinese government threaten to degradeto sedentary farming and was in turn sustained these ecosystems by limiting mobility of the pas-by them. Ignoring the needs and the experience- toral population. The results are protests, social
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 173movements and the violation of official laws, along diversity linked with equally rich biologicalwith an erosion of social bonds that formerly diversity. Himalayan pastoral movement is highlyregulated the customary use of resources. Link- focused and its propensity is toward achievingages between ecological and socio-economic specific production or other roles. Generally,approaches insure that development is location pastoral mobility is used to precede productionspecific. Centre for Sustainable Development and goals in a number of diverse sectors. In HimalayanFood Security in Ladakh, a NGO is working mountain milieu, we find a full range of mobiletowards an enhancement of the living standards practices in livestock keeping from mountainof the most deprived section of the Ladakhi nomadism through transhumance to combinedpopulation- the Changpa nomads. Food and mountain agriculture (Alpwirtschaft). However,nutrition security is important at the level of each pastoralism is not tied to one type of economicindividual for productive life; body security in system, some pastoralists have generalisedturns depends upon the security of livelihoods. consumption- oriented production, while othersEnvironmental security is the base on which both are specialised and market-oriented. Nor isfood and livelihood safety rests. Thus, conser- pastoralism limited to one type of land tenure,vation and development of the natural resources some pastoral groups migrate within the territorybecomes necessary components of a sustainable they control, while others have no political orfood and livelihood. legal claim over the land they use. Moreover, some All Indian pastoralists are facing common pastoral groups live in isolated regions far fromproblem of shrinking of their pastoral resource other populations, while others live close tobase. The establishment of national parks and peasant and urban population. Pastoral groupssanctuaries, in combination with the expansion vary in political structure from state-controlledof agriculture in to marginal areas has undermined peasants, to centralised chiefdoms, to weakthe traditional livelihood of all of them. As a result, chiefdoms, to lineage system. The dress designs,almost all the groups are involved in long standing social practices, beliefs and rituals prevalent inconflicts with the forest authorities and many of the three areas are intimately linked with the localthem were barred from their grazing areas. Forestauthorities are continuing with their policies economy, availability of raw materials either locallythough there is mounting evidence that livestock or nearby and culture-historical factors. Once agrazing contribute to the conservation of bio- human group has made a particular techno-diversity and eco-system. economic adaptation, there remains latitude for The main challenge is how to establish a sus- socio-cultural variation. The traditional pro-tainable and efficient level of operations for the duction strategy of pastoralists is of convertingmaintenance of natural resources and to ensure temporary abundance into storable form that canfood security in the area. The authorities have to be used throughout the year. Though thedeal with problems of the depleted animals and permanent and essential resources are protectedvegetal genetic resources and increasing poverty and shared, the herds are owned privately. Thein Changthang. However, there is no clear policy stability of a pastoral group through time can bewith legal, institutional and planning frameworks maintained by balancing an equation betweenfor sustainable development in Changthang. pastures, animals and human population. TheWildlife development is a specialised field and quality and quantity of pastures in an area canrequires skilled workers to implement the inte- set limits to the number of animals in a herd thatgrated development programme. There are can be supported in an area at a given time. Simi-considerable problems of integration, overlaps larly the size of herds and pattern of productionand duplication of efforts among development and consumption can also set limits to the size ofagencies, with no common vision and objectives. human population that can be maintained.The development agencies are working without However, the equation is not so simple and allcommon vision and objectives causing problems pastoral groups have to adopt certain strategiesof assimilation, overlaps and repetition. like dispersal and concentration of animals and human population to overcome such problems. CONCLUDING REMARKS Culture is an adaptive strategy. It is devised according to the constraints and limitations posed The Himalayas are characterised by highly by the environment, with it are associated thecomplex sociological system, with rich cultural political factors.
  • 174 VEENA BHASIN Traditional pastoral systems have remained Currently, the trend towards globalization of thestable for a long time, particularly through flexible market, with pastoral lands increasingly beingresponses to short-term variations of climatic commercialised and/or turned in to national parksconditions. Today, however, numerous demo- has created problems for the pastoralists. Due tographic and economic changes of long-term nature neglect by officials and policy makers, pastoralistshave occurred, which triggered adaptive changes face deprivation from their traditional and custo-likely to transform this system significantly. Since mary rights to these grazing areas. The politicalIndependence of India, the pastoralists of marginalisation of pastoral communities pavedHimalayas have faced a series of significant the way for forcible eviction from their land and/changes from external political and economic or restriction of their movements. Paradoxically,changes. These structural alterations have brought demand for products of pastoralists is very high.adjustments in many aspects of the traditional Such herding groups produce practically all thepastoral system, including migratory cycle, local goat-meat in India. These herding groups alsoeconomy and social organisation. The most provide the much-needed organic manure forimportant changes that have taken place in the agriculture and horticulture. According to Kohler-region are: (i) loss of winter pasture at Skagjung; Rollefson (1992), pastoralism is necessary to(ii) settlement of Tibetan Refugees in the region sustain the environment. “In Germany, when peo-with their livestock; and (iii) changes in economy. ple stopped grazing livestock in the forests, thisThe advent of reforms and economic development led to a change in vegetation, totally altering thehas brought significant changes to the pastoral landscape. The government now actually payseconomy. Traditional trade relationships with herders to graze their animals in the forest”.lowland agricultural communities have declined in As a signatory to the United Nation Conven-importance. tion on Biological Diversity, India has committed The development process in Leh has increas- itself to respect, preserve and maintain know-ed opportunities of waged labour. This has ledge, innovations and practices of indigenousencouraged the out migration of many Changpas. and local communities embodying traditionalAccording to a household survey data carried lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sus-out between 1962 and 2001, 306 Changpas left tainable use of biological diversity. Therefore, theRupshu-Kharnak to settle near Leh town. government of India is obliged to consider reco- The number of pastoral households in gnising and protecting the role of pastoralistsRupshu-Kharnak remained relatively constant and conferring certain rights that will supportover many decades because of cultural practices their livelihoods and community conservation ofthat promoted low natural increase through domestic animal biodiversity. Governmentspolyandry, inheritance by primogeniture and should restore traditional grazing rights in forestmonasticism. With the break up of polyandry and areas including wildlife centuries and nationalinheritance through primogeniture, nuclear parks and in those areas earmarked for grazinghouseholds have started coming up. With more purposes in village common lands.avenues of earning, opportunities of wagedlabour, changing expectations among community REFERENCESmembers and lure of better life facilities in theurban areas, all have helped Changpas in making Agarwal Arun, Sabarwal VK 2004. Whither South Asiandecision to migrate. Pastoralism? An Introduction. Nomadic Peoples, 8(2): 36-53. Pastoralists play an important role in the Anderson JN 1973. Ecological Anthropology andecology of India. Contrary to their reputation, Anthropological Ecology. In: JJ Honigman (Ed.):pastoralists have traditional practices for con- Handbook of Social and Cultural Anthropology.serving vegetation by rotational grazing. Pasto- Chicago: Rand McNally, pp. 143-178. Barfield Thomas 1993. The Nomadic Alternative. Newralists make a significant contribution to India’s Jersey: Prentice Hall.economy in terms of food security (milk), pro- Barth Fredrik 1961. Nomads of South Persia-The Basserivision of draft animal power, organic manures as Tribe of the Khamesh Confedracy. London: Georgewell as foreign exchange earnings (meat, fibre e.g. Allen & Unwin Ltd. Barth, Fredrik 1966. Models of Social Organisation.pashmina wool). Since pastoralists do not own Occasional Paper Royal Anthropological Institute.land, the produce is generated by dependence London: Royal Anthropological Institute.on communally and state owned grazing land. Berreman GD 1978. Ecology, Demography and Domestic
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 175 Strategies in the Western Himalayas. J Anthropol Freshfield Douglas 1978. Round Kangchenjunga, (1903). Res, 34: 326-368. Reprinted, Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar.Bhasin Veena 1988. Himalayan Ecology. Transhumance Friedl John 1976. Cultural Anthropology. Harper’s College and Social Organisation: Gaddis of Himachal Press. Pradesh. Delhi: Kamla-Raj Enterprises. Gellner E 1973. Introduction to Nomadism. In: C NelsonBhasin Veena 1989. Ecology, Culture and Change: (Ed.): The Desert and the Sown. Berkeley, California: Tribals of Sikkim Himalayas. New Delhi: Inter-India University of California Press. Publications. Gluckman Max 1960. Custom and Conflict in Africa.Bhasin Veena 1990. Habitat, Habitation and Health in Oxford: Basil Blackwell. the Himalayas. A Comparative Study of the Peoples Goldstein MC, Beall CM 1990. Nomads of Western Tibet. of Sikkim and the Gaddis of Himachal Pradesh. The Survival of a Way of Life. London: Serindia. Delhi: Kamla-Raj Enterprises. Goldstein MC, Masserschmidt DA 1980. The significanceBhasin Veena 1993. Social Dimensions of Politics: The Case of latitudinality in Himalayas mountain ecosystems. of Tribal Democracy in Sikkim. J Hum Ecol, 4: 63-78. Human Ecology, 8: 117-134.Bhasin, Veena 1994. Patterns of Adaptation in Sikkim. J Goodall Sarah K 2004.Rural to Urban Migration and Hum Ecol, 5: 153-168. Urbanisation in Leh: A Case Study of Three NomadicBhasin Veena 1996. Transhumants of Himalayas: Pastoral Communities. Mountain Research and Changpas of Ladakh, Gaddis of Himachal Pradesh Development, 24(3). and Bhutias of Sikkim. Delhi: Kamla Raj Enterprises. Gradus Y 1985. Desert Development: Man andBhasin Veena 1997. The Human Settlements and Health Technology in Sparselands. Bostca: D. Reidel Status of People of Sikkim. In: KC Mahanta (Ed.): Publishing Company. People of the Himalayas: Ecology, Culture, Develop- Hardin, G 1968. The Theory of Commons. San Francisco: ment and Change. Edited by K.C. Mahanta. Delhi: W. H. Freeman. Kamla-Raj Enterprises, pp. 153-187. Harden G and Baden J (Eds.) 1977. Managing theBhasin Veena 2009. Pastoral Women of Himalayas. In: Commons. New York: W. H. Freeman. Veena Bhasin, Charles Susanne (Eds.): Anthropology Harowitz Michael, Jowkar Forouz 1972. Pastoral Women Today: Trends and Scope of Human Ecology. Delhi: and Change in Africa, the Middle East and Central Kamla Raj Enterprises, pp. 193-215. Asia. Working Paper No. 91. Binghamton, New York:Blaikie C 2001. Why do the Nomads Settle? Livelihood, Institute for Development Anthropology. Sustainability and Rural-Urban Migration among Hugo GJ 1981. Village Community Ties, Village Norms, the Kharnak Community of the Chang-pa of Ladakh. and Ethnic and Social Networks: A review of M.Sc. Dissertation. University of London. evidencefrom the third world. In: GF Dejong, RWBlaikie P, Brookfield H 1987. Land Degradation and Gardner (Eds.): Migration Decision Making: Society. London and New York: Methuen. Approach to Microlevel Studiesin Developed andDollfus Pascale 1981. Peopling and Migration: Some Developing Countries. New York Programme, pp. Remarks based on Research in Ladakh. UPR: CNRS. 186-224.Brombley DW (Ed.) 1992. Making the Common Work: Human Ecology – Special Issue 1996. Gender and Theory, Practice and Policy. San Francisco: Institute Livestock Management, 24(2). for Contemporary Studies. Irons WG 1971. Vatiations in politicalstratificationChakravarty Kaul Minoti 1998. Transhumance of among Yumut Turkmen. Anthropological Quarterly, Customary Pastoral Rights in Himachal Pradesh: 44(3): 143-156. Claiming the High Pastures for Gaddis. Mountain Janzen, J 1993. Mobile Livestock Keeping in Somalia- Research and Development, 18(1): 5-17. General situation and Prospects of a way of LifeCrapo H Richley 1995. Cultural Anthropology: Undergoing Fundamental Change. In: MPO Understanding Ourselves and Others. New York: Baumann, J Janzen, HJ Schwartz (Eds): Pastoral McGraw-Hill. Productin in Central Somalia. Eschborn: OTZ.Dahl G, Hjort A 1980. Some thoughts on the Jodha NS 1991. Rural Common Property Resources: A anthropological study of pastoralism. Commission Growing Crisis. London: IIED. Gatekeeper Series on Nomadic Peoples, Newsletter, 5: 14-15. No. 24.Evans-Pritchard EE 1971. The Senusi of Cyrenaica. Johnson Gregory A 1981. Decision-making organization Oxford: Claredon Press. and pastoral nomad camp. Human Ecology, 11(2).Fisher James F 1987. Trans-Himalayan Traders Economy, Kango GH, Dhar B 1981. Nomadic Routes in Jammu Society and Culture in Northwest Nepal. Delhi: and Kashmir. Studies in Transhumant and Motilal Banarsidas. Pastoralism in the Northwest Himalayas. Srinagar:Fratkin Elliot 1991. Surviving Drought and Directorate of Soil Conservation. Development: Ariaal Pastoralist of Northern Kenya. Khatana, R.P 1976a Marriage and Kinship among the Boulder: Westview Press. Gujar Bakarwals of Jammu and Kashmir. Delhi:Fratkin Elliot 1998. Ariaal Pastoralists of Northern Manohar. Kenya. Needham Heights, Mass: Allyn and Bacon. Khatana, R.P 1976b. Some Aspects of Transhumance inFratkin Elliot, Abella Roth Eric 1990. Drought and Mountainous Traits. A Case Study of Gujar, Economic Differentiation among Ariaal Pastoralist Bakarwals of Jammu and Kashmir. M. Phil of Kenya. Human Ecology, 18(4). Dissertation, Unpublished. Centre for Study ofFratkin Elliot, Smith Kevin. 1995. Women,s changing Regional Development. New Delhi: J.N.U. economic roles with pastoral sedentarization: Klute G (Ed.) 1996. Nomads and the State. Nomadic Varying strategies in alternative in Rendille Peoples, 38(1). communities. Human Ecology, 23: 433-454. Kohler-Rollefson I 1992. The Raika dromedary breeders
  • 176 VEENA BHASIN of Rajasthan: A pastoral system in crises. Nomadic Salih M 1990. Pastoralism and the State. Nomadic Peoples, 30: 74-93. Peoples, pp. 25-27.Krader L 1959. The ecology of nomadic pastoralism. Salzman PC 1971. Movement and resource extraction International Social Science Journal, 11: 499-500. among pastoral nomads: the case of Shah NawaziLanchester W, Lanchester F. 1999. People, Land and Balluch. Anthropological Quarterly, 44(3): 185-197. water in the Arabs Middle East. New York: Taylor Salzman PC 1972. Study among pastoral peoples, in & Francis Baluchistan (Iran), Rajasthan (India), and SardiniaLattimore O 1989. Inner Asian Frontiers of China. (Italy), Ph. D. Thesis, Chicago: University of Chicago Boston: Beacon Press, 1940, Reprint, 1989. Salzman PC 1980. Processes of Sedentrization asLees S, Bates D 1974. The Origin of Nomadic Pasto- Adaptation and Response. In: PC Salzman (Ed.): ralism: A Systematic Model. American Antiquity, When Nomads Settle: Processes of Sedentrization as 39(2): 187-193. Adaptation and Response. New York: Praeger, pp.Leh Nutrition Project (LNP) 1995. A Report on Baseline 1-20. Survey of Karsok, Ribil- Sumdo, Ankung Villages in Salzman Philip Carl 2002. Pastoral Nomads: Some general Nyoma Block District. Unpublished Report, Leh observations based on research in Iran. Journal of Nutrition Project, Leh. Anthropological Research, 58(2): 245-264.Lenhart L, Casimir M 2001. Environment, Property, Salzman PC 2004. Pastoralists: Equality, Hierarchy and Resources and State. Nomadic Peoples, 5(2). State. Boulder: Westview Press.Marx, Karl 1976. Capital. A Critique of Political Sanford S 1983. Management of the Pastoral Deve- Economy. Vol. 1. Harmondsworth, Penguin Books. lopment in the Third World. New York: J.Wiley &McCay B, Acheson J (Eds.) 1987. The Question of Sons. Commons. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Scholz F 1995. Nomadismus. Theorie and WandeleinerMiller DJ 1998. Tibetan population: Hard time on the sozio-okologischen kulturweise. Stuttgart. Plateau. Tibetan Studies Internet Newsletter, Volume Shankar Vinod, Singh JP 1996. Grazing Ecology. Tropical 1. Ecology. 37(1): 67-78.Netting Robert McC 1977. Cultural Ecology. Menlo Park, Sharma, Vijay Paul, Kohler-Rollefson Ilse, Morton John Ca: Cummings. 2003. Pastoralism in India: A Scoping Study.Newell WH 1967. The Scheduled Castes and Tribes of Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management. the Bharmour Tehsil of Chamba District. Simla: Singh RCP (Ed.) 1964. A Village Survey of Brahmaur. Government of India Press. Brahmaur Sub-Tehsil Chamba District. HimtchalNitzberg FL 1978 Changing pattern of multiethnic Pradesh. Census of India, 1961 Vol. XX, Part VI, interaction in the Western Himalayas. In: James F. No. 5, Government of India Press, Simla. Fisher (Ed.): Himalayan Anthropology. The Hague; Spooner B 1973. The Cultural Ecology of Pastoral Mauton, pp. 103-110. Nomads. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesely PublishingNimir-Fuller M 1999. Managing Mobility in African Co. Rangelands. FAO and The Beijer International Sweet LE 1965. Camel Pastoralism in North Arabia and Institute of Ecological Economics. the Minimal Camping Unit. In : A Leeds, AP VaydaNitzberg Frances Lou 1970. Land, Labour and Status. (Eds.): Man, Culture and Animals: The Role of The Implication of Ecologic Adaptations in a Animals in Human Ecological Adjustments. Ameri- Region of the Western Himalayas of India. Ph. D. can Association for the Advancements of Science. Thesis, Unpublished. Combridge, Mass: Harward Swidler WW 1973. Adaptive Processes Regulating University (1970). Nomad-sedentary Interactionin. University ofNitzberg Frances Lou 1978. Changing patterns of California Press. multiethnic interaction in the Western Himalayas: Swift J 1977. Pastoral Fevelopment in Somalia: herding In: James F Fisher (Ed.): Himalayan Anthropology. cooperatives as a strategy against desertification and The Hague: Mouton, pp. 103-110. famine. In: MH Glantz (Ed.): Desertification andPaine R 1974. Second thoughts about Barth’s “models”. Environmental. Boulder, Colorado: Westview-Press. Occasional paper No. 32. London: Royal Swift J, Maliki A 1984. A Cooperative Development Anthropological Institute. Experiment among Nomadic Herders in Niger.Paine R 1994. Herds of the Tundra: a Portrait of Saami London: Overseas Development Institute, Paper 18c. Reindeer Pastoralism. London: Washington Tapper Richard 1979. Pasture and Politics. Economics Smithsonian Institution Press. Conflict and Ritual among Shahsevan NomadsPastner Stephen 1971. Camel, Sheep and Nomad Social Northwestern Ban. London: Academic Press. Organisation: A Comment on Rubel’s Model. Man, Thomas R Brooke 1979. Effects of change in high 6(2). mountain human adaptive pattern. In: PF WebberPirie Fernanda 2005. Segmentation Within the State: (Ed.): High Altitude Ceoecology. Boulder: West-View The Reconfiguration of Tibetan Tribes in China’s Press, pp. 139-1XX. Reform Period. Nomadic Peoples, 9(1). Troll Carl 1968. Geo-ecology of the Mountainous RegionsRao A, Casimir MJ 1982. Mobile pastrolists of Jammu of the Tropical Americas. Dummlers. Bonn: and Kashmir: A preliminary report. Nomadic People, Collaquium Geographicum 9. 10: 40-50 (1982). Troll Carl 1972. Ceoecology of the High MountainRappaport, R1968. Pigs for Ancestors: Rituals in the Regions of Eurasia. Wisenbaden: Franz Steiner. Ecologyof a New Guinea People. New Heaven: Tyagi RK, Shankar Vinod 1988. Pastoralism and grazing University Press. systems in Central G Himalayas. 3rd InternationalRhoades Robert E, Thompson. Stephen 1 1975. Adaptive Rangeland Congress. Absract Volume II. Range strategies in Alpine environments. Beyond ecological Management Society of India, pp. 665-668. particularism. American Anthropologist, 2: 535-557. Uhlig H 1976. Rice cultivation in die Himalayas. In:
  • PASTORALISTS OF HIMALAYAS 177 Germans Scholars in India. Volume 2. F.R.G. Vincze Lajos 1980. Present animal husbandry: A dialectic Cultural Department, Bombay. model of technoenvironment integration in agropos-Vecsey Christopher 1980. American Indian environment- tral societies. Ethnology, 20: 387-403. al religion. In: Christopher Vecsey, Robert Venables Wu Ning 1997. Indigenous Knowledge and Sustainable (Eds.): American Indian Environment: Ecological Approaches from the Maintenance of Diversity in Issues in Native American History. Syracuse, NY: Nomadic Society- Experience Tibetan Plateau. Die Syracuse University. Erde, 128: 67-80.