Resource information
The conservation of Himalayan forests is big concern in view of global agenda. Many studies in this endeavor reported that the rate of forests degradation is posing a severe threat to the landscape and existing biodiversity in the Himalayas. Currently there many conservation approaches exists and of them four are widely recognized (1) Conservation through traditional religious beliefs “traditional conserved forests” (TCF); (2) Conservation through governmental planning and schemes “government conserved forests” (GCF); (3) Conservation through creation of protected areas (PAF); and (4) Conservation through community efforts “community conserved forests” (CCF). Our hypothesis in this direction says that all the conservation approaches lead to same results concerning to forest conservation. To testify our hypothesis we have studied the forests of each conservation regimes and evaluated them based on the identified indicators. We have done empirical studies and following the cloud-free satellite data were used for last three decades (such as Multi-Spectral Scanner, Linear Imaging and Self Scanning, and Enhanced Thematic Mapper ) to study a change in vegetation dynamics of the mountain forests in multi-temporal dimension. Our research concluded that community conservation approach have greater significance for biodiversity conservation and management in the Himalayan region. Here we support the model of CCF for forest ecosystem conservation, alongside the sustainable livelihood of the mountain societies. But every conservation regimes has its own importance in viewpoint of the particular objectives. Therefore, we suggests advancement and revision of PAF and GCF however, some elements of CCF can be introduced in TCF for making up it more sound in view of rapid socio-economic and cultural changes taking place in the communities.
