Himalayan Management

A hamlet or village was the operational management unit for water management. Distribution of irrigation water and responsibilities of maintenance of tank/ channels among households were decided by a selected group of elders constituting the 'Pani Panchayat (Water Council)'. Usually, a group of 3-4 households is identified for repairing canals in the face breeches or obstruction to water flow due to accumulation of stones in the stretches lying outside private farmlands.

Management Features:

Goals :   

Water from rain fed small rivers called Gaad or rivulets called Gadhera is diverted to agricultural fields through a network of channels enabling flow along gravity. Points of stable perennial flow are identified on the natural course.

Choyas:

 Tiny seasonal seepages, very close to farm fields discharging water insufficient for canalization are called Choyas. The flow is diverted towards a terrace.

Economic Needs:

Mountain ecosystem services provide both direct and indirect contributions to mountain and downstream livelihoods and the economy. In terms of direct contributions, mountains provide a large share of the world's resources for mining, forestry, water for drinking and irrigation, and hydropower, and they generate an increasing amount of wind power as well. Mountain products and services form the basis for many economic sectors – food, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics; agriculture, forestry, and range land production; hydropower generation; tourism; and others. Mountain rangeland and forests provide economic benefits to local people and global communities through medicinal plants, nuts, fruits, timber, fuel wood, and minerals. A recent study shows that forest biodiversity in the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area of Nepal provides more than a billion dollar's worth of income to local people. Timber, non-timber forest products, medicinal plants, fodder, and litter accounted for about 70% of the total household income, and each hectare of land fetched more than US$ 400 per annum (Pant et al.2011).

Globally, the total value of ecosystem services is estimated at US$ 33 trillion per year, almost double the global gross domestic product (GDP) (Costanza et al. 1997). However, few studies have looked at the value of ecosystem goods and services in the mountain context. Based on Costanza et al.'s (1997) approach, Singh (2007) estimated the total value of forest ecosystem services in Uttarakhand, India to be US$ 2.4 billion per year (Table 4). The food production and raw materials that have market values constitute only a small proportion (18.7%) of the total value. Similarly, Verma (2000) estimates the value of direct consumptive benefits from Himanchal Pradesh forests at about 1% of total benefits, while the value of indirect benefits from their ecosystem services counts for nearly 93%. The remaining 6% is from indirect consumptive benefits, e.g., tourism.