University Rawalpindi. 3 Fisheries Research & Training Institute, P.O. Batapur, Lahore, Pakistan. ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION

Transcription

1 BIOLOGIA (PAKISTAN) 2012, 58 (1&2), PK ISSN Estimation of Biomass and Carrying Capacity of Scrub Rangelands in Ucchali Wetland Complex, Soon Valley SHAHID ABBAS 1, AAMIR SALEEM 2, ZAHID SHARIF MIRZA 3 & SARWAT N. MIRZA 4 1,2,4 Department of Forestry & Range Management, PMAS-Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi. 3 Fisheries Research & Training Institute, P.O. Batapur, Lahore, Pakistan. ABSTRACT Quantitative biomass assessment of Ucchali Wetland Complex, Soon Valley, Pakistan was conducted to determine the productive potential and carrying capacity during summer, winter and spring seasons, Three sites were selected using stratified sampling with quadrate method. Overall, average biomass production was 1113 kg ha -1 in the area. The maximum biomass production (1196 kg ha -1 ) was observed in Khabaki which was followed by (1081 kg ha -1 ) Jhalar. Ucchali recorded the minimum biomass production (1061 kg ha -1 ). The area was found in fair condition with overall carrying capacity 5.82 ha AU -1 year -1. The maximum carrying capacity (5.42 ha AU -1 year -1 ) was observed in Khabaki which was followed by (5.99 ha AU -1 year -1 ) Jhalar. The minimum carrying capacity (6.1ha) was determined in Ucchali. Results obtained in this study provide the information to the manager of the wetland complex to manage area according to its carrying capacity and vegetation availability in various seasons. Key Words: Rangeland, Ucchali wetland complex, carrying capacity, biomass production INTRODUCTION Rangelands are those areas of the world which by reason of certain physical characteristics (Low and variable precipitation, uneven topography, poor drainage, or cold temperature) are inappropriate for cultivation but are a source of wood products, water and forage for livestock (Miller, 1997). Livestock forms an important source of livelihoods in rangelands. The increasing human population has raised the demand for livestock production. It in turn has exerted pressure on rangeland resources resulting in degradation and depletion of vegetation (Ahmed et al., 2006). Vegetation cover is a source of rangeland forage. Carrying capacity has widely been used as tool in range management (Bonham, 1989; Tewari & Arya, 2004; Walker, 1995). It is supportable population of an organism given the food, habitat and other necessities available within an ecosystem for that organism (Sayre, 2008; Young, 1998). Carrying capacity depends upon certain factors, such as climatic factor, rain, sunshine and social activities. This includes rainfall, vegetation accessibility and distribution, seasonality, range improvement and grazing management. Because of so many variables, there is so simple way to quantitatively determine carrying capacity. It may vary from year to year on the same area due to fluctuating forage production (Christian, 1998). Pakistan has an area of million hectare (mha), out of which 45.2 million ha (51.4 %) consists of rangelands (Mohammad & Naz, 1985; *Corresponding author: zahids2k@hotmail.com

2 94 S. ABBAS ET AL BIOLOGIA (PAKISTAN) Muhammad, 1989). The contribution of range resources in Pakistan are only % of their actual potential whereas it can be used to feed the increasing human and livestock population. Due to overgrazing, mismanagement in utilization of water resources and deforestation the palatable forage species are decreasing. The current annual production from rangelands is about 21 mt DM (Dry matter) that could be increased to at least three times (Muhammad & Naqvi, 1987; Sultana et al., 2000). The Ucchali Wetlands Complex is an important Ramsar Site in Punjab, Pakistan. The three s forming the Wetland complex are located in a cupshaped catchment area called the Soon valley and having an area of about 1233 hectares (WWF, 1994).Scrub rangelands of Ucchali Wetlands Complex, is present in District Khushab. Non uniform grazing and increasing number of livestock in the area is posing a threat to the biomass production and can lead towards the degradation of rangeland. No information is available on the carrying capacity and biomass production of the area The present study was conducted to determine the biomass production and carrying capacity of scrub rangelands in Ucchali Wetland Complex, Soon Valle. MATERIALS AND METHODS Description of Study Area The study was conducted in scrub rangelands of Ucchalli Wetland Complex, Soon Valley (32º 25 to 32º 45 N and 72º 00 to 72º 30 E). The Ucchalli Wetland Complex comprises of Ucchali, Khabaki and Jhalar Lakes and covers an area of 35 km in length and 9 km in breadth and with an average elevation of 762 m. The complex is located in the Soon Valley of the Potowar Plateau approximately 250 kilometers from Rawalpindi. The area receives relatively low annual rainfall 500 mm or less, with average minimum temperature of 10C o (January) and average maximum temperature (36 C o ) as in June (Hussain, 2002). Sampling Sites The whole area was divided into three sites namely Ucchali, Khabaki and Jhalar Lake and sampling sites were selected on the basis of this division. The total land area of Ucchali Wetland Complex is 1233 ha out of this 2.5 % area was used as sample as per standard sampling procedure. There were overall 30 plots having an area of 1 ha each. The plot to plot distance was 547 m. Each site was treated as separate block. The representative sampling sites from each were selected randomly after visiting the target area. From each 10 plots were selected randomly and from each plot, 5 quadrate were taken at a distance of 20 m. These quadrates were taken from Ucchali, Khabaki and Jhalar s. In total 150 quadrates (50 Ucchali, 50 Khabaki and 50 from Jhalar) were taken from the whole study area and the data was collected during summer, winter and spring season during Estimation of Carrying Capacity and Biomass Production Sampling was carried out during summer, winter and spring season during Intotal 450 samples were taken during the three seasons for measuring forage biomass in 30 plots. To determine the carrying capacity of study area 1m 2 quadrate was used. Quadrate was thrown in sampling plot and

3 VOL. 58 (1&2) BIOMASS AND CARRYING CAPACITY 95 forage sample was cut at ground level with the help of cutter. The fresh sample was taken in paper bag and the fresh weight of forage sample was calculated with the help of weight balance. Then fresh samples were put in oven at 48 ºC for 72 hours and dry weight of samples was calculated. The dry matter was converted into Kilogram per hectare (Kg ha -1 ). The proper use factor (PUF) was taken as 50% to calculate available forage. The animal unit was assumed, a cow having 360 kg weight, requiring 9 kg (2.5% of body weight) dry matter forage per day, 1080 kg / 4 month or 3240 kg year -1 (Kent & Coker., 1992).Following formula was used. /year/au ha/au/year / RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Estimation Of Forage Biomass Comparison of means for forage biomass production of Ucchali, Khabaki, and Jhalar during, is given in Table 1 and Fig., 1. The results shows that the overall, average biomass production was (1113 kg ha -1 ) in the area. The maximum biomass production (1196 kg ha -1 ) was observed in Khabaki which is followed by (1081 kg ha -1 ) Jhalar during, The minimum biomass production (1061 kg ha -1 ) was in Ucchali during, The reasons for higher production in Khabaki could be that Khabaki was under less grazing pressure as compared to Ucchali and Jhalar during, Table 1: Forage biomass production of Ucchali Wetland Complex during, Study sites Summer Winter Spring Average Ucchali Khabaki Jhalar Mean Comparison of means for forage biomass production of Ucchali, Khabaki, and Jhalar during, summer season 2010 is given in Table 2. The table shows that forage biomass production in Khabaki s was significantly different from Ucchali and Jhalar during summer season, It was observed that the forage biomass production (1381 kg ha -1 ) for Khabaki was higher than the forage biomass production (1174 kg ha -1 ) of Ucchali and (1179 kg ha -1 ) of Jhalar during summer season, The forage biomass production (1179 kg ha 1 ) of Jhalar was similar to the forage biomass production (1174 kg ha -1 ) of Ucchali. The reasons for higher production in Khabaki could be that Khabaki was under less grazing pressure as compared to Ucchali and Jhalar during summer season, 2010.

4 96 S. ABBAS ET AL BIOLOGIA (PAKISTAN) Fig., 1: Comparison of mean biomass production of Ucchali Wetland Complex, Soon Valley during different seasons of Table 2: Means forage biomass production (kgg ha -1 ) of Ucchali (U), Khabaki (K), and Jhalar (J) during different season, 2010 Plot number U Summer K J U Winter K J U Spring K J Mean 1174a 1381b 1179 a 917 a 998 a 1010 a 1092 a 1209 a 1054 a Values for same season with the different letter(s) are statisticallyy different at 5 percent level of significance

5 VOL. 58 (1&2) BIOMASS AND CARRYING CAPACITY 97 Table 3: Carrying Capacity (ha Au -1 4month -1 ) of Ucchali Wetland Complex, Soon Valley during different seasons in Season Overall Spring Winter Summer Sites Total forage Available forage CC (ha Au -1 4month -1 ) Range condition Ucchali Fair Khabaki Good Jhalar Fair Average Fair Ucchali Poor Khabaki Poor Jhalar Poor Average Poor Ucchali Fair Khabaki Fair Jhalar Fair Average Fair Ucchali Poor Khabaki Fair Jhalar Fair Average Fair Average Annual Carrying Capacity Table 3 shows that, the overall carrying capacity in scrub rangelands of Ucchali wetland complex, soon valley which was recorded as (5.82 ha AU -1 yr -1 ). The availability of dry forage in scrub rangelands which indicates that Ucchali wetland complex was in fair condition. In khabaki the carrying capacity was much better (5.42 ha AU -1 yr -1 ) as compared with other s. On Ucchali there was more grazing pressure where low carrying capacity (6.1 ha AU -1 yr -1 ) was estimated. Jhalar was the second priority of livestock for grazing purposes where the carrying capacity recorded was 5.99 ha AU -1 yr -1. The reason could be that more number of livestock was present in these areas. Fig., 1 shows the average annual biomass production, of Ucchali wetland complex.

6 98 S. ABBAS ET AL BIOLOGIA (PAKISTAN) Seasonal Carrying Capacity i) Summer season carrying capacity Table 3 shows the overall carrying capacity (1.73 ha AU -1 4 months -1 ) in summer season, which indicates that in summer season 2010, Ucchali wetland complex, was in fair condition according to availability of forage biomass. On khabaki the carrying capacity was good (1.56 ha AU -1 4month -1 ) while on Ucchali the carrying capacity was fair (1.84 ha AU -1 4month -1 ). On Jhalar the carrying capacity was also fair 1.83 ha AU -1 4month -1 during summer season, Fig., 1 shows the summer season biomass production of Ucchali wetland complex. ii) Winter season carrying capacity Table 3 shows the overall carrying capacity (2.22 ha AU -1 4month -1 ), in winter season, which indicates that in winter season , Ucchali wetland complex, was in poor condition due to availability of low forage biomass. On Jhalar the carrying capacity was poor (2.13 ha AU -1 4month -1 ) while on khabaki the carrying capacity was (2.16 ha AU -1 4month -1 ). On Jhalar the carrying capacity was also poor 2.35 ha AU-1 4month-1 during winter season, Figure 1 shows the winter season biomass production of Ucchali wetland complex. iii) Spring season carrying capacity Table 3 shows the overall carrying capacity of scrub rangelands in Ucchali wetland complex, which was calculated as (1.93 ha AU -1 4month -1 ) which indicates that in spring season 2011, Ucchali wetland complex, was in fair condition on the basis of forage biomass availability. In khabaki the carrying capacity was much better (1.79 ha AU -1 4month -1 ) as compared to other s. In Ucchali the carrying capacity (1.98 ha Au-1 4month-1), was fair, while in Jhalar the carrying capacity was also fair 2.04 ha AU -1 4month -1 during spring season, Figure 1 shows the spring season biomass production (kg ha -1 ) of Ucchali wetland complex. The maximum biomass production (1196 kg ha -1 ) was observed in Khabaki which was far below the value of 4350 Kg ha -1 recorded in some high potential sites of Pothwar tract protected for 2 years, which is equivalent to 2 ha per animal unit/ annum. Similar estimates have been made on moderate and depleted sites as 7 and 56 ha per animal unit per annum respectively (Quraishi et al., 1993).On the other hand maximum carrying capacity (5.42 ha AU -1 year -1 ) was observed during this study was in Khabaki which is far less than that for the high potential sites. Most the sites during the present study had lower values of biomass production and carrying capacity. For example, Ucchali recorded the minimum biomass production (1061 kg ha -1 )overall carrying capacity 5.82 ha AU -1 year -1. Range condition is the present state of vegetation of a range site in relation to the climax plant community for that site. Excellent or good range condition represents climax and poor range condition represents deviation from climax (Dyksterhuis, 1958).In Pindigheb, area of Attock district where two ecological zones are established, the unprotected over grazed areas showed about times decline in forage production. The unprotected over grazed areas have 147% and 638% development potential in each ecological zone for carrying capacity in animal units per hectare per year, if protected from open grazing and improved by system of grazing management (Raza & Ahmad,

7 VOL. 58 (1&2) BIOMASS AND CARRYING CAPACITY ).The soil characteristics of the wetland complex supporting the plant communities are similar, therefore, the carrying capacity and biomass production were also similar. The only difference was the proximity to villages which probably enhanced the grazing pressure which was responsible for the differences in values. Haider et al. (2011)had found that in in open grazing system, the dry forage yield in Pabbi Hills of Kharian Range had declined from 550 Kg ha -1 in to 220 Kg ha -1 in They recommended 6-month seasonal deferred grazing to be practiced in this region. Similarly for Mari Reserve Forest of Pothwartract, Chaudhry et al. (2010)had found that reseeded area produced about 16 times (7733 kg ha -1 ) more forage than the untreated area (491 kg ha -1 ) with carrying capacity of 0.07 and 1.18 Animal Units per ha per year in untreated and treated areas respectively. It is, therefore, concluded that the biomass production and resulting carrying capacity of the wetland complex can be substantially improved by proper system of grazing management. REFERENCES Ahmed, M., Raza, F. A., Masud, J., & Ali, I., Ecological assessment of production potential for rangeland vegetation in Southern Attock, Pakistan. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 2: Bonham, C. D., Measurements for terrestrial vegetation. John Wiley and Sons. New York. Chaudhry, A. A., Haider, M. S., Ahsan, J., & Fazal, S., Determining carrying capacity of untreated and treated areas of Mari Reserve forest of Pothwar Rangelands, after reseeding with Cenchrus ciliaris. J. Animal & Plant Sciences, 20(2): Christian, C. Y., Defining the range: The Development of Carrying Capacity in Management Practices. J. Hist. Biol., 31: Dyksterhuis, E. J., Ecological principles in range evaluation. Bot. Rev., 24: Haider, M. S., Maclaurin, A., Chaudhary, A. A., & Mushtaque, M., Effect of grazing systems on range condition in Pubbi Hills Reserve Forest, Kharian, Punjab, Pakistan. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 71(4): Hussain, M. (2002). Expolaration of legume diversity endemic to Salt Range in the Punjab: Report submitted to University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan. Kent, M., & Coker., P., Vegetation description and analysis. A practical approach. CRC press Boca Raton Ann Arbor and Belhaven press Londan. Miller, D., Rangelands and Range management. Newsletter No. 27, ICIMOD, Nepal. Mohammad, N., & Naz, M. S., Range management and forage research in Pakistan. Progressive Farming, 5: Muhammad, N., Range management in Pakistan. ICMOD. Katmandu, Nepal. Muhammad, N., & Naqvi, A. H., Dry matter yield of promising grasses in

8 100 S. ABBAS ET AL BIOLOGIA (PAKISTAN) tropical and rangelands of Sindh, Pakistan. Tropical Agriculture, 64: Quraishi, M. A. A., Khan, G. S., & Yaqoob, M. S., Range Management in Pakistan. Qazi Publications. Lahore. Raza, F. A., & Ahmad, M., Rangeland vegetation degradation and development potential of Pindigheb area Pothwar. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research, 11(1): Sayre, N. F., The genesis, history, and limits of carrying capacity. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(1): Sultana, F., Qamar, I. A., Sultani, M., Ali, A., & Arshad, M., Determination of carrying capacity of a sown pasture in the pothwar plateau of Pakistan. Pak. J. Biol. Sci, 3: Tewari, V. P., & Arya, R., Degradation of arid rangelands in Thar Desert, India: A review. Arid Land Research and Management, 19(1): Walker, J. W., Viewpoint: grazing management and research now and in the next millennium. Journal of Range Management, 48: WWF. (1994). Report on the Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) training workshop organized in the Ucchali Complex by the Punjab Wildlife Department of the Government of Pakistan and the World Wide Fund For Nature (WWF). Karachi, Pakistan. Young, C. C., Defining the range: The development of carrying capacity in management practice. Journal of the History of Biology, 31(1):