112 



(2) limiting the period during which grazing is allowed ; or 



(3) combining (1) and (2). 



The first method, where it can be efEectively carried out, 

 is the best — the best not merely in the interests of the rege- 

 tation but also of the animals, which are thereby well 

 nourished. But it requires, as compared with the second 

 method, a larger and better supervised establishment; and 

 the small fees usually realised for grazing will rarely cover 

 the expenditure involved. In practice, therefore, the second 

 method, altnough much less efifective, is often preferable. 

 Sometimes both methods may hs enforced simultaneously, as 

 in certain of the Ajmere forests. 



It may be remarked in this connection that one of the chief causes of tho 

 inferiority of Indian cattle is the smallness of the fees cl)ar$;ed for grazing and 

 the loose way in which these fees are collected. The Indian cattle-owner does not 

 limit the number of bis stock according to the grazing area at his di8{>nEal. He 

 usually lets nnture perform thi« office, and kee)8 as many ill-fed or half-starved 

 animals a<< can n^ana^e to escape death. This would not he the case were the 

 fees ohariied suiScinntly high and were the number of anima's allowed to graze per 

 acre strictly limited. It is a common practice for Gorernment to sell the grazing 

 right by anction, or to rent it to a contractor on the condition that the fee charged 

 per capita ehall be limited to a certain maxiicum. The contractor's interest then 

 is to graze as manv animals as possible on the land. The appalling number of 

 cattle which are killed off every dry year in the more arid parts of India has led 

 to many proposals for increasing the grazing areas and for throwing open tha 

 Goyernment forests to grazing. Such mtasures merely tend to increase the number 

 of miserable auiiKals, which exist without profit arid evea to the detriment of the- 

 owners until the next season of drought does its work. The only remedy appears 

 to lie in limiting the intensity of the grazing in the Government estates to- 

 what the land can snppnrt, and in charging such fees as will make it worth the- 

 while of cattle-owners to keep only animals that can bring them in a profit. 



Althoutyh the areas subjected to the pastoral method of 

 treatment should be worked with a view to the production 

 of fodder, it by no means follows that none of the wood pro- 

 duced can be utilised. Apart from the fodder, a supply of 

 small timber can be obtained by subjecting the trees to 

 branch coppice fellings, for instance, or, where the number 

 of cattle is limited, over-mature trees can be removed by 

 the selection method. It should not, however, be overlooked 

 that the treatment is primarily intended to favour the 

 production of fodder not of wood, and that if restrictions ar& 

 introduced with the object of preserving the trees it is 

 because these trees are chiefly useful for the fodder they 

 furnish, eitlier directly in the shape of leaves and twigs or 

 by the shelter they afford to the soil. In most cases it will 

 be found that the direct profit from grazing is greater than 

 that which could be obtained under the strictest system of 

 closure for timber growing. 



