Every year during December and January, in the Indian Himalayan state of Uttarakhand, rural communities carry out traditional burning on steep hill slopes to regenerate grass. These carefully timed burns, which take place when fuel stocks are low, are needed to support livestock and, indirectly, agriculture in the region.
Similar practices are observed among Indigenous and traditional groups in other regions, highlighting the importance of controlled burning in supporting livelihoods, maintaining biodiversity, and reducing wildfire risk.
Unfortunately, in Uttarakhand, these winter burning practices for regenerating grass remain misunderstood. They are often wrongly believed to happen in summer and blamed for wildfires, which means their important role in rural life remains overlooked.
Across the world, with wildfires becoming more frequent and intense worldwide, the limitations of a “zero-fire” government policy – which focuses on putting out all fires – are becoming ever more evident. However, recent interdisciplinary research highlights that adapting to climate change (and more wild fires) requires learning to live with fire, rather than attempting to extinguish it in every instance.
So there is renewed attention on Indigenous and traditional burning practices and how they can complement prescribed burning practices implemented by the state agencies. Controlled use of fire, which was once discouraged, is now cautiously reconsidered as a necessary tool for reducing the risk of mega wildfires.
Without grass-cutting and controlled burning, these grassy slopes can fill with trees and shrubs.
Author, Author provided (no reuse)
My research examines these approaches to living with fire in the Uttarkashi district of the Uttarakhand Himalayas, where both officials and communities conduct controlled burning. It highlights that these different approaches differ in their social and environmental objectives, and community-led burning practices offer lessons for others.
At first glance, the fires lit by state agencies and those set by rural communities may appear similar in their timing and intensity: both are low-intensity burns conducted during winter months and remain confined to small areas. However, they differ in purpose and what they achieve.
For state agencies, prescribed burning is primarily a fire-prevention measure. The goal is to reduce inflammable material on the ground that could fuel wildfires in the summer. In this approach, the forest is valued primarily for its trees and carbon sequestration (the capturing, removal and permanent storage of CO₂ from the earth’s atmosphere), while the needs of local communities are given less importance. Moreover, these prescribed burning practices remain poorly implemented.
Forest fires are common in Uttarakhand’s pine forests during summer. Communities are often blamed, but many factors contribute to the spread of these fires.
Author provided (no reuse)
On the other hand, communities value forests more broadly and see forests as a site for both grass and trees. They emphasise that winter burns are crucial to sustaining grass. Without them, trees and unwanted shrubs spread, leaving less grass available for fodder.
When to set fires
Beena,