And why not? For, Kanha is one of a few lucky exceptions whose orchards haven't been struck by a rampant apple drought in Himachal Pradesh this year. Official estimates put the total produce this year at less than 15 per cent of last year. Shimla, Kullu and Kinnaur, the major apple-growing districts, have all been hit badly. By all accounts, this is the worst year ever for Himachal's apple farmers. "Except last year, when everything favoured a good crop, the productivity graph in the '90s has been dropping discernibly," says Ravinder Chauhan of Kyari village in Shimla district. In a normal year, Chauhan's orchards produce about 4 to 5 lakh boxes of apples; this year it will be a few thousands.
Last year's bumper crop may help farmers tide over the present adversity. "But another failure of this scale next year may prove to be an economic disaster," says Surender Singh, a farmer in the Kotkhai tehsil of Shimla district. The scale of the disaster is not uniform. According to scientists, a large slice of luck helped farmers like Kanha Singh. Most of the lucky orchards are located at higher altitudes where moisture content is higher. But even here, there are exceptions to the rule which the scientists blame on bad management practices. But many farmers disagree. It is crucial, then, to know what caused this massive abortion.
There are several alleged culprits, but an abnormally warm and an almost snowless winter seems to have been the over-riding factor. "Ideally, for flowering to happen, apple trees need 1,500 to 2,000 hours of chilling. But this year, it was less than 200 hours," explains R.P. Awasthi, dean at the College of Horticulture, Dr Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry in Nauni, Himachal Pradesh. "Last December was as hot as May and we had just one snowfall instead of the usual three to four," says Chauhan. Worse, says Awasthi, March and April were unusually warm, making it difficult for insects, which are largely responsible for pollination, to survive. As a result, flowering was far from normal.
Whether it's global warming or a local aberration, most farmers agree that climate has warmed over the years. Chauhan, who owns one of the oldest orchards in Kotkhai tehsil, the apple-bowl of Himachal, feels the warming trend has upset the flowering season. "Often, the fruit doesn't get enough time to develop, resulting in dwarfs," he says. He points to a '60s picture of the Kotkhai valley to emphasise the extent of deforestation, which in all probability significantly changed the local climate.
Darwinian wisdom says that the more diverse the species, the better the chances of survival in an unpredictable environment. The fact that a single variety-Red Delicious-accounts for 90 per cent of all apples grown in Himachal Pradesh amounts to evolutionary suicide. "This variety is especially vulnerable to climate variations. If you've noticed, orchards situated at heights above 6,000 ft have fruits while those below 5,000 are more or less barren," says Awasthi. Another problem with Red Delicious is that after 15 years, it turns biennial, flowering once in two years. Awasthi feels that this year's apple shortage could also be a fallout of a large number of trees turning biennial.
"This trend towards monoculture must be bucked," says Chauhan. Awasthi agrees. "It is time that farmers started planting sturdier varieties like Spartan, Gloster, Macintosh, and Staymen. Ideally, the proportion of Red Delicious should be reduced to about 50 per cent," he says. An added advantage is that the other varieties don't turn biennial.
Intensive monoculture has also meant increasing use of fertilisers and pesticides. This obviously has had its adverse impact on the physiology of the tree, the structure of the soil and the nature of local biodiversity. For instance, Kanha Singh remembers seeing swarms of bees and butterflies during flowering. "Now they have almost disappeared. I have a feeling it is because of excessive use of pesticides," he says.
Balbir Chauhan, another farmer, says the use of pesticides and fungicides in the apple-growing regions has doubled in the last decade. "Earlier, we used to use one or two pesticides. Now we use a combination of eight to nine pesticides," he says. J.N. Sharma, a plant pathologist based in Kotkhai, records the emergence of a new pest or fungus every year in one or the other orchard. "It's a vicious circle. More productivity means more pesticides. More pesticides means more pests and pest-resistance, which in turn means even greater use of old and new pesticides. There is no way out except biological control which I'm afraid hasn't been successfully demonstrated yet," he says.
Spurious pesticides is also a major problem. Awasthi agrees that there is no check on pesticide companies. "With increasing use of pesticides, many have mushroomed over the years but there is no quality check of any sort," he concedes.
Excessive use of fertiliser has also had its side-effects. Kanha Singh, for instance, drastically cut use of fertilisers five years ago, opting for organic alternatives instead. He believes by doing so he has increased his apple harvest. Awasthi also favours the organic route, but "you cannot stop using fertilisers if you want more crop", he says. "Intensive farming means taking more nutrients out of the soil than can be naturally replenished. Hence, more fertilisers. Fertilisers, however, need a lot of moisture for the roots to suck them up. Lack of water means more of it remains in the soil, somehow changing its structure," he explains.
Chauhan also blames scientists for not monitoring the after-effects of new pesticides. "There are many plants in my orchard which have dried up for no apparent reason. Many others have been experiencing premature leaf-fall while some others are bearing stunted fruits. Besides, soil that has nurtured trees for 40 to 50 years doesn't seem to be accepting new plantings. Which means the soil's make-up has undergone a drastic change about which scientists themselves are clueless," he says.
Farmers accuse scientists of being lazy and offering piecemeal solutions to problems, like the use of pesticides. "They are just not interested in research. I cannot be accused of poor management practices yet my crops have failed. For instance, the scientists tell me to spray two or three pesticides together but I suspect that the effect of one cancels out that of the other. How else does one explain, even after reckoning pest-resistance, the armies of pests every year? Isn't it their duty to investigate so that we can make informed choices?" asks Chauhan. He cites monitoring local climate changes, doing soil surveys, studying the long-term effect of pesticides and fertilisers, breeding sturdier varieties and maintaining seed-banks as some of useful research that they should engage themselves in. And this, he adds, can't happen unless they actively collaborate with the farmers.
Meanwhile, as if to rub salt into the apple farmers' wounds, the government has excluded fruits from the ambit of the recently-announced crop insurance policy. Indeed, if the scientists cannot offer viable solutions to their recurring problems, the government could at least have given them an insurance cover to ease their very real worries over next year's crop.
