Divya Mudappa - Session 03, 2022-05-31

(00:00) Knowledge and learnings for germination Mudappa explains that collecting seeds got easier with time. Their phenological studies provided inputs on when to collect them. She says that the downside of collecting seeds from the same individual is the low genetic diversity of that species. She recalls that much knowledge of growing seeds in the nursery came from trial and error and common sense. Mudappa explains that ideal conditions are given to the seeds to grow in the nursery. Although all seeds are sown in a uniform soil mixture, the germination depends more on seed maturity. She says that the challenge lies in protecting the seedling and saplings from rodents and slugs, during the vulnerable stages- these learnings are verbally passed down to new team members and through experimentation. Mudappa says that initially, they treated the seeds like the way they are in silviculture, but they soon realised that if the seeds are left in the soil for a long, they will germinate and grow well.

(11:40) Will finding better conditions for each species to grow help in restoration? Mudappa says that although research-wise it is interesting to investigate better conditions for the growth of each species, it is not essential for restoration. She explains that the amount of work that goes into experimentation is much more than its contribution to restoration and therefore, fine-tuning may not be necessary. However, she believes that close attention needs to be given to highly endangered species. She adds that growing saplings in experimental set-ups aid in studying their growth and survival rates, but they will not be useful practically as the conditions of the restoration sites are variable. Mudappa says that they collect data on seed characteristics which can potentially be used in future research.

(20:18) Documentation, learning about site history Mudappa talks about the initial attempts made at documenting their work. She says that documentation would have been useful as many species they work with have not been dealt with before. She mentions that many of her teammates are not academically inclined and work on the project because of the idea of restoration. She explains that through company ‘bibles’ and written records, they learn about site and plantation history. By looking at remnant crops like coffee and cardamom and identifying invasives, they deduce the history of the site. Mudappa describes methods implemented to tweak the fragments- before planting shade-loving native rainforest saplings- like leaving out existing recovering species and planting pioneers. The number of saplings they plant depends on naturally regenerating seedlings in the site.

(29:33) Choosing which fragment to restore first Mudappa says that those fragments consisting of a mix of less degraded to degraded parts are targeted first. The degraded portions in the edges are first restored, eventually protecting the interiors, which then improve. She talks about other less degraded sites which have not been restored yet and other sites that have recovered without intervention.

(35:31) Role of formal science and practical knowledge in restoration work; important questions in the restoration context Mudappa highlights the importance of vegetation surveys in understanding plant communities, which continues to influence species selection for restoration. Practically, the nursery aids in trial-and-error which helps them decide on an efficient method to germinate seeds. Mudappa says that research work helps in convincing people to restore and conserve. She says that studying soil and below-ground systems like mycorrhiza would be fascinating. However, she is unsure of its application in restoration. She mentions two aspects that would help benefit restoration. One- find improved ways to control invasives without using chemicals and checking whether it is worth doing it. Two- work on understorey plant restoration. The fragments that have been restored do not have most understorey species. They learnt that fragmentation and isolation largely impact understorey plants due to limited dispersers. Mudappa and team plan to focus on the recovery of these plants in the fragments to the fullest.

(45:45) Opinion on soil studies and micromanagement of sites, further plans to restore other taxa protecting sites after planting Studying soil may help in increasing success but it may not be worth the effort that goes into it according to Mudappa. She explains that because of the healthy microbial and mycorrhizal community in the landscape, their saplings are surviving well. However, she believes that if a species is endangered and is not growing well, soil studies can be useful. Mudappa talks about pursuing understorey restoration next and how their understanding of invertebrates is limited. She explains that growing epiphytes requires good expertise, however, once the microclimate recovers in a fragment, they will soon be colonised by orchids and epiphytes. She strongly feels the need to protect sites as many trees in the fragments have been cut for temple festivals and constructions. Periodically, they de-weed the fragments but they do not actively manure or water them. Mudappa explains that these sites are closely watched by the forest department and companies due to which they need to be cared for in the initial stages. She believes that once this period has crossed, the plants survive on their own if they are not cut.

(56:05) Will there be any difference in restoring her land, compromises made while working on fragments owned by others Mudappa says that if she had a land of her own, she would not interfere much if it were close to a protected forest. Even otherwise, she would simply plant some saplings. Other than not being able to protect the fragment, Mudappa explains that they do not have conditions or constraints in restoring lands owned by others. Sometimes they are requested to not plant those trees that invite elephants which is understandable. She talks about locals collecting fuelwood from the fragments and the team’s unsuccessful attempts at suggesting alternatives. She explains that the locals prefer fuelwood as it is used for several purposes and is free of cost. She recalls reduction in tree lopping when the government provided free LPG Cylinders, but once the LPG cost increased, fuelwood collection also increased.

(1:03:33) Does dealing with people’s issues lessen the focus on restoration? Does idealism impact their work? Mudappa says that a different set of skills, interests and philosophy is required to deal with communities, and their issues and to get them to restore. Concerning themselves in these matters takes Mudappa and Sridhar (T. R. S. Raman) away from pursuing restoration and facilitating research. She feels that it is her slightly introverted nature which does not allow her to assert her views on people. She says that idealism may have impacted the way they worked earlier. As of now, the team is doing their best in working with communities and convincing them to restore. She describes how her teammates (Sridhar, Srini, Ganesh Raghunathan, Ananda Kumar M. and Kshama V. Bhat) have their own relationships and strengths with different players. [Archivist’s note: Interviewee refers to T. R. S. Raman by their nickname, Sridhar, throughout the interview] [Archivist’s note: Interviewee refers to K. Srinivasan by their nickname, Srini, throughout the interview]

(1:12:37) Forest Department’s outlook on the restoration project and other questions that influence their understanding of the landscape Mudappa talks about how oblivious and ignorant the Forest Department has been towards their restoration project. She recalls some individuals from the department who have enthusiastically planted with the team and have sought suggestions on ecological issues. She says that because restoration has gained popularity, the department seeks their advice on the species to plant on politicians’ birthdays. She talks about the scope for restoration within the Anamalai Tiger Reserve (ATR) but when they approached the Forest Department with the idea, they were dismissed and were asked to get the National Tiger Conservation Authority’s (NTCA) permission. She also recollects an incident where a representative of the Isha Foundation was allowed to survey the ATR to plant 1 crore trees, most of which were non-native. Surveys on birds, plants, mammals and amphibians carried out by Mudappa and others have helped them highlight the importance of forest fragments. Mudappa says that accidental discoveries like Corilla snails in fragments belonging to companies make the owners proud. She says that studies that focus on the effect of fragmentation on any taxa are always useful. She mentions focal areas of research like long-term studies by her teammates, Akhil Murali and Srini (Srinivasan K.) and nursery techniques by Kshama V. Bhat. She talks about a few studies like Vijay Ramesh’s survey of restored, unrestored and benchmark sites and Anand M. Osuri’s forest recovery study. However, she says that they must be cautious in using the same experimental design to look at the recovery of other species as the presence of those species may not be a direct reflection of restoration.

(1:25:43) Funding for restoration work To get funds, Mudappa and team had to set research goals. As the project comprised physical work, the labour cost was very high, and most companies provided in-kind support (like transportation and space for saplings) and not funds. Restoration work would be budgeted but it was not the primary component. Of late, they have found avenues to get monetary support for different kinds of work. She explains that local philanthropies are driven by questions on the number of livelihoods being supported and the socio-economic benefits that locals get. Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies and Rainmatter Foundation are two organisations that help them with restoration for the long term. She says that this kind of relation-building is possible with local donors but not international ones. She recalls that their funding from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)- Netherlands was stopped after two years as the organisation’s goals and focal region changed. She says that although things have been smoother, the efforts that go into procuring the funds are big. Mudappa explains that because the results of the restoration project can be visible only in the far future, it has been even more challenging to secure funds. She adds that the changing ownership of the lands also makes matters worse.

(1:36:27) Working with the forest department Mudappa says that as individuals it is complicated to work on it. She talks about working with the forest department and people on issues like wattle control in grasslands, conflict management and supporting ideas of coexistence, which was initially not accepted; and explains that once these ideas are realised, it is easier to work on them. Mudappa and Sridhar (T. R. S. Raman) have discussions with people of power about how the law comes in the way of continuing restoration. She recalls anecdotes where companies see the importance of growing native trees in their tea estates. She says that while laws have been created to prevent people from exploiting forests, it also is preventing people from wanting to plant native trees or create forest patches.