Taking up alternative labour or trade indicates what change in pastoral society?

Correct answer: Pressure on traditional pastoralism and diversification of livelihood

Direct answer: Option A, pressure on traditional pastoralism and diversification of livelihood. Pastoralists traditionally earned a living through animals, grazing, and related exchange. When forests and routes were restricted, taxes rose, or grazing became difficult, animal keeping alone could become less reliable. Some people therefore took wage labour, cultivation, trading, transport, or other work. This does not necessarily mean that pastoralism disappeared; it shows adaptation and a wider livelihood strategy. Option A captures both parts: pressure on the old system and diversification into new activities. Option B is wrong because the change was not caused by unlimited pastures; access was often restricted. Option C is wrong because forest laws did not completely end. Option D is wrong because animals continued to have economic value through milk, wool, meat, transport, or sale. The reasoning is: restrictions reduce the reliability of the traditional income → families add other work to manage risk. Memory cue: new work often shows adaptation under pressure, not passive surrender.