As BSF mulls 90-km Sundarbans fence, security clashes with ecology
Just a few months after the Border Security Force (BSF) explored the curious prospect of releasing snakes and crocodiles into rivers at the Indo-Bangladesh border
Just a few months after the Border Security Force (BSF) explored the curious prospect of releasing snakes and crocodiles into rivers at the Indo-Bangladesh border to deter “illegal activities,” the security force has now initiated another controversial feasibility study for a colossal project to safeguard the area. This time, as The Hindu reported, it is to install physical fences along a 90-km stretch of the Sundarbans mangroves, habitat to rich flora and fauna, including the iconic tiger that swims in the brackish water. Installing physical fences here is going to be no easy task: the thick mangrove forests, creeks and swamps make it inaccessible. The BSF today patrols the marshy border, surveillance cameras have been installed, and the government has also sanctioned the construction flood-light illuminated fences, a non-physical barrier, according to reports. The Sundarbans Wildlife Sanctuary will however “remain touched” by the fencing, a BFS official told The Hindu, adding that the structures will not affect the biodiversity of the Sundarbans, as it is being envisaged for the banks of the Ichamati river in the northern reaches conducive to the project.
The official said that all those who might lose their land will be also compensated. But a scientist familiar with the Sundarbans has expressed fear that the fence could adversely affect the movement of species such as deer, wild boar, crocodiles, and, of course, tigers, all of which constantly cross rivers and sand banks. Megnaa Mehtta, an assistant professor in social anthropology at University College London, told The Hindu, “I’m not sure why the Ichamati would be out of bounds to them… It is like any other river or forest sandbank.” Land-water dynamics The idea of a fence in the fluid ecology of the Sundarbans is a colossal waste of government resources, both funds and labour, Dr. Mehtta added: “In an area that requires several other fundamental infrastructural improvements, this should certainly not be a priority for the government.” The delta’s land-water dynamics are fluid and land is constantly eroded with new sandbars being formed through accretion, she added. “Mangroves emerge on these sandbanks. Such a fence is futile in such an ecology, and the purpose of the fence — to prevent “infiltration” from Bangladesh — will also not be served, Dr. Mehtta added.
On the other hand,Krishna Ray, associate professor of the department of botany, West Bengal State University, said the area chosen for the fencing, which he is familiar with, need not be problematic for either the people (mainly fishers) or biodiversity. "Being a porous border area, it should be well protected,” Dr. Ray told The Hindu. “In my opinion fencing in non-protected areas along Bangladesh border might not harm the ecosystem very much, if the BSF people took care of the mangroves on shoreline and wildlife while setting up their fencing.” He “welcomes” the fencing because he believes in regulatory control. “At present I do not think regulations are being followed there. The mangrove ecosystem has already suffered enough from illegal fisheries and construction all over Sundarbans in nonprotected areas.” Compensation for the landless On the contrary, Dr. Mehtta said decades of research in the area has shown that this is not a common route for any form of antisocial infiltration or one that could be a threat to the security of the nation. “For decades, men, women and entire families have moved across the border for labour but also to visit relatives that live just across the border but belong to the same family.” Border crossings will continue, but because of the fence, they will become even more “risky,” she said.
The BriefWire