Socio-economic factors
threatening the survival of Ganges River Dolphin Platanista gangetica gangetica in the upper Ganges River, India
Tawqir Bashir 1, Afifullah Khan 2, SandeepKumar Behera 3 & Parikshit Gautam 4
Present Address: 1 Wildlife
Institute of India, Post Box. # 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248001,
India
1,2 Department of Wildlife Sciences,
Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh 202002, India
3,4 Freshwater and Wetland Division,
WWF-India, 172 Lodhi Estate, New Delhi 110003, India
Email: 1 tbashir@wii.gov.in ; 2 afifkhan@rediffmail.com; 3 sbehera@wwfindia.net; 4 pgautam@wwfindia.net
Date of publication (online): 26 July 2010
Date of publication (print): 26 July 2010
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Gill Braulik
Manuscript details:
Ms # o2333
Received 19 October 2009
Final revised received 16 July 2010
Finally accepted 17 July 2010
Citation: Bashir, T., A. Khan, S.K Behera & P. Gautam (2010). Socio-economic
factors threatening the survival of Ganges River Dolphin Platanista gangetica gangetica in the upper Ganges River, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2(8): 1087-1091.
Copyright: © Tawqir Bashir,Afifullah Khan, SandeepKumar Behera & Parikshit Gautam 2010. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 UnportedLicense. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article
in any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by
providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.
Author Details: Tawqir Bashir is a Senior Research Fellow at Wildlife Institute of
India presently studying the ecology of high altitude carnivores in Eastern Himalaya
for PhD programme. Dr. AfifullahKhan is Chairman at the Department of Wildlife Science, Aligarh Muslim
University, India. His research interests are to study the home range patterns,
prey-predator dynamics and landscape ecology using remote sensing and GIS. Dr. Sandeep Kumar Behera is a
Senior Coordinator of the Ganges River Dolphin Programmeat WWF-India and has been studying the ecology of Ganges River Dolphin in different
tributaries of its distribution for the past two decades. Dr. Parikshit Gautam holds the chair of Director Freshwater
and Wetland Division at WWF-India. His
research interests mainly focus on the conservation of wetland biodiversity.
Author Contribution: Regarding both thestudy and the current paper, field data collection, data analysis and
preparation of the manuscript/paper was done by the first author. The remaining three authors were principal
investigators and collaborators who contributed with their valuable suggestions
and guided the first author all through the study.
Acknowledgment: We are grateful to Aligarh Muslim University for providing
us the facilities required for conducting this research. We also express our
thanks to WWF-India for providing financial support. Mr. SatishSharma, Range Officer, Narora Division was very
helpful and cooperative in terms of official permissions regarding our surveys.
Last but not the least we thank our field assistants, Parmanand,Radhey Shyam, Kale and Rajkumar for their rigorous efforts during the surveys.
Abstract: The present study was conducted along the upper Ganges
River between Narora barrages and Anupshaharfrom January to June 2007. Community
interviews were conducted in order to assess the socio-economic profile of the
fishermen community, their level of dependence on the river and their attitude
towards the conservation of Ganges River Dolphin Platanista gangetica gangetica. The estimated literacy rate from interviews was 45%, and average annual
income per household was 27,000 INR (Indian National Rupee). The respondents were found to be well aware
of the river biodiversity and believed excessive water extraction and pollution
to be the responsible for any perceived decline in the dolphin population. About 55% of the fishermen were found to fish
for commercial purposes, and a majority of them (71%) used nylon gill-nets. A majority (94%) of respondents that had
boats of their own fished in the middle of the river, an activity often
conducted in groups. 12% of respondents
reported to have encountered dolphin carcasses. Excessive fishing and dolphin poaching were found to be interrelated; if
fishing can be more effectively managed poaching may automatically
decline. 41% of the fishermen
interviewed were found to be willing to stop fishing providing adequate
alternative livelihoods are provided by the government.
Keywords: Carcasses, fishermen community, Ganges River Dolphin,
gill-nets, livelihood, Platanista gangetica gangetica, socio-economics.
Introduction
The Ganges River passes through northern India and has
enormous cultural and economic significance. It is worshipped as a goddess by Hindus and is a centre of social and
religious tradition (Adel 2001); however, it is one of the most polluted and
highly exploited rivers in the world. It
supports about 8% of the world’s population living in its catchments (Newby
1998), directly or indirectly depending on it for their livelihood. As a result, the Ganges River Dolphin Platanista gangetica gangetica - one among the two subspecies of Platanista gangetica (the other being the Indus River
Dolphin P. gangetica minor inhabiting Indus River), comes
into direct competition with people either for food (fish) or space or
indirectly faces threats due to pollution. The Ganges River Dolphin, locally known as ‘Susu’
is distributed along the Ganges, Brahamputra, Karnaphuli-Sangu and Meghna River
systems and their tributaries, from the foot hills of the Himalaya to the
limits of the tidal zone in India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan (Anderson
1879; Jones 1982; Reeves & Brownell 1989; Sinha2000). The subspecies is positioned at
the apex of food chain in the freshwater ecosystem and plays a vital role in
maintaining its ecological balance (Behera1995). In spite of being a “Flagship”
species, representing an ecosystem in need of conservation (Behera1995; Choudhary et al. 2006; Beheraet al. 2008; Bashir 2010) its status has become a
matter of grave concern over the past few decades. Its population has declined in range, and
frequent incidental killings in gill-nets and threats to its habitat have
compelled conservationists to list it as a Schedule I species in the Indian
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and also classify it as Endangered (Smith &Braulik 2008). The subspecies is also facing the consequences of habitat fragmentation
through the construction of dams and barrages which has partitioned the
meta-population into isolated sub-populations (Choudharyet al. 2006; Bashir et al. 2007). Its distribution range is continuing to
shrink and it has been eliminated from many of the smaller tributaries and
upper reaches of the Ganges system (Sinha &
Sharma 2003).
The main threats to dolphins survival are construction
of barrages, heavy siltation, use of chemical fertilizers and organochlorines pesticides for farming in the river
corridor, bycatch in gill-nets, prey depletion and
intentional killings for oil and meat (Nair 2009; Sinha& Sharma 2003). In order to achieve
the goal of sustainable conservation of the subspecies the present study was
conducted to quantify the socio-economic condition of the fishermen
communities, their dependence on river resources, and their attitude towards
the dolphin in its only viable habitat within the upper Ganges River (Behera 1995).
Material and Methods
In order to achieve the objectives of the study, a
stretch of 28km from Narora Barrage (28011’28.4”N
& 78023’48.1”E) to Anupshahar (28021’52.0”N
& 78016’24.8”E) was specified for socio-economic interview
surveys in the villages located along the banks of the river (Fig. 1). The interviews were conducted with
individuals of a household mainly family heads (male or female) generally in
the presence of rest of the family members using a semi-structured
questionnaire (Choudhary et al. 2006). Eleven villages where nearly 60% of the
residents were fishermen were targeted, out of which 35-40% of households were
randomly selected for interviews, representing a total of 217 households. These villages were selected based on their
direct dependence on the river. The
households were interviewed about their socio-economic status, dependence and
perception towards the Ganges River and its fauna, and their attitude towards
conservation of the Ganges River Dolphin.
Results
Socio-economic profile and awareness
The estimated literacy rate among the sampled households
was 45%, 21% of which were educated to secondary level and the rest to primary
level. Although, the literacy rate among
the children was 63% only a small proportion (17%) were receiving education to
secondary level. The overall sex ratio
of the sampled households was 0.87:1.00 (female/male) with 27% females literate
to primary level and 51% males literate (68% to primary level). The average annual household income was
about 27,000 (Indian National Rupee),
with each household having an average of five family members. The communities also rear livestock with an
average of 2-3 animals/family.
Of the total inhabitants interviewed 98% confirmed the
presence of different species of fishes, turtles, and dolphins, whereas 32%,
15% and 3% reported the presence of crocodiles, snakes and otters respectively,
in this stretch of the Ganges. 25% of
respondents reported less than 25, 60% (25-50), 10% (50-75) and 5% (> 75)
fish species present in this stretch. 34% of the respondents reported the dolphins to be distributed up to Brijgath (82km upstream of Narora)
while the rest believed the same to be restricted only up to Anupshahar (Fig. 2). 19% of the respondents reported an estimate of more than 75 dolphins
surviving between Narora and Anupshahar,
while 32% (50-75), 30% (25-50) and 19% believed the number to be less than 25
individuals. The respondents had mixed
views regarding the dolphin population trend with 53% believing an increase and
rest (47%) decrease in population over the years. When asked about the reasons for decreasing
population trend of the dolphin, 59% of respondents held decreasing water level
(over extraction) responsible while 30% believed it was due to increasing water
pollution (both being interrelated), only 3% believed increasing bank
cultivation to be the culprit, while the remainder had no idea about the
causes. However, no poaching and
decrease in poaching were given as reasons for a perceived increase in the
dolphin population by 72% and 10% of the respondents respectively, while the
rest believed the fast propagation (breeding success) of the subspecies to be
the reason for the increase. Almost all
the respondents believed the Ganges River to be sacred, considering the dolphin
as its guards and watchdogs, and all of them anticipated the continued survival
of both. Most believed that fishing is
detrimental to the dolphin, but all of them argued that they do not have any
alternative. When asked about any help
from the government they were found to have a negative perception towards it,
but a good proportion (41%) of the inhabitants were found willing to leave
their fishing practices if provided with alternatives by the government,
sufficient to fulfill their livelihood requirements.
Dependence and threats
Although, 75% of the fishermen households primarily
conducted fishing they also practiced agriculture on their own land or land
taken on lease along the river banks. They used chemical fertilizers at an average of 20-25 g/plant. Also, profits from fishing were very small as
they were bound to share a huge portion (60%) of their catch with the fish
contractors. 12% of the total
respondents fish for commercial (exclusively for selling) purpose, 45% for
subsistence (for own use) while 43% for both the purposes; however they added
that the sale of fishes depends upon the size of the catch, which if small was
kept for their own use and when large the remaining was sold in the
market. It was reported that 44% of the
respondents used gill-nets of size ranging from 2-15 cm (mesh size), 29% used
hook- thread while the remaining 27% were found to use both types of gears for
fishing, depending on their intention. Only 32% of respondents had their own boats of which 94% fished in the
middle of the river, and 31% did the same activity in groups. Even among people having no boats of their
own, 49% used to fish in the middle of river by borrowing boats from their
fellow fishermen, but only 7% of these fished in groups (Figs. 3 & 4). Frequent visits to the local fish market by
the interview survey team indicated consistent availability of fish below the
permissible fish weight (250g) for sale.
Although the fishermen generally hesitated when asked
about any incidents of dolphins being caught in their nets, 4% agreed to the
fact and reported that they released the animal even if they had to cut or
spoil their nets to do so. Yet 23% of
the respondents were well aware of dolphin oil price ( 4000-5000 /litre)
in the black market and also a small proportion of the respondents (8%)
hesitantly reported the use of dolphin oil to improve their fishing. 12%
reported sighting of dolphin carcasses at different banks over different years.
Discussion
The socio-economic profile of the fishermen community
clearly states their level of poverty which necessitates the importance of
earning a living above obtaining education even in early childhood. Rearing livestock does not provide
substantial improvements to their socio-economic status. The result is that fishermen have few
economic opportunities other than continuing to fish for subsistence or
commercial purposes.
The study indicates that the fishermen community had a
fairly good knowledge of the river biodiversity. Being more focused towards the
fishes, their perception about the fish species in the stretch is in accordance
with the documented estimates (Jayaram 1999; Behera 2002). The
fluctuations in their perceptions regarding dolphin distribution may be
influenced by their past knowledge, amount of time spent fishing in different
seasons, and migration patterns of dolphins in different seasons. However, reports regarding dolphin numbers
can be considered as over estimates when compared with the more quantitative
scientific abundance estimate of 28 individuals in the study stretch (Bashir et al. 2010), influenced by their inadequacy in
interpreting repeated dolphin surfacing to different individuals. Their mixed views concerning the dolphin
population trends indicates that according to their memory and perception there
have not been any major changes in the Ganges Dolphin abundance, although
dedicated field surveys indicate that the dolphin population has increased in
the study stretch but not at a rapid rate (Behera& Rao 1999; Bashir et
al. 2010). The entire Ganges basin is
polluted by an annual usage of 2573 tones of pesticides and 1.15 million metric
tones of chemical fertilizers in its catchment area (Gupta 1984). The use of the same in agriculture along the
river banks may directly affect the water quality of the river and make it
undesirable for the dolphin. High levels
of pollution may lead to lowered immune ability of dolphins to respond to
naturally occurring diseases (Lahvis et al. 1995) or
impair their reproductive system, as observed in common seals (Reijinders 1986).
The study inferred that poverty compels the fishermen to
fish but the harassment by fish contractors encourages them towards excessive
fishing. Since most of the fishermen use large meshed gill-nets they are
focused on catching large sized individuals and therefore assumed to be
conducting commercial fishing (55%). Use
of boats for fishing in groups in the middle of the river may result in an
increase in the frequency of incidental killing of dolphins in the nylon
gill-nets of large mesh sizes (Behera 1995; Hassan et
al. 1998). Substantial catches of small
fish, below the permissible weight may result in dolphin prey depletion (Mohan
et al. 1997) and potentially affect the sustainability of Ganges River
fisheries. Poaching and intensive
fishing are interrelated as the later requires dolphin oil as fish bait. The reports of dolphins entangled in
gill-nets, the sighting of carcasses, and awareness about dolphin oil prices,
suggests that some dolphin poaching may be occurring in the area.
Overall, it was observed that the Ganges River is
respected by all the people irrespective of their castes and religion, but none
of them would miss a chance to exploit its resources for their subsistence or
commercial benefits. Yet their attitude
towards dolphin conservation suggests a safe future for the species, provided
the government plays an active role.
Conclusion
The Ganges River Dolphin is an indicator of riverine health, and like the river it is in a bad
way. Besides being helpless towards its
unhealthful home, many dolphins die getting entangled in gill-nets. Time is fast running out to save the dolphin
but the concerns of the fishermen can also not be neglected, as the Ganges has
been serving as a source of subsistence for them since time immemorial. There is a need to make efforts through a
number of routes to prevent the extinction of this charismatic freshwater
dolphin and enable the fishermen to achieve better living standards and
understand the conservation importance of the species in a way that both
ecology and economy are sustainably strengthened.
Recommendations
There is a need for awareness of fishermen regarding the
importance of aquatic ecosystems so that they realize its significance for both
the conservation of wildlife and also their own sustenance. Fishermen communities should be helped to
obtain better educational opportunities. Alternatives to fishing as a livelihood, such as eco-tourism
which would surely result in the reduction of pressure on the fish population
and hence to the dolphin should be explored. Periodic monitoring of the dolphin population
needs to be carried out, possibly by launching a ‘Project Dolphin’ at the national
level similar to that of Project Tiger. The level of pollution needs to be frequently monitored and the
effluents need to be treated to less hazardous products before discharge. Infrastructure should be developed to
generalize the use of manure and natural fertilizers instead of chemical
fertilizers and organo-chlorine products. Round-the-clock fishing and fishing during
dolphin birthing season (Oct-Mar) especially at the time of peak birthing
(Dec-Jan) months (Nowak 2003) should be prohibited by the law. A team of local conservation oriented
volunteers should be designed to report any concerned illegal activity in the
river stretch so that immediate actions could be taken. Since illegal fishing is encouraged by the
fish market, adequate actions should be taken by the government against the
fish contractors by stringently implementing the law and imposing fines against
them.
References
Adel, M.M. (2001). Effect on water
resources from Upstream Water Diversion in the Ganges Basin. Journal of Environmental
Quality 30: 356-368.
Anderson, J. (1879). Pisces,
pp.863-869. In: Anderson, J. (ed.). Anatomical and Zoological Researches; Comprising
an Account of the Zoological Results of the Two Expeditions to Western Yamuna
in 1868 and 1875, and a Monograph of the Two Cetacean Genera, Platanista and Orcella. Bernard Quaritch,
London.
Bashir, T. (2010). Ganges River Dolphin (Platanista gangetica) seeks help. Current Science 98(3): 287-288.
Bashir, T., A. Khan, J.A. Khan, P. Gautam & S.K. Behera (2007). Aspects
of ecology of Gangetic Dolphin (Platanista gangetica) in Western Uttar Pradesh, India. A survey report
funded by WWF-India; Department of Wildlife Sciences, AMU, Aligarh, U.P, India,
68pp.
Bashir, T., A. Khan, P. Gautam & S.K. Behera (2010). Abundance and prey availability
assessment of Ganges River Dolphin (Platanista gangetica gangetica) in a stretch of upper Ganges River, India. Aquatic Mammals 36(1): 19-26.
Behera, S.K. (1995). Studies on Population Dynamics,
Habitat Utilization and Conservation Aspects of for GangeticDolphin (Platanista gangetica)
in a stretch of Ganga River from Rishekeshto Kanpur. PhD Thesis, School of Studies in Zoology, JiwajiUniversity Gawalior, 198pp.
Behera,
S.K & R.J. Rao (1995). Observation on the behaviour of Gangetic dolphins in
the upper Ganga River. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 96: 43-47.
Behera, S.K. (2002). Status Report of Upper GangaRiver (Bijnor to Narora), Ganges River Dolphin Conservation
Project, World Wide Fund for Nature- India, 31pp.
Behera,
S.K., V. Sagar & A. Nawab (2008). Environmental flow requirements
vis-à-vis habitat use pattern of freshwater dolphins. Proceedings
of the 11th International River Symposium, Brisbane, Australia.
Choudhary, S.K., B.D. Smith, S. Dey& S. Prakash (2006). Conservation andbiomonitoring in the Vikramshila Gangetic dolphin Sanctuary, Bihar, India. Oryx 40(2): 189-197.
Gupta, D. (ed.) (1984). The Ganga Basin. Basin sub-Basin Inventory of Water Pollution. Part-
II:ADSORBS/7/1982-83.Centre for Study of Man and Environment, Central Board
for the Preservation and Control of Water Pollution, New Delhi, 204pp+7
annexes.
Hassan, S.S., R.K. Sinha,
S.N. Ahsan & N. Hassan (1998). Impact of
fishing operation and hydrological factors on recent fish catch in Ganga near Patna, India. Journal of the Inland Fisheries Society of
India 30(1): 1-12.
Jayaram, K.C. (1999). The Fresh Water Fishes of
the Indian Region. Narendra Publishing House, 551pp.
Jones, S. (1982). The present status of the Gangetic susu, Platanista gangetica (Roxburgh),
with comments on the Indus susu, P. minor (Owen) (Food and Agriculture
Organization [FAO] Advisory Committee on Marine Resources Research, Working
Party on Marine Mammals). FAO Fisheries Series 5: 97-115.
Lahvis, G.P., R.S. Wells, D.W. Kuehl, J.L. Stewart, H.L. Rhinehart& C.S. Via (1995). Decreasing lymphocyte responses in free ranging
Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncates) are associated with increased
concentrations of PCBs and DDT in peripheral blood. Environmental Health
Perspective 103(4): 67-72.
Mohan, R.S.L., S.C. Dey, S.P. Bairagi & S. Roy
(1997). On a survey of Ganges River Dolphins Platanista gangetica of Brahamputra River Assam. Journal of the Bombay
Natural History Society 94: 483-495.
Nair, A.K.
(2009). The status and distribution of major aquatic fauna in
the National Chambal Gharial Sanctuary in Rajasthan
with special reference to the Gangetic Dolphin Platanista gangetica gangetica (Cetartiodactyla: Platanistidae). Journal of Threatened Taxa 1(3): 141-146.
Newby, E. (1998). Slowly down the Ganges. Lonely Planet
Publications, 23-25pp.
Nowak, R. (2003). Ganges and Indus Dolphins, or Susus, pp.128-130. In: Walker’s Marine Mammals of
the World, Vol. 2, 1st Edition. The Johns Hopkins Univesity Press, Baltimore, MD.
Reeves, R.R. & R.L.
Brownell Jr. (1989). Susu Platanista gangetica (Roxburgh,
1801) and Platanista minor (Owen, 1853), pp.69-99. In: Hidgway, S.H. & R. Harrison (eds.). Handbook of Marine Mammals, Vol. 4, Academic Press, London.
Reijinders, P.J.H. (1986). Reproductive failure of common
seals feeding on fish from polluted waters. Nature 324: 456-57.
Sinha, R.K. (2000). Status of the
Ganges river dolphins Platanista gangetica in the
vicinity of Farakka Barrage India, pp.42-48.In: Biology and conservation of Freshwater Cetaceans in Asia. IUCN species
survival commission occasional paper No.23 IUCN Gland, Switzerland.
Sinha,
R.K. & G. Sharma (2003). Current Status of the Ganges River
Dolphin, in the river Kosi and Son, Bihar India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 100(1): 27-37.
Smith, B.D. & G.T. Braulik (2008). Platanista gangetica. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>.
Downloaded on 19 July 2010.