Jalaplavit_final_vol_6_no._3

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Pesticide Toxicity with Special Reference to Wetlands of India
- A Review

1Dhaval Varagiya, 2Devang Pandya & 3Ketan Tatu
[1]Doctoral Research Scholar, R. K. University, Rajkot,
[2] Dy.Director, School of Pharmacy, R K University, Rajkot
[3]Senior Scientist, GEER Foundation, Gandhinagar
Email of Corresponding Author1: [email protected]

Abstract: Harmful effects of pesticides on wildlife (especially birds) and wildlife

habitats have been a concern for long time. Wetlands constitute one such habitat
threatened by the pesticides. Alarming levels of pesticides have been already
recorded in Keoladeo N. P., Rajasthan. In Gujarat, SACON had recorded high levels of
pesticides in some wetlands like Sukhbhadar, Meshwo dam, Pariej and Wadhvana
irrigation reservoirs. There may be several other wetlands in Gujarat, including those
in wetland-rich Porbandar district that might be facing pesticide toxicity problem.
But there has been lack of comprehensive research in this direction till date.

Keywords: Pesticides, Porbandar, Toxicity, Wetlands

Introduction first pesticide used in Sumeria about
Ecotoxicology is defined as ‘‘the 4500 years ago. Paul Muller discovered
dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT)
science of contaminants in the in 1939, which was used widely
biosphere and their effects on afterwards for different reasons
constituents of the biosphere, worldwide. But, later its threats to
including humans’’ (Rattner 2009). A environment were recognised and its
pesticide is usually defined as “a use is greatly reduced excluding to be
chemical substance, biological agent, used as malaria control. In India, the
antimicrobial or disinfectant used use of pesticides began in 1948 with
against pests including insects, plant the introduction of DDT for the control
pathogens, weeds, mollusks, birds, of malaria and benzene hexachloride
mammals, fish, nematodes (BHC) for locusts. Production of these
(roundworms) and microbes that substances in India started in 1952
compete with humans for food, (Goel & Aggarwal 2007).
destroy property, have a propensity for
spreading or area vector for disease or More than 400 pesticides of 4
simply a nuisance” (Goel & Aggarwal groups are used in India.
2007). Elemental sulphur dust was the
51

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

1st Generation includes Chlorinated they appear in the market (The
Insecticide Act, 1968 and the
hydrocarbon compound: DDT, Insecticide Rules, 1971 in India) that
include an assessment of the potential
Endosulfon, Heptachlor, Aldrin, Isodrin risk to wildlife and the environment
(Ali et al. 2014). However, several
and Dieldrin etc. includes studies have shown that they affect
2ndGeneration non-target species also. Moreover,
they affect the physico-chemical
Organophosphate: Quinalfos, quality of ecosystems (e.g., wetlands)
in which they enter. Specifically,
Monocrotofos, Malathion, Parathion, though India has achieved
independence in crop production with
Trichlorophan, Fenchlorofos, Phoxim, modern techniques and tools like
pesticides and fertilizers, But, the
Abate, Dichlorovos, Fenthion and country is still miles away in
generating safe food for humans and
Haloxon etc. animals (Kumar & Singh 2012). Out of
3rdGeneration includes Carbomates: more than 400 pesticides available in
the Indian market, only 234 pesticides
Aldicarb, Carbafuron, Carbaryl and are registered (Dhananjayan &
Ravichandran 2014).
Aminocarb etc. Synthetic
4thGeneration includes Review of Literature

Pyrethroid: Cypermethrin, Pesticides
One of the important matters to
Deltamethrin, Permethrin and
remember about pesticides applied to
Cismethrinetc (Kumar & Singh 2012). the soil is their long persistence,
measured not in months but in years
Actual, rather than perceived, after their application. Aldrin has been
recovered after four years, Toxaphene
effects of pesticides were bought to remained in the sandy soils after 10

public attention in May 1962, by a

writer turned biologist Rachel Carson

in her book titled Silent Spring (Levine

2007). This landmark text may be

identified as the single most significant

contribution to the change and indeed

reversal of public attitudes to pesticide

use (Carlile 2006).

Pesticides are supposed to kill

only the targeted species, i.e., mainly

the insects feeding on crops and other

weeds competing with crops.

Pesticides are believed to pass through

various registration and tests before

52

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

years, Benzene hexachlorine at least 11 impacts of pesticides on birds and
years, Heptachlor at least 9 years, and other biota (especially some plant
Chlordane has been recovered after 12 groups and fish) in wetlands and
years in the amount of 15% of original recommendations of such assessments
quantity (Carson 2000). should be taken into consideration by
the Governments (state & central)
As mentioned above, due to while introducing new chemicals as
long half life and slow decomposition also framing rules and regulations on
rate, pesticides remain in soil including the use of pesticides (Rahmani 2012).
sediments of the wetland basins and
retain their hazardous effects for very Impact of Pesticides on Birds in and
long time which may severely harm the around Wetlands in India
wildlife and other forms of biodiversity.
To take advantage of easy water Wetland birds or Waterbirds are
availability, many agricultural fields are under growing threat of pesticide
located near fresh water inland toxicity as death of wetland birds due
wetlands. But, due to heavy use of to pesticide poisoning. There are
pesticides in them, their agricultural recent records of mortality of wetland
runoff easily takes pesticide residues birds such as Spot-billed Pelican,
into the wetland and harms the Painted Stork, Eurasian Spoonbill, Little
important biodiversity. In many Egret, Black-headed Ibis, and Black-
American and European countries, crowned Night Heron due to
pesticides are found in different phosphamidon poisoning at Anna
samples. Indian wetlands and other Zoological Park, Chennai; of the Red-
important habitats are already crested Pochard and Common
contaminated with pesticides and Moorhen in Sitarganj Forest Range,
major work is yet to be done Uttarakhand due to Chorpyrifos
(Murlidharan et al. 1993, 2000, 2004, poisoning; of the Demoiselle Cranes in
2008, 2009, 2014) Amreli and Surendranagar districts of
Gujarat due to phorate poisoning (as
The impacts of agrochemicals also rodenticide poisoning). Moreover,
on birds (including those of wetlands) intentional pesticide poisoning of
are poorly studied in India. There is an waterbirds (like Black-crowned Night
urgent need to run the country wide Heron and Purple Heron) using
evaluation program to access the
53

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

carbofuran pesticides has been West Sundarban Wildlife Sanctuary,
recorded at Virundunagar, Tamil Nadu. West Bengal
What is most disturbing is that what
gets published about pesticide Boom in industrialization in
poisoning in birds of wetlands is a West Bengal has contributed
miniscule percentage of the reality ( extensively in pollution levels in
Muralidharan et al. 2014). estuaries which may affect important
mangrove ecosystem of Sundarban.
Pesticides not only threaten the Both estuaries and mangrove swamps
existence of waterbirds; they endanger are wetland ecosystems. Pesticides and
the existence of terrestrial birds too nutrient-rich inorganic fertilizers have
which live in the fields adjoining spoiled the geochemistry of the
wetlands. Agricultural fields are often estuarine waters. Municipal sewage
established on the banks of wetlands and domestic waste generated by
for easy and local irrigation water people count almost 400 tons every
availability. But if such wetland waters year. Further, the population residing
are contaminated with pesticides, they around the Sundarban disposes of
can be the source of bioaccumulation waste in an unregulated manner (Vyas
and biomagnifications of toxic et al. 2012).
substances even in the body tissues of
terrestrial birds like Indian Peafowl-the Mahala Water Reserve, Jaipur
national bird of India and Schedule-I Rajasthan
species as per Indian Wildlife
(Protection) Act, 1972. Seeds and Researchers have monitored
shoots of crops that are treated with and surveyed pesticide pollution in
pesticides can even cause direct Mahala and reported toxic levels of
toxicity in such birds. Since last 25 pesticides mainly HCH, DDT, and aldrin
years, there have been reports of in birds like Flamingo, Pied wagtail,
increasing large-scale mortalities due Black-winged stilt and Red-wattled
to increased use of Lapwing. They estimated more
insecticides/pesticides in agricultural pesticides in brain, as compared with
lands (Choudhury et al. 2007). other tissues (Dhananjayan &
Ravichandran 2014).

54

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Keoladeo National Park, Rajasthan, after being metabolized from aldrin
India was responsible for the death of many
Sarus Cranes in Keoladeo (S
Pesticides are also traced from Muralidharan, 1993). More than
the eggshells of colonial waterbirds of double, water was supplied to the Park
Keoladeo National Park (KNP) wetland in 1990 compared to 1989. And the
complex (a Ramsar Site from India). supplied water was also detected with
Dialdrin was found in higher contamination of aldrin and BHC which
concentration in eggs of Large explains the reason behind the death
Cormorant (1.54 ppm), Indian Shag (Muralidharan, 2000).
(2.94 ppm), Darter (1.52 ppm), Grey
Heron (5.95 ppm), Cattle Egret (2.52 Gujarat
ppm), Painted Stork (5.78 ppm), and During 2005-2007, 16 bird
Spoon Bill (1.3 ppm) (Dhananjayan &
Ravichandran 2014). species in more than 100 samples were
collected from Ahmedabad after being
Sarus crane is the tallest flying killed with kite flying threads. All
bird of the world and state bird of carcasses were detected with pesticide
Uttar Pradesh. Gujarat state is one of contamination during the study, which
the top three stronghold states from makes the situation more alarming
view-point of Sarus population. Sarus (Venugopal Dhananjayan, 2013).
is the symbol of monogamy and pair Organochlorines were also traced in
bonding but, pesticides affect the blood plasma of another 13
reproductive system of this resident species of birds. (Dhananjayan &
crane of India. As a result, less than six Muralidharan 2010). Salim Ali Center
breeding pairs of Sarus cranes survive for Ornithology and Natural History
in the KNP at present compared to 27 (SACON) had recorded high levels of
in 1973. Aldrin was responsible for the pesticides in some wetlands like
death of 18 Sarus between 1987–1988 Sukhbhadar and Meshwo dams and
and 1989–1990 at KNP. Very high (i.e., Pariej and Wadhvana irrigation
89.75 ppm) residues of aldrin in the reservoirs (Vijayan et al., 2004).
gastrointestinal tract and dieldrin in
much higher quantities in the brain Vultures, that are often found
with respect to the lethal level (i.e., 4–5 resting/roosting in the canopies of
ppm) clearly indicated that dieldrin trees around wetlands, are very crucial

55

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

scavengers of our environment but supports 261 species of birds, 22
unfortunately majority of them have species of mammals, 39 species of
been wiped out due to Diclofenac and reptiles, 4 species of amphibians, 55
pesticides. Two carcasses of the Indian species of butterflies, and 759 species
White-backed Vulture were collected of plants and many species of fresh
from Ahmedabad in 2003. DDT, water fishes (Varagiya 2015). Every
Dieldrin, Endosulfan were detected in year, hundreds of birds, both resident
liver and brain tissues (Muralidharan et and migratory, are rescued from farms
al. 2008). The presence of persistent adjoining wetlands of Porbandar which
organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and are believed to be the victims of
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were feeding on pesticide treated seeds.
also determined in blood plasma of Increasing use of pesticides by farmers
white-backed vulture, Egyptian vulture, around Amipur, Bardasagar and
and Griffon Vulture collected from Mokarsagar is also likely to affect
Ahmedabad(Dhanajayan et al. 2011) . swamp ecology. Post winter farming in
the Amipur wetland and other dams
The irrigation reservoir turned itself may dump many pesticides in the
Sanctuary i.e. ‘Thol Bird Sanctuary’ near soil and many affect waterbirds in
Ahmedabad faces serious threat of future. Porbandar release enormous
fertilizers and pesticides in the amount of wastewater with high
adjoining farms. There were few contents of unionized Ammonia and
incidences of poisoning of waders inorganic suspended load via various
such as Ruff towards the end of March industrial sectors (Stanley 2013).
2009. More than 20 ruffs were found
dead in a fallow field (Jathar & Hathi Total 226 wetlands have been
2009). This issue needs urgent mapped by the Space Applications
attention to avoid future mortalities of Center (SAC), ISRO in this area of
the birds due to pesticide poisoning. Porbandar district. Inland wetlands
But, the water samples, soil samples contribute 27.3% of the total wetland
and the actual levels of pesticides in area and coastal wetlands contribute
birds are yet to be analyzed. 72.7% of the total wetland area. Some
Porbandar significant wetlands of Porbandar
district include Mendha creek,
Porbandar is one of the mega Visavada, Kuchhadi, Subhashnagar,
bio-diverse district of Gujarat as it
56

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Zavar, Karly I, Karly II, Porbandar Bird recorded in the district (Varagiya &
Sanctuary, Chhaya-I, Chhaya-II and Joshi 2015a).
Porbandar Rann, Vanana, Dharampur,
Bhadarbara, Bardasagar, and Amipur Chhaya Rann wetland of
wetlands, out of them Kuchhadi, Porbandar, the proposed extension of
Subhashnagar, Zavar, Karly I, Karly II, Porbandar Bird Sanctuary and Bird
Vanana, Dharampur share physical Sanctuary itself also receive untreated
boundary with Gosabara Mokarsagar sewage and domestic waste from
Wetland Complex but named Chhaya village and Porbandar city
accordingly the villages nearby. The respectively (Dhaval C Varagiya &
entire area is rich in waterbird diversity Joshi, 2015b). Amipur reservoir has
and abundance (Varagiya et al. 2016). high value as waterbird habitat but
Wetlands of Porbandar are lifeline for agriculture is practiced in post winter
people and wetland dependent to summer period when water would
biodiversity including flora, birds, typically dry up in the reservoir pose a
reptiles, insects and mammals. major threat to waterbirds and wetland
Mokarsagar Wetland Complex qualifies (Tatu 20134). Such practices are very
the criteria of Ramsar convention on harmful to wetland ecosystem and
wetlands, Biodiversity Heritage site may lead to pesticide pollution of the
and Important Bird Area (IBA) and wetland. Thorough literature survey
recently proposed as wildlife and personal communication with
sanctuary. Wetlands of Porbandar eminent environmentalists give no
support more than 124 waterbird clue regarding further literature
species out of total 261 bird species describing evaluation of pesticide
toxicity in Gujarat, especially
Porbandar district.

References Carlile, B. (2006). Pesticide selectivity,
health and the environment: Cambridge
Ali, U., Syed, J. H., Malik, R. N., University Press.
Katsoyiannis, A., Li, J., Zhang, G., and
Jones, K. C. (2014). Organochlorine Carson, R. (2000). Silent Spring: Penguin
pesticides (OCPs) in South Asian region: Books with Hamish Hamilton.
a review. Science of the Total
Environment, 476, 705-717.

57

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Choudhury, B. C., S. Sathyakumar and C. and Pharmacological Research, 4(3), 49-
Sylvia (2007). An Assessment of the 56.
Current Status of the Indian Peafowl
(Pavo cristatus) in India based on Levine, M. J. (2007). Pesticides: a toxic
Questionnaire Surveys. In S. time bomb in our midst. Westport:
Sathyakumar & K. Sivakumar (Eds.), Greenwood Publishing Group.
Envis Buletin: Galliformes of India (Vol.
10, pp. 53): Envis Center, Wildlife Muralidharan, S. (1993). Aldrin
Institute of India, Dehradun, India. poisoning of Sarus cranes (Grus
antigone) and a few granivorous birds
Dhananjayan, V. (2013). Accumulation in Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur,
pattern of persistent organochlorine India. Ecotoxicology, 2(3), 196-202.
pesticides in liver tissues of various
species of birds from India. Muralidharan, S. (2000). Organochlorine
Environmental Science and Pollution residues in the waters of Keoladeo
Research, 20(5), 3149-3156. national park, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. Bull
Environ Contam Toxicol, 65(1), 35-41.
Dhananjayan, V., and S. Muralidharan.
(2010). Levels of organochlorine Muralidharan, S., V. Dhananjayan and P.
pesticide residues in blood plasma of Jayanthi (2009). Organochlorine
various species of birds from India. Bull pesticides in commercial marine fishes
Environ Contam Toxicol, 85(2), 129-136. of Coimbatore, India and their
suitability for human consumption.
Dhananjayan, V., S. Muralidharan, and P. Environ Res, 109 (1), 15-21.
Jayanthi (2011). Distribution of
persistent organochlorine chemical Muralidharan, S., V. Dhananjayan, R.
residues in blood plasma of three Risebrough, V. Prakash, R. Jayakumar
species of vultures from India. Environ and P. Bloom (2008). Persistent
Monit Assess, 173(1-4), 803-811. organochlorine pesticide residues in
tissues and eggs of white-backed
Dhananjayan, V., and B. Ravichandran vulture, Gyps bengalensis from different
(2014). Organochlorine Pesticide locations in India. Bull Environ Contam
Residues in Foodstuffs, Fish, Wildlife, Toxicol, 81(6), 561-565.
and Human Tissues from India:
Historical Trend and Contamination Muralidharan, S., K. Ganesan, K.
Status Environmental Deterioration and Nambirajan, V. Kirubhanandhini, and V.
Human Health (pp. 229-262): Springer. Dhanajayan (2014). Wetland birds-
indicators of pesticide contamination-
Goel, A., and P. Aggarwal (2007). Current and future prospects for
Pesticide poisoning. National medical research in India. In G. V. Gopi & S. A.
journal of India, 20(4), 182. Hussain (Eds.), Waterbirds & Protected
Areas (Vol. 16, pp. 314-323): Wildlife
Jathar, G., and D. Hathi (2009). Thol - a Institute of India, Dehradun, India.
bird paradise of Gujarat. BUCEROS
ENVIS Newsletter: Avian Ecology, 14(3). Muralidharan, S., R. Jayakumar and G.
Vishnu (2004). Heavy metals in feathers
Kumar, N. and S. Singh (2012). Pesticide of six species of birds in the district
Toxicity in wild Life with Special Nilgiris, India. Bull Environ Contam
Reference to Avian: A Review. Toxicol, 73(2), 285-291.
International Journal of Toxicological

59 58

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Rahmani, A. R. (2012). Major Mokarsagar Wetland Conservation
recommendations from Threatened Committee,Gujarat, India.
Birds of India Their Conservation Varagiya, D. and K. Joshi (2015b).
Requirements. BUCEROS ENVIS Extension of Porbandar Bird Sanctuary
Newsletter: Avian Ecology, 17(1). to Chhaya rann area upto Ratanpar
village. Porbandar: Mokarsagar Wetland
Rattner, B. A. (2009). History of wildlife Conservation Committee, Gujarat, India.
toxicology. Ecotoxicology, 18(7), 773-
783. Varagiya, D. C., K. Tatu and D. Pandya
(2016). Avian Biodiversity of Amipur
Stanley, O. D. (2013). Wetland Wetland (Porbandar District, Gujarat)
ecosystems and coastal habitat diversity and Threats to it Due to Pesticide
in Gujarat, India. Journal of coastal Toxicity. Paper presented at the RK
development, 7(2), 49-64. University’s First International
Conference on Research &
Tatu, K. (2013). Overview of Inland Entrepreneurship.
Waterbird Habitats in Gujarat and
Suggestions for Their Effective Vijayan, V. S., Prasad, S. N., Jaggi, A. K.,
Management. In G. V. Gopi & S. A. Tiwari, P. Kaushik, L. Vijayan, and S.
Hussain (Eds.), Waterbirds of India. Murlidharan. (2004). Inland wetlands of
India: Conservation Atlas. Coimbatore,
ENVlS Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected India: Salim Ali Center for Ornithology
Areas (Vol. 16, pp. 216-247): Envis and Natural History (SACON).
Center, Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun, India. Vyas, P., K. Sengupta, A. Pande, and K.
Sivakumar (2012). Status Report of
Varagiya, D. C. (2015). Biodiversity of Coastal and Marine Protected Areas in
Porbandar. Retrieved August 13, 2015, West Bengal. In K. Sivakumar (Ed.),
<http://www.mokarsagar.org/aboutpbr. Waterbirds of India. ENVlS Bulletin:
php> Wildlife and Protected Areas (Vol. 15,
pp. 118): Envis Center, Wildlife Institute
Varagiya, D. C., and K. Joshi (2015a). of India, Dehradun, India.
Checklist of Waterbirds of Mokarsagar
wetland complex of Porbandar.

……………………………………..

60 59

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Tena and Bhatha Wetlands in Surat District (Gujarat, India)-
Beyond Waterbird Habitats

Palak Thakore (Email:[email protected])

Abstract: Though wetlands have acquired the recognition as waterbird

habitats, the study conducted by me has indicated that wetlands also
support livelihood of local people (farmers) and terrestrial birds by
facilitating irrigation waters for cultivating various crops as also hedge
trees/shrubs. I studied agriculture practices by farmers and farmland
dependent birds in the agricultural fields in Surat district, Gujarat State
(India) that get irrigation waters from two wetlands, namely, Tena village
wetland and Bhatha village wetland. The study has indicated that but for
the irrigation waters available from these two wetlands, local farmers of
the two villages could not carry out farming of various crops like rice
paddy, sugarcane, vegetables etc. Moreover, my study has also indicated
that farming enabled by waters of the two wetlands could attract 74
species (out of total 96 species recorded) of terrestrial birds.

Keywords: Bhatha wetland, crops, farmers, Tena wetland, Terrestrial birds

Introduction may not be distant)
In India, wetlands have gained communities/people alike. In other
popularity among the masses, mainly words, wetlands are not life support
due to their function as waterbird systems for waterbirds only, but they
habitats. Even today, due to number of are life-lines for local communities too.
camera-equipped nature lovers, bird Moreover, I also believe that such
watchers and wildlife enthusiasts who wetlands also benefit terrestrial birds
are active on social media, wetlands that depend for food on farmlands as
have widely acquired popularity as these wetlands fulfil irrigation needs of
places to observe and photograph the very farmlands on which many
waterbirds (often referred to as terrestrial farmland birds depend. I
‘waterfowl’). This is a good sign of carried out a study on Tena and Bhatha
awareness among people about village ponds (near Surat, South
wetlands. But, I believe that many Gujarat) and croplands in their environs
wetlands in rural landscapes are not to assess their importance for
just for waterbirds. Rather, they are waterbirds and terrestrial birds as also
also for terrestrial birds and local (and

60

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

the local farmers. In the study, I had be dependent on these wetlands for
tried covering almost all local irrigation-waters.
agricultural fields which were found to

Study Area

Tena village

Bhatha village
Surat

Fig.1a. Location of Tena and Bhatha village with respect to location of Surat City

Tena
wetland

Fig.1b. Tena wetland near Surat City, Surat District, South Gujarat

Bhatha Bhatha Wetland--2
wetland 1

Fig.1c. Bhatha wetland near Surat City, Surat District, South Gujarat

61

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

The study area was constituted of the m with maximum depth of 3 m. Water in
agricultural fields which were found to be these wetlands usually lasts for 6-7
dependent on the wetlands of Tena months. As per 2011 Census, Bhatha
village and Bhatha village (Figs. 1a-1c). village has a population of 5,122 people
Both the wetlands were located on the and 779 people are engaged in
outskirts of Surat city (Surat district, agricultural labour while 120 are
Gujarat state). Their details are as follows: cultivators. Average rainfall in this area is
Tena Wetland: Tena wetland 400 to 500 mm that is received between
(21°13'46"N, 72°40'37"E) is located 17 km June and September/October each year.
north-west of Surat city (South Gujarat). It Material and Methods
had an area of approximately 3-4 sq. km Both the wetlands were visited in the
and its maximum depth is over 2m. Water months from April to December during
in the wetland usually lasts in the wetland each of the years 2012, 2013, 2014 and
for 7-8 months every year. As per 2011 2015. Thus, I covered all the seasons (late
Census, Tena village had a population of summer, monsoon and winter) for
1976 people (in 470 households), of conducting the field-work. Each month,
which, 500 people were engaged in the wetlands were visited every 3rd day
agricultural labour. The village had 436.62 with maximum 3-4 hours spent in
hectares (4.36 sq.km) of land, out of morning (starting from 6:30 am-7:00 am)
which 280.62 hectares (2.81 sq.km) were and 2-3 hours spent in evening (starting
irrigated while 156 hectares (1.56 sq.km) from 4:30 pm). Field-work consisted of
were non-irrigated. the two main components: (1) survey of
Bhatha-Wetland: Bhatha (21°11'45"N species of waterbirds and terrestrial birds
72°45'34"E) is located 6.75 km north-west in the farmlands that received water from
of Surat City (South Gujarat, India). It is Tena and Bhatha wetlands; and (2)
11.5 km south-east of Tena village. One getting information on cropping pattern
can see the two juxtaposed wetlands and through observations and communication
I call them Bhatha-1 and Bhatha-2. with the farmers. For survey of the birds
Bhatha-1 wetland has an area of about 1- in the farmlands, I had laid transects of
1.5 sq.km and it has maximum depth of average 1 km length which I had
1.5 m. Bhatha-2 wetland has an repeatedly conducted to cover all the
approximate area of around 400-500 sq. three seasons.

62

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Results & Discussion

During my field visits I found that there (Oryza sativa), Sugarcane (Saccharum

was no irrigation water supply from one or officinarum), Lady’s Fingers/Okra

the other major canal network. Therefore, (Abelmoschus esculentus), Toor (Cajanus

farmers were completely dependent on the cajan) Indian bean (Dolichos lablab), Little

waters of Tena and Bhatha wetlands for gourd (Coccinia grandis), Manila
irrigation-water needs of their fields. As tamarind/’Goras aamli’ (Pithecellobium

the two wetlands were dependent on dulce) and one flower-bearing plant

rainfall for their water stock, it can be said Marigold (Calendula officinalis). In general,

that farming in the area was completely each of the farmers of Tena village was

dependent on natural hydrological cycle. I found utilizing major part of his land for

had found that the cropping pattern in the growing Paddy and Jowar though he also

fields dependent on both wetlands was not cultivated Lady’s Finger and Indian bean in

very similar, though some crops were small area of his land. On the other hand,

found to be common for both the villages. each of the farmers of Bhatha village was

They are summarized in Table 1. In all, the found utilizing his entire land for

wetlands supplied waters for the following cultivation of single crop only, mainly

crops: Jowar (Sorghum bicolor), Paddy Sugarcane.

Table 1: Crops grown in Tena and Bhatha wetlands

Tena Wetland Bhatha Wetland

Sugarcane Sugarcane
Paddy Jowar
Jowar Toor
Ladiy’s Finger Little Gourd
Indian bean Manila Tamarind
Mari gold

Fig. 2 Glimpses of Agriultural Fields Irrigated by waters of Tena and Bhatha Wetlnads

63

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Table 2: Birds Recorded in Different Types of Croplands Irrigated by Tena and
Bhatha Wetlands, Surat District, Gujarat, India

Sr Common Name Scientific Name Status Niche, Feeding Crops Village
no habit
1 Painted Francolin Francolinus pictus R tr, Granivorous All T, B
2 Grey Francolin Francolinus pondicerianus R tr, Granivorous All T, B
3 Rain Quail Coturnix coromandelica WM tr, Granivorous P, S T
4 Barred Button-quail Turnix suscitator R tr, Granivorous P, S, J T, B
5 Brown Crake Zapornis akool R aq,Omnivorous P, S, J T
6 White-breasted Amaurornis phoenicurus R aq, Omnivorous All T, B

Waterhen Pavo cristatus R tr,Omnivorous All T, B
7 Indian Peafowl Anastomus oscitans WM aq,Insectivorous P T
8 Asian Openbill Ciconia episcopus R aq, Carnivorous P T
9 Woolly-necked Stork Threskiornis R aq,Omnivorous P T
10 Black-headed/White melanocephalus
Pseudibis papillosa R aq/tr, P T
Ibis
11 Red-naped/Black Ibis Platalea leucorodia Omnivorous T
Ixobrychus cinnamomeus T
12 Eurasian Spoonbill WM aq,Carnivorous P
13 Cinnamon/Chestnut Ardea purpurea T, B
Bubulcus ibis WM aq,Insectivorous P, S T, B
Bittern
14 Purple Heron Ardea alba R aq,Carnivorous P, J T, B
15 Cattle Egret Mesophoyx intermedia R aq/tr, All T, B
Egretta garzetta Carnivorous T, B
16 Great Egret Ardeola grayii R aq,Carnivorous P, S T
17 Intermediate Egret Ardeola grayii R aq,Carnivorous All T, B
18 Little Egret Accipiter badius R aq, Carnivorous All T, B
19 Pond Heron Milvus migrans R aq, Carnivorous P T, B
20 Black-shouldered Kite Aquila nipalensis R tr, Carnivorous All T
21 Shikra Circaetus gallicus R tr, Carnivorous All T
22 Black Kite Falco tinnunculus R tr, Carnivorous All T
23 Steppe Eagle Falco peregrinus WM tr, Carnivorous All T
24 Short-toed Snake eagle Circus aeruginosus R tr, Carnivorous All T
25 Common Kestrel Anthropoides virgo WM tr, Carnivorous All T
26 Peregrine Falcon Grus Antigone WM tr, Carnivorous All T
27 Marsh Harrier Rostratula benghalensis WM aq,Carnivorous All T
28 Demoiselle Crane Vanellus indicus WM aq, Granivorous P, J T, B
29 Sarus Crane R aq, Omnivorous P, J, S
30 Greater Painted Snipe Columba livia R aq,Insectivorous P, S T, B
31 Red-wattled Lapwing Spilopelia senegalensis R aq/tr, All T,B
Spilopelia chinensis Insectivorous T, B
32 Rock Pigeon Psittacula krameri R tr,Granivorous P, J T, B
33 Laughing Dove R tr,Granivorous All
34 Spotted Dove Psittacula eupatria R tr,Granivorous All B
35 Rose-ringed Parakeet R tr,Frugivorous & All
Melopsittacus undulatus Granivorous T
36 Alexandrine Parakeet R tr,Frugivorous & J, MT
Eudynamys scolopaceus Granivorous T, B
37 Budgerigar Centropus sinensis Exotic( tr,Granivorous J T, B
Feral)
38 Asian Koel R tr,Frugivorous All
39 Southern Coucal R tr,Carnivorous All

64

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

40 Spotted Owlet Athene brama R tr,Carnivorous All B
41 Asian Palm-swift Cypsiurus balasiensis T
42 Common Hoopoe Upupa epops R tr,Insectivorous All T
43 Indian Roller Coracias benghalensis T
44 White-breasted Halcyon smyrnensis R tr,Insectivorous LF, I T, B

Kingfisher Merops orientalis R tr,Insectivorous All T, B
45 Green Bee-eater Merops philippinus T
46 Blue-tailed Bee-eater R aq/tr, All

Insectivorous

R tr,Insectivorous All

WM tr,Insectivorous All

47 Coppersmith Barbet Megalaima haemacephala R tr.Frugivorous All T, B
48 Eurasian Wryneck Jynx torquilla WM tr,Insectivorous P T
49 Yellow-crowned Leiopicus mahrattensis R tr,Insectivorous All T

Woodpecker Lanius isabellinus WM tr,Carnivorous All T
50 Isabelline Shrike Lanius schach R tr,Carnivorous All T, B
51 Long-tailed Shrike Dicrurus macrocercus R tr,Insectivorous All T, B
52 Black Drongo Oriolus kundoo R tr,Frugivorous P, MT, T, B
53 Golden Oriole and Insectivorous MG
tr,Insectivorous All B
54 Asian Paradise Terpsiphone paradise R

Flycatcher R
R
55 Jungle Crow Corvus macrorhynchos R tr,Omnivorous All T, B
R tr, Omnivorous All T, B
56 House Crow Corvus splendens tr,Granivorous J, P, I T
R tr,Omnivorous J, P, S T, B
57 Rufous-tailed Lark Ammomanes phoenicura R
R
58 Ashy-crowned Sparrow- Eremopterix griseus

lark

59 Whiskered Bulbul Pycnonotus jocosus tr,Omnivorous All T, B
tr,Omnivorous All T, B
60 Red vented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer tr,Omnivorous J, LF, T, B
LG, MT
61 White-browed Bulbul Pycnonotus luteolus tr,Insectivorous J, S, P, T, B
LG
62 Ashy Prinia Prinia socialis R tr,Insectivorous MG, J T, B
tr,Insectivorous J, S, P T, B
63 Plain Prinia Ixobrychus cinnamomeus R tr,Insectivorous J, S, P, T, B
64 Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis R LG
65 Common Tailorbird Orthotomus sutorius R tr,nsectivorous MT, B
& Necatrivorous MG
66 Lesser Whitethroat Sylvia curruca WM tr,Insectivorous J, S, B
MG
67 Tawny-bellied Babbler Dumetia hyperythra R tr,Omnivorous J, LF, I T
tr,Omnivorous All T, B
68 Common Babbler Turdoides caudate R tr,Omnivorous P, I, T T, B
69 Jungle Babbler Turdoides striata R tr, Omnivorous All T, B
70 Yellow-eyed Babbler Chrysomma sinense R tr,Omnivorous J, P, S T
71 Common Myna Acridotheres tristis R tr,Omnivorous J, I T
72 Brahminy Myna Sturnia pagodarum R tr(wetland) P, T, T, B
73 Rosy Starling Pastor roseus WM Insectivorous MG
74 Blue-throat Luscinia svecica WM tr,Omnivorous All T, B
tr,Omnivorous All T, B
75 Magpie Robin Copsychus saularis R tr,Insectivorous J, P, S T, B
R tr,Insectivorous P, S T
76 Indian Robin Saxicoloides fulicatus WM tr,Insectivorous J, S B
WM tr,Insectivorous J B
77 Common Stonechat Saxicola torquatus WM
WM
78 Desert Wheatear Oenanthe deserti

79 Red-breasted Flycatcher Ficedula parva

80 Black Redstart Phoenicurus ochruros

65

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

81 Pale billed Flowerpecker Dicaeum erythrorhynchos R tr,Frugivorous & MG, T, B

Necatrivorous MT, P

82 Purple-rumped Sunbird Leptocoma zeylonica R tr,Insectivorous & All T, B

Necatrivorous

83 Purple Sunbird Cinnyris asiaticus R tr,Insectivorous & All T, B

Necatrivorous

84 House Sparrow Pesser domesticus R tr,Omnivorous J, P T, B

85 Chestnut-shouldered Petronia xanthocollis R tr,Omnivorous J, P T

Petronia

86 Baya Weaver Ploceus philippinus R tr,Granivorous P, J, S T, B

87 Indian Silverbill Lonchura malabarica R tr,Granivorous P, J, S T, B

88 Red Avadavat Amandava amandava R tr,Granivorous P, J , S T, B

89 Scaly-breasted Munia Lonchura punctulata R tr,Granivorous P, J, S T

90 Black-headed Munia Lonchura atricapilla R tr,Granivorous J, S B

91 Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava WM aq,Insectivorous All T

92 White Wagtail Motacilla alba WM aq,Insectivorous All T

93 Paddyfield Pipit Anthus rufulus R tr,Insectivorous P, J T

94 Tree Pipit Anthus trivialis WM tr,Insectivorous P, J, S T

95 Common Rosefinch Carpodacus erythrinus WM tr,Granivorous J, P T

96 Red-headed Bunting Emberiza bruniceps WM tr,Granivorous J T

Notes: (i) Abbreviation of crops: Sugarcane = S, Paddy = P, Jowar = J, Ladies finger = LF, Indian bean =

I, Toor = T, Little Gourd = LG, Manila Tamarind = MT and Mari gold = MG; (ii) Abbreviation of the areas

: Tena = T, Bhatha = B

As seen in Table 2, a total of 96 agriculture fields irrigated by
species of birds were recorded in
the agricultural fields irrigated by Bhatha village wetland. The likely
Tena and Bhatha village wetlands.
Of these, 71 species were resident, reason for higher bird species
24 species were winter migrants and
1 was a feral exotic species. A good diversity unique to the fields
number of species, i.e. 54 (or
56.25% of total 96) bird species irrigated by Tena wetlands than that
were common to the fields irrigated
by Tena wetland and the fields associated with Bhatha wetland may
irrigated by Bhatha wetland. About
34 bird species (i.e., 35.41% bird be that the Tena farmers had opted
species) were recorded only in the
fields that were irrigated by Tena for combination of one major
wetland. Only 8 (i.e., 8.34%) bird
species were unique to the grain/cereal crop(like

paddy)covering larger land area

along with secondary crop in

smaller land area. On the contrary,
Bhatha village’s fields were

dominated by monoculture of cash

crop like sugarcane. However, it was

very apparent that there was

substantial bird species richness

66

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

(i.e., 54 out of total 96 species non-wetland ecosystems to support
recorded) common to the terrestrial birds (including arboreal
agricultural fields irrigated by both birds)too. If the wetlands like Tena and
the village wetlands. Bhatha village wetlands were not
available for getting irrigation waters for
It was interesting to note that out of the agro-ecosystems in their respective
the 96 species of birds that were environs, the farmers could not do
recorded in the fields irrigated by Tena farming in the area successfully and in
and Bhatha wetlands, only 22 species(i.e., turn, the seventy-six terrestrial bird
23%) were waterbirds and rest of them species(mentioned earlier) could not get
(i.e., 74 species or 77 % species) were food and/or habitat from the farmlands
terrestrial (including arboreal). Using the (with their hedges). In other words, my
literature like Ali (1941) and Ali and study has shown that wetlands like Tena
Ripley (1978), I found that of the total 74 and Bhatha do not just benefit the
species of terrestrial birds, 76% species waterbirds, but they also support the
were residents, 23% were winter terrestrial bird diversity of surrounding
migrants and 1% species was feral exotic agrarian ecosystems. During my surveys,
species. raptors were seen gliding or soaring over
all crop types in search of prey or sitting
It was also very interesting to on trees in both areas. Some small bird
understand that though wetlands species, such as Tawny-bellied Babbler,
themselves are well-known for their Common Babbler, Jungle Babblers, Tailor
ability to provide habitats to the bird, Indian Robin and Magpie Robin
waterbirds, my study has indicated that were seen in the bushes along the edges
wetlands also support terrestrial of the farms. Sunbirds were found mostly
(including arboreal) birdlife in the on Acacia plants while Jungle Crows and
terrestrial ecosystems (like agro- House Crows were seen on
ecosystems) in the environs by means of Pethecelobium dulci tree. Though all
provisioning of critical natural resource such birds were terrestrial, two wetlands
(i.e., water) to maintain those terrestrial were highly responsible for their
ecosystem. One should think beyond the existence. It is also interesting to note
stereo-type thinking of “wetlands for
waterbirds”. Rather, people should that the agriculture fields supported by
understand that if wetlands themselves Tena and Bhatha wetlands had provided
are for waterbirds, their waters enable
67

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

habitat to some threatened and rare these birds for foraging,. Nonetheless, if
species of birds such as Brown Crake (a waters from the wetlands would be
secretive rare aquatic bird), Woolley- extracted by farmers in an uncontrolled
necked Stork (Vulnerable species, IUCN), manner, life requisites of the waterbirds
Sarus Crane (Vulnerable, IUCN), Indian inhabiting those wetlands will be
Peafowl (Schedule-I as per IWLP Act, adversely affected due to rapid water
1972), Eurasian Spoonbill (Schedule-I as level decline. Moreover, there would also
per IWLP Act, 1972), Steppe Eagle be internal competition and conflict
(Endangered, IUCN), Cinnamon Bittern (a among farmers. I have observed that
rare, secretive species), Eurasian Wryneck with the help of long irrigation-water
(a rare, secretive species), Red Avadavat supplying pipes and diesel pumps, water
(an uncommon species) etc. Of all these was poured from the two wetlands to
threatened species, those that were various fields by their respective owners
waterbirds, were mainly found in (farmers) and there had been unseen
inundated paddy fields. dispute between farmers-the farmers
whose fields were nearby the wetlands
Conclusions and Recommendations: and the farmers whose fields were away
Farmers in Gujarat (and elsewhere in from the wetlands. This was because the
India) often exploit waters from local farmers having their fields away from the
wetlands for fulfilling their need for the wetlands had to pass their irrigation
irrigation water. If the region has no water pipes through farms which were
other canal irrigation network, such use located near the wetlands. Thus, there
of local wetlands for irrigation needs might be a need of regulating the water
cannot be objected on humanity extraction rate so that waterbirds using these
grounds. The present study has shown two wetlands for fulfilling their life requisites
that fields supported by waters from do not suffer. Though it is good to see the
local wetlands (like Tena and Bhatha list of 96 bird species occurring in the
wetlands) do support some farm- agricultural land irrigated by local wetlands,
dependent waterbird species and many it also has other side of the coin. If the
terrestrial (including arboreal). It can be farmers of these villages have been using
said that indirectly Tena and Bhath synthetic pesticides and fertilizers non-
wetlands supported these birds as but judiciously, then they might harm the birds
for their waters, fields could not attract in chronic manner.

68

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3 (Research Special)

Several farmers of Tena village company is now operational near Tena
who were earlier growing Jowar crop had wetland, which I think, is undesirable
recently sold their farms to change from ecological and socio-
companies on high price. Glass breaking economic view-points.

Fig. 4 Glimpses of Industrial Units that have come up in the Agriculture Fields
Irrigated by Tena and Bhatha Wetlands

Acknowledgements study. I am thankful to Dr. Sameer
I am thankful to Dr. Ankur Patel, Dr. Patel for facilitating his tele-lens for
Jwalant Desai, Dr. Ashish Gajjar, Dr. bird photography during the study.
Pradip Sharan, Mr. Vijayendra Desai Last but not the least, my thanks are
and Mr. Nikunj Patel for their help in due to Mr. Yogesh Patel for
photographing the birds during this supporting me during the study.

References

Ali, S. (1941): The Book of Indian Birds. Kasambe R, Dudhe N, Wagh G and

Bombay Natural History Society, Kale M (2014): Bird Biodiversity in

Mumbai, India Agricultural Landscape in Vidarbh,

Maharashtra. Newsletter for

Ali, S. and S. D. Ripley (1978): Birdwatchers. 54(6) published in

Handbook of the Birds of India and October 2015

Pakistan, Oxford University Press,

Mumbai, India

------------------------

69

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3, Dec. 2015 (Research Special)

Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin and Review of Past Studies on it in
Gulf of Kachchh, Gujarat, India

1Yashpal A. Anand,2Linz Buoy George and 3Hyacinth N. Highland
1,2,3 Department of Zoology, School of Sciences, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad.

Email of Corresponding Author1: [email protected]

Abstract

The first Marine Protected Area (i.e., National Park and Sanctuary) of India was
established in Gulf of Kachchh (GoK) in the year 1982 under the Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972. Various marine mammals occur in this area including dolphins, porpoise and
dugong. Among them, sightings of Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis) are
common as compared to that of other marine mammals in the GoK. The present article,
though not based on primary research, focuses on reviewing past studies mainly
covering its sightings in the Gulf.

Keywords: Gulf of Kachchh, Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, Marine Protected Area,

Marine National Park and Sanctuary.

Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin They sometimes enter rivers, but
(Sousa chinensis) is found in bays, open rarely move away from the sea beyond a
coasts, coastal lagoons, coral reefs, few kilometers upstream and usually
mangrove swamps and estuarine areas remain within the range of tidal
in tropical to warm temperate coastal influence. There are two distinct forms
waters(Jefferson and Karczmarski 2001, of this species, i.e., Sousa plumbea and
Ross 2002). Its individuals are usually Sousa chinensis.
encountered within shallow near-shore
waters and in estuarine areas (Jefferson Size-wise, Indo-Pacific humpback
and Karczmarski 2001).They are rarely dolphin ranges from 1.8 m to 3 m in
encountered in the waters more than 20 length. It can weigh from 250 kg to 285
m deep (Sutaria & Jefferson 2004). kg (Jefferson, 2000). It consumes a wide
variety of fishes near-shore and reefs. It

70

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3, Dec. 2015 (Research Special)

also eats cephalopods in some areas Humpback Dolphin in GoK

(Jefferson and Karczmarski 2001). The GoK is one of the few coastal
Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins zones in the world having rich
biodiversity (ICMAM 2002). Vast
(Sousa chinensis) are distributed intertidal mudflats along with
between the southern coast of Africa to mangroves and corals makes the GoK
the coast of China and eastern coast of a preferred zone for breeding by many
Australia in the Indian and Pacific Ocean marine organisms. GoK is a shallow
(Jefferson & Karczmarski 2001). It has coastal waterbody with depth ranging
been also reported from number of sites from 20 m at the head of the Gulf to 60
along the coast of India, but the species m at the mouth (Singh et. al. 2004). The
has not been studied in detail along the first Marine National Park and Sanctuary
coast of India (Sutaria and Jefferson (MNP&S) of the country was established
2004, Kumaran 2002). It is also reported in GoK in the year 1982 under the
from Gujarat. Marine National Park and Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The Gulf
Sanctuary (MNP & S), Gulf of Kachchh has a diverse physical conditions with
area is known for Indo-Pacific humpback many islands and marine ecosystems.
dolphin’s occurrence (Singh 2003, The Gulf has 42 islands and large
Sutaria and Jefferson 2004).

In the Gulf of Kachchh (GoK), marine ecosystem which supports a

Gujarat, only few studies on marine wealth of marine life (Singh et al.

mammals and especially on Indo-Pacific 2004).

humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis)

have been carried out. They mainly

covered the aspects like sightings

records, distribution and threats.

Threats to Humpback Dolphins

Some Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins, particularly in the northwest Indian Ocean, have been

hunted for human consumption and oil. Entanglement in fishing gear and being caught as by-

catch pose a threat throughout their range. These dolphins are also caught in anti-shark

gillnet off southeast Africa and eastern Australia, which may pose a threat to

the sustainability of this species in South Africa. Mangrove degradation due to coastal

development may also pose a threat to this species as mangroves are an important part of their

habitat. Source: www.marinebio.org

71

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3, Dec. 2015 (Research Special)

Fig.1 Marine National Park and Sanctuary, Gulf of Kachchh (Source: ICMAM, 2002)

Review of Past Studies in GoK low-tide for carcass-based data
collection and collection of stranding
Different researchers have used records. Indo-Pacific humpback
different methods for their respective dolphins were frequently spotted and
studies on humpback dolphin such as reported by researchers and nature-
literature review, Interview survey of enthusiasts in the Marine Protected Area
fishermen, boat surveys during high tide (MPA),GoK.
(for direct sightings), reef surveys during
Singh (2003), based on his study
Taxonomic Classification of Indo- during the time-frame of February 2000
Pacific humpback dolphin to March 2002, has mentioned that
though humpback dolphin was not
Kingdom: Animalia recorded during his survey, its
Phylum: Chordata occurrence in Gulf of Kachchh cannot be
Class: Mammalia ruled out. Singh (2003) has also
Order: Cetartiodactyla
Family: Delphinidae

Genus: Sousa

72

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3, Dec. 2015 (Research Special)

mentioned that ZSI has listed three total of 78 individuals were counted
species of dolphins including humpback (Sutaria and Jefferson 2004). Sutaria and
dolphin in Gujarat and Gulf of Kachchh Jefferson (2004) had also calculated
is the most suitable area compared to mean density of 0.27 individuals/km2
other coastal water areas of Gujarat. He (SD=0.3) of Indo-Pacific humpback
has also mentioned that during his dolphin in the area covered in the GoK.
study, humpback dolphin or any dolphin During this study, Sutaria and Jefferson
other than Common dolphin could not (2004) had also found a dead specimen
be identified by pairs of binoculars from in January 2002. Occurrence of Indo-
distance, but their occurrence cannot be Pacific humpback dolphin was reported
ruled out. However, Sutaria and between Okha to Jodia in GoK.
Jefferson (2004) sighted a total of 21
groups of Indo-Pacific humpback In GoK, boat traffic, boat strike,
dolphins in a search effort of 570 km accidental catch in fishing net, Industrial
during their study conducted from pollution, development of ports and
September 2001 to February 2002 in jetties and sharks are possible threats to
Gujarat and Goa, In the MPA in GoK, a the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin
(Singh 2003, Sutaria and Jefferson 2004).

References Jefferson, T. and L. Karczmarski
(2001).Mammalian Species.Sousa chinensis,
ICMAM (Integrated Coastal Zone and Marine 655: 1-9.
Area Management) (2002).Geographic
Information System for Gulf of Kachchh. Ross, G. J. B. (2002). Humpback dolphins
Project Directorate, Chennai, Department of Sousa chinensis, S. plumbea, and S. teuszii.
Ocean Development, Government of India, In: W. F. Perrin, B. Wursig and J. G. M.
pp 53. Thewissen (eds), Encyclopedia of Marine
Mammals, Academic Press.pp. 585-589.
Jefferson, T. (2000). Wildlife Monographs.
Population Biology of the Indo-Pacific
Hump-Backed Dolphin in Hong Kong
Waters, 144: 1-65.

73

Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-1881), Vol.6, No.3, Dec. 2015 (Research Special)

Singh, H. S. (2003). Sea mammals in marine Sutaria D.and T.A.Jefferson(2004). Records
protected area in Gulf of Kachchh, Gujarat
State, India. Indian Journal of Marine of Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphins (Sousa
Sciences, 32(3) 258-262
chinensis, Osbeck, 1765) Along the Coasts
Singh, H.S., C. N. Pandey, P. Yennawar., R. J.
Asari,B. H. Patel, K.Tatu and B. R. Raval of India and Sri Lanka: An Overview. Aquatic
(2004).The marine national park and
sanctuary in the Gulf of Kachchh – a Mammals.30(1), 125-136, DOI
comprehensive study on biodiversity and
management issues. GEER Foundation, 10.1578/AM.30.1.2004.125.
Gandhinagar.

Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin in GoK Yashpal Anand

74

WETLAND SCIENCE
Perspectives from South Asia

Editors
B. Anjan Kumar Prusty
Rachna Chandra
P. A. Azeez

To be released in 2016

Principal audiences

Post graduate, Pre-doctoral and Doctoral
students of Environmental Studies,
Ecology, Aquatic Biology, Marine Biology,
Limnology, Wildlife, and Landscape
Ecology.

Technical specialties/benefits

The book will include: It is high time that ‘Wetland Science’ needs
 Recent advances in the field of Wet- recognition as a sub-discipline and requires
consolidation of various topics under it com-
land Science including application of prehensively. The proposed book will be
various tools, viz., GIS and RS, useful for students of Post-graduation in
mathe- matical and chemical Environ- mental Studies, Limnology,
modeling in wet- land studies. Wildlife, Aquatic Biology, Marine Biology,
 The chapters on modeling will be fo- Landscape Ecology and for research scholars
cusing on ecological, hydro- from these v a r i e d disciplines.
chemical and socio-economical
aspects. The sustenance of wetlands is at stake due to
 Socio-economic an policy issues in
addition to purely scientific issues anthropogenic pressures. Although wetlands
(being an interdisciplinary science
and the wetlands being an issue that are disappearing at an alarming rate, their
con- cerns several stakeholders, and
various segments of society) con- servation values and economic

The book would be an amalgamation potentialities are realized lately. Wetland, a
of basic and applied aspects on
wetlands, as well as classical resource that could be utilized sustainably
theoretical and research oriented
issues, and would contain much without loosing its biodi- versity values,
information about the latest trends in
Wetland Science in South Asia. receive wastewater and run off in urban

EDITORIAL TEAM AFFILIATION areas and are also an effective filter, sink

Dr. B. Anjan Kumar Prusty & Dr. RachnaChandra and transformation system for pollutants.
Gujarat Institute of Desert Ecology
These are important among ecological
Post Box # 83, Mundra Road, Opp.Changleshwar
Temple, Bhuj - 370001, Gujarat, India services, the wetlands offer. Unsystematic

Dr. P. A. Azeez release of chemicals by industries, unskilled Major aspects covered
Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology andNatural
application of agro-chemicals that ultimately  Wetlands introductory
History reach the wet- lands have drawn attention of
Anaikatti (PO), Coimbatore - 641108,India researchers to chalk out strategies for the  Current status

E-mail id: [email protected] conservation, sus- tainable utilization and  Bio-geochemical issues, limnology
management of wet- lands. This book is an and hydrology
Publisher
Springer (India) Private Limited, attempt to acknowledge the discipline  Wetland biodiversity
‘Wetland Science’, consolidate research  Current issues and climate change
New Delhi findings and reviews, and synthesize articles
on different aspects of the wetlands of South  Ecosystem goods and services
Asia.  Mapping of wetlands

(naturalresource mapping)

 Modeling and simulation

 Wetland restoration
 Wetlands in South Asia: legislation

and policy framework
 Wetland science in South Asia:

gaps and futuristic

Avichal Tatu

The next issue of Jalaplavit (ISSN 2321-
1881) will be launched in August 2016.
Please send popular articles, scientific

papers, observation notes &
photographs pertaining to Wetland

Biodiversity by 15th July 2016.