Burma: Cyclone proved the failure of “development” based on
mangrove destruction
In the first weekend of May, a cyclone
ravaged Burma. Cyclone Nagris hit the Irrawaddy delta with winds
reaching 190km/h. However, most havoc was played by a sea surge
that came with the storm: a wave up to 3.5m high swept away and
inundated half the houses in low-lying villages. People couldn’t
flee and figures of dead people are estimated
at more than 100,000.
The storm was strong indeed, but the
root of such an enhanced devastation can be traced back in the
country’s so called “development programmes” in the industries
of tourism and shrimp farming, that implied the destruction of
formerly lush mangroves.
The importance of mangroves as buffering
zones that protect inhabited areas from storms and big waves is
widely acknowledged. Mangroves are salt-tolerant and grow along
coastlines, rivers and deltas where the saltwater and freshwater
meet, often covering a few kilometers inland. They form a dense
protection barrier of intertwining roots, branches, and trunks
that dissipate the force of storm surges.
Whenever coastal zones are being deprived
of their mangrove protection, the damage of big waves is much
more dramatic. The BBC reported several studies that reveal the
importance of mangroves to human lives and settlements: a study
of the 2004 Asian tsunami found that areas near healthy mangroves
suffered less damage and fewer deaths. Also a study published
in December 2005 said healthy mangrove forests helped save Sri
Lankan villagers during the Asian tsunami disaster, which claimed
the lives of more than 200,000 people. Researchers from IUCN compared
the death toll from two villages in Sri Lanka that were hit by
the devastating giant waves --while two people died in the settlement
with dense mangrove and scrub forest, up to 6,000 people lost
their lives in a nearby village without similar vegetation (1).
According to Mangove Action Project
(MAP), the loss of mangroves started in Burma under British colonial
rule, “in order to clear space for rice production. Since that
time, mangrove loss has continued; during WWII [Second World War]
to satisfy military demands, and more recently, for fuel wood
and unsustainable developments, such as industrial shrimp aquaculture
and urban expansion.” MAP reports Burmese researchers revealing
that “during a period of 75 years (1924-1999), 82.76% of the mangroves
of the Irrawady were destroyed.”
“The conversion to large-scale shrimp
and fish farms is the most significant threat to mangroves world
wide, and other pressures include tourism developments and rising
populations. This is worrisome to those who believe that global
warming and rising sea levels will cause more frequent and intense
storms, and that the loss of mangroves will make the coastlines
more susceptible to damage.” (2)
The
December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami that ravaged several Asian
coasts, the 1999 Super Cyclone that hit the coast of Orissa (India)
killing more than 10,000 people are sad memories recalled by the
recent disaster in Burma, especially because they could have been
“greatly lessened and much loss in life and property damage could
have been averted if healthy mangrove forests had been conserved
along the coastlines of the Irawaddy Delta," said Alfredo
Quarto, MAP's executive director.
The cause of the evil is well known
by national and international authorities. An FAO officer has
acknowledged that "There are very limited areas that you
would describe as pristine or densely covered mangrove in the
Irrawaddy area" and though there are some efforts to rehabilitate
and replant mangroves, the loss rate is quite substantial still.
The officer said that "During the 1990s, they lost something
like 2,000 hectares each year, which is about 0.3% being lost
annually. But that does not give you the whole picture because
the majority of these tidal habitats are being degraded, even
if they are not being completely destroyed." (1)
How many other lives should be lost
in order to gain the political will to change the present “development”
policies that have so dramatically proved to be unsuccessful?
No development is possible on the long run when it implies destroying
our home, our nature. Burma’s people can sadly tell you that.
Article based on information from: (1)
“Mangrove loss 'put Burma at risk'”, Mark Kinver, BBC News,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7385315.stm; (2)
Press Release: “Destruction of Mangrove Forests Increased Devastating
Impact of Cyclone Nagris”, MAP.
http://www.mangroveactionproject.org
/news/current_headlines /press-release-destruction-of-mangrove-forests-increased-devastating-
impact-of-cyclone-nagris/
