Hindustan Times ST (Jaipur)

Maha’s mangrove cover: Reports by state and Centre differ

- Prayag Arora-desai

MUMBAI: Two different reports on mangrove cover in Maharashtr­a – one by the Union environmen­t ministry and the other commission­ed by the state forest department – show a discrepanc­y of 33sqkm (equal to 6,111 football fields) in the extent of mangroves.

Though experts said the discrepanc­y falls within the acceptable realm of error for satellite imagery analysis, environmen­talists have expressed concern over this difference from administra­tion and conservati­on standpoint­s.

A survey conducted by the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology, at the behest of the state forest department, showed a mangrove cover of 353.1sqkm.

The survey used satellite data up to the year 2019. HT reported the data on March 4.

In contrast, the Forest Survey of India’s (FSI) biennial report (last released in 2019), pegs the total extent of mangrove cover in the state at 320sqkm. This report, however, used satellite data only between October 2017 and January 2018.

A comparison between the sensors, scale, resolution and minimum mappable units used in each of the above surveys is not publicly available.

“While an increase in the mangrove cover between 2018 and 2019 would have certainly happened, it can’t be 33sqkm in such a short period of time. And even if the discrepanc­y is plausible due to difference­s in the scale and spatial resolution of images used, it only shows that there is no real substitute for an on ground assessment of the true figure,” said Stalin D, director, NGO Vanashakti, who has recently filed a fresh plea over non-compliance of the Bombay high court’s 2018 judgment on mangrove protection.

Virendra Tiwari, APCCF, mangrove cell, and independen­t mappers attributed the discrepanc­y to difference­s in methodolog­y. “The difference is most likely due to different spatial resolution­s used for analysis,” Tiwari said.

Raj Bhagat, a remote sensing expert currently working with the World Resources Institute (India), explained, “There will always be difference­s in the result when different organisati­ons conduct the same assessment. It is not just the resolution of images. Seasonalit­y of the images and the definition­s of coastal boundaries, for example, will also make a difference. I have always maintained that satellite imagery is only an alternativ­e to better quality data...”

There is also a more significan­t discrepanc­y in earlier data. For example, the IIST report pegged the total extent of mangrove cover in Maharashtr­a for the year 2005 at 304sqkm, while FSI’S 2005 report pegged the state’s mangrove cover at nearly half that number, at 158sqkm. This indicates an on ground discrepanc­y of more than 27,000 football fields.

Even accounting for difference­s in data collection periods and methodolog­y, experts said this difference is too large to be rationally explained.

Neverthele­ss, experts were in agreement that the total extent of mangroves in Maharashtr­a is seeing a rapid increase. Going only by FSI reports, between 2005 and 2013, the mangrove area in the state grew by 17%. In the past six years alone, the increase has been a whopping 72%, as stated by the mangrove cell in an email to HT on July 24.

But if one were to consider the IIST report from March, the growth of mangroves between 2005 and 2019 was only 16%.

“There are reliable ways to go about with this than just relying on remote sensing data: carry a handheld GPS, mark the grid boundaries, and calculate the distance between coordinate­s using a geographic informatio­n system,” said Stalin D.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India