Talk:Sundarbans
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Tiger website
here is a link to a website containing information on sundarbans tigers. It has weekly updates from a research team who are monitoring a radio collared tiger-
www.sundarbanstigerproject.info
I think it would be a relevent link for both this "Sundarbans" page and any on tigers
All the best
Adam Barlow barl0048@umn.edu
202.56.4.109 10:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] please help if you can
i read ,amazingly if true, that sunderbans are not natural forestlands, but manmade ones. and most likely to be implanted by britishers during their colonial rule. as a proof of it, it is known that the trees in sunderbans are in a straight line contrary to the principles of nature where they should have been in random order as seen on all the natural jungles. if anyone can vindicate or reprove it by via authetic source i shall be grateful to him user:nidhishsinghal email: nidhishsinghal123@yahoo.com
- Sorry, this simply is NOT true. There have been various reports and accounts preceeding any European visit to Bengal. And also, the trees being in a straight line is also untrue. Thank you. --Ragib 22:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
hi. nice to hear from you. i know that there have been various reports and accounts preceeding any european visit to bengal for sunderban forests. but they only indicated the presence of much smaller sunderban delta with indegenious trees and mangrooves like Nypa fruticans. what the matter of fact is that sunderbans derive their name from sundari trees, the largest and tallest ones in the so called forest range. and they cover the much larger part of now what is called sunderban delta. and they are the ones which are mostly found in straight line,(its a documented fact) which further suggest a man made origin. my only doubt was that whether this extension of sunderbans was done by the brits or it predated them. may be, you can have a look at the indian side of sunderban delta (for the straight line fact) as i dont have much information about the bangladeshi side. although i really appreciate your kind reply. thanking you.
nids 01:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)nidhishsinghal
- I don't know where you get these crazy information (and "documented" facts), but these are definitely wrong. For one thing, the size of the forest has dwindled currently to 1/3rd of its size 200 years ago (see Banglapedia, when the first surveys were conducted by British East India Company.
- Anyway, here are some references you should dig up in your local libraries, instead of reading awesomely fascinating-sounding, but totally baseless conspiracy theories about a man-made forest.
- D Prain, Bengal Plants, 2 vols, Calcutta, 1903;
- D Prain, Flora of Sundarbans Records of the Botanical Survey of India. New Delhi; 1903;
- Khasru Choudhury et al The Bangladesh Sundarbans, IUCN- The World Conservation Union, Dhaka, 2001;
- NA Siddiqi, Mangrove Forestry in Bangladesh, IFES, Uni. Chittagong, 2001.
- Thanks. --Ragib 02:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Conflicting Tigers
There are two references to the number of tigers in the Sundarbans. I am in favour of the 700 as it has a citation. Can we please sort this out? Evildoctorcow 09:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Could the reference to the tigers being 'man eating' also be deleted since I'm sure that is not their sole dietry intake :) It seesm to me most people will realise that tigers can be dangerous to humans.--Mrg3105 19:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Question:
"There are several speculated causes as to why these tigers maul humans:"
Why do you need reasons? Why shouldn't they?
[edit] Dolphins
The Sunderbans is also home to some rare species of freshwater dolphins:the gangetic dolphin and the Irrawaddy for instance.These species are fast disappearing in South and South East Asia.They have recently come under threat due to rising salinity levels in the waters;in fact,the pin dolphin,a salt water species has recently been sighted in Bangladesh.The Olive Ridley Turtle,yet another endangered species,has its habitat here.I feel it is important to mention these in the article,as these are an important part of a fragile ecology.......Anirudh
[edit] Question from a neophyte
Hello. I just created a Wikipedia account and haven't yet edited anything, but am excited to do so. Before I do I wanted to check and get some opinions on whether or not what I had in mind is worthwhile/conforms to WP standards. I found this article because the tiger in Yann Martel's "The Life of Pi" is a Sundarban tiger, and I wanted to know more about them. Is that fact - that the tiger in the book is from the Sundarbans - worth noting in the article? Or is it too minor? Thanks!
Sjforman 16:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] A good source
A good source of information for this article is this book (full text available online):
- Riley, Laura & Riley, William (2005), Nature's Strongholds: The World's Great Wildlife Reserves, Princeton University Press, ISBN 0691122199, <http://books.google.com/books?id=icMuBQhW4vgC&pg=PA179&dq=bangladesh&lr=&as_brr=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&sig=KtgkXcTvipz1QFwaoLtp2i1JO_k#PPA181,M1>. Retrieved on 24 January 2008
Arman (Talk) 05:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Man-Eating Tigers?
I find it very hard to believe that 500 tigers in the Sundarbans kill 100-250 people per year and nobody does anything to stop it. Could somebody verify this "Man-Eating Tigers" section and add some references? ~ FerralMoonrender (T • C) 03:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- This website claims that the number of human deaths was 1,000 - 1,600 in 1930s. This article, published in 1997, claims the annual number to be 300. This 2004 news item gives statistics of 59 deaths on only the Bangladesh side of the forest, on the other hand this BBC news item claims 50 deaths per year on Indian side. Based on all these it is fair to comment that the number of death is probably gradually decreasing but still an annual number between 100-250 could be a reasonable estimate. Arman (Talk) 09:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)