MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM 61

Oriental Geographer

Vol. 60, No. 1&2, 2016

Printed in March 2019

MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM OF THE ST.

MARTIN’S ISLAND IN BANGLADESH: PERCEIVED

THREATS AND VULNERABILITIES TO ENVIRONMENTAL

MANAGEMENT

SHAHANA AKTHER1

Abstract: St. Martin’s island has significance ecological value for its unique coral

colonies, and many rare and globally threatened marine turtle, mammal and cetacean

species and migratory water birds. Now the island has been recognized as one of the

environmental sensitive areas which is vulnerable to a range of anthropogenic and natural

threats. Several initiatives have taken to protect the biodiversity and ecosystem of the

island, but it is unlikely to achieve to establish an effective protected area due to lack of

long-term sustainable policy implementation, monitoring and environmental legislation.

This research inspects the perceptions of current and future threats and vulnerabilities to

environmental management and major constraints to environmental protection in the

island through semi-structured and open-ended questionnaire survey with the

environmental officials who were engaged specifically in environmental interest and

conservation work in the island at least for two years. Uunplanned tourism, development

activities, and over exploitation of natural resources are the threats of most concern in the

short-term period but climate change is perceived as by far the greatest long-term threat

to the marine and coastal ecosystem of the island. The research identified institutional

capacity, long-term sustainable environmental policy, inadequate environmental

legislation, unregulated tourism and development activities, population and waste

management as currently constraining mitigation and conservation efforts. The findings

highlight the need to strict implementation of rules and regulations for biodiversity

conservation, and promote ecotourism as a sustainable alternative livelihood for the

islanders, and banned all types of commercial business.

Keywords: Biodiversity, Threats, Vulnerabilities, Perceptions and Environmental

Management.

INTRODUCTION

St. Martin’s island is a unique coral bearing island in Bangladesh with ecological

significance (Tomascik, 1997). The biodiversity of marine biotic resources of the island

have global importance (Hoque, 2016) and the island has large areas of sand dunes and

mangrove formations which are the few remaining nesting places of many globally rare

1 Shahana Akther is Assistant Professor, Department of Geography and Environment, Jagannath University, Dhaka,

Bangladesh

62 ORIENTAL GEOGRAPHER

and threatened marine species, and a flyway and wintering site for Australasian and

East-Asian migratory birds (Thompson and Islam, 2010). However, the biodiversity of

the island is now threatened having experienced catastrophic changes over the last two

decades (Haque et al., 2015 and Islam et al., 2016). The cumulative stressors (over

exploitation of natural resources, tourism, development measures, pollution and climate

change, etc.) have increased the risk of extinction of coastal and marine resources at an

unprecedented rate (Harnik et al., 2012). Though, the Government of Bangladesh (GoB),

and other national and international non-government organizations (NGOs) are trying to

protect the ecosystems, efforts have been insufficient for the sustainable environmental

management of the island (Khan, 2008). It is predicted that without immediate substantial

action to conserve the ecological resources of the island, the natural places and associated

ecological value will be lost (Molony, 2006). It is a shared responsibility of the GoB and

other signatory countries for the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) to protect the

biodiversity and restoration the ecosystems of the island (Hassan et al., 2005).

STUDY AREA

The island is situated in the north east of the Bay of Bengal and lies between 200

34´and

20039

´Nlatitude, and 92

0 18

´and92

0 2´E longitude (Figure 1) (Thompson and Islam, 2010).

The total area of the island is about 12 km2

with the island itself being approximately 5.9

km2 and the rest of the area being rocky platforms entering the sea (DOE, 2012).

Figure 1: Location of the Study Area

MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM 63

The island comprises five distinct physiographic areas: Uttar para, Golachipa, Madhya

para, Dakhin para and Cheradip. The key habitats of the islands are rocky and sandy

inter-tidal habitats, rocky sub-tidal habitats, offshore lagoons, sea grass beds, coral

aggregations, soft coral habitats and offshore soft-bottom habitats (Thompson and Islam,

2010 and Islam et al., 2001). The dominant marine species are corals, reptiles, turtles,

seagrass meadows, algal flora, gastropod-algae, molluscs, echinoderms, reef fishes and

shorebirds (Hasan et al., 2014). It is of high biodiversity significance, and the research

focuses on the environmental management of the island in the context of marine

environmental degradation.

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

The main aim of the research is to investigate the environmental officials perceptions of

the threats to and vulnerabilities of the marine biodiversity and ecosystems of St.

Martin’s island. The aim is to explore the risks to marine ecosystems’ sustainability from

different vantage points, and to identify and understand the major constraints to

biodiversity conservation in order to make recommendations for the future conservation

and sustainable environmental management of the island.

However, the specific objectives of the research are:

to investigate the current status of marine and coastal biodiversity in the study

area;

to identify the current and future threats to and vulnerabilities of the biodiversity;

and

to recommend measures and policy needed for the sustainable environmental

management of the island.

METHODOLOGY

A pragmatic (mix method) research approach was used in this research. Qualitative data

was obtained in 2017 through questionnaire survey. Questionnaire survey was employed

to establish perception on threats and vulnerabilities to environment management. The

questionnaire consisted of closed structured questions to produce quantitative data on the

status of biodiversity and threats and vulnerabilities to the coastal and marine ecosystem

on the island. This was tracked by a series of semi-structured and open-ended questions

to deliver qualitative responses on the present activities or policy to manage

environmental degradation and recommendations for the future environmental

management. The questionnaire comprised of 27 semi-structured and open-ended

questions.

Using a five-point Likert scale, respondents were asked to illustrate the current situation

of marine biodiversity of the island and then to rank top five immediate (5 to 10 years

from present) and long-term (more than 10 years) threats to the coastal and marine

biodiversity. Respondents were also asked to rank top five impacts of climate change

which expected to affect the island to understand respondents’ perception about specific

impacts of climate change for these two timescales.

64 ORIENTAL GEOGRAPHER

A pilot exercise was commenced for the initial drafting of the questionnaire and reviews

made. Forty two respondents, officials were randomly chosen from government, local

and international NGOs who were actively engaged specifically in environmental interest

and conservation work in the island at least for two years. Equal number of respondents

represented from each group. The respondents were well informed group about the total

environmental condition of the island, existing and future threats to the biodiversity and

policy needed for environmental management. The findings of the qualitative and

quantitative data were complied with secondary information. The results were

investigated to establish the findings and give recommendations.

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Perception about the Current Biodiversity Status and Major Threats to the

Ecosystems

All the respondents (both government and non-government officials) elaborately

described the major ecosystems, number of species and the key threats to the biodiversity

(Table 1). The information was cross checked and complied with the “Environmental

Profile of St. Martin’s Island” Thompson and Islam (2010) and “Report on St. Martin’s

Island Ecosystem Boundary” (Hague et al. 2015). Most of the respondents mentioned that

due to lack of environmental base line data and detail scientific survey, it was not

accurately possible to assess the current status of ecological health of the island.

Table 1: Major Threats to the Ecosystem in and around the Island [Major Threats are

Signified by (√)]

Key

Ecosystem

Significant Breeding

Population and their Endemic

Species

IUCN

Red List

Major Threats to Ecosystems**

Habitat

Loss

Coral

Reef

Damage

Sea

Level

Rise

Tropical

Cyclone and

Storm Surge

Sea Surface

Temperatur

e Rise

Pollution Unsustainable

Extraction

Marine Habitat 36 species of Corals,

14 species of Seagrass meadows,

43 species of Algal flora and 44 species of Gastropod-algae

2, * √ √ √ √ √ √

Inter-tidal

Habitats

30 species of Corals,

187 species of Molluses, 9 species of Echinoderms,

55 species of Reef fishes,

12 species of Crabs, 154 species of Algae

* √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Mudflats Unknown number of species of

Shorebirds, Yellow-lipped sea

krait, Fiddler crabs

* √ √ √ √ √

Mangrove 4 species of Mangrove vegetation * √ √ √

Sand Dunes and Beach

11 species of Turtles and unknown number of Shore birds

5, * √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Lagoons and

Wetlands

Unknown number of Water

monitor, Bengal cobra, water birds and garden lizard

* √ √ √ √ √

*Not yet been assessed according to the IUCN Red List **More than one opinion was taken from one respondent

Source: Author own research, Thompson and Islam, 2010 and Haque et. al., 2015

MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM 65

About 65% government and non-government respondents felt that the prowling situation

of the ecosystem was poor, 25% government respondents thought it was fair and 10% felt

it was good according to the five-point Likert scale (Table 2). In contrast, 57% local and

71% international non-governmental respondents perceived that the current situation was

poor and felt that the ecosystems were threatened due to over exploitation of natural

resources, unplanned infrastructure development, unregulated tourism and climate change

impacts, and it also became detrimental to the health of the ecosystem. Moreover, 15%

local non-government respondents felt that the condition was very poor.

Table 2: Ecological Health of the Island

Respondent

Group

Number of

Respondent

Very

Poor Poor Fair Good

Very

Good Respondents’ Perceptions

Government 14 3 9 2 “There is a significance

disturbance of ecosystem

due to climate change, but

the health status of coastal

and marine ecosystems is

fair to good”

“I think biodiversity is rich

but environmental stress

and human pressure creates

poor situation and many

species now are extinct,

need detail baseline survey”

Non-

government

(Local)

14 6 7 1 “Some species are under

threatened position but all

other marine species are in

good position. Due to lack

of baseline data it is quite

difficult to understand

actual situation, need detail

survey”

Non-

government

(International)

14 9 4 1 “Anthropogenic cause poses

great threats to the

biodiversity especially

human … overall situation

is poor. However,

immediately need base line

survey and strict protection”

Total 28 15 14 11 2

Source: Field Survey, 2017

Interestingly, maximum non-government respondents thought that the condition of

ecological health of the island was bad whereas the government officials perceived that

the condition was good.

66 ORIENTAL GEOGRAPHER

The respondents were asked to rank the top five immediate (5 to 10 years) and long term

(10+ years) threats to the marine and coastal biodiversity of the island and the finding are

shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Top Five Immediate (a) and Long-term (b) Threats to the

Coastal and Marine Ecosystems of the Island Source: Field Survey, 2017

All the respondents (forty two) identified tourism as an immediate threat to the

biodiversity. Coral reef damage and over exploitation of natural resources were also

mentioned as an immediate threat by 90% respondents. Development activities and

pollution were also mentioned by 76% and 43% respondents, respectively as threat.

Around 28% respondents mentioned climate change, population and over fishing as a

2

5 5

3

44

3

1 1

5

2

1

2

4

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Government Non-government (Local) Non-government (International)

Nu

mb

er o

f ti

me

men

tio

ned

Top five immediate (5-10 years) threats a

Tourism Development

Coral reef damage Pollution

Over exploitation of natural resources Over fishing

Coral loss Climate change

5 5 5

4

3

2

3

4

1

2

3

1 1

4

2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Government Non-government (Local) Non-government (International)

Nu

mb

er o

ftim

e m

enti

on

ed

Top five long-term (10+ years) threats b

Climate change Habitat loss Tropical cyclone Development

MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM 67

short-term threat. Tangible issues such as unregulated tourism, coral reef damage, marine

resource exploitation, and increasing and uncontrolled development were seen as a

greater threat than the climate change in short-term period (Fig 3a).

Figure 3: The Immediate (a) and Long-term (b) Environmental Threats to the Marine and Coastal

Ecosystems of the Island More than one opinion was taken from one respondent

Source: Field Survey, 2017

Moreover, climate change was perceived to be the most important threat to long-term

timescale (10+ years). All the respondents ranked climate change as a top threat and they

mentioned that climate change as a major concerned for its impact on marine

biodiversity. Tropical cyclones and habitat loss were also mentioned as threat by 90%

respondents. They explained that both human and natural activities accelerated the habitat

loss. In addition, anthropogenic cause and development activities were also mentioned by

72% respondents separately as threat. Unsustainable resource use and coral reef damage

were also mentioned by 47% respondents to long threat. Interestingly respondents did not

perceive population as a threat to long-term where as they identified it as a short-term

threat. Climate change impacts were identified by most of the respondents as a top long-

term threat (Figure 3b) and human activities ranked as a top short-term threat (Figure

3a).

However, there is a difference between the perceptions of government and non-

governmental respondents about the short-term and long-term threats. More surprisingly

where non-governmental respondents ranked tourism as a top immediate threat,

government respondents ranked it as 4th

number (Figure 3). About 90% respondents,

both government and non-government ranked coral reef damage as an immediate threat

in contrast only 24% respondents considered it as a long-term threat. It may be possible

they viewed coral reef damage as a habitat loss in the long-term timescale.

When evaluating the potential impacts of climate change separately, all of the

respondents perceived sea level rise as the most important threat to the biodiversity for

short and long-term period. Moreover, 86% respondents (both government and non-

government) identified tropical cyclones as the second top climate change threat to the

short-term (5-10 years) period in contrast, 90% respondents ranked it third in long-term

period. In addition, rainfall variation and sea surface temperature rise were also

mentioned as a short-term impact by 76% respondents. Temperature rise, storm surge and

acidification were also mentioned by 67%, 47% and 38% respondents separately as a

short-term period (Figure 4a).

68 ORIENTAL GEOGRAPHER

Figure4:Short-term (a) and Long-term (b) Climate Change Impacts on the Marine and Coastal

Ecosystems of the Island More than one opinion was taken from one respondent

Source: Field Survey, 2017

In contrast, 90% respondents identified sea surface temperature rise as a long-term (10+ years)

climate change impact (Figure 4b). Furthermore, 85% non-government respondents perceived

that water contamination as a long-term climate change impact. The non-government

respondents told that the climate change increases the intensity of floods and heavy runoff

during the rainy season produced huge quantities of sediments, nutrients and pesticides which

mixed with inshore water and degrade biodiversity. More surprisingly respondents were not

mention water contamination as a threat to short-term period.

Socio-economic Activities

Respondents identified four socio-economic activities which created threats to the

biodiversity (Table 3). Respondent’s comments are providing to contextualize answers.

Table 3: Socio-economic Activities Create Threatened Position to the Marine and Coastal

Ecology in and Around the Island

Livelihood

option

Number of

respondents*

Respondents comments

Fishing 38 Along with overfishing, they use gill and mesh nets which catch fish

along with other non-targeted species which bring death to the non-

targeted species. Shrimp fry collection also causes loss of aquatic

organisms, degrade biodiversity.

Trade 36 Local people (islanders) and outsider are engaged to collection of

corals, turtles, shells, star fish etc. sell to the neighboring market

(Cox’s Bazar, Myanmar) and the tourists. Commercial business of

corals, marine algae also decline marine biodiversity.

Agriculture 30 Islanders cut trees, fill up land for agriculture and use of chemical

fertilizers, pesticides pollute marine and coastal water. Cyclone and floods

accelerate the pollution. They use ground water for irrigation reduce the

availability of fresh water whereas the whole island will suffer from

serious scarcity of fresh water, pose great threats to the ecosystem.

Ship and boat

anchoring,

operation and

maintenance

28 They (inhabitants) directly dispose solid waste, sewerage, oil spillage

to the sea which decreases the health of ecosystem in the inshore

area. Boat grounding in the beach damage corals and it produce fine

sediments which has bad effects on ecosystem.

Total 132

Source: Field Survey, 2017 * More than one opinion was taken from one respondent

MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM 69

MAJOR CONSTRAINTS TO BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

Respondents identified seven major constraints to protect the biodiversity of the island.

Dual Policy of Government

Dual policy of Government was the most commonly mentioned constraints to

environmental management of the island. Around 96% non-government and 57%

government respondents perceived that government took several initiatives and plan to

protect the ecosystems but at a time they promote local tourism. About 50% non-

government respondents mentioned that using the gaps of ECAs they (stakeholder and

outsider) expand tourism and trade activities in the island. Moreover, 36% non-

government respondents also told that the development activities are taking place in

restricted ecological zone with permission. During the last two decades, infrastructures

were developed dramatically and destroyed the ecosystems.

Weak Enforcement of Law

Due to lack of financial support, low manpower and weak monitoring system failed to

stop the demolition of ecosystems which is mentioned by the 90% government and non-

government respondents. Three or four people are not enough to monitor 12 km2

island

where local peoples are continuously try to exploit the natural resources.

Unplanned Tourism

Moreover, 85% respondents identified unregulated and unplanned tourism was another

major constraint to environmental protection. About 78% non-government respondents

perceived that the existing pattern of tourism during winter season (November to February)

was unsustainable and harmful for the ecosystem. In addition, 85% non-government and

43% government respondents mentioned that tourists produced huge plastic wastes which

were directly thrown to the inland and sea which also pollute the environment.

Environmental Legislation

Furthermore, 62% respondents thought that environmental legislation was out dated and it is

not appropriate for environmental management of the unique ecosystems, the island needs

special conservation act and enforcement. About 78% of non-government respondents

perceived that lack of expertise and fail to understand the natural process were another major

constraint to environmental management. In addition, 36% non-government respondents

also mentioned that without appropriate legislation and coordination of different government

bodies, it is quite impossible to protect the marine ecosystem from the range of threats

associated with climate change and anthropogenic source.

Human Capacity and Poverty

Poverty and scarcity of alternative livelihood were another major constraint for

environmental management in the island which is mentioned by 71%both government

and non-government respondents.

Reluctance to Deal with Climate Change

About 62% respondents mentioned that the reluctance by the Government and other non-

government organization to address the issue of climate change. For instance,

70 ORIENTAL GEOGRAPHER

Government project such as SMBCEDP and CWBMP only focused on specific aspects of

biodiversity conservation rather than border issues of climate change impacts.

Waste Management

Moreover, 57% respondents commented that waste management was an obstacle for

environmental management of the island. Government and stakeholders ineffectually

address the waste management issue. As a result uncontrolled and untreated waste and

sewage was piped directly to the inshore area or stored in open place which adversely

affected marine and coastal ecosystems.

POLICY RECOMMENDATION FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

In addition to identifying constraints to environmental management, respondents

identified eight potential policy recommendations to address the threats to the ecosystem.

Table 4: Policy Recommendations for more Effective Environmental

Management in the Island

Policy

Recommendation

Number of

Respondents*

Selected Respondents Responses

Long Run Sustainable

Policy Implementation

21 Long run sustainable conservation policy needs to be

harmonized and actively engage local community in

conservation activities.

Create Alternative

Livelihood

19 Empowerment of local people through small handicraft,

cottage business and increase capacity building by

training could reduce the dependency on natural

resources.

Coordination and

Cooperation of

Government body and

NGOs

17 Need active cooperation and coordination of national

and international body for biodiversity conservation.

Regional Cooperation

and Capacity Building

17 The island may enable to more resilient to the long-term

climate change impacts by effective regional

coordination and communication.

Appropriate Legislation

of Climate Change

Agenda

16 All the development and conservation activities taken in

the island should considered the climate change impacts

and made climate change as a political agenda and

actively worked with international organizations to

minimize the climate change impacts and adapt

mitigation measures.

Promote Ecotourism 15 Within the carrying capacity tourism industry should

regulate and need certification in the island.

Awareness 14 Increasing the awareness of local community and the

tourist to conserve the biodiversity.

Total 119

Source: Field Survey, 2017

* More than one opinion was taken from one respondent

MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM 71

DISCUSSIONS

There is a strong evidence for deteriorating the health of marine ecosystems and

decreasing marine species in St. Martin’s which is also found in the research of Hoque

(2016) and Islam (2016). This study revealed that perceived climate change impacts were

not considered in the conservation action which has taken in the island. According to

IPCC (2007), climate change impacts are already visible in this island such as sea level

rise is increasing coastal flooding and beach erosion, rising sea surface temperature

causing coral bleaching, and tropical cyclone and storm surge increases erosion and

habitat loss. Moreover, erratic rainfall leading scarcity of fresh water is already a

delinquent in the island and climate change will be accelerated the problem. Furthermore,

ocean acidification is also perceived as a threat to short-term and long-term timescale.

Water contamination and pollution also have adverse impacts on biodiversity. These

problems are also identified by the research of Maruf (2004) and Maruf and Hashibul

(2006). Beside these, there are a sign of changing pattern of siltation and accretion of the

island which may also be affected by climate change in future. According to the IPCC

prediction, the island will be at great risk to extinction by the end of 2050. However,

Brown (2008) and Sear et al. (2001) also revealed that the small islands of Atlantic and

Pacific Oceans also sensitive to biodiversity loss and susceptible to environmental threats

particularly those associated with climate change.

Moreover, scarcity of alternative livelihood, islanders heavily depend on natural

resources and exploited marine resources in an unsustainable way. The study explored

that fisherman often use grill nets, poison, cyanide and dynamite to catch fish which

destroy marine species. Commercial trade of marine species such as corals, seaweeds also

accelerated habitat loss. Beside these, the agricultural practices of islanders also pollute

environment and increased habitat loss and deforestation. According to IPCC, the

ecological health of small islands in the Bay of Bengal and Indian Ocean are also

threatened by destructive and overexploitation of natural resources such as fishing,

habitat loss and pollution. The interrogation exposed the complex interactions of human

impose and global scale climatic stresses created critical situation for the ecology, which

is also found by Forster et al. (2011) in their research in Caribbean UKOTs small islands.

The study explored that due to lack of detail ecosystem baseline data, it was not possible

to assess how many species are extinct and how many species were in endangered

position which is also a common scenario in many small islands in the world. By the

observation, respondents commented on many globally endangered turtles, such as

Loggerhead turtle and Leatherback turtle, mammals, such as Finless Porpoise and corals

species were plentiful in this region in the last decades but now they were disappeared.

Moreover, lack of awareness and understanding the significance of biodiversity among

the local people and stakeholders, they are little concerned about the environmental

management and conservation issues in the island.

In 1999, Government declared the island as an ecologically critical area (ECA) but

Government failed to protect the biodiversity of the island which was also found in the

study of Kabir et al. (2009). Dual policy of Government hinders the conservation efforts.

Government try to protect biodiversity but at a time they also encouraged local tourism

72 ORIENTAL GEOGRAPHER

and gave permission to establish new infrastructures. It was not clearly mentioned in the

declaration of ECA that which area was ecologically sensitive and what activities may

happen in which area. By using the leakage, there are lots of infrastructures developed in

the last two decades. According to BBS (2015), more than 8000 people live in this tiny

island which was beyond the carrying capacity. In addition during tourist season huge

number of tourists exceeded the capacity and put pressure on total ecosystems of the

island. Beside these, the study revealed that most of the Government biodiversity

conservation fund is used to build infrastructure and rest house in the ecologically

sensitive area for Government official recreation purposes rather than appropriate actions

for biodiversity conservation.

In addition, Tomascik (1997) proposed conservation zones, such as manage resource

zone, sustainable use zone and restricted access zone for the island environmental

management but still now it is not implemented by the Government. Moreover, most of

the land is privately own, so it is quite difficult to control development without

implementation of ecologically sound land use policy with active participation of

stakeholders. Furthermore, with low manpower and insufficient financial support, it is

quite difficult to sustain environmental management in the island.

The study suggests that Government effort and initiatives to manage and protect

biodiversity from environmental stressors appear to be inappropriate and insufficient.

Limitations to environmental management and in specifically risks associated with

climate change, are therefore improbable due to poverty and lack of awareness. Instead,

issues related to government policy and implementation, the study also highlighted some

principal limitations such as institutional capacity, over population, unplanned and

unregulated tourism and development, waste management and long-term sustainable

policies to determine the environmental issues.

CONCLUSION

The biodiversity of St. Martin’s island has global importance. The island has large areas

of sand dunes and mangrove formations which are the few remaining nesting places of

many globally rare and threatened marine species, and a flyway and wintering site for

Australasian and East-Asian migratory birds. The biodiversity of the island is now

threatened having experienced catastrophic changes over the last two decades. The

cumulative stressors (over exploitation of natural resources, tourism, development

activities, pollution and climate change, etc.) have increased the risk of extinction of

coastal and marine resources at an unprecedented rate. As a signatory to the CBD and

other Multilateral Environmental Agreements, Bangladesh has international obligation to

protect biodiversity and ensuring the sustainability of environment under the Millennium

Development Goals. Though, the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) and other national

and international non-government organizations (NGOs) are trying to protect the

ecosystems, efforts have been insufficient for the sustainable environmental management

of the island. It is argued that without immediate substantial action to conserve the

ecological resources of the island, the natural places and associated ecological value will

MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM 73

be lost. It is a shared responsibility of the GoB and other signatory countries of the

Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) to protect the biodiversity and restoration the

ecosystems of the island.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In response to these limitations, the study recommends some policies to mitigate

and sustainable environmental management in St. Martin’s island.

Strict implementation of conservation zones proposed by CWBMP and protect

the restricted zone under IUCN’s category I.

Promote eco-tourism based on multi-sector cooperation and community

involvement and banned all commercial tourism and collection of souvenirs.

Banned shrimp fry collection and use of chemicals or poisons and gill nets for

fishing and strictly forbidden the use of chemical fertilizer and pesticides in the

agricultural land. Establish proper waste management system and restricted to

dispose of any kind of pollutants on the land, estuarine or marine water.

Build regional and global networking, cooperation and collaboration for

sustainable

environment management and increase institutional capacity and cooperation

with other law enforcement and parliamentary agencies for environmental

protection.

Raise awareness among the community, tourist and encourage stakeholder to

conserve

biodiversity.

REFERENCES

BBS (2015). Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, Population Census 2011, Ministry of Planning,

Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka.

Brown, N. (2008). Climate change in the UK Overseas Territories: An Overview of the Science,

Policy and You, Peterborough, UK.

DOE (2012). Department of Environment, Transboundary diagnostic analysis: Proximate and

Root Causes, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of the People’s Republic

of Bangladesh, Dhaka.

Forster, J., Lake, I. R., Watkinson, A. R. and Gill, J. A. (2011). Marine Biodiversity in the

Caribbean UK Overseas Territories: Perceived Threats and Constraints to Environmental

Management, Marine Policy, 35: 647–657.

Harnik P. G., Lotze, K. H., Anderson, S. C., Finkel, Z, V., Finnegan, S. David, R., Lindberg,

Liow, L. H., Lockwood, R., McClain, R. C, McGuire, L. J., O’Dea, A., Pandolfi, M. J.,

Simpson, C. and Tittensor, D. P. (2012). Extinctions in ancient and modern seas, Trends

in Ecology and Evolution, 27: 608–617.

74 ORIENTAL GEOGRAPHER

Haque, A. B., Eusuf, M. H., Naser, N., Ahsan, K. H. and Uddin, K. (2015). Report on Saint

Martin’s Island ecosystem boundary, Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem

(BOBLME) Project, Department of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forest,

Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka.

Hassan, R., Scholes, R. and Ash, N. eds. (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current

State and Trends, Island Press, Washington D.C.

Hasan, M. E., Dev, P. K. and Rahman, M. H. (2014). Report on Land-based Biodiversity of St.

Martin’s Island (Flora - Fauna Checklist) Draft report submitted to IUCN-Bangladesh

and Save Our Sea, Dhaka, November, unpublished.

Hoque, N. U. (2016). Environmental Hazards and Conservation Approach to the Biodiversity and

Ecosystem of the St. Martin’s Island in Bangladesh, in Janardhana, N. R., Sudhakar, M.

and Gossel, W. eds. Management of Natural Resources in a Changing Environment,

Springer, London: 259-270.

IPCC (2007). International Panel on Climate Change, Climate change 2007: The Physical

Science Basis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Islam. M.S., Hoque. A. and Uzzaman, M. Rabi (2001). Quaternary Geomorphic Evolution of the

St. Martin’s Island in Bangladesh, Indian Journal of Geography and Environment, 6. 1-

24.

Islam. M. S., Khan S. R. and Hoqie. M. M. (2016). Underwater observation through Scuba Diving

to Study Physical Damage of Coral and Sub-aquatic Environment of St. Martin’s Island,

Bangladesh. The Journal of NOAMI, 33(192). 1-18.

Kabir, S. M. H., Ahmad, A. T. A., Ahmad, M., Ahmed, Z. U., Begum, Z. N. T., Hassan, M. A. and

Khondker, M. eds. (2009). Encyclopedia of flora and fauna of Bangladesh, Asiatic

Society of Bangladesh, Dhaka.

Khan, M. H. (2008). The Wetlands: Our Ecological Heritage, Paper presented at conference on the

Asian Wetland Convention of the Society of Wetland Scientists, Taipei, August,

unpublished.

Maruf, H. (2004).On Sustainable Management of the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem

(BOBLME), Department of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Peoples

Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka.

Maruf, M. H. and Hasibul M. I. (2006).Status of the Biodiversity of St. Martin’s, Bay of Bengal,

Bangladesh, Institute of Marine Sciences, University of Chittagong, Chittagong.

Molony, L. (2006) St. Martin’s Island ECA Conservation Management Plan, Department of

Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Government of the People’s

Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka.

Sear, C., Hulme, M., Adger, N. and Brown, K. (2001).The Impacts of Global Climate Change on

the UK Overseas Territories Technical Report and Stakeholder Survey, Tyndall Centre

for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia, Norwich.

Thompson, P. M. and Islam, M. A. eds. (2010). Environmental Profile of St. Martin’s Island,

United Nations Development Program, Dhaka.

Tomascik, T. (1997).Management Plan for Resources of Narikel Jinjira (St. Martin's Island),

Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of the People’s Republic of

Bangladesh, Dhaka.