Bangladesh’s seasonal Sundarbans ban raises questions over fragmented conservation, as tourism and cultural activities continue across the border in India during the ecosystem’s breeding season.
The Forest Department of Bangladesh has imposed a three-month ban on entry into the Sundarbans from June 1 to August 31 to protect biodiversity, wildlife and fishery resources during the breeding season. The decision reflects a growing recognition that the Sundarbans ecosystem needs protection during the most sensitive period of the year. However, an important question remains: can conservation efforts succeed if protection measures are not coordinated across the entire Sundarbans landscape?
This question has become especially relevant because, while Bangladesh has restricted access to its part of the Sundarbans, some areas of the Indian Sundarbans continue to host tourism and cultural activities, including events such as the Hilsa Festival (Ilish Utsab), which celebrates the region’s famous fish and attracts visitors. The issue is not whether such cultural festivals are good or bad. The real concern is whether conservation efforts can be fully effective when different management approaches exist on two sides of the same ecosystem.
The Sundarbans is not divided by nature. Although Bangladesh and India manage their own territories, the forest, rivers, fish populations and wildlife move freely across political boundaries. Fish do not recognise international borders. Water flows between both sides, carrying nutrients, sediments and aquatic species. Migratory birds, dolphins, crocodiles and even the iconic tiger depend on ecological processes that connect the entire landscape.
This is why the current situation raises important concerns. Bangladesh is asking local fishers, forest-dependent communities and tourism operators to temporarily halt activities to allow fish and wildlife populations to breed and recover. At the same time, if tourism pressure, increased boat traffic or intensive fishing-related activities continue in nearby parts of the Indian Sundarbans, the ecological benefits of the restrictions may be reduced. Conservation measures are often most successful when neighbouring regions work together and pursue similar objectives.
Another concern is the lack of coordinated monitoring between the two countries. Data on fish breeding, wildlife movement, fishing pressure and tourism activities are often collected separately. Without joint monitoring, it becomes difficult to understand the overall health of the ecosystem or assess whether conservation measures are producing the desired results.
This does not mean that festivals such as Hilsa Utsab should be blamed for environmental problems. Cultural celebrations are important for local identity, tourism and economic development. However, the timing and environmental impacts of such events deserve careful consideration, especially when neighbouring regions are implementing strict conservation measures during the same period. Conservation and cultural activities should not be seen as opposing goals. Instead, they should be balanced through scientific planning and environmental safeguards.
The way forward lies in stronger cooperation between Bangladesh and India. First, both countries should strengthen transboundary conservation planning and coordinate major ecological protection measures during critical breeding seasons. Second, joint scientific monitoring programmes should be established to assess fish populations, water quality, biodiversity and ecosystem health across the entire Sundarbans. Third, modern technologies such as satellite monitoring, remote sensing, drones and GPS-based patrol systems can help improve surveillance and reduce illegal activities.
Most importantly, local communities must be included in conservation efforts. People living around the Sundarbans depend on its resources and often possess valuable ecological knowledge. Supporting alternative livelihoods during seasonal restrictions and increasing environmental awareness can improve compliance and reduce pressure on natural resources.
The Sundarbans is a shared natural heritage of Bangladesh and India. Protecting one side while challenges persist on the other is unlikely to deliver lasting conservation success. If both countries truly want to safeguard fishery resources, biodiversity and ecosystem resilience, they must move beyond border-based management and embrace a coordinated approach. Nature does not recognise political boundaries and effective conservation should not be limited by them either.
The writer is a Former BIMSTEC Fellow, School of Ecology and Environment Studies, Nalanda University.
