Iqbal Hussain
A friend told me recently, “Mobile towers are making birds disappear.” My immediate response was simple: let us not turn an impression into a fact; let us look at the evidence. The concern is understandable. Mobile towers have expanded rapidly, while people in many places feel that familiar birds are becoming less visible. But scientific research does not provide a simple or conclusive answer that mobile-tower radiation is responsible. Some studies have reported associations between electromagnetic-field exposure and bird abundance or behaviour. A 2007 study from Belgium, for instance, reported fewer breeding male house sparrows at locations with higher measured electromagnetic-field strength.
Some Indian studies from Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir have likewise reported differences in bird abundance or diversity around mobile towers. However, other research has found no such association. A field study of house and tree sparrows in Guwahati found no impact of electromagnetic radiation on their abundance at the exposure levels examined. Indian research from Chhattisgarh has also pointed out the lack of sufficient evidence to establish mobile-tower radiation as a cause of declining sparrow populations. The evidence, therefore, remains mixed and inconclusive.
“Mobile connectivity is essential to modern life, so technology must advance alongside environmental responsibility. Science requires evaluating evidence rather than jumping to conclusions based on unverified observations.”
A study from Lolab Valley, Kupwara, is particularly relevant to Kashmir. It reported fewer birds within 200 metres of selected mobile towers than beyond that distance. But such an observation does not, by itself, establish that electromagnetic radiation caused the difference. Bird distribution can also be influenced by vegetation, food availability, nesting sites, habitat disturbance, traffic, noise and human activity. This is where a basic principle of science becomes important: correlation is not causation. We should neither dismiss the concern nor create unnecessary fear.
Instead, Kashmir needs systematic research comparing areas around communication towers with appropriate control sites while measuring electromagnetic exposure alongside habitat quality, vegetation and other ecological factors. Mobile connectivity is now essential for education, healthcare, communication and everyday life. The answer is therefore not to oppose technology, but to ensure that technological development proceeds alongside environmental responsibility. My friend’s observation may be worth investigating—but an observation is only the beginning of scientific inquiry, not its conclusion. We should not decide the answer before we have examined the evidence.
(The author is a teacher and Environmental Science researcher pursuing a PhD in Environmental Science. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the author and aren’t necessarily in accord with the views of “Kashmir Horizon”)
[email protected]
