 Good evening aspirants, welcome to the Hindu News Analysis session by Shankar Ayes Academy for the date 19th of December 2021. The list of articles we will be discussing today is displayed here. So without wasting much time, let us start today's discussion. Today as a part of the main sanser discussion, I will be covering a question from the 2020 GS paper 3. Now let us take up the question. Let me read out the question. What are the major factors responsible for making the rice wheat system a success? In spite of this success, how this system has become a ban in India? This is the question. See, this is a very direct question. There is no difficult directive words for us to worry about. The question has two parts in it. In the first part, you have to focus on the factors or the conditions that made the rice wheat system a success in India. In the second part, you have to focus on how the rice wheat system is bad for India. So let us start the answer discussion part. First the introduction. What to write in the introduction? We know that India has always been a agricultural country. But when did this rice wheat system start? See in the late 1950s, India faced severe food shortages. India had to import wheat from US under the PL480 program. It was an embarrassing situation for India to be in, being an agricultural country and depending on a foreign country for its agricultural needs. So India decided to take steps to become an self-sufficient country in terms of its food grain production in a rapid manner. Around the same time, Norman Borlang developed a high yielding variety of wheat. India used this to kickstart its green revolution. Through green revolution, India decided to become self-sufficient in terms of its food grain production. Do you need to write everything I just said in your introduction? No, not at all. See, this is a 15 mark question. So a four or five line introduction, mentioning about the conditions that led to the green revolution in India will be fine. It would be more than enough. And since this is a discussion, I am giving you an extra detail. And note here, this is not the only introduction you have to use. You can write your own introduction that suits your answer. Now having addressed the introduction part, let us move to the body of the answer. First, let us focus on addressing the first part of the question. That is, factors responsible for the success of the wheat rice system. One of the most important government initiatives that led to the success of the rice wheat system is MSP, that is, minimum support price. We know under minimum support price, there is efficient government procurement only in case of rice and wheat. This assured purchase by the government in case of rice and wheat is the main driving force behind farmers choosing to produce only rice and wheat. Second important factors is the government allocating most of its resources and manpower in various agricultural universities to focus only on research that deals with rice and wheat crops. See, this scenario has made these two crops have advantage over other competing crops. Government also subsidized high yielding varieties of seeds and fertilizers that aid the production of rice and wheat. Finally, the government improved the availability of irrigation. They made this possible by providing free electricity and allowing free exploitation of groundwater. See, in case of some regions like the Tanjur region in Tamil Nadu, every year, three rice crops are produced. See, with assured procurement by the government, the farmers don't have to worry about the market forces. They just produced and sold it to the government. This resulted in the success of the rice wheat system. One point you can add here is the food preference of people in India. We know in India, the staple food grains are rice and wheat. This also contributed to the success of rice wheat system. Now, having addressed the first part of the question, let us move to the second part. In spite of success, how this system became a ban in India. First, let us take the environmental aspect. Here you can mention about monocropping and its role in depleting the soil nutrition. How the excessive use of fertilizers have led to eutrophication on various water bodies of India. You can mention about the excessive use of high yielding seeds that is leading to the disappearances of native varieties. You can also mention about how monocropping has led to the increase in pests, which in turn has led to increased use of pesticides. You can also mention about the salinization of land in Punjab and Tamil Nadu due to the overuse of groundwater. See, you can also brainstorm points and add your points in the environmental perspective. Now, moving on to the economical perspective. See, only a handful of states like Punjab, Haryana and Tamil Nadu benefited from the rice wheat system. This led to regional disparities and distrust migration. Also, the yield from high yielding varieties started declining with time. To maintain the higher yield, farmers had to use increased amount of fertilizers. This resulted in reducing the profits of the farmers. Farmers also became excessively dependent on the high yielding variety seeds supplied by the MNCs. Okay? See, in the health aspect, you can mention about how just focusing only on the rice and wheat system, many traditional coarse grains lost their significance. The increasing case of diabetes and obesity in India can also be linked to the excessive focus given to the rice and wheat system. Finally, you can write about the political aspect. Here, you can mention about the Tamil Nadu-Karnataka issue. See, Tamil Nadu is mostly a semi-arid region. But Tamil Nadu benefited a lot from the Green Revolution. Its agricultural sector over took that of Karnataka. Most of the agricultural lands of Tamil Nadu are directly or indirectly dependent on the Kaviri River. Earlier, there was no conflict. But Karnataka has also developed a lot after the 1991 liberalization process. Karnataka's water needs have increased. So, they are asking for their share of Kaviri water. And Tamil Nadu also needs water for its farmers. This has led to the conflict. So, the ill-advised implementation of the rice-wheat system during the Green Revolution has even led to political conflicts. This aspect also you can mention in the main part of your answer. See, I may have missed some points. If you have any points that you would like to add, post them in the comment section so that other aspirants can also benefit from that. Now, coming to the conclusion part. Here you can mention various steps taken by the government to move away from the rice-wheat system. You can mention about the recent move by the government to rebrand course cereal as Nutri cereal to increase its consumption. Government also recently increased the minimum support price provided to the Nutri cereals which will help in its production. You can mention about the Evergreen Revolution proposed by Dr. M. Swaminathan. You can also mention about the Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana which promotes organic farming. You can mention about the Umbrella scheme, the Green Revolution Krishonathi Yojana which was launched in 2005. See, you can mention that government has taken all these measures to move away from the bane of the rice-wheat system. Now, we have discussed all the aspects of the question. You can also write your own versions of the answer and post them in the comment section. With this, let us conclude the main question discussion and take up the first news article for our discussion. Look at this article. This FAQ article talks about the issue of legal age of marriage for women. This topic has resurfaced because the union cabinet recently decided to raise the legal age of marriage for women from 18 to 21 years on December 15, 2021. An important point to note here is that the legal age of marriage for men is 21 years. And with this decision, the government will be bringing the marriage age for women and men at par. That is, they are planning to make the legal age of marriage for men and women equal. So, in this context, let us discuss the marriage laws in India, purpose of raising the age. And we shall also discuss whether this move will serve the purpose or not. The syllabus regarding this discussion is highlighted here for your reference. Now, let us start the discussion. First of all, why there is a minimum age of marriage? What is the reason for having a minimum age of marriage? We have a minimum age provision to prevent child marriage and also to prevent the abuse of minors. Now, what is the laws in India which deal with the legal age of marriage? See, in India, there is no single law. We have various personal laws that deal with marriage according to the particular religion. For example, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 and the Indian Christian Marriage Act of 1872. Both these laws prescribe age of 18 years for the bride and 21 years for the groom. And in case of Islam, the Muslim Personal Law application Act 1937 allows marriage if the boy and the girl have attained puberty. This law has no age limit. Just attaining puberty is enough to get married according to the Muslim Personal Law. Apart from these personal laws which deal with various religions, we have the Special Marriages Act 1954 which governs interfaith marriages. This Special Marriages Act 1954 also lays down 18 years for women and 21 years for men as the age of marriage. And finally, there is the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006. According to the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006, Marrying below 18 years for women and 21 years for men is illegal. So for raising the legal age of marriage for women, all these legislations must be amended. See in prilims, you can expect a Christian from this. They may give various legislations and ask you to find what are the legislations that have to be amended to raise the legal age of marriage for women. So as we discussed, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, the Christian Marriage Act of 1872, the Muslim Personal Law Application Act 1937 and the Special Marriage Act 1954 and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006 have to be amended to raise the legal age of marriage for women. In order to raise the legal age of marriage, all these laws must be amended. No coming back to this article. Let us see why the government has decided to re-examine the legal age of marriage. That is, let us see what is the purpose of raising the legal age of marriage. First reason is to improve the nutrition of mothers and infants. See early marriage as a result early pregnancies have an impact on nutrition level of mothers and their children. Diminished to nutrition level will have an impact on overall health and well-being of both the mothers and children. This consequently will have an effect on both the infant mortality rate and the maternal mortality rate. For those who are not aware, infant mortality rate is the probability of a child born in a specific year or period dying before reaching the age of one. To put it in simple words, IMR is the number of deaths per 1000 live births of children under age of one. And MMR that is the maternal mortality rate is the number of maternal deaths during a given period of time per 1 lakh live births during the same period of time. Note the difference here. IMR is infant deaths per 1000 live births and MMR is maternal deaths per 1 lakh live births. Now coming back. See the second reason for raising the legal age of marriage is to empower women. See it is expected by increasing the legal age of marriage women will spend more time in schools and colleges. This will help women enter the labour market force with better skills. Finally this will empower women. Now the third and final reason is increasing the legal age of marriage will further bring down child marriage. See even the recently released National Family Health Survey 5 revealed that child marriage has come down marginally from 27% in 2015 to 2016 period to 23% in 2019 to 2020 period. So by increasing the legal age of marriage the government is trying to further bring down this child marriage menace. See now we will see will the government really achieve what all the aims it envisioned just by raising the legal age of marriage. While child born to a adolescent mother have higher prevalence of stunting and lower weight experts argue that the underlying cause is poverty. Experts say that more than the age of the mother it is the income level that determines whether the child born will be healthy or not. So just raising the legal age of marriage is not enough. In addition to increasing the legal age there is a need to improve access to education skill training and employment opportunity for women. Also the government must take steps to ensure safety environment for women. They must ensure women are free from the constant threat of rape and sexual assault. This is one of the reasons why girls are married of early. So ensuring safety is more important than just increasing the legal age of marriage. Finally the government must take steps to address early pregnancies instead of focusing only on the age of marriage. The government can achieve this by extending family planning and reproductive health support. See this will help bring focus on preparation for pregnancy and delaying the first birth. This measure will help bring down IMR and MMR. So the final verdict is that just by raising the legal age of marriage the government cannot achieve all that it is planning to achieve. It must make many additional measures also. See raising the legal age of marriage is not a sudden decision. Actually Finance Minister Nirmala Sita Raman in her 2022 budget speech announced that the government should set up a task force to look into the age of girl entering motherhood. In that line a task force was set up in June 2020 by the Ministry of Women and Child Development. This task force is a 10 member panel. It was headed by Ms Jaya Jaitley. This task force was set up to look into the correlation between age of marriage with the issues of women like nutrition, prevalence of anemia, IMR, MMR and other social indices. The panel submitted its report to the Prime Minister's office and the Ministry of Women and Child Development in December 2020. Just remember one of the key proposals of the task force is to raise the age of marriage. Apart from these recommendations, the other recommendations include a strong campaign to reform patriarchal mindset, improving access to education, providing girls with safe transportation to schools, ensuring clean toilets and sanitary napkins so that girls do not drop out from schools, providing sex education, providing vocational training and finally providing livelihood options. Ms Jaya Jaitley argues that just raising the legal age of marriage will not achieve much unless all the recommendations of the task force are met. So like we discussed, Ms Jaya Jaitley also feels that only by raising the legal age nothing much can be achieved. So finally let us see will the new proposal make women more vulnerable? See according to the National Family Health Survey 5, 23.3% of women aged 20 to 24 years married before the age of 18. This data demonstrates that the 2006 Prohibition of Child Marriage Act has failed to prevent child marriages. If we increase the legal age of marriage further, there will be an increase in number of people considered underage. So these people will lose their legal protection. This raises a concern. So by implementing the increased legal age of marriage, many people will lose their legal protection. So before implementing that steps must be taken to provide legal protection to the people who are considered underage. Okay, now look at this data. The National Family Health Survey 4 data by Center for Women's Development Study shows that 56% girls were married below the age of 21 and this figure was as high as 75% among the poorest category of the population. So the level of income is directly linked to when the woman is getting married. So steps must be taken to increase accessibility to education and improving the employment opportunity for women. The final issue is that there is a increasing evidence that prohibition of child marriage act is mostly utilized by parents to penalize their daughters who marry against their will or elope to avoid forced marriages, domestic abuse and housework. So raising the legal age in most cases might make the woman vulnerable. Okay, this is a sorry state of affair. So as we discussed, government should not just focus on raising the legal age of marriage alone. They must focus on all the recommendations given by the Jayajitli task force. The government should focus on strong campaign to reform patriarchal mindset, help improve access to education, must provide girls with safe transportation to schools, ensure clean toilets and sanitary napkins are available on the schools, providing sex education, providing vocational training and finally providing livelihood option for girls. Only this will help address the issue holistically. And only by addressing all this, we can expect a positive change. So with this, let us conclude this discussion and let us take up the next article. Look at this article. The article talks about the UNSC draft proposal sponsored by Niger and Ireland. The proposal says that the climate issue will be effectively brought under the purview of United Nations Security Council. Also, the supporters and sponsors of the proposal claim that this proposal will enforce and hold countries accountable for their promises to mitigate global warming. Note that this draft proposal is a revised version of a draft proposed by Germany, but this was opposed by the UNSC in 2020. Also, the news highlights India's rejection of this UNSC draft proposal on climate. See, it also lists the reason for India's rejection. See, in this context, we will discuss about the background of the UNSC draft proposal on climate. Also, we will see why the resolution was introduced by Niger and Ireland. Finally, we will see the reasons why India has rejected this draft proposal. Also, we will conclude by discussing the future of this resolution. The syllabus regarding this discussion is highlighted here for your reference. Now, let us start our discussion. Before getting into our discussion, we will have a very brief discussion on UNSC, that is, United Nations Security Council and the UNFCCC, that is, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Security Council is one of the main organ of United Nations. It takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to peace or acts of aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute in order to settle it by peaceful means. In some cases, the Security Council can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security, okay? So, the primary function of the United Nations Security Council is to prevent conflicts and maintain global peace. I hope this brief discussion jogged your memory about UNSC. Now, moving on to UNFCCC. See, the United Nations has a specialized agency for discussing all matters related to climate change. The specialized agency is called United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change or UNFCCC. There are over 190 countries who are parties to the UNFCCC. They meet several times every year. They even have a two-week conference in the year-end. See, for example, the recent one at Glasgow. To know more about this, watch our news analysis on 11th November, 15th November and 29th November of 2021. See, the UNFCCC works on a global approach to combat climate change. It is this process that has given rise to Paris Agreement and its predecessor, that is, the Kyoto Protocol. These are international instruments that are designed to respond to climate change crisis. Now, we have got the basic understanding about the role of UNFCCC. Having done with the introduction, now, let us begin our discussion. Let us begin by looking at the background of the draft proposal. See, for the last few years, a few European countries led by Germany have been pushing the Security Council to play a significant role in climate change discussion as well. They argue that the climate change had an international security dimension. You may wonder how climate change is linked to international security. See, the climate change induces shortage of food or water, loss of habitat or livelihood or even migration. These impacts of climate change aggravates the existing conflicts or even creates new conflicts. This can have implications on the United Nations field mission which are deployed across the world in peacekeeping efforts. So, the current draft resolution piloted by Ireland and Niger is not the first attempt at bringing climate change to Security Council's agenda. Last year, a similar strong resolution was proposed by Germany. However, it was never put to vote because of the possible objections from the United States. United States had made it clear that it would block any such attempts with a veto. Note that the two-year term of Germany at the Security Council got over last year, but the proposal had other backers like Ireland and Niger. Thus, the proposal was refreshed by Ireland and Niger, thereby leading to the formation of United Nations Security Council's current proposal on climate. The draft resolution called the United Nations Security General to submit a report on the security aspects of climate change in the next two years. It also asked the Secretary General to appoint a special envoy for climate change. Further, it asked United Nations field missions to regularly report on climate change assessments in their areas of operation. Also, the proposal asked United Nations Security Council to take the help of climate experts in carrying out their routine functions. See, having looked at the background of the proposal, now we will see why this draft proposal was introduced by Ireland and Niger. As we already saw in our discussion, the old proposal of Germany was backed by Ireland and Niger. Now, the question may raise why this push for UNSC to play a role in climate being strengthened by Ireland and Niger. This is because one of the visiting missions of the United Nations in the region of Lake Chard, the President of Nigeria mentioned that the shrinking of Lake Chard has contributed to the rise of the Boko Haram. Thus, this is the direct consequence of climate change. See, this lake that is the Lake Chard has lost 90 percent of its surface area since 1960s, thus leading to the destruction of livelihood of locals and other communities. Thus, this lake region has become a fertile ground for the growth of this Boko Haram. See, Boko Haram is a Nigerian group that seeks to overthrow the current Nigerian government, thereby replacing it with a regime based on Islamic laws. So, this scenario made both Niger and Ireland point out that people in countries that are most vulnerable to climate change are also most vulnerable to terror groups and violence. See, given according to the report by Peace Research Institute CIPRI, 10 out of 21 ongoing United Nations peacekeeping operations are located in countries which are ranked as most exposed to climate change. This is the reason why Niger and Ireland are asking the United Nations to play a significant role in climate change control. Now, we will see why India rejected this United Nations Security Council's draft proposal on climate. We will also see the views of Russia and China also. See, Russia said that many developing countries have been backing this proposal in the hope that they would get some assistance in fighting climate change. But according to Russia, this won't happen. The developing countries won't provide assistance just by bringing climate under the United Nations Security Council's purview. In case of China, the Chinese representative said that the United Nations Security Council can consider security risks driven by climate change. But this has to be done based on country by country or situation by situation analysis. See, the opposing countries mainly Russia and India have been arguing that the United Nations Frame One Convention on Climate Change must remain as a forum for discussing all climate change related issues. They also claim that the Security Council does not have the expertise to do so. They have also pointed out that in the United Nations Frame One Convention on Climate Change, the decisions are taken by consensus of the all 190 plus countries. Whereas in the United Nations Security Council, the decision is taken only by a handful of developed countries. Also, India opposes this proposal because any future decisions on climate will be taken without the involvement of most of the developing countries. And there will be no negotiation or consensus. India also mentioned that many of the United Nations Security Council members are the main contributors of climate change due to historical emissions. So, if the Security Council takes over the responsibility of the climate change issue, a few states will have a free hand in deciding on all the climate change related issues. See, India even suggested that it would support a more limited draft that focuses exclusively on the Sahel region of the Northern Africa. Look at this image here. This is the Sahel region. See, this region forms a transitional zone between the arid Sahara desert region in the north and the Belt of Humid Samana region in the south. See, in this region, the desertification is directly sparkling water-related conflicts. So, India said it will support a more limited draft that focuses exclusively on the Sahel region of the Northern Africa. But India showed its rejection to the full proposal by recording its first negative vote in its term at the United Nations Security Council. Now, we will see the future of this proposal. As we saw in our discussion, the proposal was about integrating climate-related security risk into the United Nations Security Council's conflict prevention mandate. This was sponsored by Niger and Ireland. They claimed that their proposal was backed by 113 countries including permanent Security Council members like the United States, the United Kingdom and France. However, there was a strong counter by India and the proposal was vetoed by Russia. In case of China, they abstained from voting. Thus, the Security Council failed to adopt the proposal. Let us see what happens if this resolution is brought again in the future. See, already the Security Council is polarized between the United States, the United Kingdom and France on one side and Russia and China on the other side. By bringing the climate change, which is a global issue into an already polarized Security Council, will only deepen the issue. See, at present India is one of the most populous countries in the United Nations Security Council. Not only this, India itself is a highly exposed region in the risk of climate change. Hence, India's voice will be important in deciding whether United Nations Security Council's role on climate change is mandatory or not. This is all about this article. See, here we discussed about the background of the United Nations Security Council draft proposal on climate. Also, we saw why the resolution was introduced by Niger and Ireland. Finally, we saw the reason why India has rejected this draft proposal. At last, we concluded by discussing the future of this resolution. With this, let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Look at this news article. This news article talks about the ill effects of mandatory iron fortification. This is because fortification will increase serum ferretinin without changing hemoglobin level. So, in this context, we will discuss in detail about what is iron fortification, what are all the ill effects of excess iron and what are all the issues with iron fortification. Finally, we will see the alternative solutions for iron fortification. Now, let us start our discussion. The addition of one or more essential nutrients to a food irrespective of its presence in the food is called food fortification. This is done for the purpose of preventing or correcting a demonstrated deficiency of one or more nutrients in a population or a specific population group. In a similar way, when iron is added in food, we call it iron fortification. Some examples of preferred iron fortifications are elemental iron, iron sulphates and iron fumarate. Cereals are the most widely used vehicles for iron fortification, although many others such as milk products, sugar, curry powder, soya sauce and cookies have been successfully used. See, the selection of iron fortification is dependent on the food vehicle. The color of the iron compound is often a critical factor when fortifying lightly colored foods. Also, the use of more soluble iron compounds often lead to the development of off colors and off flavors due to reaction with other components of the food material, but they have the advantage of being highly bioavailable. See, vitamin C is known to increase the bioavailability of non-heme iron. In some countries, bovine hemoglobin concentrate, which has an exceptionally high bioavailability, is often used as a heme iron fortificant in local feeding programs. The presence of phytates, polyphenols and calcium are known to adversely affect the bioavailability of non-heme iron fortificants. In that case, sodium iron EDTA may prove to be a better choice of fortificant in the future. We have discussed about the basics of the iron fortification now. The aspects we discussed are little technical, so no need to dwell deep into it. But what we are going to discuss here on is important, so pay close attention. We will see now the ill effects of excessive iron. See, iron is an oxidant with variety of ill effects. Hence, its excess is not safe. Iron increases the risk of many non-communicable diseases like diabetes, hypertension and even high blood cholesterol. Let us see some of the evidence related to these ill effects. See, according to a national health and nutrition examination survey of the healthy US population, those with high ferretinine level have a four-fold high risk of having diabetes. Also in India, a national quality controlled survey of Indian adolescents was done to evaluate the risk of high blood sugar, high blood lipids and high blood pressure. This was done because their serum ferretinine increased. The result showed a clear and significant risk of each of these conditions as serum ferretinine increased. Now let us see the issues created by iron fortification. See, fortification of one staple food like rice, wheat or salt will increase serum ferretinine but it does not necessarily change the hemoglobin level. Thus, when all the staple foods are provided together, the increased iron intake could be 20 to 30 milligram per day. The survey has also found the risk when an additional 10 milligram of iron per day was taken. See, this condition increased high blood sugar prevalence by 2 to 14 percent across the states of India. Also, there was similar risks in high blood pressure and high lipids. Also, it is found that the risk is already high. This was proved by another published analysis of the same national survey. The survey showed that not less than 50 percent of the Indian children aged between 5 to 19 years already have a biomarker of either high blood sugar or high blood lipids. This is irrespective of their thin or stunted appearance. Thus, the risk of chronic disease is already high in our children. Note that India is already called the world capital of diabetes and hypertension. Till now, we have discussed the problems associated with iron fortification. Now, let us see the alternatives for iron fortification. First is having a diversified diet. See, in India, the cereal intake is already too high. This should be replaced by more quality foods like pulses, fruits and vegetables. Second is doing proper research. See, proper analysis should be done to know whether anemia needs such mandatory measures like iron fortification. Also, the hemoglobin diagnostic cutoffs for anemia should be revised in different geographies. Because a lower cutoff will mean a lower anemia prevalence. Note that iron deficiency in Indian diet is not a universal problem, since the requirement of iron in Indian population have been lowered by half to two-thirds in 2020. Hence, unnecessarily, mandating the iron fortification removes the people's choice of foods. Thereby, people might lose their autonomy. It is also unethical if the risk of other morbidities is increased. Lastly, the cause of anemia must be evaluated and treatment should be prescribed accordingly. See, these are the alternatives for iron fortification. So, in this discussion or in this segment, we discussed about basics of iron fortification, ill effects of iron fortification and the alternatives for iron fortification. So, with this, let us conclude this discussion and take up the last article for our discussion. Look at this article. See, the garyal reintroduction in the Bias Conservation Reserve is an ambitious program of the Punjab government. After successfully reintroducing garyals in the rivers of Punjab, where it went extinct half a century ago, the state's wild life preservation wing is now keeping its fingers crossed. See, the released garyals are healthy and they have adapted to the Bias Conservation Reserve as their home. The state's wild life preservation wing is expecting the breeding of the crocodilians to start in the next few years. So, this is the crux of the news article. So, in this context, let us learn about the habitat of garyals, its protection status, places where they can be found in India. And finally, let us conclude by discussing about the threats faced by the garyal population in India. Now, let us start the discussion. First of all, have a basic understanding that garyals are different from crocodiles and alligators. All three belong to different families, but they can be termed as crocodilians. See, crocodilians refers to all the members of the family, crocodility, family alligatority, and family gavelity. So, have this basic understanding. Now, talking about its habitat. See, garyals, sometimes called gavels, are a type of Asian crocodile and they are distinguished by their long and thin snouts. Garyals live in clear freshwater river system. They can be found mostly in riverbends where the water is deeper. See, they are not well suited for land. So, what they do is, they generally leave the water only to bask in the sun or to nest. They primarily regulate their body temperature by basking in the sun to warm up or resting in shade or water to cool down. Moving on to its characteristics. See, a typical garyal will reach up to 12 to 15 feet in length and can weigh up to 2000 pounds. See, the adult garyals mainly feed only on fish population. Now, coming to its distribution. See, actually, the geographical range of garyal distribution has reduced throughout Punjab, Bhutan, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. Presently, the wild population of garyals can only be found in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal. The surviving population can be found within the tributaries of Ganges river system like Girwa, Sone, Ramgamga, Gangdak, Chambal, and a small population can also be found in Maharnati river in Odisha. Now, coming to the protection status of garyals. See, according to IUCN protection status, it is critically endangered. Garyals have been identified as the most critically endangered crocodilian species in the world. The garyal is listed in the sites Appantic swan. See, Appantic swan list species that are in danger of extinction. And in India, it is protected under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife Protection Act 1972. Now, before concluding, let us see the threats faced by the garyals. See, as I said, garyals bask in the sun, right? They usually prefer sandbanks for basking. This makes them vulnerable to attacks by wild animals. The eggs of garyals are also eaten by feral dogs and humans. This is a cause of concern. We already saw garyals prefer clear freshwater, right? So, river pollution is affecting their habitat. Other threats for garyals include dam construction, large-scale fishing operation, floods, illegal sand mining, and poaching. So, in this segment, we discussed about garyals, its protection status, its distribution, and finally the threats faced by the garyals. With this, let us conclude the news article discussion session. Now, let us take up the practice prelims question. We have two practice prelims questions today. Let us take them one by one. Look at this question. This is a map-based question. Lakes are given, continents are given. We have to find which of the given pairs are correctly matched. See here, from our discussion, we know lake Chad is located in Africa. So, the first pair is wrong. And the third pair, that is Lake Dhal, we know is located in India. So, the third pair is also wrong. So, from this, we can know only the second pair, that is Lake Victoria, that is located in Africa, is only the correct statement, or the correct pair. So, the correct answer for this is option A, two only. Now, let us take up the second question. Consider the following statements. National Chumble Sanctuary is the main area for the species reintroduction of the Corkadelian species garyal. This is the first statement. The second statement, Chumble supports the largest population of garyals in the world. We have to find the correct statements. See here, both the statements are correct. Know that, Chumble is the chief tributary of Yamuna River. The National Chumble Sanctuary was set up in 1979 as a riverine sanctuary along an approximately 425 km length of the Chumble River and its ravines, stretching over 226 km wide along the river. The project is managed by the wildlife wing of Uttar Pradesh Forest Department and it is headquartered at Agra. See, the National Chumble Sanctuary is the main area for species reintroduction program of the Corkadelian species garyal. So, the first statement is correct. The second statement, that is the Chumble supporting largest population of garyals in the world, is also a correct statement. So, since both the statements are correct, the correct answer is option C, both one and two. The main question based on today's discussion is displayed here. Write your answers and post it in the comment section. With this, let us conclude our discussion. If you like today's video, like, comment and share it with your friends. And don't forget to subscribe to Shankara AS Academy YouTube channel. Thank you.