(TASC) On the date of 1960, a crisis began to occur within the Aral Sea. The sea which was very significant in size started to lose the water in its banks. The cause of this complication was striving to guide the rivers’ Amu Darya and Ayr Darya to help bring water through the desert (SOAS). This decision was made to help the citizens of the towns. By diverting the sea’s water, the workers hoped that the action would help produce more crops (TASC). This brought of more food for the townspeople. Before the mishap, the Aral Sea was the “fourth largest saline lake” (TASC). The sea was significant to many of its inhabitants. The body of water was a life source for much Central Asia for many years (SOAS). Before long, the water that belonged to the Aral Sea started disappearing. According to Synnott (2008), the depressing truth is that the sea may never return to its natural state (SOAS). Many problems have occurred with no secure solution from this matter of the Aral Sea. The environmental impacts due to the mistake of diverting the water include salinity levels rising, water mismanagement, soil corrosion, and soil and water contamination (TASC). Formerly, the locals used the sea to provide food for their families (TASC). Grievously, that form of income became lost because of the vanishing water. Suddenly, the salinity levels rose drastically in the body of water exterminating most of the fish (TASC). The residents could fish in the Aral Sea before the levels rose severely. The Aral Sea Crisis explained that rivers collect salt revenues from the ground which increases salinity, smaller lakes have stopped receiving water (TASC). The crisis began with the salinity, and then the river started to run dry, because of the rerouting of the two rivers. Unfourtanly, the article continued to say that trying to add water the lakes will not help resolve the disaster of salinity (TASC). The salinity levels will have to stay the same in the sea until a better solution comes around to improve the situation. …show more content…
Kamalov was purposefully making a joke about the current state of the sea in today’s time. His joke or statement does seem to make sense because of the dried-up sea, and it seems that it is the “end” of the community life as the people who lived there know it. This explanation is partly correct because there will no more fish to catch or plants to plant from lack of water for the citizens living there. The resident’s land will become barren from lack of the source of …show more content…
The written include in their article that “unsuitable irrigation of water” is what caused the crisis in the first place (Oberkircher 394). This problem just may be one of the causes that indeed proceeded to dry the river until there was no water. Oberkircher’s article progressed to explain the fault of the Uzbekistan’s irrigation networks which were created sometime in 2000 to help fill (395). The systems were to help with the water management in the sea. The author continues to explain that the employees of the project of irrigation networks were to operate the facility on a financially based, government-run system (Oberkircher 395). The author described why the water mismanagement was a significant cause of the dried-up