'The Transactions of the Bombay Geographical Society. From January 1865 to December 1867. (Edited by the Honorary Secretary.) Volume XVIII.' [‎72] (99/268)

proceedings of the
change are further not those of the heaviest discharge of water by the rivers.
These changes are said to be most m June and November. It is, therefore,
probable that the ordinary oceanic and tidal currents are the removing agents,
rather than the scour of rivers.
There is farther nothing to show that this destruction of land is not local, and
on the whole of small importance, or that it is not compensated by a gain of
land on the opposite or eastern shore of the Gulf.
The investigations suggested by the Bombay Geogiapbical Society seem ad
mirably adapted to determine this question of the alteration in depth and in com
tour of coast on the shore of the Gulf of Cambay. And tbere is no question that
to arrive at any satisfactory results these careful soundings Measurements of the depth of a body of water. and surveys must bo
extended on either side of the points more immediately under investigation.
The second question of the depression of the Bunn appears to me of very much
greater importance. It is one concerning which the collection of accurate data
is most desirable. It is more than probable that the few facts given in this
article are only a small portion of what is known. But I must give a caution against
admitting as conclusive evidence in favour of a general depression of the Bunn
from the single fact that the lands of one village, Bheemkutt, had been washed
away. Such a case may very probably be due to local causes, and is not, taken
alone, any proof of even a general encroachment of the sea, much less of a general
depression of the land. I am by no means aware either that it is “ universally
admitted ” that the Bunn is an “ upheaved sea bottom, npheaved by volcanic
action!” Grant, who gave an admirable description of Cutch in 1837, did not
think so, as he describes it is being filled by deposits brought by rivers. And
Mr. Blanford, writing long before this article was submited to him, described
it as cc the bed of an inlet of the sea filled up by the accumulation of detritus
brought down by the rivers. It is just at present in the debateable state : water
part of the year, land another part, but every year must increase the height of
the land surface, and consequently diminish the depth of the water at the period
of the overflow. Of course, the whole may be an area of depression, but farther
proofs of this are necessary than the fact of a small portion having been sank
(and another raised) by the earthquake of 1819.”
To determine the facts as to whether a gradual secular depression is taking
place in the Bunn or not will need careful observations. The annual flooding of
the Bunn is stated to be caused by the sea being forced np the Gulf of Catch
and the more easternly months of the Indus by the South West Monsoon, the
waters poured into the Bunn by rivers being thus ponded back. If this be the
case, it will certainly result that the depth to which the Bunn is flooded during
different years will vary with the intensity of the monsoon, and with the amount
of the waters brought down by rivers. Observations, therefore, at that time of
year would be worthless if used to determine any changes of level. To obtain
any trustworthy results, I think it will be essential to erect fixed and solid
marks pillars of masonry with solid foundations—at intervals along the coast,