cumgranosalus

There was a good chance of acquittal. Either way the government had a problem....this is the best result by far for the regime.

19 hours ago, LukKrueng said:

You got it wrong. YL's sentence was supposed to be 2-10 years, and she was accused of negligence to see what her government was doing and to control it. 

The minister is accused of falsifying government-to-government rice deals

well said.

conciliatory?

nonsense! sentences like these make Thailand look ridiculous in the eyes of the world.....yet again the Junta shows that rather than the interests of the Kingdom, they are wrapped up in their own self-obsession.

1 minute ago, oyster said:

Well it certainly beats Game of Thrones.....not that I have ever watched it or intend to. But why watch fiction when we have real life. This I will follow closely, although I do wish the lady luck.

Surely it IS Game of Thrones?

I can't see how the government can come out of this with anything but egg on their faces.

Almost as if someone knows the result before it happens!

On 8/19/2017 at 10:15 PM, sandrabbit said:

It's overfished, all you you see are squid boats now, as fish disappear squid and jellyfish take over. It was overfished before the pollution and the water seems quite clean now with shoals of small fish in the shallows but just dig a metre down and see whats there. The thing that stands out is the lack of sharks, I've not seen one in 8 yrs here except in the aquarium or fish farm and in a sub tropical area as here there should be a lot of black tip & grey tip reef sharks. Not seen any rays either, they would be a premium on the table ..........

There changes in catch species are not squid they are a traditional catch - jellyfish are linked to pollution as most fish do not predate jellyfish....jellyfish predate fry and smaller organisms in the food chain

On 8/19/2017 at 10:16 PM, sandrabbit said:

squid boats

Not only squid are attracted by light - it is a method used to attract all sorts of fish to the surface. However it is long lining and bottom trawling by factory ships that cause the most damage .

I think people are confusing association and causation.

 

I think we all realise that one fishing trip is insufficient to draw any conclusions.

Have you seen the fishing fleets at Rayong? Have you seen the factory fleets in Malaysia and have you assessed their capacities?

It seems you are coming to your conclusion by one personal experience.

 

There is a general obfuscation going on here to confuse the effects of pollution or hide them, beneath the umbrella of overfishing. The implication being that the sudden decreases in fish caught near Map Ta put are caused by overfishing and not pollution - This I think is a far too simplistic - and convenient - assessment of the situation.....just an ill-considered get-out clause.

 

The sudden lack of local fish around Ban Chang and Map Ta Put is much more likely to be caused by or at least exacerbated by pollution. The local fishermen have put in catch figures that show a drop of up to 90% in some areas since the oil spill.

 

The are several misconceptions about who how and where the fishing is affected.  We are talking about fishing close to the shore - not the “deep sea” industrial scale fishing. The local fisheries include crabs, squid and small species of fish. A lot of the stuff you see drying of the racks along that coast.

The lights you see are often far out at sea and incidentally are not just squid boats - the lights attract all sorts of fish. Again it is the methods that cause overfishing - modern factory methods with advanced sonar destroy entire shoals in one gulp - this is not the kind of fishing that goes on the Ao Phrao bay.

 

It is also help to bear in mind that CLEAR water is a sign that there are no micro or smaller organisms floating around in it - and they are the base of the food chain.

 

Overfishing is a worldwide problem and it is caused largely by usually illegal factory fishing by bottom trawlers and long liners. These tend to stay well away from shore - often to avoid detection and supply mother ships well away from land..

    

Fish  stocks even in deep waters are affected by the land as most fisheries rely on Mangroves etc. as spawning grounds, hatcheries and nurseries. So Any damage to the environment along the coast can have a devastating effect.

 

(and looking into the ware  calling it clean and saying there seems to be little fish in it is just not a valid way of judging the effects of pollution (over 2 decades) on a fish population.

 

I would also refute or disregard any conclusions that are based on personal anecdotal experience.....this is a matter for careful statistical analysis. Or at least reasoned argument.

Unfortunately a lot of the data required is either not collated or further obfuscated by industry and the authorities so we are presented with a picture that needs to be assessed by a reasoned argument based on the ramifications environmental issues that have been established in that region. Glib citation of “overfishing” is not enough as it flies in the face of the conditions in the area and the rate of loss of fish stocks which have disappeared dramatically after the various oil leaks and discharges in the area.

 

Over fishing is a problem everywhere (it is almost a constant regarding all fisheries in the region and worldwide) but the effects of pollution can tip the scales especially on the inshore stocks that have supported the small boats used there.

 

Gulf of Siam and South China Seas are the most over-fished seas in the world as it is surrounded by billions of population.

 

"The Gulf of Thailand is one of the most exploited seas in the world when it comes to fishing. .out at seas Thai and Malaysian boats are engaged in commercial fishing on an industrial scale often supplying catches to mother ships from Malaysia or Vietnam...... quite different from the long tail boats and smaller (squid) fishing vessels around Map Ta Put and Ban Chang.

 

Overfishing implies an unsustainable fish stock - if you have 1 million fish and take out 1 million and one that is over fishing - if you stock is 10 and you take out nine that ain’t so bad, but you have to work out why there are only 10 fish.... but in the Rayong Bay we are looking at a sudden depletion in fish and crustacean stocks.

 

 

So, the last thing needed is oil/petrochemical pollution on top of that.

All fish stocks are stressed and as I said not simply by overfishing - external pressures from industry make it harder for fish to survive and continued or increased fishing will then exacerbate the situation.

 

 

Greenpeace warns that Thailand's marine ECOSYSTEM is on the verge of collapse, threatening the livelihoods of millions of traditional fishermen as well as the larger fisheries. ...and it is those “traditional” fishermen that are voicing their concerns about Map Ta Put.

 

Fish need to spawn and propagate is fish stocks are going to be sustainable and in the local waters off Rayong this can easily be interrupted by pollution from the industrial estates.

 

Consumption of fish in Malaysia increased by 150 per cent since 1961 as local reliance on fish as a major protein source increased.

Malaysians are the biggest consumers of seafood in Southeast Asia. Malaysian fish stocks have depleted by up to 90% in some areas - especially due to bottom trawling.......the case for the bay near Map ta put and Ban Chang is not the same, we are talking about small boats relying on a  local stock. Thailand has a larger vessels fleet in Rayong but it is the ones fishing close to land that are concerned.

Malaysian over fishing is done on an industrial scale - long lines (4 km) and bottom trawling are both extremely damaging to fish stocks but also to the environment - this is not the method used by the local small boats at Map Ta Put.

 

The development around Ban Chang and Rayong has lead to the destruction of huge areas of wetlands - this in turn has devastated fish populations in the region as Mangroves etc. are the breeding grounds for the majority of fish in the seas and oceans.

 

The situation is similar to Malaysia...“More than 75 per cent of the local marine stock come from mangrove forest but nearly 56 per cent of mangrove forests in the peninsular are gone due to development, so there are lesser nurseries for sea animals to breed now,” 

 

Overfishing therefore is part of a bigger picture - that of maintaining fish stocks and repeated pollution by the petrochemical industries around Chonburi and Rayong does not help at all.

 

These big commercial fleets have destroyed stocks of larger fish by up to 90% which in turn damages the spread of species by damaging the food chain, they are a “pollution” in themselves, but these are again the long liners and trawlers not the local traditional long-tail fishermen. But as I said earlier an already damaged ecosystem is en more susceptible to damage by such things as oil leaks.

 

So basically overfishing on an international scale means we should be all the ore concerned about oil spills and other pollutants damaging what little stock we have left.

A farcical situation....but they have only dropped charges against one of them?

 

This is turning into a very complex "Kreng Jai" situation!

36 minutes ago, Gary A said:

Is it any different than Pattaya Bay? Not many fish there either. Even the squid are overfished.

You assume overfishing - why?

 

to overfish one usually needs industrial scale trawlers or dynamiting etc etc......Pattaya has ben a tourist centre now for decades with all the concomitant pollution problems and damage through tourism.

Rayong bay, despite the petrochemicals has manage to maintain a small localised fishing industry. How sustainable it was is difficult to demonstrate as Thailand is notorious for lack of monitoring and accompanying statistics. however - that the fish population is reducing seems pretty certain but to suggest "overfishing" as the cause or art least root cause would fly in the face of what information is available. It is far more likely that the damage to the eco-system caused by repeated oils spills and other pollutants is the underlying cause.

The entire coast from Bangkok to Chantaburi (even beyond) is subjrext to a considerable amount of manmade stress and the regions and bays are not isolated entities, pollution travels on wind tide currents land rivers etc etc.....and can be washed up and down the coast and back into the land at different points however the area from ban Chang to rayong is one of the largest petrochemical regions in Asia. furthermore plans have just been announced to start a massive expansion. actually this is already underway with te extension of roads to the region and the planned railways.

for fisheries and agriculture to survive right ext to this kind of industry there needs to be close monitoring and regulation......even if the people don't die, their product will be wothless once it is know where it has come from.

 

as you point out Pattaya is not far away and the threat of major industrial pollution can't be good for the tourist industry either.

one wonders why the underpass hasn't opened yet - I get the feeling that some terrible engineering blunder has been made and they are looking for a way to say the tunnel is a white elephant without losing face - maybe it will neer open? Just a monument to Pattaya town planning?

19 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

From the other thread about it, the only cables being installed are high tension ones, which sort of makes sense.

 

It occurs to me that with ( probably ) work about to start on the next underpass on Sukhumvit, things are going to get REALLY BAD, traffic wise.

Big C, Homepro etc are going to be fuming.

Home WORKS (not Home pro) next to Big C are closing down.

...and they're looking at 5 year tourist /long-term visas and dropping the 90 day requirement in favour of a 1 year sign-on.

 

in the meantime Sri Racha immigration are refusing one year B visas for teachers at private language schools and requiring them to extend their visas every 90 days at a cost of 1900  baht.(7600 p/a)

Basically it is just one in a litany of mishaps and intentional breaches of environmental law that have occurred in the region.

 

The chemicals used to "disperse" the oil are often as damaging or even more so than the oils themselves. However it seems that on this occasion the substance used sent the oil to the seabed......with all the concomitant problems that generates. However on the surface, everything looks fine.

 

Thailand's industrial policies are a best haphazard and the decisions to set up one of the largest petrochemical industries  in Asia were taken decades ago. over the years it has been shown that dealing with the inevitable pollution problems engendered by this massive development have been pitiful.

 

pollution doesn't suddenly stop or disappear, it lingers and some of the more serious effects don't manifest themselves for decades...of course without proper accurate monitoring it is very hard to see precisely what is going on.....this is of course greatly appreciated by the industries - both National and International - in the area - they can save huge amounts of cash by not having to keep up safety and pollution standards.

 

this article in the Nation indicates that local people are very concerned about the effects of pollution on this area.

Rayong - "dead Sea"

3 hours ago, oldlakey said:

Yes I have heard that as well, who knows it might even be true for whatever reason, less drinking and driving is not the reason though must be luck I reckon

Road deaths around the world go down on big holidays.....commercial traffic is light, police mount campaigns and many people use buses or taxis instead of taking their own car. In Thailand it is also possible that the percentage of motorcycles on the roads goes down

I'd say that "death by hospital" should give the most cause for concern

8 minutes ago, Happyman58 said:

Ok i got one Our village in ubonratchathani has not had water for  3 days Not one Thai has complained yet. Why That is how easy they accept

how do you know?

 

"Ancient wisdom" knows nothing - if they did how come the average life expectancy was below 40 years.

 

the problem in Thailand is that healthcare workers at all levels are poorly trained and corruption sees the advancement of many who don't deserve it.

 

I don't know what you are referring to with "flesh eating bacteria"? - do you mean necrotizing fasciitis? what is the connection?

 

 

Unfortunately many people don't know what flu actually is and that it can be a killer.

Most times a cold or other fever is referred to by the sufferer as "Flu" - they are wrong, flu is quite specific has various strains is potentially lethal and there are vaccines available.

it has also been shown that diseases like flu can have after effects later in life - such as cardio-vascular.

20 hours ago, khunPer said:

I presume that you didn't read slowly – I'm not assuming, nor comparing anything – as all references, except the separate post with the European study of swimming jellyfish (only) in currents (box jellies are not easily available in that area I think , see my previous note) – are about Box Jellyfish only, if you please read the links:
Wikipedia, "Box jellyfish"

National Geographic, "Box Jellyfish"

Travel NQ, "15 Fascinating Facts I Learned About Australian Box Jellyfish"

–looked at through my glasses, it clearly says "Box" in front of "Jellyfish" in all titles...

 

The European study is interesting about swimming jellyfish and currents, as it's stated in the other Box Jellyfish links that Box Jellyfish actually swim; and also stated by yourself in previous posts, that Box Jellyfish can swim in current.

 

I'm actually to a degree backing your own statement with sources, however I cannot judge the ability of the Box Jellyfish here in Golf of Thailand swimming in monsoon current and waves, as I'm not an expert; that's why I don't draw any conclusions or post any remarks about it. But if you read the study about jellyfish's ability of swimming in current, and get some local data about current, you may be able to draw some level of conclusion; re. your discussion with moderator PoorSucker about weaves and currents during Samui rainy season. I thought it might be quite interesting to find out, as numerous people seem to be scared about the Box Jelleyfish.

 

Based on common sense – because I know way to little about Box Jellyfish, and don't wish to spend time searching for more scientific studies and read them, as neither jellyfish, nor Box Jellyfish has any deep interest for me – I would initially agree with moderator PoorSucker about the rainy season here; which is also based on my own experience from living beach-front on Samui for a decade, with the monsoon storm and current some years hitting quite hard during the rainy season...

Silly! - are you trying to move goalposts? only one of these  is about box jellies as I have pointed out in my forst 2 replies to your misleading posts. Why bundle stuff about jellyfish with Box jellies - you clearly were unaware of the difference so posted a lot of stuff that is a best tangential - noew you realsie you were making a mistake you are trying to change the parametres of wht you have already posted by ignoring the faulty elements

"

This study claims that jellyfish "can sense the ocean current and actively swim against it"; however it don't mention Box Jellyfish directly – probably not the best kind of jellyfish to play with, or just not available in the test area – but in the notes it has a single reference to another scientific report, which says that "Box Jellyfish Use Terrestrial Visual Cues for Navigation".

 

 

Here's an article and video from BBC Jellyfish 'can sense ocean currents'

 

And the original scientific study Current-Oriented Swimming by Jellyfish and Its Role in Bloom Maintenance

 

And the reference to the report about Box Jellyfish Use Terrestrial Visual Cues for Navigation"

The saddest of them all are the "if-you-don't-like-it-go-home" "you-are-a-guest" brigade.

 

They reveal to the rest  how vacuous their thinking is with this cliche'd non-argument. It is the tool of  those who simply don't understand that it is neither argument nor reasoned opinion..

 

These people love to use words like "rant" and "troll" especially when they have a gut feeling they don't agree, feel uncomfortable with the message or just don't like something.

Bereft of an argument - they resort to ad hominem attacks, and catch phrases like the above as if that justifies the dislike they are otherwise incapable of articulating.

It is very sad too that many people on Thaivisa don't seem to be able to tell the difference between a reasoned opinion and mere gainsaying , stereotyping or ad hominem attacks.

THey say everyone is entitled to their own opinion but so many times what people post simply isn't an opinion....it's just a rant?

16 hours ago, khunPer said:

Please slowly read again exactly what I'm saying – »...however it don't mention Box Jellyfish directly...« and »...but in the notes it has a single reference to another scientific report, which says that "Box Jellyfish Use Terrestrial Visual Cues for Navigation".«

 

You are the one that talks about that Box Jellyfish can swim, and I looked for proof to either back your unstated claim or the opposite – and also learn something myself – compared to swimming or only drifting in currents; and also about attacking at night. It is mainly to get some documented facts instead of thoughts – seem however like a lot more studies are needed – for Samui visitors, understandable afraid of a close encounter these dangerous spices. I don't draw any conclusions, but leave that to true experts, like yourself...

As I said you shouldn't lump jellyfish and Box Jellies together - on a taxonomic level it's actually worse than comparing a hamster to a buffalo.

just because a species of Jelly fish does something it doesn't follow that it applies to a Box Jelly.

virtually all the web addresses you have given refer to jellyfish not box jellies.

 

it is a serious problem that people assume that the Box Jelly is "just another jellyfish" which leads them to make all sorts of incorrect assumptions about it's natural history.

Prevailing winds are only a small factor - the pollution is all pervasive - it affects the sea land the land as well as the atmosphere - it also doesn't confine itself to well defined lines nor does it clear up quickly - it can remain for years.

 anyone who thinks wind is complete protection is kidding themselves. Ground winds and higher winds  can blow in opposite direction - pollutants can convect  be caught up in storms etc.and land some distance from their sources - apparently in the opposite direction to any perceived prevailing winds. the other thing about prevailing winds is that they are "prevailing" they are not 100% constant in that direction.

Pollutants are carried by other factors  - rain, rivers, irrigation, vehicles, illegal disposal soil movements accidental discharges, leaks, much of this is avoided by companies - especially small events - all these accumulate to render the region more and more toxic.

 

The sea quality changes not only  from leaks directly into the sea but matter carried from the land by winds (prevailing or otherwise) into the sea, or run  off for rivers and streams, discharges from vessels et c etc - all this has an accumulative effect on the marine environment and disturbs the natural balance in th area - a break in the food chain or changes  in temperature can then trigger such things as algal blooms, these in turn can affect fish stocks and the amount of light or oxygen in the water whic in turn can accelerate the cycle.

 

 

The sea is not a single isolated entity, it is affected by what is happening on the land around it also the two rely on each other for a stable evironment - heavy industry which has already demonstrated a  reckless disregard for regulations and te environment is a threat to all in the region - water, land sea, food we eat plants we harvest fish we eat...all are part of the land/sae/industrial environment.