People’s network takes on China over Mekong

[webfact]

People’s network takes on China over Mekong

By The Nation

 

Rocks and rapids in the Mekong River --picture: International Rivers

 

Local residents and environmentalists spent the weekend having a hot debate with the Chinese Embassy about Beijing’s utilisation and management of the Mekong River. 

 

While the embassy accused Thai media of spreading false information on China’s development projects in Southeast Asia’s longest rivers, the Thai Mekong People’s Network fought back, saying Beijing was exploiting the Mekong for its own benefits.

 

The embassy issued a statement last Friday defending China’s projects in the Mekong – known in China as Lancang – in relation to ecological protection, the blasting of rapids, hydro-power projects and the sharing of hydrological data.

 

The group, representing people living along the river in eight provinces, responded on Sunday saying the river’s resources have been destroyed and exploited by large corporations. 

 

Yet the embassy’s statement claimed China “protects the environment like we protect our eyes and treat the environment like it is our lives”. 

 

It said under the framework of the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation, six countries have established the Environmental Cooperation Centre and Water Resources Cooperation Centre and “we have also actively engaged in sustainable infrastructure construction, investment and financing.

 

“With the aim of building a green railway, the China-Laos Railway project has synchronised environmental protection with construction at the stages of design, implementation and inspection, which is hailed by the government and people of the Laos.”

 

However, the people’s network countered by saying the so-called “green” aspect of the China-Laos railway project is only at the conceptual level, and that there are no concrete plans on how the destruction of natural resources, livelihoods and local economies will be alleviated. 

 

“The project has drawn strong public criticism due to the extensive adverse impacts it is having on the people and the environment,” they said. 

 

As for the blasting of rapids to clear navigation routes from southern China via Myanmar and Thailand to Laos, the embassy said the project was only being studied. “Up until now, the four countries have had no engineering plans, let alone taken any action in the so-called ‘rapids blasting’,” it said. 

 

However, the network argued that the “blasting” began in 2000 and a major portion of the rapids from China’s southern Yunnan province to the border of Myanmar and Laos has already been cleared. “As a result of this, the ecological system of Mekong and the livelihoods of people downstream have been exposed to adverse impacts,” they said, adding that the key concern is the plan to further clear rocks and rapids from the Golden Triangle via the Thai-Lao border to the Lao province of Luang Prabang. 

 

During a “consultation meeting” in January in Chiang Rai’s Wiang Kaen and Chiang Saen districts, participants were only shown a map and a plan to “improve” 13 rapids in the area by the “surgical removal of some small rocks”, when in reality the rapids slated for removal are large ones with gigantic rocks. The people’s network also pointed out that the Mekong project plans also explicitly state that 20,000 tonnes of rocks will be excavated in a 6-kilometre stretch of the river. 

 

As for the hydro-power dams, notably in the mainstream of the Mekong, the embassy said China’s dams and reservoirs help regulate the flow of water during dry and wet seasons. It also said that in 2013 and 2016, when the entire Lancang-Mekong River was hit by severe drought, China – though hit by the disaster itself – provided emergency water supplies to the 60 million affected people living downstream. 

 

It also quoted a 2017 online post by the Mekong River Commission saying that droughts in the Mekong basin were not caused by upstream dams, but more by extreme weather conditions, and insisted that the upstream dams played an important role by storing water in the wet season for use during the dry season. 

 

However, the network countered this claim saying that the river’s levels, particularly along the Thai-Lao border, stopped following seasonal patterns since China built dams in the upper reaches of the Mekong 20 years ago. Since then, it said, people have had to rely entirely on water being discharged by the Chinese authorities. 

 

The network also said that the sharing of hydrological data of the dams is pointless because “data notifications, which have only been made through government channels, have failed to keep the public sufficiently informed”. 

 

The network said, China has also “failed to address transboundary impacts, and the notifications have also not addressed the impacts on downstream communities and the ecological system”.

 

Source: http://www.nationthailand.com/news/30372597

 

-- © Copyright The Nation Thailand  2019-07-09

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

[bangkokfrog]

Sadly a waste of time. China doesn't have a good record of caring about or listening to "the people".

[leeneeds]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Beijing was exploiting the Mekong for its own benefits.

Steam roll ahead, the Chinese way 

take advantage where ever possible on 

environmental, copy right, plagiarism, trade,

consequences are inconsequential to their mind set.

[Isaan sailor]

China preys on poor countries.  Beware, Thailand.

[seajae]

china does whatever it wants and screw anyone else, they lie blatantly about it as well. Trouble is no one has the balls to actually face off with them, all too pathetic to stand up and say no so they just whinge about it instead. China needs to be put in its place but I highly doubt we will see anyone try to do it, they are claiming everything they can as theirs and ignoring the rest of the worlds countries and rights

[holy cow cm]

They abuse, get caught and then complain they are being mistreated and misunderstood. But hey are always the aggressor. On the Mekong subject they say none of anyone's business as the river is in their territory. 

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Beijing was exploiting the Mekong for its own benefits

To be fair I'm sure some Thai government officials are likely to benefit as well.

[hotchilli]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

“With the aim of building a green railway, the China-Laos Railway project has synchronised environmental protection with construction at the stages of design, implementation and inspection, which is hailed by the government and people of the Laos.”

China doesn't give a shit about Laos people !

 

[Johnnyngai]

2 hours ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

We'll be at war with them soon enough and their numbers won't mean anything in the face of new technology weapons. 

During the lean years of the 1960s,

Chairman Mao allowed millions to starve just so there would be enough money to build the first atom bomb. 

Do not under estimate the will of those who were born with sawdust in their mouth.  

[Johnnyngai]

45 minutes ago, hotchilli said:

China doesn't give a shit about Laos people !

 

Does anyone ever gave a shit about the Laos people.

The Laos country side is still litter with unexploded ordnance.    

[Isaan sailor]

China will take over any SE Asian country that lets them.  Today, only Vietnam oppose them.

[Selatan]

4 hours ago, seajae said:

china does whatever it wants and screw anyone else, they lie blatantly about it as well. Trouble is no one has the balls to actually face off with them, all too pathetic to stand up and say no so they just whinge about it instead. China needs to be put in its place but I highly doubt we will see anyone try to do it, they are claiming everything they can as theirs and ignoring the rest of the worlds countries and rights

What country has broken the most treaties that it has signed

[zydeco]

1 hour ago, Johnnyngai said:

During the lean years of the 1960s,

Chairman Mao allowed millions to starve just so there would be enough money to build the first atom bomb. 

Do not under estimate the will of those who were born with sawdust in their mouth.  

China has their own soft generation now. If the government, for example, let's the China housing bubble deflate even a little, mobs are out in the street ready to loot. This bunch can be had, if only the world will ban together to choke them off. 

[Selatan]

2 hours ago, hotchilli said:

China doesn't give a shit about Laos people !

But America gave lots of shit to the Laos people! 

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/laotians-killed-50-years-bombing-campaign-181121000620903.html

 

A planeload of bombs every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day, for 9 years. That's a whole lot of shit!

[Selatan]

8 hours ago, leeneeds said:

Steam roll ahead, the Chinese way 

take advantage where ever possible on 

environmental, copy right, plagiarism, trade,

consequences are inconsequential to their mind set.

When I hear the Europeans and the Americans telling tropical countries not to cut down their forests because the forests were the lungs of the earth, I cannot help but laugh at their hypocrisy.

 

Both the US and EUrope have lost most of their virgin forests.

 

[zydeco]

23 minutes ago, Selatan said:

But America gave real shit to the Laos people! 

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/laotians-killed-50-years-bombing-campaign-181121000620903.html

 

A planeload of bombs every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day, for 9 years. That's whole lot of shit!

And yet after the war, Laos still existed as a country. After the Chinese are through with them, Laos will be just another Chinese province. At no time during the war did 400,000 Americans move into China to begin displacing the Lao people. The Chinese are doing that right now.

[leeneeds]

19 minutes ago, Selatan said:

When I hear the Europeans and the Americans telling tropical countries not to cut down their forests because the forests were the lungs of the earth, I cannot help but laugh at their hypocrisy.

 

Both the US and EUrope have lost most of their virgin forests.

 

( 1620  date -- 1926 date ) your dates! 

 

Each year Americans plant at least 1.6 billion trees  or about 6 trees for each one we use.  Of this total, forest products companies plant about half, or threequarters of a billion trees, annually.  These figures actually understate the nation's true reforestation rate as they don't include millions of hardwood trees that are not planted because they regrow naturally.  

An average of almost 5,000,000 new trees are planted each day in the U.S.

Partly as a result of a strong reforestation record, the growth of U.S. forests exceeds the amount harvested by 33%  confirming that trees are a renewable resource and that we are renewing them.

There is an important but often overlooked distinction between deforestation and timber harvesting.  Developing countries sometimes clear land of trees (deforest) for agriculture, grazing and other uses.  But in the U.S., woodlands are typically managed and reforested after harvest so as to grow future forests.  We call this sustainable forestry.   In fact, the U.S. today has virtually the same number of forested acres it had in 1920  despite the enormous increase in population and per capita wood use since then.  We are not deforesting the United States.  We are voluntarily replacing what we use, and without government regulation.

Forest products companies own only 14% of all the timberland in the U.S., compared with private individuals who own 59%, and public agencies which own 27%.  Yet forest products companies each year plant 43% of all the trees planted in the United States on little more than 1 million acres of industry timberland.

Each year, some 1.6 billion seedlings are planted in the U.S.--more than 5 new trees a year for each American.

The forest industry plants more than 43% of the 1.6 billion seedlings are planted annually in the U.S.; 40% are planted by nonindustrial private landowners; and 16% by government.

In 1994 nearly 2.5 million acres were planted with trees in the United States on rural lands of all ownerships. This compares with 2.5 million acres planted in 1992 and 2.4 million acres planted in 1993.

Of the 2.5 million acres planted to trees in 1994, National Forests accounted for 10% of the total acreage; 43% of the total was planted on forestry industry lands; 42% of nonindustrial private lands; and all other ownerships contributed 5% of the total acreage planted.

In 1994, 1.5 billion nursery tree seedlings were produced in the U.S.  The forest industry nurseries produced 49% of these tree seedlings; State and local governments 29%; other industry 15%; and Federal agencies 7%.

Under the 1956 to 1960 Soil Conservation Reserve Program (Soil Bank), 2.2 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland nation-wide.

Under the 1986 to 1992 Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), 2.5 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland nation-wide.

In 1995 in the U.S., trees were planted on 2,421,861 acres, timber stand improvement was completed on 3,162,575 acres, and nursery production totaled 1,651,123,000 trees.

In 1995 in the U.S., of the 2.4 million acres of trees planted, 11.7% was on federal land, 3.7% was on non-federal public land, 42.8% was on forest industry lands, 2.3% was on other industry lands, and 39.5% was on non-industrial private lands.

South

Each year the South's landowners (industrial and non-industrial) plant approximately 1.2 billion new trees, an average of 3,288,000 trees per day.

Under the 1956 to 1960 Soil Conservation Reserve Program (Soil Bank) 1.9 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in the U.S. South.

Under the 1986 to 1992 Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) 1.3 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in the U.S. Southeast.

In 1995 in the U.S. South, trees were planted on 1,689,981 acres, or 69.8% of all tree planting in the U.S.

Georgia

Georgia set a world record for tree planting in 1988 . . . 603,000 regenerated acres.

Georgia ranked number one in acres of trees planted in the U.S. in 1993 with 284,482 acres planted to trees.

In 1994 Georgia led the nation in tree planting, with nearly 330,000 acres, 13% of the nation's total.

In 1995, Georgia planted 287,247 acres of trees, the most of any state in the U.S.; 54% non-industrial private; 45% forest industry.

Since 1981, Georgians have replanted nearly 5 million acres in trees to ensure that future forests will continue to support our economy and environment in this sustainable use.

Since 1981, over 650,000 acres of forests in Georgia have been naturally regenerated.

Reforestation, using improved loblolly and slash pine nursery stock, can improve per acre timber yields by 10 percent or more.

Georgia has replanted more than 3 billion trees over the past decade.

Under the 1956 to 1960 Soil Conservation Reserve Program (Soil Bank) 693,499 acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in Georgia.

Under the 1986 to 1992 Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) 645,931 acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in Georgia.

According to a 1988 USDA report, after the CRP enrollment, there are still 1.1 million marginal cropland and pasture acres in Georgia that if planted to forest crops would earn higher producer incomes than the current crops and pasture uses.

 

knowledge of environment impact by those who lived in those days was zilch, 

that is not the case with the Mekong!

[Traubert]

1 hour ago, zydeco said:

China has their own soft generation now. If the government, for example, let's the China housing bubble deflate even a little, mobs are out in the street ready to loot. This bunch can be had, if only the world will ban together to choke them off. 

The problem with that theory is that there isn't a Chinese housing bubble. Maximum mortgage is 75%, second home 50% cash deposit and third home cash purchase only. Approximately 40% of Chinese residential property is bought for cash. Plus the supply of housing is controlled to prevent bubbles. Western economic theory can't be applied in China.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2017/05/07/what-bubble-how-china-stays-in-control-of-its-wild-housing-market/#231a683c16d5

 

 

[Traubert]

1 hour ago, zydeco said:

And yet after the war, Laos still existed as a country. After the Chinese are through with them, Laos will be just another Chinese province. At no time during the war did 400,000 Americans move into China to begin displacing the Lao people. The Chinese are doing that right now.

There has been a Laotian/Chinese community since the borders were drawn. It represents approximately 2% of the population. China has no plans to increase that number except on fluid trade flow border movements, unless you can show us different?

 

400k would still only represent 7% of the population anyway, in the unlikely even that it happened.

 

I'm sure the Laotians would rather have a Chinese neighbour than a garden full of unexploded American ordnance.

[Selatan]

12 hours ago, zydeco said:

And yet after the war, Laos still existed as a country. After the Chinese are through with them, Laos will be just another Chinese province. At no time during the war did 400,000 Americans move into China to begin displacing the Lao people. The Chinese are doing that right now.

If the Laos government allows many Chinese to work or do business there, I believe they are entitled to their reasons for doing so. After all, Laos is considered to be lowly populated and lacking in skilled manpower. If Laos thinks that they require outside talent and capital to come in, why must the Chinese be barred from entering? You farangs want that role for yourselves or you prefer Laos to be in permanent poverty trap?

[Selatan]

11 hours ago, leeneeds said:

( 1620  date -- 1926 date ) your dates! 

 

Each year Americans plant at least 1.6 billion trees  or about 6 trees for each one we use.  Of this total, forest products companies plant about half, or threequarters of a billion trees, annually.  These figures actually understate the nation's true reforestation rate as they don't include millions of hardwood trees that are not planted because they regrow naturally.  

An average of almost 5,000,000 new trees are planted each day in the U.S.

Partly as a result of a strong reforestation record, the growth of U.S. forests exceeds the amount harvested by 33%  confirming that trees are a renewable resource and that we are renewing them.

There is an important but often overlooked distinction between deforestation and timber harvesting.  Developing countries sometimes clear land of trees (deforest) for agriculture, grazing and other uses.  But in the U.S., woodlands are typically managed and reforested after harvest so as to grow future forests.  We call this sustainable forestry.   In fact, the U.S. today has virtually the same number of forested acres it had in 1920  despite the enormous increase in population and per capita wood use since then.  We are not deforesting the United States.  We are voluntarily replacing what we use, and without government regulation.

Forest products companies own only 14% of all the timberland in the U.S., compared with private individuals who own 59%, and public agencies which own 27%.  Yet forest products companies each year plant 43% of all the trees planted in the United States on little more than 1 million acres of industry timberland.

Each year, some 1.6 billion seedlings are planted in the U.S.--more than 5 new trees a year for each American.

The forest industry plants more than 43% of the 1.6 billion seedlings are planted annually in the U.S.; 40% are planted by nonindustrial private landowners; and 16% by government.

In 1994 nearly 2.5 million acres were planted with trees in the United States on rural lands of all ownerships. This compares with 2.5 million acres planted in 1992 and 2.4 million acres planted in 1993.

Of the 2.5 million acres planted to trees in 1994, National Forests accounted for 10% of the total acreage; 43% of the total was planted on forestry industry lands; 42% of nonindustrial private lands; and all other ownerships contributed 5% of the total acreage planted.

In 1994, 1.5 billion nursery tree seedlings were produced in the U.S.  The forest industry nurseries produced 49% of these tree seedlings; State and local governments 29%; other industry 15%; and Federal agencies 7%.

Under the 1956 to 1960 Soil Conservation Reserve Program (Soil Bank), 2.2 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland nation-wide.

Under the 1986 to 1992 Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), 2.5 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland nation-wide.

In 1995 in the U.S., trees were planted on 2,421,861 acres, timber stand improvement was completed on 3,162,575 acres, and nursery production totaled 1,651,123,000 trees.

In 1995 in the U.S., of the 2.4 million acres of trees planted, 11.7% was on federal land, 3.7% was on non-federal public land, 42.8% was on forest industry lands, 2.3% was on other industry lands, and 39.5% was on non-industrial private lands.

South

Each year the South's landowners (industrial and non-industrial) plant approximately 1.2 billion new trees, an average of 3,288,000 trees per day.

Under the 1956 to 1960 Soil Conservation Reserve Program (Soil Bank) 1.9 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in the U.S. South.

Under the 1986 to 1992 Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) 1.3 million acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in the U.S. Southeast.

In 1995 in the U.S. South, trees were planted on 1,689,981 acres, or 69.8% of all tree planting in the U.S.

Georgia

Georgia set a world record for tree planting in 1988 . . . 603,000 regenerated acres.

Georgia ranked number one in acres of trees planted in the U.S. in 1993 with 284,482 acres planted to trees.

In 1994 Georgia led the nation in tree planting, with nearly 330,000 acres, 13% of the nation's total.

In 1995, Georgia planted 287,247 acres of trees, the most of any state in the U.S.; 54% non-industrial private; 45% forest industry.

Since 1981, Georgians have replanted nearly 5 million acres in trees to ensure that future forests will continue to support our economy and environment in this sustainable use.

Since 1981, over 650,000 acres of forests in Georgia have been naturally regenerated.

Reforestation, using improved loblolly and slash pine nursery stock, can improve per acre timber yields by 10 percent or more.

Georgia has replanted more than 3 billion trees over the past decade.

Under the 1956 to 1960 Soil Conservation Reserve Program (Soil Bank) 693,499 acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in Georgia.

Under the 1986 to 1992 Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) 645,931 acres of new pine plantations (afforestation) were planted on former cropland in Georgia.

According to a 1988 USDA report, after the CRP enrollment, there are still 1.1 million marginal cropland and pasture acres in Georgia that if planted to forest crops would earn higher producer incomes than the current crops and pasture uses.

 

knowledge of environment impact by those who lived in those days was zilch, 

that is not the case with the Mekong!

Well, in the case of Indonesia and Malaysia, both still have very high percentages of forest cover, at 56% and 59% respectively, even though the West have been campaigning against the deforestation to plant oil palms. Don't forget oil palms are trees too. 

 

I feel that the oil palm is demonised because the West have to compete against it. Oil palms only need to be replanted after 25 years and palm oil is cheaper to produce than soybean, rapeseed and sunflower oils.

 

In the past, the rubber tree was the preferred plantation crop in Malaysia and Malaysia used to be the top producer of natural rubber but that position has now been taken by Thailand. Most rubber plantations have turned into oil palm plantations but some have been maintained as a renewable source of rubberwood, which is considered a tropical hardwood.

 

Even the often criticised Brazil have 56% forest cover. Whereas the US has 33% forest cover. Laos has a fantastic forest cover of 71%, so some deforestation may not be so bad, if the country wants to become more prosperous. Thailand's figure is quite bad at only 29% for a partly tropical and subtropical country.

[Oliver Holzerfilled]

4 hours ago, Selatan said:

Well, in the case of Indonesia and Malaysia, both still have very high percentages of forest cover, at 56% and 59% respectively, even though the West have been campaigning against the deforestation to plant oil palms. Don't forget oil palms are trees too. 

 

I feel that the oil palm is demonised because the West have to compete against it. Oil palms only need to be replanted after 25 years and palm oil is cheaper to produce than soybean, rapeseed and sunflower oils.

 

In the past, the rubber tree was the preferred plantation crop in Malaysia and Malaysia used to be the top producer of natural rubber but that position has now been taken by Thailand. Most rubber plantations have turned into oil palm plantations but some have been maintained as a renewable source of rubberwood, which is considered a tropical hardwood.

 

Even the often criticised Brazil have 56% forest cover. Whereas the US has 33% forest cover. Laos has a fantastic forest cover of 71%, so some deforestation may not be so bad, if the country wants to become more prosperous. Thailand's figure is quite bad at only 29% for a partly tropical and subtropical country.

What percentage are the desert, tundra and grasslands of Laos as compared to the USA?

[VocalNeal]

18 hours ago, Selatan said:

When I hear the Europeans and the Americans telling tropical countries not to cut down their forests because the forests were the lungs of the earth, I cannot help but laugh at their hypocrisy.

 

Both the US and EUrope have lost most of their virgin forests.

 

Who did the survey in 1620? Don't tell me? It was done by using satellite images. 

 

What a complete load of tosh.

 

I doubt there was any kind of unified survey in 1926 either

 

Yes England was essential denuded for ships and agriculture but it is a small place.

[Johnnyngai]

21 hours ago, zydeco said:

China has their own soft generation now. If the government, for example, let's the China housing bubble deflate even a little, mobs are out in the street ready to loot. This bunch can be had, if only the world will ban together to choke them off. 

If you were to visit the wet market in smaller cities, one million or less, 

you will still see the kind of trash they call fish or meat.  

By their own statistic, 45% of their population still live in the country side,

available to do mule work. 

Housing bubble only applies to well to do countries.   

Mainland Chinese are too afraid of big mortgage debts

because there is no such thing as a social safety net in China.. 

[Johnnyngai]

20 hours ago, zydeco said:

And yet after the war, Laos still existed as a country. After the Chinese are through with them, Laos will be just another Chinese province. At no time during the war did 400,000 Americans move into China to begin displacing the Lao people. The Chinese are doing that right now.

China is too over populated, an average Chinese citizen has no choice but to go where the food is. 

Chinese had been immigrating to various South East Asian countries for the last 700 years.  

Some people even joke about Chinese are like cockroaches, they immigrate to everywhere.  

Chinese had been displacing the locals for the last 700 years ? ? 

 

Would first world Americans want to move to a fourth world place such as Laos ? ? 

Third world Chinese and Fourth world Laos, they were made for each other.