Tv Host Apologises For Filming In Restricted Area

[Lite Beer]

TV host apologises for filming in restricted area

By Kasem Chanathinart,

Prasit Tangprasert

The Nation on Sunday

Actor and TV host Jessadaporn "Tik" Pholdee yesterday issued an open letter of apology after being charged with trespassing and disobeying officials' orders for recording a TV programme in a restricted area in Phu Khiao wildlife reserve in the northeastern province of Chaiyaphum

In the letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Nation, he apologised for causing conflict and doubt but said his action was based on good intention and he had explanation, although it was hard for everybody to understand. However, the most important thing was that he wanted the conflict and argument to end with a good solution.

He said he understood and respected reasons of all sides as everyone had their own duty. He wanted to help preserve the environment, as did the authorities who filed charges against him, so he wanted to say sorry for causing any trouble.

In an interview, Jessadaporn said the area where his team recorded the programme had a nature trail, which was available for learning and doing research. Villagers and tourists could visit the area. And, there was no officer stationed to prohibit his team at the area where the team recorded the show.

The Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation allowed him to air the disputed episode on August 12 but he had to leave out two sections in the episode before airing it, according to INN News.

The department filed the charges on July 20.

Meanwhile, Chaiyaphum Governor Jarin Jakkapak said Phu Khing was the only restricted area in Phu Khiao wildlife reserve. Therefore, everybody would have to understand his or her limits and obey the law.

In related news, people who use Sor Por Kor land meant for poor farmers for other purposes would lose rights over such land, Agriculture Minister Theera Wongsamut said, noting that Wang Nam Khieo in Nakhon Ratchasima was an area where land had been used wrongly.

He said people using land improperly, especially those who build resorts, must turn the land to agricultural areas within 60 days otherwise they would lose ownership of such blocks.

The rights of around 300 Sor Por Kor recipients had been withdrawn after authorities found they had not used blocks for agricultural purposes, he said, adding that initially 25 resorts had been constructed on some Sor Por Kor blocks.

Theera said Agricultural Land Reform officials warned farmers about the issue. It had also asked resort owners to explain their actions.

-- The Nation 2011-07-31

[JurgenG]

To answer whybother in an other thread

In related news, people who use Sor Por Kor land meant for poor farmers for other purposes would lose rights over such land, Agriculture Minister Theera Wongsamut said, noting that Wang Nam Khieo in Nakhon Ratchasima was an area where land had been used wrongly.

He said people using land improperly, especially those who build resorts, must turn the land to agricultural areas within 60 days otherwise they would lose ownership of such blocks.

The rights of around 300 Sor Por Kor recipients had been withdrawn after authorities found they had not used blocks for agricultural purposes, he said, adding that initially 25 resorts had been constructed on some Sor Por Kor blocks.

It's all about farmers using the land for an other use than farming.

It's about the state telling people what they should and should not do.

Some people wonder why poor farmers associate with a billionaire like Thaksin. If we look west, we have an other example of "unholly" alliance between rural folks and big business, it's in the USA, the Republican party with his "red States" (coincidence ? ) . What these people have in commun (together with taxi drivers) ? They are their own boss and they down't like the state to telle them what they should do.

The traditional Thai system is basically a feudal one. For people lacking historical perspective, just lat say it's like communism, where the state and the administration tell people what is good for them. They also have in common that they don't like free elections.

[simon43]

I do not understand why it is illegal to film within the Phu Khing area of the Phu Khiao wildlife reserve.

There is no suggestion in the article that it is a military-sensitive area.

What exactly did the authorities not want the TV crew to film?

I'm intrigued, especially because of the subsequent grovelling apology by the TV presenter

Simon

[OzMick]

" Jessadaporn said the area................ had a nature trail, which was available for learning and doing research."

If you are thinking nature special, David Attenborough or the like, the program was a Thai-style comedy - boom, boom!

[OzMick]

To answer whybother in an other thread

http://www.thaivisa....25#entry4591473

In related news, people who use Sor Por Kor land meant for poor farmers for other purposes would lose rights over such land, Agriculture Minister Theera Wongsamut said, noting that Wang Nam Khieo in Nakhon Ratchasima was an area where land had been used wrongly.

He said people using land improperly, especially those who build resorts, must turn the land to agricultural areas within 60 days otherwise they would lose ownership of such blocks.

The rights of around 300 Sor Por Kor recipients had been withdrawn after authorities found they had not used blocks for agricultural purposes, he said, adding that initially 25 resorts had been constructed on some Sor Por Kor blocks.

It's all about farmers using the land for an other use than farming.

It's about the state telling people what they should and should not do.

Some people wonder why poor farmers associate with a billionaire like Thaksin. If we look west, we have an other example of "unholly" alliance between rural folks and big business, it's in the USA, the Republican party with his "red States" (coincidence ? ) . What these people have in commun (together with taxi drivers) ? They are their own boss and they down't like the state to telle them what they should do.

The traditional Thai system is basically a feudal one. For people lacking historical perspective, just lat say it's like communism, where the state and the administration tell people what is good for them. They also have in common that they don't like free elections.

Your free thinkers didn't mind buying an agriculture-only lease for buffer zone land from the administration. If you bought a similar lease from your neighbour, and instead of farming, decided to build a house, what do you think his reaction would be?

[TheWalkingMan]

I am lost on this. Is this an area with those controversial resorts?

TheWalkingMan

[OzMick]

I do not understand why it is illegal to film within the Phu Khing area of the Phu Khiao wildlife reserve.

There is no suggestion in the article that it is a military-sensitive area.

What exactly did the authorities not want the TV crew to film?

I'm intrigued, especially because of the subsequent grovelling apology by the TV presenter

Simon

I don't think there would be any objection to you filming with a hand-held camera - AIU the area is considered environmentally sensitive, not otherwise.

It seems that they didn't apply for a permit (which probably would have been denied) or pay any fees (more importantly) to carry out what became an illegal commercial venture. The episode( s?) has gone to air which means that a value for it must have been set - under the precept that a person shouldn't be allowed to profit from his crime, all of the revenue (if generous, all of the profits) could be confiscated, plus other penalties.

Hence the grovelling, and the "hard to understand" explanation - he tried to sidestep the rules to make money. TIT, everybody understands, just look at the following piece.

[tomross46]

The law is the law, if you do something against the law, than you broke the law, and should suffer the results. If you do not like the law change it. Just because you are a journalist, does not give you the right to break the law. Just because some people do not like the government, does not give them the right to set fire to Bangkok.

[animatic]

I do not understand why it is illegal to film within the Phu Khing area of the Phu Khiao wildlife reserve.

There is no suggestion in the article that it is a military-sensitive area.

What exactly did the authorities not want the TV crew to film?

I'm intrigued, especially because of the subsequent grovelling apology by the TV presenter

Simon

I don't think there would be any objection to you filming with a hand-held camera - AIU the area is considered environmentally sensitive, not otherwise.

It seems that they didn't apply for a permit (which probably would have been denied) or pay any fees (more importantly) to carry out what became an illegal commercial venture. The episode( s?) has gone to air which means that a value for it must have been set - under the precept that a person shouldn't be allowed to profit from his crime, all of the revenue (if generous, all of the profits) could be confiscated, plus other penalties.

Hence the grovelling, and the "hard to understand" explanation - he tried to sidestep the rules to make money. TIT, everybody understands, just look at the following piece.

If they had paid the local puyai his tea money we would never be seeing this at all. They just went in and shot without a by your leave to the local lord... And he put his local government minions on their case, and likely more tougher behind the secenes because he wanted that groveling apology to set an example. Just bending a law to suit the bosses desires.

Edited July 31, 2011 by animatic

[buddy]

The law is the law, if you do something against the law, than you broke the law, and should suffer the results. If you do not like the law change it. Just because you are a journalist, does not give you the right to break the law. Just because some people do not like the government, does not give them the right to set fire to Bangkok.

......and if the law is wrong, unjust or protects vested interests?

I suppose you cant see anything wrong in goverrnments imposing Identity Cards on its population?

[TAWP]

The law is the law, if you do something against the law, than you broke the law, and should suffer the results. If you do not like the law change it. Just because you are a journalist, does not give you the right to break the law. Just because some people do not like the government, does not give them the right to set fire to Bangkok.

......and if the law is wrong, unjust or protects vested interests?

I suppose you cant see anything wrong in goverrnments imposing Identity Cards on its population?

They started burning Bangkok because of the ID card plan?

[LJW]

They started burning Bangkok because they could

[cloudhopper]

The law is the law, if you do something against the law, than you broke the law, and should suffer the results.

Absolutely.

Oh BTW did you know that it is against current Thai air law for anyone to even carry any type of photography apparatus aboard a Thai registered aircraft?

[londonthai]

the restricted area in Phu Khiao reserve might be there to protect unique species, animals or plants, from collectors and poachers. Authorities, scientists, local population would know about it, but there is not need to air it on the national television. The reason behind the ban on filming doesn't even to be explain in detail

[OzMick]

the restricted area in Phu Khiao reserve might be there to protect unique species, animals or plants, from collectors and poachers. Authorities, scientists, local population would know about it, but there is not need to air it on the national television. The reason behind the ban on filming doesn't even to be explain in detail

As per post #4, it was NOT a nature program - it was a comedy, G/f familiar with it tells me. A full crew with generators, lights, cameras, probably a little land clearing, no permits or permission. Can't think of a civilized country where you would get away with it.

[rucus7]

Some people wonder why poor farmers associate with a billionaire like Thaksin. If we look west, we have an other example of "unholly" alliance between rural folks and big business, it's in the USA, the Republican party with his "red States" (coincidence ? ) . What these people have in commun (together with taxi drivers) ? They are their own boss and they down't like the state to telle them what they should do.

Sorry Your analogy is lost on me. Please expand on who the American farmer is in league with in what big business?? Sounds more like you are comparing apples and oranges, both are fruit and have a semi round shape. Don't disrespect Thai people by associating them with American Republicans.

[NowImEasy]

From what I can gather from the news article, and this is only my own thoughts, is that the filming would show the "resorts", or better defined as luxury vacation houses on the park land. I gather from the story that poor farmers were granted 25 rai of agricultural land inside the park borders to grow crops. In a recent thread, it was reported about luxury houses illegally built on Government land. They were built by connected govt officials. I don't know if it is the same parkland, but both were in Nahkon Ratchisima, (maybe the mountainous area where the highway from Bkk skirts the lake.) <BR>So if this is the case, the TV crew could have been on a mission to document the illegal encroachment. And then it stands to reason that the illegal occupants of the "resorts" would call the police to stop the expose' from being filmed.<BR>Being sober as I write this, it sounds right. I welcome my fellow tv followers to blast holes in my theory.

[TAWP]

It would be a good theory but it isn't in line with the facts of what show that was actually filmed there, as reported above.

[londonthai]

"Phu Khing was the only restricted area in Phu Khiao wildlife reserve. ... In related news, people who use Sor Por Kor land meant for poor farmers for other purposes would lose rights over such land, Agriculture Minister Theera Wongsamut said, noting that Wang Nam Khieo in Nakhon Ratchasima ..."

just sloppy the nation journalism - 2 unrelated stories sticked together.

rather a small chance, that another illegal houses were shown in this comedy

Edited July 31, 2011 by londonthai

[Thai at Heart]

Watched something on Channel 3 about this story yesterday. It showed some very spectacular scenery, some deer and the presenter walking through pretty dense jungle like Bear Grylls. I wouldn't be surprised if TAT ask to use some of the footage for advertising.

He shouldn't have done it, but on the basis that he didn't discover any hidden nuclear silos, this seems like the local pooyais extracting their pound of flesh for not being accorded the the right level of respect. If it is off limits for conservation purposes, then say so, leading it into a discussion of stating it to be a "restricted area" is probably misleading due to being lost in translation.

He shouldn't have done it, but for it to becomes a "national" story is all a bit overblown.