Thai Govt Called For Moving 2 Million People From Mountain Zones

[connda]

The Thai gov can't even get enough blankets to the people who live in the mountains. No way they are going to relocate 2 million of them. And even if they did, those same people would just destroy the new area they are in.

Dream on.

Why do they need blankets? What did they do before there was a magnanimous government to hand out blankets. Those folks were doing just fine by being left alone.

[zappalot]

Now we have to be an expert to say we need nature?

Thais dont need nature. Actually they not only dont like it they also do everything to disturb/destroy places where they try to protect nature and/or animals. (e.g. the elephantnaturepark.org...)

[BuffaloRescue]

Surely the deforestation has got more to do with business in the city than people living traditional lives in the mountains, as the hill tribes have been doing for hundreds of years before there was even somewhere called "Thailand"

[Chupup]

Wheras i like the thought that somone is talking about change and how to do it, thats all it is, just talk, that's all it always is

nothing will be done, Thailand will bumble along as usual thinking just one day to the next, and if some one can make a few quick bhat logging they will, and F k the inviroment i'm alright jack

[anterian]

Primitive peoples have always destroyed the environment, England was once covered in ancient forests, now just a few tiny remnants remain. The Sahara desert was one the Roman granary. Legislation always fails in the face of human need and human greed. It is a battle that will never be won until we change the mindset of the people.

Actually, primitive people usually live in relative harmony with the land. The native North American people had close spiritual ties with the land. The traditional Karen agricultural practices maintained healthy forests. It is "civilization" that tends to harm the land. And one can make a strong argument that it is modern capitalism that is the primary cause of the worst environmental damage to the planet whether it be forests or the oceans. At its heart, capitalism is an extractive economic model that will extract until nothing remains. Whether it be major oil spills in Baku or the Gulf of Mexico, deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia, the Japanese fishing fleet's drift netting, or global warming, the one unifying root cause of the inevitable environmental collapse of the planet is that capitalism is the economic model of the ruling elite just about everywhere.

OOO please how many american indian reservations have you been on. I live in New Mexico home of more native indian tribes than any other state and they are the last people I would ask for enviromental help from. Just as I would not ask the hill tribes of Thailand for advice from. Drive on the 1263 highway and you will see the affects of clear cutting and slash and burn. Several months ago I asked what was to be done with the hilltribe people and there way of life when the question of reforestion came up, I guess this is the answer.

It is a fallacy to claim that primitive people lived in harmony with nature, it is simply that their numbers were so small that nature could keep pace with the damage they caused. The mega fauna of America and Australia were wiped out thousands of years ago by primitive people. The great forests of Europe were destroyed by charcoal burners, ship builders and the spread of agriculture, those forest remnants that remained did so because the were preserved by kings as Royal hunting grounds. Probably the classic examples of the human inability to manage the environment is the collapse of the Mayan empire and the Easter Island culture.

It seems many people still believe in the fallacy of Rousseau's "noble savage".

[yoon01]

I live in a mountainous area. I have been here for 10 years. The tree line is slowly moving up the mountain due to encroachment. This year there was a lot of wind when they lit the while mountainside. A lot of trees have been damaged. Where I live is a mayor watershed area. A few years ago PTT invested millions of baht for new trees. The forester who initiated the project took good care. For the first three years he had people watching the area during the burning season. Then he moved and the project was taken over by a new forester. I was told, he didn't want to spend any money on this project. The year after fires went through the young trees. Many died, few remained. This year they finished the job and most of the trees are gone. And this is a major watershed area. The people who burn these mountains also use the water for their garlic and potatoes.

Why do they burn? For personal gain. Some say it keeps the forest from being burned by lightning before the rainy season starts but I've heard mushroom picking, hunting and livestock as the main motive. So when did all go well? A man from this village was sitting on the road every day. Watching the forrest. He was taking care nobody would go in the forrest to burn it. And nobody did. A local was involved. Also, the main culprits were paid off. The headman knows who is burning these woods. The main reason things went wrong is that money flowed into peoples pocket, the new forester, instead of where it should go: maintaining the forests.

Moving 2 million people? Where? I have seen this village grow from bamboo huts to nice houses. People worked hard. Do they want to move it all? Yeah, we live in teak houses. We live in the forest and cutting a tree for a house doesn't damage the forest. You have to get the people who live in these forests involved. They know the forest and they could maintain them. Pay them to keep it lush. Make it their living.

[canopy]

In my observations living in the mountains, sad to say hill tribes are not living in harmony with the land, nor are the Thai's. In my years here, I have never encountered a native who did a nature walk or appreciates the natural beauty and sounds of the forests. They'd rather turn on their own music at max volume, surely everyone has noticed that one somewhere or another. Protected forests are simply places to dump garbage as advised to me by the authorities as we have no garbage service, cut down down trees and plants, especially all orchids and things of beauty, slash down forest, poison it, and burn it to make illegal farms, and hunt down everything from the smallest ant egg to the biggest most endangered animals. No one sees anything wrong with this picture. It's just the thing you do.

Funny story, a neighbor went out of his way to go on my land and cut down a stringer of bananas and put them on my porch. He said they were ripe and the birds were eating them. Bless his heart, I smiled and said thank you. Little did he know I like attracting birds to the area and giving some bananas back to the soil on occasion.

The government should do a 30 year case study of turning one village into a caretaker of the forest. Realistically, I don't think such a modest endeavor can be successful. In time, it will succumb to the reality of the area.

[geriatrickid]

Primitive peoples have always destroyed the environment, England was once covered in ancient forests, now just a few tiny remnants remain. The Sahara desert was one the Roman granary. Legislation always fails in the face of human need and human greed. It is a battle that will never be won until we change the mindset of the people.

Actually, primitive people usually live in relative harmony with the land. The native North American people had close spiritual ties with the land. The traditional Karen agricultural practices maintained healthy forests. It is "civilization" that tends to harm the land. And one can make a strong argument that it is modern capitalism that is the primary cause of the worst environmental damage to the planet whether it be forests or the oceans. At its heart, capitalism is an extractive economic model that will extract until nothing remains. Whether it be major oil spills in Baku or the Gulf of Mexico, deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia, the Japanese fishing fleet's drift netting, or global warming, the one unifying root cause of the inevitable environmental collapse of the planet is that capitalism is the economic model of the ruling elite just about everywhere.

What a crock of sh*t. North American native people were some of the worst defilers of the land engaging in slash and burn agriculture and wiping out a wildlife population before moving on long before the europeans showed up. Because local human populations were small enough, the environment was able to recover.

In addition to trotting out the myth of the noble savage we now get a lesson in capitalism that appears to have been borrowed from the Albanian Friends of Lenin Institute. Yes, capitalism involves an element of withdrawal, but it also requires inputs, as in investment. You have confused unethical business practices with the fundamentals of capitalism.

Please tell me how traditional karen agricultural practices maintained healthy forests? Since when does complete deforestation followed by slash and burn translate into a healthy forest? You do realize that the karen practice wiped out whole swathes of ecosystems. Oh yes, they would lay some areas fallow, but those fallow areas were usually areas they did not lend themselves to the karen strategy of raping the land. Are you aware that animals venturing into the cleared land to seek some food to survive after having their habitat wiped out would be killed regardless of age or sex of the animal? The pressure on forest dwelling animals due to the karen ritual practices was devastating. The karen who have since gone on to poaching endangered species, honed their harmony with the land skills by burning those very same animals out during litter and nesting.

season.

It is only because of the intervention of modern agricultural practices that the forests are being saved. There are people that deviate from acceptable practices, but that should not be confused with modern responsible agricultural practice.

Good job on the revisionism.

[geriatrickid]

Primitive peoples have always destroyed the environment, England was once covered in ancient forests, now just a few tiny remnants remain. The Sahara desert was one the Roman granary. Legislation always fails in the face of human need and human greed. It is a battle that will never be won until we change the mindset of the people.

Actually, primitive people usually live in relative harmony with the land. The native North American people had close spiritual ties with the land. The traditional Karen agricultural practices maintained healthy forests. It is "civilization" that tends to harm the land. And one can make a strong argument that it is modern capitalism that is the primary cause of the worst environmental damage to the planet whether it be forests or the oceans. At its heart, capitalism is an extractive economic model that will extract until nothing remains. Whether it be major oil spills in Baku or the Gulf of Mexico, deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia, the Japanese fishing fleet's drift netting, or global warming, the one unifying root cause of the inevitable environmental collapse of the planet is that capitalism is the economic model of the ruling elite just about everywhere.

OOO please how many american indian reservations have you been on. I live in New Mexico home of more native indian tribes than any other state and they are the last people I would ask for enviromental help from. Just as I would not ask the hill tribes of Thailand for advice from. Drive on the 1263 highway and you will see the affects of clear cutting and slash and burn. Several months ago I asked what was to be done with the hilltribe people and there way of life when the question of reforestion came up, I guess this is the answer.

It is a fallacy to claim that primitive people lived in harmony with nature, it is simply that their numbers were so small that nature could keep pace with the damage they caused. The mega fauna of America and Australia were wiped out thousands of years ago by primitive people. The great forests of Europe were destroyed by charcoal burners, ship builders and the spread of agriculture, those forest remnants that remained did so because the were preserved by kings as Royal hunting grounds. Probably the classic examples of the human inability to manage the environment is the collapse of the Mayan empire and the Easter Island culture.

It seems many people still believe in the fallacy of Rousseau's "noble savage".

I swear I didn't see this before I responded. Honest, I didn't copy LOL

[anterian]

I believe you:)

[jaideecm]

When I was living at Wat Thaton temple in 1993 the government gave trees to the hill tribe people there and showed them how to plant them then take care of them and paid them to do so. They planted tens of thousands, watered them during the dry season and kept the weeds away. Today the area around the temple and the villages behind the temple are a wash in large native beautiful trees. They even planted a few wild mango and other wild fruit trees so the villagers could pick fruit to eat when in season.

[ableguy]

Fact : Paying people to plant trees is far less costly than trying to move and rehouse 2 million people.

Fact, 10,billion minus stolen 5 billion by officials equals 5 billion and probably half of that will be skimmed off too. Result nothing meaningfull will get done.

[ableguy]

The Thai gov can't even get enough blankets to the people who live in the mountains. No way they are going to relocate 2 million of them. And even if they did, those same people would just destroy the new area they are in.

Dream on.

Why do they need blankets? What did they do before there was a magnanimous government to hand out blankets. Those folks were doing just fine by being left alone.

The blankets were just a scam for stealing money, many being sold on by coorupt officials.

[lungmi]

The hill people have been doing fine for hundreds of years,

but the industrial strip logging operations by influencials is the real deforestation hazard.

They are just scapegoating the poor tribes people as an excuse,

plus it makes more factory workers and leaves the land to be

strip deforested in more places without complaints,

but HUGE kick backs to look the other way...

in a word this all STINKS.

More than 20 years I work with the hillribe people.

What I see now is pure fascism and racism. The gouvernenment has his Jews.

The districts along the Burmese border never vote for Thaksin.

Only 7% of the lost of rainforest can be attributed directly to the hilltribes (google National Geographic), the rest is in the responsibility of the international Woodmafia (Germany, UK, Japan, Italy, France, Switzerland, Thai Forest Departement)

For Slash-and-Burn the hilltribes have a higher input, may be up to 20%.

Yes, the Hilltribes produced opium, their only traditional medecin over centuries. Outside of a health system it was their human right. But in the war on drugs under Thaksin they were the first victims, his croonies of Police and Forest Rangers

wanted to take over for their own business.

[lannarebirth]

Primitive peoples have always destroyed the environment, England was once covered in ancient forests, now just a few tiny remnants remain. The Sahara desert was one the Roman granary. Legislation always fails in the face of human need and human greed. It is a battle that will never be won until we change the mindset of the people.

Actually, primitive people usually live in relative harmony with the land. The native North American people had close spiritual ties with the land. The traditional Karen agricultural practices maintained healthy forests. It is "civilization" that tends to harm the land. And one can make a strong argument that it is modern capitalism that is the primary cause of the worst environmental damage to the planet whether it be forests or the oceans. At its heart, capitalism is an extractive economic model that will extract until nothing remains. Whether it be major oil spills in Baku or the Gulf of Mexico, deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia, the Japanese fishing fleet's drift netting, or global warming, the one unifying root cause of the inevitable environmental collapse of the planet is that capitalism is the economic model of the ruling elite just about everywhere.

What a crock of sh*t. North American native people were some of the worst defilers of the land engaging in slash and burn agriculture and wiping out a wildlife population before moving on long before the europeans showed up. Because local human populations were small enough, the environment was able to recover.

In addition to trotting out the myth of the noble savage we now get a lesson in capitalism that appears to have been borrowed from the Albanian Friends of Lenin Institute. Yes, capitalism involves an element of withdrawal, but it also requires inputs, as in investment. You have confused unethical business practices with the fundamentals of capitalism.

Please tell me how traditional karen agricultural practices maintained healthy forests? Since when does complete deforestation followed by slash and burn translate into a healthy forest? You do realize that the karen practice wiped out whole swathes of ecosystems. Oh yes, they would lay some areas fallow, but those fallow areas were usually areas they did not lend themselves to the karen strategy of raping the land. Are you aware that animals venturing into the cleared land to seek some food to survive after having their habitat wiped out would be killed regardless of age or sex of the animal? The pressure on forest dwelling animals due to the karen ritual practices was devastating. The karen who have since gone on to poaching endangered species, honed their harmony with the land skills by burning those very same animals out during litter and nesting.

season.

It is only because of the intervention of modern agricultural practices that the forests are being saved. There are people that deviate from acceptable practices, but that should not be confused with modern responsible agricultural practice.

Good job on the revisionism.

You know it is mainly the Army and Forest Department and the "Dark Forces" they sold to that deforested the North don't you?

[lannarebirth]

Fact : Paying people to plant trees is far less costly than trying to move and rehouse 2 million people.

Fact, 10,billion minus stolen 5 billion by officials equals 5 billion and probably half of that will be skimmed off too. Result nothing meaningfull will get done.

Well there's a global initiative underway for rich countries to pay poor countries to reforest huge areas. You wouldn't want to have any idigenous peoples getting in on that action would you. Get'em outta there and let some business/political cartel run the show. Yeah, that's the ticket.

[lungmi]

Fact : Paying people to plant trees is far less costly than trying to move and rehouse 2 million people.

Fact, 10,billion minus stolen 5 billion by officials equals 5 billion and probably half of that will be skimmed off too. Result nothing meaningfull will get done.

Well there's a global initiative underway for rich countries to pay poor countries to reforest huge areas. You wouldn't want to have any idigenous peoples getting in on that action would you. Get'em outta there and let some business/political cartel run the show. Yeah, that's the ticket.

I saw practising my duty as traditional doctor in many Hmong huts a big bleached photo of her Holy Mother - The Mother of the King. Her programme how to assimilate even the strongest antagonist-assimiliation tribe mankind knows was a worldwide honoured programme. Aborted by .....instructed posters said it already.

Correction: The Provinces voting for the Dems exclude Chianmai and Chiangrai.

[lungmi]

In the bigger picture this sounds like part of AGENDA 21 [ agenda for the 21st. century - Rio global summit 1991] gradually going forward all over the world to remove humans from the wilderness areas and concentrate them into small highly controlled areas.

The red villages can give a place as reeducation-camp. Maoist solution.

For concentrations camps (Nazi solution) I don't see the place.

For labour camps ("soft" Nazi solution) carbage collection in Pattaya and Phuket (women included).

[canuckamuck]

I live in the mountains too, and nearly all the people I know are Karen. I don't know a single one of them that has a clue about, or a inclination to, do anything to improve the environment. They simple don't even consider it.

That being said however, I can't imagine the human tragedy that would result from removing 2 million people from their homes (Our land is 4th generation family land) and putting them where? In some sort of refugee camp I assume. That is horribly wrong and shows that rights come with riches and connections.

What I think they should do is remove 2 million people from Bangkok so they can dig a big ditch through the middle of it and let rivers do what they do naturally. Who put the dam_n city in the floodplain anyhow, not the hill tribes.

[Johpa]

When I was living at Wat Thaton temple in 1993 the government gave trees to the hill tribe people there and showed them how to plant them then take care of them and paid them to do so. They planted tens of thousands, watered them during the dry season and kept the weeds away. Today the area around the temple and the villages behind the temple are a wash in large native beautiful trees. They even planted a few wild mango and other wild fruit trees so the villagers could pick fruit to eat when in season.

Wat Thaton, AKA Wat Hilton, has a tremendous donation base resulting from a need of a few to forgive their sins from ill-gotten profits. These same people may pay locals to plant trees to surround their favored Wat with its statuary of Buddhas and Chinese deities, but they, nor the pampered chief abbot (caoawat) care a whit about the hill folks. Although the head abbot did allow at one time some crazy farang to charge fellow farangs and entrance fee to the temple grounds.

[lungmi]

When I was living at Wat Thaton temple in 1993 the government gave trees to the hill tribe people there and showed them how to plant them then take care of them and paid them to do so. They planted tens of thousands, watered them during the dry season and kept the weeds away. Today the area around the temple and the villages behind the temple are a wash in large native beautiful trees. They even planted a few wild mango and other wild fruit trees so the villagers could pick fruit to eat when in season.

Wat Thaton, AKA Wat Hilton, has a tremendous donation base resulting from a need of a few to forgive their sins from ill-gotten profits. These same people may pay locals to plant trees to surround their favored Wat with its statuary of Buddhas and Chinese deities, but they, nor the pampered chief abbot (caoawat) care a whit about the hill folks. Although the head abbot did allow at one time some crazy farang to charge fellow farangs and entrance fee to the temple grounds.

The Abbot has a hidden Mercedes 600!!! in his grounds, donation of his mother.

[lungmi]

I live in the mountains too, and nearly all the people I know are Karen. I don't know a single one of them that has a clue about, or a inclination to, do anything to improve the environment. They simple don't even consider it.

That being said however, I can't imagine the human tragedy that would result from removing 2 million people from their homes (Our land is 4th generation family land) and putting them where? In some sort of refugee camp I assume. That is horribly wrong and shows that rights come with riches and connections.

What I think they should do is remove 2 million people from Bangkok so they can dig a big ditch through the middle of it and let rivers do what they do naturally. Who put the dam_n city in the floodplain anyhow, not the hill tribes.

My people are Hmong, Karen, Lisu and poor Thai in a Hilltribe school (teacher for English, traditional medicine and Buddhist ethics). They learn quickly, we have biofarming, a fish farm, handicraft teaching with devoted teachers. No curriculum, surviving with your own mind and hands is our aim. We are supported by a Princess Sirindhon foundation and a German charity group.

Small money, but it works.

A photo of my kindergarten kids, ethnies are mixed, they are all little Buddhas.

Who wants them to send to hell?

Edited March 31, 2012 by lungmi

[Arkady]

The sheer scale of moving all these people will not have been thought out properly, and where will they be re-homed? Perhaps they have plans for a million or so to 'vanish'. After all, a lot of the Hill Tribe people don't even have ID cards as the Government only partly acknowledges their existance, rather like the slums in BKK. Surely education is the answer but we can only dream of such a sensible way forward in 'Miracle Thailand'.

They are probably planning to deport the ones that don't have Thai ID cards to Burma but didn't like to mention that. If Burma refuses to take them they will probably leave the ones who no money at all in refugee (concentration) camps near the border.

[lungmi]

The sheer scale of moving all these people will not have been thought out properly, and where will they be re-homed? Perhaps they have plans for a million or so to 'vanish'. After all, a lot of the Hill Tribe people don't even have ID cards as the Government only partly acknowledges their existance, rather like the slums in BKK. Surely education is the answer but we can only dream of such a sensible way forward in 'Miracle Thailand'.

They are probably planning to deport the ones that don't have Thai ID cards to Burma but didn't like to mention that. If Burma refuses to take them they will probably leave the ones who no money at all in refugee (concentration) camps near the border.

Hmong, Lisu (Lisaw), Lahu (Mosher) can't be "deported" to Burma, because they have never been there.

For Karen it's different, about 60% (approximative) stay in Thailand in the third generation.

They have Thai ID cards, but not all civil rights (up to district).

About 20% are admitted, they are registered under a number (fjkh334221.......), no civil rights.

For the others no special qualification, they are "stateless" (about 60 000-80 000). Under UNO and natural logic standard you can't deport them.

You see, the only solution for the mentioned problem is to send the concerned government agencies officers to plant trees.

[Johpa]

Hmong, Lisu (Lisaw), Lahu (Mosher) can't be "deported" to Burma, because they have never been there.

For Karen it's different, about 60% (approximative) stay in Thailand in the third generation. They have Thai ID cards, but not all civil rights (up to district).

About 20% are admitted, they are registered under a number (fjkh334221.......), no civil rights.

For the others no special qualification, they are "stateless" (about 60 000-80 000). Under UNO and natural logic standard you can't deport them.

The Karen, who are the dominant group along the western border have been in the region for far longer than three generations. Only the most eastern villages closer to Chiang Mai have been around for about as little as maybe four generations. From south of Mae Sot and up to Mae Hong Song, the Karen are for all intents and purposes the indigenous minority. I can remember as recently as 30 years ago in districts like Khun Yuam that you could not find an ethnic Thai outside the paved streets surrouonding the Amphoe offices. Go get a 4-wheel drive vehicle or a dual sport motorcycle and ride the old "elephant trail" from Mae Hong Song to Wat Chan and you will only find Karen villages along the way.

And yes, Thai ID cards are coded far more than most people are aware, and highland minorities, even when Thai citizens, have the code for those in the know. There is a Thai Achaan at CMU, whose name I can't remember, who has done some studies on this subject. I heard her give a talk a few years ago and I believe there were maybe five different primary codes for dividing the populace. I will look at my daughters card to see which number or letter her ID begins with. Maybe I will start a thread in the general section so that we can compare first digits.

As for the IDPs living along the border in camps like Mae La, these people were being exterminated by the Burmese. Things appear to be changing inside Burma, hopefully for the better, but only time will tell. But the logic for not deporting them has been based upon humanitarian concerns and not whatever the heck is natural logic other than the logic of avoiding suffering and death.

[lungmi]

Hmong, Lisu (Lisaw), Lahu (Mosher) can't be "deported" to Burma, because they have never been there.

For Karen it's different, about 60% (approximative) stay in Thailand in the third generation. They have Thai ID cards, but not all civil rights (up to district).

About 20% are admitted, they are registered under a number (fjkh334221.......), no civil rights.

For the others no special qualification, they are "stateless" (about 60 000-80 000). Under UNO and natural logic standard you can't deport them.

The Karen, who are the dominant group along the western border have been in the region for far longer than three generations. Only the most eastern villages closer to Chiang Mai have been around for about as little as maybe four generations. From south of Mae Sot and up to Mae Hong Song, the Karen are for all intents and purposes the indigenous minority. I can remember as recently as 30 years ago in districts like Khun Yuam that you could not find an ethnic Thai outside the paved streets surrouonding the Amphoe offices. Go get a 4-wheel drive vehicle or a dual sport motorcycle and ride the old "elephant trail" from Mae Hong Song to Wat Chan and you will only find Karen villages along the way.

And yes, Thai ID cards are coded far more than most people are aware, and highland minorities, even when Thai citizens, have the code for those in the know. There is a Thai Achaan at CMU, whose name I can't remember, who has done some studies on this subject. I heard her give a talk a few years ago and I believe there were maybe five different primary codes for dividing the populace. I will look at my daughters card to see which number or letter her ID begins with. Maybe I will start a thread in the general section so that we can compare first digits.

As for the IDPs living along the border in camps like Mae La, these people were being exterminated by the Burmese. Things appear to be changing inside Burma, hopefully for the better, but only time will tell. But the logic for not deporting them has been based upon humanitarian concerns and not whatever the heck is natural logic other than the logic of avoiding suffering and death.

Right, most more then 3 generations.In southern Lamphun ( Amphoe Li) the Buddhist Karen made their home of pilgrimage. Wonderful place, high class architecture for the Pagoda (octogene burmese style, a magnifique Stupa) Where do you migrate it?

A painting in Wat Li shows already what some mercernaries of the government try to do with Karen people.

Edited April 3, 2012 by lungmi

[hellodolly]

I have logged near salmon bearing streams with major restrictions imposed

on the results. This was done with no negative effects on the fishery.

I would think it is more important to educate the hill people to

understand the why's and how's that need to be used to protect the environment,

and have field personnel present for control and education

I see major environmental impacts being used all over Thailand in the way roads are constructed and maintained.

People can live and use the environmentas long as they understand and use the procedures needed to conserve it. I think the Hill People have a greater love for the land concerned than the government people

that may want to log, mine or otherwise use the land.

The days are passed when forest can be withdrawn from the active land base. Pretty well all forest sites can be used as long as the proper procedures are used.

Well said. I believe that in the long run there will have to be people moved out of the watersheds but they are going to need a lot of people to maintain the forest after it is replanted. Who better than some of the hill tribes who look at a forest and see a Buffet of food with out destroying it.

[Ijustwannateach]

Getting back to the topic again for a moment- my first thought was- put 2 million people, theoretically more than a couple percent of the whole nation's population- where?

[ginjag]

agreed -WHERE ?? just ridiculous to even think about it, typical Thai Government, uncaring,about the families involved ,as though they were lepers.

If they can talk stupid, I will give you stupidity on the same level==give them all a bottle of Laos whisky and a new motorbike, thats a quicker way to cull.

[DeepInTheForest]

Some background, when it is available, is always good when grappling with a difficult topic, is it not?

Readers can always use scholar.google.com to look for academic papers (usually the free ones are dated, but even older material can give one a sense of the historical background of the debate). You can click on the links to the .pdf files on the right hand side of the page.

Can you find any research that will support or negate parts or all of your argument, or those of others? Academic research is of course subject to its own shortcomings, but it never hurts to see what people are publishing. Sometimes it's not necessary to plow through the entire paper, though some of them make fascinating reading. There is an abstract at the start, and conclusions at the end. You can learn a lot this way. Things are often complicated-- the devil is often in the details. Our easy generalizations often fail to stand up under scrutiny. Coming to grips with our world and its problems is a struggle... but what is the alternative? .

http://scholar.googl...=en&as_sdt=1,14

http://mtnforum.net/...les/pub/860.pdf

http://anthropology....adigm.Leisz.pdf

http://www.rdgs.dk/d...fs/107/1/04.pdf

http://www.cifor.org...dt-Vogt0101.pdf

http://econweb.umd.e...ations/jc39.pdf

http://lib.icimod.or...8/files/857.pdf

Edited April 7, 2012 by DeepInTheForest