Haze Spreading In Chiang Mai

[...Ken]

"But, it doesn't allow for much organic material to exist, so this is one reason for the lack of good top soil necessary for watershed in The North."

The existing nutrient in the Northen soil is certainly sufficient to support a vibrant forest ecology.

It is the diminishing number of tree roots per rai that is compromising the ability of the watershed to retain water, not the lack of or quality of the soil.

What is usually regarded as "top soil" is seldomly found in any forest. Nutrient and the appropriate ph

is what is required for sustainable tree growth....besides, the tree roots are usually far below the top soil. It is amazing what grows out of this barren looking red clay when the rains begin.

...Ken (aka the teakwalla)

[mrmillersr]

Just outta curiousity what are the radon readings in Chiang Mai. seems like an incredible amount of cancer rates for air pollution to be the sole or even main culprit.

I don't know what the radon readings might be but it shouldn't be too difficult to make the case that the air pollution is the primary source of the problem.

Chiang Mai has over 2000 factories with over 1000 located within the city area. Many of these factories are polluting both the air and water supplies.

You next add in all the vehicle exhaust and the constant burning of toxic materials especially plastics.

Another part of the air pollution comes from cremations. I don't know the current numbers that take place daily, weekly, etc. so don't ask me. When a body is cremated it produces particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, metals (mostly mercury from dental fillings), dioxins and furans into the air.

All of this gets trapped in a basin where the pollutants are continuously increased in number and recirculated. Fifteen, twenty years of this and viola! You now have a major health crisis on your hands.

Ask yourself this. Would you stay somewhere if you knew an impending disaster was on its way?Most I'm sure would answer no. So, then why would anyone stay put when they know a health disaster has already hit and it's not going away anytime too soon?

I'll end by saying some of you may not have the wherewithal or common sense to do it, but my suggestion to move out of this area as soon as possible, is the best advice you will likely get.

[mobile69]

However, I did read that in the 1890's you could see Doi Chieng Dao from Chiengmai.

...Ken

You can see Doi Chang Dao in the cool season & wet season from my garden, south of Chiang Mai. Today I can't see Suthep.

A couple of years ago, I flew into CM at this time of year. All the way from BKK, all you could look down on was a brown cloud, with only the summit of Inthanon visible. As we descended into CM, all you colud see out of the window was brown. From the airport, Suthep wasnot visible.

I did a search on google a few days ago for lung cancer Chiang Mai - pulled up a study of radon levels in Saraphee.....

[Wallalai]

I hope that you are not one of those people who suggest that if we we were born in America (or any country outside of Thailand?), then we have less of a voice concerrning pollution here.

That would be trolling

It's not my intention, just to point that many expats here are familiar with:

Do what I say, but not what I make

[Ajarn]

I hope that you are not one of those people who suggest that if we we were born in America (or any country outside of Thailand?), then we have less of a voice concerrning pollution here.

That would be trolling

It's not my intention, just to point that many expats here are familiar with:

Do what I say, but not what I make

Thais and farangs are all in the same boat when it comes to 'curing' pollution.

[Ajarn]

The existing nutrient in the Northen soil is certainly sufficient to support a vibrant forest ecology.

It is the diminishing number of tree roots per rai that is compromising the ability of the watershed to retain water, not the lack of or quality of the soil.

It's not simply the tree roots that make a watershed work. The composted organic material on the forest floor contributes to many kinds of plant growth, all of which contribute to the watershed.

What is usually regarded as "top soil" is seldomly found in any forest.

What I regard as topsoil is the composted organic material that is found in most healthy forests.

[...Ken]

The existing nutrient in the Northen soil is certainly sufficient to support a vibrant forest ecology.

It is the diminishing number of tree roots per rai that is compromising the ability of the watershed to retain water, not the lack of or quality of the soil.

It's not simply the tree roots that make a watershed work. The composted organic material on the forest floor contributes to many kinds of plant growth, all of which contribute to the watershed.

What is usually regarded as "top soil" is seldomly found in any forest.

What I regard as topsoil is the composted organic material that is found in most healthy forests.

I believe we are both coming from a similar point of view. Yes, it is not simply the number of tree roots per rai.....but without the tree roots to anchor the mass of surface growth to the subsoil, and provide the shade that is a prerequisite to much vegetation, the ability for shallow rooted plants to retain excessive runoff is limited. I do challenge your opinion that visible 'top soil' is the 'be all' of a healthy forest ecosystem. On my wee farm up north, we brought in a tractor (many years ago) to scrape off the nutrient rich red clay where my driveway was to go. We later levelled a large area in a misdirected attempt to create a monoculture of green short stalked vegetation. In the process a good 6 inches of 'top soil' was redistributed. Once the rains came the yearly quota of 6 ft high prickle bush aka 'nam Khi yuh' takes over......and has done for 16 years. My point is that the northern Thailand surface/subsurface soil is very nutrient rich, with little or no degradation from hundreds/thousands of years of forest fires.

In regards to your statement "topsoil is the composted organic material that is found in most healthy forests". I don't intend to be confrontational, but you have apparently been reading more issues of Mother Earth News than might be necessary. Healthy forests generally have a very thin

layer of composted organic material. Healthy forests are always in transition, however the greatest period of time (between fires) is when there is a predominant canopy which blocks off light and checks understory growth....choking off almost all competitors. Fires open that canopy and allow light and nutrient to sustain new growth.

Having once been a logger I have been priviledged to have actually experienced the relative lack of

variety of life in 200/300 year old forest. A 50/100 year old forest has a far greater variety of life.

BTW....I have read my share of Mother Earth News ;-)

...Ken

[Ajarn]

Fires open that canopy and allow light and nutrient to sustain new growth

Until the next fire, of course. Then it's back to square one as far as new growth

[Wallalai]

Thais and farangs are all in the same boat when it comes to 'curing' pollution.

Thais and farangs should be in the same boat when it comes to 'curing' pollution.

And apparently it's not the case as the biggest polluter is reluctant to do any effort in this way. That's the point.

The fires here are contributing in a ridiculous amount of the world pollution, while some others are deliberately threatening our life. Like extinguish a fire in the garden when the house is in fire.

Of course, it can be annoying for the expat's comfort.

[Ajarn]

I have no idea what you are babbling about.

[Puwa]

Wallalai is correct in pointing out that the US is a major polluter. I am an American and I can admit this fact without hesitation. As it happens, I tend to disagree with the policies that permit so much irresponsible pollution.

I also believe that an individual person should be able to express his beliefs, without fear that his voice will be disregarded because he happens to come from a country whose government acts in a different way. At the end of the day we are individuals, endowed with our own independent conscience and reason, not pre-programmed representatives of nations, governments, ethnic groups, etc.

But the main point I want to make is that reading the posts on this topic, there are a lot of some unfortunate and prejudicial statements being thrown around. To wit:

If only people would realise what they are doing is ruining the future for their children and grand children but as usual in Thailand money in your hand talks louder than a promise for the future.

according to the wif, she said that there have been news items on TV and the newspapers about how bad the burning is for the peoples health.They choose to ignore it.

Remember, this is the land of "mai pen rai" - this is how they live and this is how they die. Too often, things that are important are taken too lightly and nothing gets accomplished.

Am I wrong and all the Thai are in their garden burning their crap? Seems quite weird to me

Why can't they just cut it & let it rot during the wet season? It's not as if the land's gonna be used. Also they mainly light the fires at dusk, no wind to disperse the smoke. Too bad if you live nearby. Goddamn pea brains.

So, what one reads in this post is a litany comments that link a situation--poor air quality--to a set of general insults to the country and the people: "they" are corrupt, indifferent, homogeneous, and unintelligent. Such comments are extremely offensive.

At the same time, several members are holding more intelligent discussions about agricultural and environmental practices, in an effort to understand what they are seeing, rather than just lashing out from a point of ignorance. The cure for ignorance is knowledge, and seeing that most of us are in Thailand, it shouldn't be to difficult to obtain some knowledge about the place. I recommend blending what you experience firsthand with the informed analysis of local commentators. More concretely: read any 3 books by Pasuk Pongpaichitr, who writes in English, including her seminal work "Thailand: Economy and Politics."

Puwa

[chuchok]

So, what one reads in this post is a litany comments that link a situation--poor air quality--to a set of general insults to the country and the people: "they" are corrupt, indifferent, homogeneous, and unintelligent. Such comments are extremely offensive.

At the same time, several members are holding more intelligent discussions about agricultural and environmental practices, in an effort to understand what they are seeing, rather than just lashing out from a point of ignorance. The cure for ignorance is knowledge, and seeing that most of us are in Thailand, it shouldn't be to difficult to obtain some knowledge about the place. I recommend blending what you experience firsthand with the informed analysis of local commentators. More concretely: read any 3 books by Pasuk Pongpaichitr, who writes in English, including her seminal work "Thailand: Economy and Politics."

Puwa

Crap. Please tell me what more knowledge we need.Will your so called local commentator reveal all?

Have you lived in Asia for long?

Your comments are offensive to me.

"They" can be "indifferent".How else would you explain it.

[Puwa]

Hi Chuchok,

I have lived nine of the last sixteen years in Thailand.

My local commentator is one of the most respected academics in Thailand, a well-known professor at Chulalongkorn University, and the author of several definitive books on Thailand's economy and politics: http://pioneer.netserv.chula.ac.th/~ppasuk/books.htm

I can't say exactly what you will learn, but I learned something about the agricultural economy and the relationship between farmers and the state. It's really quite interesting stuff, and it relates to the topic at hand by filling in some context and background to farming policies and practices.

First, I reject the idea of "they." This is a diverse nation whose people hold diverse beliefs. There is no single "they." Just as there is no single "we."

Second, there are many ways to explain apparent indifference. To be sure, some are indeed indifferent. Others care, but don't know what to do. Others care so much they are trying to do something about it. Others may want to act, but are afraid to challenge the dominant powers-that-be. Fifteen environment activists have been assassinated in Thailand in the last five years. There are fourteen listed in the following document, and the fifteenth by my count was the monk murdered in Chiang Mai last July. http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/0402/188/ (the list starts about halfway down the page.

So, there is no simple "they" and clearly not everyone is indifferent.

Please explain why you were offended by my comments.

Puwa

So, what one reads in this post is a litany comments that link a situation--poor air quality--to a set of general insults to the country and the people: "they" are corrupt, indifferent, homogeneous, and unintelligent. Such comments are extremely offensive.

At the same time, several members are holding more intelligent discussions about agricultural and environmental practices, in an effort to understand what they are seeing, rather than just lashing out from a point of ignorance. The cure for ignorance is knowledge, and seeing that most of us are in Thailand, it shouldn't be to difficult to obtain some knowledge about the place. I recommend blending what you experience firsthand with the informed analysis of local commentators. More concretely: read any 3 books by Pasuk Pongpaichitr, who writes in English, including her seminal work "Thailand: Economy and Politics."

Puwa

Crap. Please tell me what more knowledge we need.Will your so called local commentator reveal all?

Have you lived in Asia for long?

Your comments are offensive to me.

"They" can be "indifferent".How else would you explain it.

[Rinrada]

The only fire that I will ever have on my 20 rai will be on the B.B.Q...sods...

[Puwa]

(reposting with clearer use of quotations)

Hi Chuchok,

Have you lived in Asia for long?

I have lived nine of the last sixteen years in Thailand.

Please tell me what more knowledge we need.Will your so called local commentator reveal all?

My local commentator is one of the most respected academics in Thailand, a well-known professor at Chulalongkorn University, and the author of several definitive books on Thailand's economy and politics: http://pioneer.netserv.chula.ac.th/~ppasuk/books.htm

I can't say exactly what you will learn, but I learned something about the agricultural economy and the relationship between farmers and the state. It's really quite interesting stuff, and it relates to the topic at hand by filling in some context and background to farming policies and practices.

What I am suggesting is that there may be more to the situation than meets the eye, nose, and throat. Successul environmental regulation is dependent on many political, social, and economic factors.

"They" can be "indifferent".How else would you explain it.

First, I reject the idea of "they." This is a diverse nation whose people hold diverse beliefs. There is no single "they." Just as there is no single "we."

Second, there are many ways to explain apparent indifference. To be sure, some are indeed indifferent. Others care, but don't know what to do. Others care so much they are trying to do something about it. Others may want to act, but are afraid to challenge the dominant powers-that-be. Fifteen environment activists have been assassinated in Thailand in the last five years. There are fourteen listed in the following document, and the fifteenth by my count was the monk murdered in Chiang Mai last July. http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/0402/188/ (the list starts about halfway down the page) My point is that there are many people who are not indifferent and whose pursue their commitment even in the face of serious risks--that's the oppositie of indifference in my book.

So, there is no simple "they" and clearly not everyone is indifferent.

Your comments are offensive to me.

Please explain why you were offended by my comments.

Puwa

[mrmillersr]

But the main point I want to make is that reading the posts on this topic, there are a lot of some unfortunate and prejudicial statements being thrown around. To wit:

If only people would realise what they are doing is ruining the future for their children and grand children but as usual in Thailand money in your hand talks louder than a promise for the future.

according to the wif, she said that there have been news items on TV and the newspapers about how bad the burning is for the peoples health.They choose to ignore it.

Remember, this is the land of "mai pen rai" - this is how they live and this is how they die. Too often, things that are important are taken too lightly and nothing gets accomplished.

Am I wrong and all the Thai are in their garden burning their crap? Seems quite weird to me

Why can't they just cut it & let it rot during the wet season? It's not as if the land's gonna be used. Also they mainly light the fires at dusk, no wind to disperse the smoke. Too bad if you live nearby. Goddamn pea brains.

So, what one reads in this post is a litany comments that link a situation--poor air quality--to a set of general insults to the country and the people: "they" are corrupt, indifferent, homogeneous, and unintelligent. Such comments are extremely offensive.

Puwa

What a load of crap. People are reporting what they have experienced and seen with their own eyes and many I am sure, have lived here for many years.

You turn this into a platform by saying the posts are insulting the country and the people and the comments are extremely offensive. That's your idiotic interpretation that I find offensive.

I'm a realist living in the real world, and call it like I see it. Reality is often not pretty and the truth often hurts, but it's better to face the facts rather than acting like all is well when it isn't.

By the way, the avatar photo you use looks a little like the 60s radical Abbie Hoffman who liked to ramble on. Any connection?

[Rinrada]

By the way, the avatar photo you use looks a little like the 60s radical Abbie Hoffman who liked to ramble on. Any connection?

Abbie and Jerry Rubin....yippies......@ 1968

Hoffman suffered from bipolar disorder (Jezer, 1993), and was found dead on April 12, 1989 at the age of 52.

His death was recorded as a suicide, possibly connected to the news that his elderly mother had been diagnosed with cancer.

However, his suicide note read, "It's too late. We can't win. They've gotten too powerful."

[Puwa]

What a load of crap. People are reporting what they have experienced and seen with their own eyes and many I am sure, have lived here for many years.

You turn this into a platform by saying the posts are insulting the country and the people and the comments are extremely offensive. That's your idiotic interpretation that I find offensive.

I'm a realist living in the real world, and call it like I see it. Reality is often not pretty and the truth often hurts, but it's better to face the facts rather than acting like all is well when it isn't.

By the way, the avatar photo you use looks a little like the 60s radical Abbie Hoffman who liked to ramble on. Any connection?

OK, let's try this again. It's one thing to report what you see--the air is bad. And it is something different to say that the air is bad because the Thai people are "pea-brains," don't care, are too corrupt to take an interest, etc, which were the offensive comments I was referring to.

Acting like all is well when it isn't would be saying that the air is clean. Who said that? A "realist living in the real world" would acknowledge that a blanket criticism of the mentality and motivations of Thai people based on a few personal observations couldn't possibly be accurate. Or are you one of those selective realists?

You call it like you see it, and I call it like I see it. I call it by pointing out what I think is wrong and suggesting a more logical way to look at things, feeding information and facts into the discussion. You call it by labeling my views idiotic and comparing me to the "60s radical Abbie Hoffman." Please explain what you see as radical in my comments.

In fact, Hoffman was a dedicated anti-establishment person. My views here are that we need to understand the mainstream economic and political realities in order to understand environmental problems. Others in the thread are saying that people just don't get it, and the best thing is to move away. That sounds like a radical 1960s commune-type philosophy. Pure escapism! What a bunch of hippies!! I'm going to go put on a tie.

Seriously, though. Think of it this way. Six foreigners visit the USA for a year. They see a brown cloud over a city, and someone throwing a paper cup out of a moving car, and declare that Americans are dumb or indifferent about their environment, without knowing anything about the intricate politics and history of environmental protection in the US, about the EPA, Love Canal, the Sierra Club, conservation education in schools, Teddy Roosevelt and the National Park system, municipal recycling, and the constant give-and-take between economic interests and public welfare. Would it be right or wrong to point out that they may not know the whole story, and that their prejudicial comments offend? The cloud was real, the cup was real, but the conclusion was wrong. That's what I am saying

You say I have turned the forum into a platform--what does that even mean?

[trigger]

We seem to have disagreements between a do-gooder, tree-hugging academocrat and people who live in the real world. Mingling with the occasional professor isn't the same as experiencing how many thousand indifferent souls there are in the Thai countryside. There is a"they" out there and unfortunately it is the majority. There is only one thing the burners and other polluters will understand and that is a big stick and this won't be coming from any Thai government or police force in the near future. On a recent visit to Penang (not the most disciplined society) I noticed that every single motorcyclist was wearing a crash helmet. The reason - big fines for non-compliance and there was little police presence unlike in Thailand where they can be regularly seen riding motorbikes without crash helmets.

[Puwa]

...a do-gooder, tree-hugging academocrat...

brilliant! but wouldn't the other posters who raised the issue of burning be the tree-huggers? and i'm a do-gooder for suggesting that someone read a book? hmmm, doesn't add up. discard your simplistic labels and try to follow the arguments again.

[Ajarn]

It does seem, for some, that once someone is labled a 'tree hugger', etc., reasoned thinking goes out the window...

[KhunMarco]

Lol, you quoted my question as an offence.

Let me try again. Am I wrong and all the Thais are riding their motorbike without a helmet and making u turns in the middle of the street when they see the cops? Do they drive on the walkside?Do they stop at the "zebra" signs for pedestrians? Hmm seems quite weird to me.

I'm sorry to offend the 3% of the population that is not represented by these generalizations

[jomama]

Fifteen environment activists have been assassinated in Thailand in the last five years. There are fourteen listed in the following document, and the fifteenth by my count was the monk murdered in Chiang Mai last July.

Yes and they are dead. They probably stepped on powerful toes, or tried to stop poaching (like Dian Fosse) or encroachment by local people. They were courageous, no doubt, but most likely were not campaigning to get the overwhelming majority of environmental offenders to change their ways.

Those offenders are "regular" people who happily burn whatever they feel like because it's convenient for them to do so, even though it's against the law. It's that simple. Wider envirnmental concerns have no place in their world view, which consists mostly of themselves. Many Thai folks are scofflaws -- the rules don't apply to them, as in the habitual, systematic disregard for laws and rules already mentioned. I find these folks to be incredibly self-focused and also unable to project cause and effect. I've seen people smacked on motorbikes who are outraged, bewildered, shocked, even though they pulled out around a blind corner without looking. How could the "outside" world violate their self-absorbed universe, they wonder. It's much like children react.

Because there has been little enforcement of various rules throughout their lives, many Thais take certain rules as worthy of the paper they're written on, which of course is not much. Until there is pain associated with violations, there will be no change. When 10,000 baht fines are levied on a consistent basis residential burning will begin to diminish.

There may be 15 heroes, but there are millions who don't know, millions who don't think about it and millions who simply don't care. It's not their problem, after all.

[Ajarn]

Many Thai folks are scofflaws -- the rules don't apply to them, as in the habitual, systematic disregard for laws and rules already mentioned

Not just Thai folks, either. Farangs are just as guilty, in my experience.

[chuchok]

Those offenders are "regular" people who happily burn whatever they feel like because it's convenient for them to do so, even though it's against the law. It's that simple. Wider envirnmental concerns have no place in their world view, which consists mostly of themselves. Many Thai folks are scofflaws -- the rules don't apply to them, as in the habitual, systematic disregard for laws and rules already mentioned. I find these folks to be incredibly self-focused and also unable to project cause and effect. I've seen people smacked on motorbikes who are outraged, bewildered, shocked, even though they pulled out around a blind corner without looking. How could the "outside" world violate their self-absorbed universe, they wonder. It's much like children react.

Because there has been little enforcement of various rules throughout their lives, many Thais take certain rules as worthy of the paper they're written on, which of course is not much. Until there is pain associated with violations, there will be no change. When 10,000 baht fines are levied on a consistent basis residential burning will begin to diminish.

Replace the word Thais with Asians.(generisation it may be)

farangs can be the same, but I feel that they care a little more for the environment as a whole.

[trigger]

It does seem, for some, that once someone is labled a 'tree hugger', etc., reasoned thinking goes out the window...

Sorry about that, the more of the posts that I read written in what I considered a superior manner ,just got up my nose. It all reminded me of the kind of people that make policy in UK. and have, by believing there is good in all people, dragged the country down. If people behave like morons then it is unlikely you will change them by pointing out that a few of their compatriots are the salt of the earth. Singapore citizens were similar to Thais before Lee Kuan Yu came on the scene and realised you needed an iron fist in a velvet glove to produce a society that would benefit the vast majority of citizens. Even so, the idealists constantly bemoan the loss of individual rights and prefer a society where people can behave as they wish.

I lived in a village in Lamphun for four years up to 1994 and on a recent visit found the environment much worse today. Many houses had some sweeping-up of lamyai leaves and burning with household waste including the usual plastic bags into which every purchase you make are deposited. Some of the worst burners are the food stalls and other small eateries who produce much more waste than households. Unfortunately, in Thailand, the apparent stupidity seems to start at the top so it is unlikely the people at the other end are going to behave in a reasonable manner. Also the age thing in LOS means it is impossible for a younger environment-aware person to influence an older polluter so they must grin and bear it. I remember when the government decided to do something about the road casualties and insisted on seatbelts being worn. What's wrong with that you may ask - well it doesn't do a lot for the twenty odd people sitting in the back of a pick-up. Just an example of inept government decision-making and it won't get any better by saying nice things about people who for whatever reason(cultural, traditional, poor education or congenital stupidity) won't change. But it is their country and as visitors we have a choice - like it or lump it, just move on.

[mrmillersr]

Interesting. Take a serious topic and you get some people who understand what's going on and voice their concern. Good. That at least shows there are people out there aware of the problem. If they feel like venting that none of the powers to be seem to give a ###### about doing anything, they are correct. The situation was serious 14 years ago when laws were passed to end this endemic problem. Repeat - 14 years ago. Stiff fines - go to jail.

So what has happened since? Nothing, zilch. Take that back. The condition has gotten worse. Can anyone tell me what might be more important than something that is directly affecting your health? The severity of air pollution in Chiang Mai is at such a level it is likely causing a multiple of serious health conditions, besides the well documented respiratory disease cases that have been reported. Everything from heart disease, various cancers, asthma, stroke, skin disease etc. etc. can be directly linked to the toxic air you are now breathing.

Because of the seriousness of the topic, I find it very distracting and irrevelant for someone like Puwa to post something as asinine as this:

"OK, let's try this again. It's one thing to report what you see--the air is bad. And it is something different to say that the air is bad because the Thai people are "pea-brains," don't care, are too corrupt to take an interest, etc, which were the offensive comments I was referring to."

Puwa, free speech is great but my suggestion is to get off your grandstand and take your agenda elsewhere. Trying to turn this topic into something it is not (an anti-Thai attack) is inappropriate and offensive to many that have made Thailand their home and have done more to help the system than to hurt it. My posts may not always be popular but at least I deal with the topic at hand and stick to the subject. I suggest you do the same.

[Ajarn]

Puwa, free speech is great but my suggestion is to get off your grandstand and take your agenda elsewhere.

Please follow your own good advice

[...Ken]

Geez........and I thought you were all touchy, feely, hand holders.

...Ken

[p1p]

Hey lads, if we get much more heated I may have to pull the plug on this thread. A real shame, because it is a subject worth discussing in a calm manner.

Thais and farangs should be in the same boat when it comes to 'curing' pollution.

And apparently it's not the case as the biggest polluter is reluctant to do any effort in this way. That's the point.

The fires here are contributing in a ridiculous amount of the world pollution, while some others are deliberately threatening our life. Like extinguish a fire in the garden when the house is in fire.

Of course, it can be annoying for the expat's comfort.

Incidentally, can anybody translate this into sense for me???