Down under or Thai? Aussie mum trades Oz for Land of Smiles

[webfact]

River basins could lose protection
Pongphon Sarnsamak
The Nation

Critics fear ploy to facilitate Bt350-bn scheme

BANGKOK: -- Plans by the Office of Natural Resources and Environ-mental Policy and Planning (ONEP) to seek the removal of certain river basins from a list of protected areas has worried environmental advocates, who view the move as a bid to relax the legal requirements for participants in the government's Bt350-billion water-management mega-project.

ONEP said recently it would ask the government to de-list those river basins protected by a Cabinet resolution, due to a "lack of clarity" on designated boundaries for protected areas.

However, environmental advocates say they are concerned the de-listing will open the floodgates for construction projects under the government's mega-project scheme.

The mega-project construction plan has attracted only a small number of bidders, as many prospective participants are concerned about the environmental impact assessment (EIA) requirements.

ONEP secretary-general Santi Boonprakrab said he had proposed the government amend the Cabinet resolution issued on November 3, 2009, and remove from the list the protected basins of large rivers.

Among those rivers proposed for de-listing are the Ping, Wang, Yom, Nan, Songkhram, Kwae Noi, Kwae Yai, Lam Plai Mat, Lower Chao Phraya and Bang Pakong.

Santi said ONEP wanted to de-list the river basins because his agency was keen to make the boundaries of protected areas clearer before listing them again.

Under the Cabinet resolution, any construction project built in a protected area is subject to an EIA study, or an environmental health impact assessment.

To date, about 47 national river basins have been listed as protected areas under the Cabinet resolution of 2009.

Hannarong Yaowalers, president of the Foundation for Integrated Water Management, said he was worried the removal of protected river basins would allow the Bt350-billion mega-project to go ahead with no restrictions. Without existing measures of screening, there could be adverse impacts on the environment and natural resources, as well as the local people's health, he added.

"If the government agrees to amend this Cabinet resolution and remove the … basins from protection, that means we will have no way of assessing the environmental and biological conditions in local areas," he said.

He suggested ONEP use another measure to designate the boundaries of protected basins instead of removing them from the protection list.

However, ONEP's Santi insists the de-listing is not aimed at relaxing rules for the mega-project. "Although protection under the Cabinet resolution is lifted, there are other laws that can protect the river basins," he said.

The National River Basin Management Sub-Committee will study Santi's proposal on May 23.

De-listing candidates
Rivers proposed for removal from the protected list:
Ping, Wang, Yom, Nan, Songkhram, Kwae Noi, Kwae Yai, Lam Plai Mat, Lower Chao Phraya, Bang Pakong


-- The Nation 2013-05-11

[clifric]

Santi said ONEP wanted to de-list the river basins because his agency was keen to make the boundaries of protected areas clearer before listing them again.

So leave them listed while you do the research you ninny!!

[maidu]

It's all about money. If Shinawatre clan and their buddies see any way to make more baht, they'll do it. Silly concerns, like habitat protection, are considered non-issues for them. If there is some nice looking terrain which they can scrape flat and cram a bunch of townhouses or shopping malls, they'll buy the land for a pittance, then develop it and make as big a killing as they can.

[LuckyLew]

The whole scheme or scam is not about getting the job done right or done by competent people

Since they have the budget allocated, now the goal is to get it done as cheaply as possible so they

can maximize personal gain

They do not care who it affects or what it does to natural habitats or how it affects the environment,

Thailand is not known for it's greenness, just known for pocketing 30-40%.

[seajae]

you have to wonder how much santi is getting latest yes man.

[plachon]

The irony is that ONEP should be at the forefront of environmental protection, by ensuring that other state agencies and the private sector abide by existing environmental laws, without grace and favour to some sections in society. Instead, it seems that in this case they are seeking to side-step the laws, weak as they are, by removing protection status from these river basins, just so the political network of Thaksin business cronies can sling some more concrete in the already over-developed river basins of Thailand. This is not to say that there are not some very good people in ONEP who would be resistant to this proposal, but unfortunately, they are out-gunned and out-trumped in the hierarchical system of the Thai bureaucracy, so cannot be outspoken for fear of their jobs. Thus, the task will fall to domestic non-governmental organisations to highlight the policy abuses and systemic corruption that will almost inevitably accompany this 350 B billion water resources development plan.

[Joe Mamma]

Thailand can do mega projects, but has to close down rural schools because of lack of funds??

[OzMick]

The plan is simple:

delist

construct

relist

I have a suggestion - if ONEP (why only one P?) had rubber stamps made for SFA, DILLIGAF, or the Thai equivalent, they could complete EIAs much faster.

[maidu]

Thailand is following China's lead: build everywhere. Scrape the land and cram as many units as possible. Gotta have parking spaces, so put in a minimum amount. Parks aren't essential at developments, so forget about parks. Playgrounds for kids aren't essential, so forget those, oh, maybe a little plastic slide every 10,000 units. Libraries aren't essential - forget about them. Money is God, so whatever needs to be done to make more of the stuff, let's do it!

[maidu]

This is an important issue. Thai authorities are trying to un-protect river basins. What's next, allowing Bangkokians to go in to Lumpini park with hoes and wheelbarrows, to take out the grass and uproot trees? I'm thinking of contacting Avaaz about this. It's nearly on a level with Sumatra officials allowing developers to destroy the last bit of forest where wild orangutangs range.

Thailand doesn't have any orangutangs. Indeed, 99% of its wild mammals were wiped out decades ago. But the little bit of semi-wild areas in its watersheds should be sacrosant. Instead of losing protection, the government (if it had a modicum of environmental awareness) should be bolstering its protection.

[DeepInTheForest]

Every post above is on point. Thanks to the posters for their insights. Water is of course essential, and one of the major dangers in mucking with the river system is that it will impact the quality of drinking water. Even tube wells and the aquifers they tap depend on recharge in part from rivers.

In February the UN rapporteur on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation (she is the first in this relatively new office) issued a report on Thailand.

From the report:

While recognizing the significant progress made in Thailand ... especially [in] rural basic sanitation, the Special Rapporteur noted ... that only 21 per cent of community wastewater produced daily is treated.

“Rivers and other sources of water are being increasingly polluted by the discharge of untreated human waste,” she said. “I was shocked by the very poor ...disposal ... of human waste, which may be one of the major causes of the increasing diarrhoea morbidity rate..."

She expressed special concern for those on the margins of Thai society: hill tribe people, migrant workers' camps in the north of the country, and female prisoners, saying that their water and sanitation facilities were often substandard, and in order to use them, people had to sacrifice their dignity.

Then there is this:

According to official data only 40% of municipal water and 20% of water provided by sub-district authorities are safe. Furthermore, some people resort to surface water sources or to groundwater sources whose quality is not systematically and periodically controlled. According to official data, the number of surface water sources with very good or medium quality is decreasing, while the number of surface water sources with deteriorating quality is on the raise. I am deeply concerned that water pollution is being increasingly exacerbated by faecal coli form, but also by large scale industrial, mining and agricultural projects...

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=12976&LangID=E

http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=12975&LangID=E

Rivers are what we drink. Their health is interlocked with ours, and all residents of Thailand should be concerned when proposals are made to skip and dodge about environmental safeguards.

Incidentally, treating water can remove coliform bacteria in the bottled water we may choose to drink, but industrial pollution is quite another matter.

Edited May 14, 2013 by DeepInTheForest

[hellodolly]

"However, ONEP's Santi insists the de-listing is not aimed at relaxing
rules for the mega-project. "Although protection under the Cabinet
resolution is lifted, there are other laws that can protect the river
basins," he said"

Like what.

If a half wit was given the job of de-listing the river basins he could come up with a better defense than that.

Not only are they going to pump more waste into the rivers but they will strip any trees and plants that soak up the water and act as a part of the defense against floods.