Maewong and the damming of democracy

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

I gave 2 examples. What do you have to offer the thread apart from a snipe?

 

To note the mindset of someone who trusts the Irrigation Department (notoriously politicised, incompetent and corrupt) over professionally conducted Environmental Impact assessments.

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, halloween said:

 

You don't know? Even if associated infrastructure doubles the dam area (which it won't) it would be ~0.4% of the total combined area. The claim that we should be concerned about the risk to endangered species is typical green rubbish to fool those who, like you, DON'T KNOW,  but accept it as fact and take that as cause enough to impede a major project. Would you call that a lie or a half truth? The figures for the area of the dam presented (by another poster) were obviously inflated - was that a lie or a half truth?

 

Are their other claims equally as fatuous? You don't know, but accept them despite the credibility deficit from their other lies, because it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy "saving the planet."

 

Chatchai presents the views of the dept he heads, which also haven't changed for 30 years. It is not a personal view, and one shared by the prior elected government. Their attempts to help the people of the area were stymied by a vocal minority. The junta has the tool to over-ride that impediment.

"Even if associated infrastructure doubles the dam area (which it won't) it would be ~0.4% of the total combined area."

 

According to Wikipedia, the dam would cover an area 17.6 square km in a park of 900 km, or approximately 2%  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mae_Wong_Dam   Do you have better figures?  What are they? 

 

The damn will require roads, it will require maintenance, and it will alter the natural downstream flow of the river.  That will have environmental consequences, which you ignore.

 

"Are their other claims equally as fatuous? You don't know, but accept them despite the credibility deficit from their other lies, because it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy "saving the planet.""

 

What are these fatuous claims?  What are the lies?  What facts have you presented?  General Chatchai is trying to resurrect a project that has been rejected for 30 years under both military and elected governments, and you assume it must be a great idea.  Is there anything to your "logic" other than you being pro-junta, pro-damn, and anti-environment?

[billd766]

2 hours ago, ddavidovsky said:

 

Sorry, my previous post was directed at halloween - I posted in haste yesterday.

 

Glad to hear you are actually familiar with the place. You should be aware of its environmental value then. Maybe you know that it's the best (and possibly last?) place in Thailand to see Rufous-Necked Hornbill? I have been there to see it - it's a great place. And it was always pretty much the best place in Thailand to see the equally sensational Crested Kingfisher, though I have never managed to see it there.

 

 

OK. Sorry for my rant at you.

 

There are reputed to be tigers up there and though they have planted cameras and a tiger or tigers have been seen no people appear to have seen the tigers.

 

The dam that everybody is up in arms about is on the Nakhon Sawan side of Mae Wong and I live on the Khampaeng Phet side about 2 km from the entry gate and my wife's land backs onto it. They have been trying to build a small reservoir on our side for years and I really hope that they do.

 

Our government water supply comes from Mae Wong into the Klong Klung which empties into the Ping River some 40 km away. Out of the 12 years we have lived here only twice did we have water all year round. Most years we run out for 2 or 3 months though this year it was for 6 months. The local tessaban send 2 fire trucks out to fill the storage tanks and ongs of all the local villages and houses around.

 

The potential reservoir has been surveyed about 5 years ago but there was again a protester group who had that one stopped too. IMO the cheapest fix would be to extend the water supply pipeline from the main village another 3 or 4 km, but as a farang, what do I know?

[halloween]

42 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"Even if associated infrastructure doubles the dam area (which it won't) it would be ~0.4% of the total combined area."

 

According to Wikipedia, the dam would cover an area 17.6 square km in a park of 900 km, or approximately 2%  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mae_Wong_Dam   Do you have better figures?  What are they? 

 

The damn will require roads, it will require maintenance, and it will alter the natural downstream flow of the river.  That will have environmental consequences, which you ignore.

 

"Are their other claims equally as fatuous? You don't know, but accept them despite the credibility deficit from their other lies, because it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy "saving the planet.""

 

What are these fatuous claims?  What are the lies?  What facts have you presented?  General Chatchai is trying to resurrect a project that has been rejected for 30 years under both military and elected governments, and you assume it must be a great idea.  Is there anything to your "logic" other than you being pro-junta, pro-damn, and anti-environment?

 

Perhaps you should read the OP, in particular "... tigers have spread into Maewong from the adjacent Huai Kha Khaeng, a world heritage wildlife sanctuary. " Which is adjacent Thungyai for a total of around 6500 sqkm. Look it up, it's better than "don't know".

The claims that this endangers tigers and other species is pure BS. The figures quoted by an environmental org over the wet season size of the dam are similarly false.

Has anybody anywhere used monkey cheeks instead of a dam to the same effect? How many hydrologists and qualified water management experts do the protesters employ - any?

The project has been rejected by a vocal minority. It HAS NOT been rejected by the elected government which approved it, or the junta, so your claim of junta bias is unfounded.

Have you ever lived near a dam, or spoke to long term residents who do? They tend to be quite happy with the end of water shortage and floods, the recreational opportunities, the improvement in the micro-climate, the increased land values these cause, and the tourism business opportunities.

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by halloween

[heybruce]

19 minutes ago, halloween said:

 

Perhaps you should read the OP, in particular "... tigers have spread into Maewong from the adjacent Huai Kha Khaeng, a world heritage wildlife sanctuary. " Which is adjacent Thungyai for a total of around 6500 sqkm. Look it up, it's better than "don't know".

The claims that this endangers tigers and other species is pure BS. The figures quoted by an environmental org over the wet season size of the dam are similarly false.

Has anybody anywhere used monkey cheeks instead of a dam to the same effect? How many hydrologists and qualified water management experts do the protesters employ - any?

The project has been rejected by a vocal minority. It HAS NOT been rejected by the elected government which approved it, or the junta, so your claim of junta bias is unfounded.

Have you ever lived near a dam, or spoke to long term residents who do? They tend to be quite happy with the end of water shortage and floods, the recreational opportunities, the improvement in the micro-climate, the increased land values these cause, and the tourism business opportunities.

 

Now you are comparing the area submerged by the damn to an area much larger than the park the damn will be located in.  I take it that you don't challenge the figure that the damn will submerge 2% of the park, or that roads, maintenance, and changes to the natural flow of the river will also have an impact.

 

You are also asking "Has anybody anywhere used...."  I don't know, and clearly you don't either. 

 

"The project has been rejected by a vocal minority. It HAS NOT been rejected by the elected government which approved it, or the junta, so your claim of junta bias is unfounded."

 

I did not claim the damn has been rejected by the current junta, I claimed that it has been rejected by 30 years of prior governments, both elected and military.  From the OP:

 

" The Maewong Dam has been on and off the table for nearly 30 years since it was first proposed in the early 1990s by the Irrigation Department. Preventing implementation are serious concerns over potentially serious environmental impacts on Maewong National Park in Nakhon Sawan. "

 

There is nothing in there about a vocal minority.  You assume that for 30 years Thai governments have wanted to build the damn but have been frightened into submission by evil environmentalists.

 

The OP states that General Chatchai wants the damn, then explains why it has been rejected for 30 years.  You reply, repeatedly, with speculation about the need for the damn, absence of viable alternatives, and claim of lies and intimidation by evil environmentalists.  Do you have any facts to support your claim that the damn is a necessary expenditure of 13 billion baht with no good alternatives?

[halloween]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Now you are comparing the area submerged by the damn to an area much larger than the park the damn will be located in.  I take it that you don't challenge the figure that the damn will submerge 2% of the park, or that roads, maintenance, and changes to the natural flow of the river will also have an impact.

 

You are also asking "Has anybody anywhere used...."  I don't know, and clearly you don't either. 

 

"The project has been rejected by a vocal minority. It HAS NOT been rejected by the elected government which approved it, or the junta, so your claim of junta bias is unfounded."

 

I did not claim the damn has been rejected by the current junta, I claimed that it has been rejected by 30 years of prior governments, both elected and military.  From the OP:

 

" The Maewong Dam has been on and off the table for nearly 30 years since it was first proposed in the early 1990s by the Irrigation Department. Preventing implementation are serious concerns over potentially serious environmental impacts on Maewong National Park in Nakhon Sawan. "

 

There is nothing in there about a vocal minority.  You assume that for 30 years Thai governments have wanted to build the damn but have been frightened into submission by evil environmentalists.

 

The OP states that General Chatchai wants the damn, then explains why it has been rejected for 30 years.  You reply, repeatedly, with speculation about the need for the damn, absence of viable alternatives, and claim of lies and intimidation by evil environmentalists.  Do you have any facts to support your claim that the damn is a necessary expenditure of 13 billion baht with no good alternatives?

 

Why wouldn't I compare it to the combined areas? Are there natural or artificial barriers, or just lines on a map?  Try to justify the increased concerns of danger to tigers who have migrated and are free to migrate again - you can't because its meaningless rubbish to convince the uninformed "don't knows" to support their cause. Just as those who "don't know" accept the viability of untried hydro-engineering. They don't question, or read critically, they accept the blather as fact, making them gullible fools.

Newspapers print stories titled "Last Tiger Sanctuary in SE Asia at Risk" (Jakarta Post, May 4 2012) based on garbage they are fed.

I'm quite sure that some of these people firmly believe in this cause, but that doesn't make it true.

The dam has been opposed for 30 years, and much of that delay was caused by that opposition, by rejected court cases, and pressurised governments. It has never been rejected by a government, but simply not approved, for a myriad of possible reasons not related to environmental damage. The courts rejected the environmental concerns, alternatives were studied and rejected, and the original plan reverted to as the best option.

I am not justifying the dam, the Thai governments and the Irrigation dept who proposed and accepted the proposal do that, as do the locals who support it. 

Enough of this, believe what you want. The dam will be built anyway.

Edited September 8, 2016 by halloween

[heybruce]

2 minutes ago, halloween said:

 

Why wouldn't I compare it to the combined areas? Are there natural or artificial barriers, or just lines on a map?  Try to justify the increased concerns of danger to tigers who have migrated and are free to migrate again - you can't because its meaningless rubbish to convince the uninformed "don't knows" to support their cause. Just as those who "don't know" accept the viability of untried hydro-engineering. They don't question, or read critically, they accept the blather as fact, making them gullible fools.

Newspapers print stories titled "Last Tiger Sanctuary in SE Asia at Risk" (Jakarta Post, May 4 2012) based on garbage they are fed.

I'm quite sure that some of these people firmly believe in this cause, but that doesn't make it true.

The dam has been opposed for 30 years, and much of that delay was caused by that opposition, by rejected court cases, and pressurised governments. It has never been rejected by a government, but simply not approved, for a myriad of possible reasons not related to environmental damage. The courts rejected the environmental concerns, alternatives were studied and rejected, and the original plan reverted to as the best option.

I am not justifying the dam, the Thai governments and the Irrigation dept who proposed and accepted the proposal do that, as do the locals who support it. 

Enough of this, believe what you want. The dam will be built anyway.

I see.  You maintain it is all about the tigers, there are not other reasons to oppose the damn.  What led you to this conclusion?

 

Beyond that, you offer speculation without evidence.  Once again, as I posted earlier:

 

" The OP states that General Chatchai wants the damn, then explains why it has been rejected for 30 years.  You reply, repeatedly, with speculation about the need for the damn, absence of viable alternatives, and claim of lies and intimidation by evil environmentalists.  Do you have any facts to support your claim that the damn is a necessary expenditure of 13 billion baht with no good alternatives? "

 

Regarding your claim:

 

"The dam will be built anyway."

 

Not unless Prayut decides to use his rule by decree powers to overturn past decisions.

[halloween]

13 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I see.  You maintain it is all about the tigers, there are not other reasons to oppose the damn.  What led you to this conclusion?

 

Beyond that, you offer speculation without evidence.  Once again, as I posted earlier:

 

" The OP states that General Chatchai wants the damn, then explains why it has been rejected for 30 years.  You reply, repeatedly, with speculation about the need for the damn, absence of viable alternatives, and claim of lies and intimidation by evil environmentalists.  Do you have any facts to support your claim that the damn is a necessary expenditure of 13 billion baht with no good alternatives? "

 

Regarding your claim:

 

"The dam will be built anyway."

 

Not unless Prayut decides to use his rule by decree powers to overturn past decisions.

You see <deleted>. The hugely exaggerated concern for tigers expressed by the dam opponents is an example of their widely propagated lies, which you choose to believe even when you admit you don't know.

I don't speculate about the need for the dam, the Irrigation Dept and 2 Thai governments STATE the considered need. The courts rejected environmental concerns.

Edited September 8, 2016 by metisdead
Profane acronym removed.

[heybruce]

26 minutes ago, halloween said:

You see <deleted>. The hugely exaggerated concern for tigers expressed by the dam opponents is an example of their widely propagated lies, which you choose to believe even when you admit you don't know.

I don't speculate about the need for the dam, the Irrigation Dept and 2 Thai governments STATE the considered need. The courts rejected environmental concerns.

Ok, you are alluding to facts.  That's a start.  Can you provide sources for these facts?

 

[tbthailand]

On September 7, 2016 at 4:50 AM, halloween said:

Environmentalists say many things, most of which are not true.

I guess that you can justify that completely absurd statement....

 

Or were you sprayed with too much Roundup.... ?

[heybruce]

On 9/6/2016 at 10:50 PM, halloween said:

 

Environmentalists say many things, most of which are not true. Yet you prefer to believe them rather than the professional engineers and other officers of the Irrigation Dept. Why is that?

 

9 hours ago, tbthailand said:

I guess that you can justify that completely absurd statement....

 

Or were you sprayed with too much Roundup.... ?

My guess is childhood lead poisoning from auto exhaust or paint.  However one can't rule out mercury poisoning from contaminated fish.

 

Those damned environmentalists!  If it weren't for their tampering with progress and the minor brain damaging consequences, we could have more interesting thinkers like..., well, let's not name names.

[DeepInTheForest]

Enjoyed reading this 'discussion'.

When a person is adamant in his opinions on a given subject despite whatever evidence is presented, one is usually safe in assuming that he has skin in the game.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."      -UptonSinclair

 

 

[halloween]

On 09/09/2016 at 3:36 AM, heybruce said:

 

My guess is childhood lead poisoning from auto exhaust or paint.  However one can't rule out mercury poisoning from contaminated fish.

 

Those damned environmentalists!  If it weren't for their tampering with progress and the minor brain damaging consequences, we could have more interesting thinkers like..., well, let's not name names.

" ...serious concerns over potentially serious environmental impacts on Maewong National Park in Nakhon Sawan.
Those concerns grew recently when scientists found evidence that endangered species like tigers have spread into Maewong from the adjacent Huai Kha Khaeng......."

 

You have been given the size of the area and the dam and the area of the combined national park and wildlife refuge. Do you continue to deny that those "serious concerns" are a gross exaggeration? In fact a lie? Or, in the face of the evidence, do you resort to "don't know" accompanied by thoughtless acceptance?

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

" ...serious concerns over potentially serious environmental impacts on Maewong National Park in Nakhon Sawan.
Those concerns grew recently when scientists found evidence that endangered species like tigers have spread into Maewong from the adjacent Huai Kha Khaeng......."

 

You have been given the size of the area and the dam and the area of the combined national park and wildlife refuge. Do you continue to deny that those "serious concerns" are a gross exaggeration? In fact a lie? Or, in the face of the evidence, do you resort to "don't know" accompanied by thoughtless acceptance?

Please read the quote you posted carefully.  It states that concerns grew when evidence of endangered species was found, it doesn't state that endangered species are the only concern.  With that in mind, on what do you base your claim of "gross exaggeration"?

[ddavidovsky]

The Crested Kingfisher is the only reason I need to save this place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAmnWu85Ec4

And no, having a reservoir there won't mean more kingfishers - it only lives on a specific kind of mountain torrent, exactly the part that will be flooded. Mae Wong is certainly the best place in Thailand for it - I'm not aware of any other reliable spot at all.

 

Of course there are a million other reasons. When a forest is cut down, there is animal carnage. Tigers and some monkeys might be able to scramble away, but sloths, lorises, pangolins, sun-bears, etc etc etc  will just be slaughtered. Doubtless many of these species under are legal protection so that alone should block this unnecessary project.

 

Some people here obviously have no clue as to what a forest holds and don't want to know.