Untitled Document

The Nation

Opinion
Mekong: wrong blasted way

Published on Nov 28, 2002

Only a few weeks after it was established, Thailand's Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment (MNRE) has committed itself to supporting a
controversial infrastructure project. The Navigation Channel Improvement
Project on the Upper Mekong River, known locally in Chiang Rai province as
the "Mekong rapids blasting project", would dynamite and excavate a
navigation channel through 21 rapids and shoals in the Mekong River along
the Burma-Lao PDR border, and the Thai-Lao border.

Last week, Sophat Tovichakchaikul, director of the Water Crisis Prevention
Centre, Department of Water Resources, MNRE, announced that the project
should be implemented because an environmental impact assessment (EIA)
indicated that there would not be any negative impacts caused by the
dynamiting of the rapids.

According to the EIA, a joint Environmental Impact Assessment Team and a
Detailed Survey Team "went to the working sites [10 rapids and one shoal]
along the Upper River on April 18 and April 29, 2001 respectively for the
purpose of a detailed survey and hydrological data collection". In other
words, the project EIA was based on two days of field investigations.

On the basis of this two day-long "environmental assessment" of probably
the least-studied and least-known ecosystems of the Mekong River, the EIA
concluded that there would be no long-term impacts on the fisheries and
fishing-based livelihoods of communities living along the Mekong River in
Laos and Thailand. The fact is, the EIA does not assess these potential
impacts.

Not surprisingly, Laos, which has the most to lose and the least to gain
from the navigation channel improvement/rapids blasting project, requested
the Secretariat of the Mekong River Commission (MRC) to review the EIA for
the project.

As a result of the request, the MRC Secretariat contracted academics in
Australia and New Zealand to review the EIA.

According to Professor RM McDowall of the National Institute of Water and
Atmospheric Research in New Zealand, "Reading of the EIA makes it clear
that no explicit effort has been made to determine the fish fauna and its
ecology in the development zone nor to measure the potential impacts of
channelisation [the navigation channel improvement/rapids blasting project]
on such biological values. Put plainly, the EIA is manifestly totally
inadequate."

According to Brian Finlayson of the University of Melbourne, Australia, the
Science, Technology and Environment Agency Assessment Regulation of Lao
PDR, Article 12, Item 2, requires that "the [EIA] report shall identify and
describe the environmental impacts of the project and compare them to the
impacts of one or more reasonable alternatives to the project . . . These
are not considered in the EIA as required by the Lao regulations."

In Thailand, the EIA process and the navigation channel project violate
several sections of the Constitution, including the section that recognises
the rights of local communities to participate in the decision-making and
management of their local natural resources.

The experts sent their reports to the Secretariat of the MRC. The
Secretariat sent the reports to the governments of Laos and Thailand. To
date, neither government has done anything in response.

This lack of response endangers the lives of thousands of families living
along the stretch of the Mekong River that will be damaged by the rapids
blasting project. These rapids are an important habitat for fish, other
aquatic animals and plants that contribute to the food security of these
families.

According to the design plans for the navigation channel, the thousands of
tonnes of rock blasted out of the rapids will be dumped in the deep pools
of the river. The deep pools are critically important dry-season habitats
for the fishes of the upper Mekong, and are therefore the best fishing
grounds for nearby local communities. Filling the deep pools with the
blasted rocks will have a severe and permanent impact on the fisheries of
the upper Mekong River, and on the thousands of fishing families living
along the river. None of this was considered by the EIA.

In April 2002, the MRC Fisheries Programme published a research paper
entitled "Deep pools as dry season fish habitats in the Mekong River
Basin". According to this report, "It is also generally believed that the
Mekong giant catfish, Pangasian-odon gigas, spends the dry season in deep
pools. Fishers in Xaya-bouri province, Laos, reported the existence of a
deep pool near [the village of] Ban Muangliap, which they believe is a dry
season habitat for the Mekong giant catfish. Fishers in Bokeo province,
which is near the border of Thailand, Laos and Burma, also believe that the
giant catfish they catch originate from Xayabouri."

The proposed navigation channel project threatens not only the fisheries
and food security of thousands of people living along the Mekong River, but
also threatens the survival of one of the world's largest and most famous
wild fish, the Mekong Giant Catfish. The EIA only noted that the Mekong
Giant Catfish is an "important fish".

Clearly, an EIA that fails to assess any of the potential impacts of the
navigation channel project does not contribute to informed decision-making
about the project. Nevertheless, Thailand's new Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment, and the Science, Technology and Environment
Agency in Laos appear ready to accept the EIA and let the fishing
communities of the Mekong River suffer the consequences of the project.

Dave Hubbel

Dave Hubbel is an independent analyst researching environmental impact
assessments for large-scale infrastructure projects.