Sunny Tan >> TOC International
Mr Konethong Phounikhom, a senior civil servant of the Laotian Government told Vientiane Times (July 16 2009) that the planned hydropower projects along the Mekong River would not have negative impact.
He is the Chief of Planning and Statistics Division of the Ministry of Energy and Mines, Laos.
(left: Map of Mekong River)
Mr Konethong also said that the MOUs (Memorandums of Understanding) and PDAs (Project Development Agreements) with eight bodies, regarding the construction of eight dams along the Mekong River in Laos had been signed. One of them is the Don Sahong dam in the southernmost province of Champassak.
NGOs disagree with Mr Phounikhom
Regarding this dam, Tom Fawthorp of the reputable British newspaper, “The Guardian,” reported that it would block fish migrations that feed millions of people in the region and threaten the Irrawady dolphins and giant catfish.
In the same report he referred to Carl Middleton, who is from an environmental NGO, International Rivers and he reiterated what had been said, “The dam would block the massive fish migrations that help feed millions of people within the region. The stakes are high. This is one dam that must never be built.”
Then he went on to quote from the writing of another foreign fisheries expert who wanted to remain anonymous, “If this dam goes ahead, it will be an ecological disaster for fish migration routes between Cambodia and Laos. Over 300 species of fish would be adversely affected.”
This is only a tributary dam but a question relating to the fish migration routes is the existence of a proposal to build 11 mainstream dams on the River Mekong and how can the many migrating species survive? They will just die, becoming as dead as the dodo, leaving millions of people of the Mekong Basin who are voracious fish eaters to be denied of their normal animal protein intake, which they presently take for granted.
Can this happen? It might, provided that the Mekong River countries give the green light to the private companies to construct them. After all, it is the rage for them to apply for permission to construct the mainstream dams.
The stand of the Mekong River Commission
In a press release in June 2009 the MRC said that dams reduce the yield of fisheries, it adversely affect fish passages, fish migration, fish habitats and that is serious because 60 million people in the lower Mekong Basin depend on the river network for food, transport and economic activity.
The MRC added that many Mekong people depend on the fish for their animal protein intake so that any serious reduction in the fisheries would have a serious effect on the health and well-being of Mekong inhabitants.
However, dams, MRC said, can have both a positive and negative impact, for example, dams in the upper Mekong basin can increase the dry-season flows and reduce flood levels and benefit water users.
(right: fisherman setting traps along the river. credit: International Rivers)
Out of the two newspaper reports and a press release, there is some kind of concurrence among two of them, the MRC and fish scientists. The third one, the contention of the senior civil servant, can be said to be a laissez faire approach. In the case of the fish scientists they were not only highly vocal but also angry, whereas the MRC adopted a moderate stance.
On top of all these problems, China openly declared that she was planning to build another six mainstream dams on the Mekong-Lancang River in China.
Presently, she had already built two mainstream dams, with one that is operational and the other will be functioning soon.
The fallout on other stakeholders
However, there is every possibility that energy-hungry China will build some more such dams as she is so cash rich that she is virtually sitting on a mountain of hard cash, glistening with greenish-coloured Renminbi (Chinese currency) and her total monetary reserve is USD 2.2 trillion, more than any country on the planet.
Supposing, in the near future, say in 2020, there would be 19 mainstream dams in China, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand, then what will happen to the fish population in the Mekong Basin?
It follows, based on the arguments that had been made earlier that when the 19 mainstream dams were operational, these monstrous man-made structures would greatly exacerbate an already fragile Mekong River ecosystem and reduce its fish population to near extinction. Any layman knows the answer and it does not require a rocket scientist to come to this common sense conclusion.
In connection with this, I would again quote from Tom’s new report, “Ian Baird, a Canadian fisheries expert said this dam (Don Sahong) not only impact fishermen living in the dam area but far beyond 4,000 Islands. Some species swim up from the estuary in Vietnam through Cambodia, all the way up to Luang Prabang in northern Laos.”
As one can see by now there are serious differences between the three parties, civil servant, the MRC and fish scientists on a problem and so one can ask them all to personally meet to dialogue with one another and at the end of it produce a report for all to read and digest.
Staging such a meeting is timely as the four dam building countries, Laos, China, Cambodia and Thailand are seriously considering giving the green light for the construction of 17 mainstream dams and so let no this call be a cry in the wilderness.
Related posts:
- The neglect of professional responsibility by the mainstream press
- Mainstream media going downstream: PN Balji
- NMP speaks up against restriction of non-mainstream opinions
- Circumventing the mainstream media bias: A call for oppositional introspection
- mainstream media praised again by minister
Such a dam or set of dams would have considerable impact on the health of the whole ecosystem and represents extreme ignorance, shortsightedness and potentially greed on the part of those supporting its construction. The number of people whose health would be affected is significant as any fish species that uses different parts of the river for breeding will face a drastic drop in numbers or even extinction. For the many, many people living near the river, food sources will disappear.
Strong vocal opposition to the dam is required.
The Hoover Dam was bult In 1936.
Hoover Dam and its associated changes in water use had devastating impact on the Colorado River Delta at the mouth of the Colorado River. The construction of the dam has been pointed to as the beginning of an era of decline of this estuarine ecosystem. For six years in the late 1930s, after the construction of the dam and while Lake Mead filled, virtually no flow of water reached the mouth of the river. The delta’s estuary, which once had a freshwater-saltwater mixing zone stretching 65 kilometres south of the river’s mouth, was turned into an inverse estuary where the level of salinity was actually higher closer to the river’s mouth.
Looking upstream from Hoover Dam on March 2009, the water level has decreased drastically.The Colorado River had experienced natural flooding before the construction of the Hoover Dam. The dam eliminated the natural flooding, which imperiled many species adapted to the flooding, including both plants and animals.
The construction of the dam decimated the populations of native fish in the river downstream from the dam.Four species of fish native to the Colorado River, the Bonytail chub, Colorado pikeminnow, Humpback chub, and Razorback sucker, are currently listed as endangered by the U.S. federal government.
Same old story. As usual, the angmos who have juiced the own land to the max for centuries are now the self appointed gaurdian of the Earth, telling others countries what they cannot do which they did anyway.
The same hidden agenda to put obstacles in the way of growth of other countries to ensure their world dominance.
KopitiamApek, great report on the Hoover dam. The implication and lesson is that one must anticipate the effect of the building of any dam on the environment and such an exercise must be carried out during the early stage of the proposal.
I ask the question, “What price, Laos battery of Asia.”
Perhaps, there is a need for a cap on the number of mainstream and tributary dams on the entire Mekong basin.
4) Rurehe
Dams brings significant benefits to a country’s economic growth. On the long run, it is more “green” than most other sources of energy. The ecological impact well managed can be minimised. The benefit of many decades of a pollution free power source should not be ignored. If the west gets their way at blocking building of dams, no under-developed country can ever build another dam and enjoy its benefit. The west has already got their dams.
Now it is saying no you can’t have yours.
The 3 gorges dam will reap tremedous benefits for centuries to come. It was less problematic to implement as it is all within one country. The mekong is a lot more challenging straddling across many nations. The way forward is to built the dams and share the pain and benefits as equitably as possible among the countries. Quite a duanting task though, but if it can be worked out, it will help the region out of its poverty trap. Just like the Nile and Ganges in the Indian subcontinent. If a peaceful solution can be found to jointly tap this huge dynamo of economic and social hope, millions will benefit, never mind the West saying it is ecologically harmful.
Yes all these so called Western experts have a lot to say. Extinction of catfish, dolphins, stingrays etc etc. What a load of craps. Like Kopitiam said, they already chopped down their forests, dammed their rivers etc and now they want to tell us how to live, and which area we can progress.
What they are more concern is not the catfish but the opportunity to cruise along the Mekong taking pictures of third world people and habitat.
I support the littoral states plan to build as many dams as possible to go greeen and control floodings. The catfish are smarter than all these westerners, and they will know how to adapt.