Highway to the danger list?

Activist Srisuwan Janya was stunned by the number of fallen and missing trees by the roadside of Highway 304, which cuts through the Unesco World Heritage-listed Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex.

Shrubs had been cleared away and an excavator was working to help expand the dual carriageway into a four-lane highway.

He suspected the missing trees hadn't been removed in compliance with Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) measures and said none of the trees should have been taken from the site.

“The World Heritage Committee wouldn’t accept this,” said Mr Srisuwan, a lawyer and president of the Stop Global Warming Association.

“It’s not the right way to get more vehicles running through a conservation zone.”

Declared a World Heritage site by Unesco in 2005, Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai may fall onto the World Heritage in Danger list and lose its status due to problems caused by increased illegal logging, skyrocketing tourism, encroaching resorts and emerging development projects, including the Highway 304 expansion.

The 40th World Heritage Committee session in July will be crucial for the area as the committee will make a decision over whether to put it on the Danger list.

The decision has been postponed for the past three years.

The outcome will depend on whether Thailand can prove the effectiveness of its measures to curb the threats to the park.

ECONOMIC STRATEGY

Thailand’s second natural World Heritage listing Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai spans 6,155 square kilometres across six provinces — Saraburi, Nakhon Nayok, Nakhon Ratchasima, Prachin Buri, Sa Kaeo and Buri Ram.

It is also a strategic economic route for Highway 304, which stretches 335km through Kabin Buri district in Prachin Buri province to Pak Thong Chai district in Nakhon Ratchasima, through the Dong Phaya Yen mountains and Khao Yai National Park.

To the east — around Rayong, Chon Buri and Chachoengsao — is Thailand’s major industrial hub and commercial ports, while the northeast — around Nakhon Ratchasima to the eastern border towns — has big domestic markets linked to cross-border trade with Laos and China.

The expansion of the dual carriageway to a four-lane Highway 304 is expected to improve the economic flow between the two regions while relieving congestion and cutting road accidents.

Overpasses and tunnels will be included in the project, and wildlife passages will be built under and over the highway to prevent animals being hit by vehicles.

Just after the 2014 coup, a long-delayed EIA of the project was approved by the National Environmental Committee chaired by Adm Narong Pipatanasai, deputy chief of the National Council for Peace and Order.

The project was launched last year after the government approved a 2.9 billion baht budget for 2015 to 2017 despite the project having been shelved for more than a decade due to activist protests.

LAWSUIT FOR TREES

“Improving the roads will make vehicles run faster and increase the chances of wildlife being hit by cars. You can’t expect animals to decide to use man-made passages to bypass the highway,” Mr Srisuwan said.

“The government should encourage road users to take other indirect highways.”

He believes the Highway 304 development has also opened access to illegal exploitation of the Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai forest.

When he visited the project site on Feb 28 he decided to launch a lawsuit against state agencies alleging the highway construction does not comply with the EIA.

The EIA proposes to save the trees by using a transplant technique involving growing the trees' root balls for at least six to 12 months before removing them.

But Mr Srisuwan said he saw some trees had been cut down instead of being transplanted.

The lawsuit targets the Department of Highways (DOH), the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation (DNP), the National Environmental Board and the World Heritage Committee representative to Thailand.

Project engineer Pornchai Sirarom said that no trees had been cut down. The ongoing construction is outside the forest conservation zone, he said.

Under the law, both kerbsides of any highway are considered the property of the DOH. The most debated sections of Highway 304 are between kilometre markers 26 to 29 and 42 to 52 where the World Heritage site intersects with the road.

Mr Pornchai said the expansion of Highway 304 is on DOH property and the DOH has paid the appropriate royalties for the trees.

He added that about 951 trees have been removed from the site using the technique set out in the EIA and that root balls were grown from July last year before the trees were recently transplanted.

Some other trees had fallen down before authorities removed them and each restricted tree that has been removed is registered with the DNP to prevent smuggling, he said.

The DNP official acknowledged that some forest trees had been cut down. But they were in national forest reserve zones, where tree removal is legal if the DNP grants permission, not in the national park.

The national park law prohibits tree removal.

'IN DANGER' LIST

Last year, the 39th World Heritage Committee meeting in Bonn, Germany, did not oppose the Highway 304 expansion project but raised questions over the government’s measures to minimise the environmental impact.

This resulted in the former minister of natural resources and environment Gen Dapong Ratanasuwan declaring his "50% satisfaction" rating of the meeting.

Thailand submitted a report on Feb 1 to clarify the measures the government is taking, along with a roadmap to curb illegal logging. The committee will decide if the report is accepted. If it’s not, Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai may fall onto the World Heritage in Danger list.

According to the DNP document, the government has assured the World Heritage Committee that effective environmental measures have been implemented at the construction sites.

These include building a 2.5-metre high concrete fence along the highway to prevent animals crossing the road and barriers to protect wildlife from being exposed to traffic noise.

The highway's animal paths will include tunnels for amphibians and underpasses for small animals with camera traps.

Larger animals can cross the road via underpasses and overpasses.

The DNP will arrange annual surveys of the forest boundary, biodiversity and wildlife population to monitor forest encroachment and wildlife smuggling. Two new ranger stations will also be built near the highway.

Reforestation will also be arranged, according to the document.

Some activists believe being downgraded may help push decision-makers to tackle problems concerning the inefficient management of the World Heritage site.  

They also raised concerns about the commercial exploitation of the World Heritage sites, such as organising large concerts on private properties within Khao Yai National Park.

Last year, police launched an investigation into a private property suspected of encroaching on the forest. The owners claim they obtained the land before the national park was designed.

The property is also used to hold concerts occasionally.

One of the concerts at the property attracted more than 40,000 visitors, raising controversy over the disturbance to wildlife.

Ironically, some events promoted the theme “performance for preserving the World Heritage site”.

Controversy over the Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai has raised concerns that if Thailand fails to maintain the World Heritage site, there will be consequences for the Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex (KKFC). The Kaeng Krachan complex has been nominated for Unesco World Heritage status, and a decision is expected in the coming years.

The KKFC lies in the Tenasserim Range on the Myanmar border and covers a 4,822 square kilometre area spanning Ratchaburi, Phetchaburi and Prachuap Khiri Khan.

The KKFC is also clouded by indigenous rights problems.

A QUESTION OF MANAGEMENT

The nomination of the KKFC as a World Heritage site is a source of pride for many. But for Roong Sanaetibang, 43, who was born in the Kaeng Krachan National Park, it is a source of fear.

For centuries, generations of his family have depended on the forest for food and water. The forest taught him to respect nature, which is the core of indigenous Karen culture.

But their ties to the forest have been gradually undermined by the state blaming them for forest invasion.

The KKFC is home to more than 1,199 plant species and 720 animal species including the endangered freshwater Siamese crocodile, Asiatic wild dogs, Asian elephants, giant tortoises and tigers.

The area was declared an Asean Heritage Park in 2003.

“Everyone praises the high value of the flora and fauna of Kaeng Krachan. We’re not sure we’re counted in those values,” said Mr Roong, fearing World Heritage status will prompt authorities to force indigenous people out. “If we’re seen as invaders, we will surely be kicked out."

He said at the moment the locals have no participation in the management of the site.

“The World Heritage status will do good, but state management of the property [following the status granting] is a big question,” Mr Roong said.

“We haven’t yet seen how we can be a part of its management. We weren’t even notified about the nomination.”

The report on Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai was submitted by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment to the World Heritage Committee, along with the KKFC final report to clarify the government’s plan to resolve the matters before the committee makes its decision.

The government’s target is to achieve World Heritage status for the KKFC this year despite the fact the nomination process could take until 2018 to finalise.

“We wrote [in the report] that we’re regularly working for the improvement of indigenous people’s livelihood. We’ve never left them behind,” said Thanya Netithammakun, director-general of the DNP.

However, local Karen networks want the disputes between the communities in the KKFC and national park officials to be resolved before registering the area as a World Heritage site.

DAWN OPERATION

The rush to enhance the KKFC’s status is being criticised for potentially pitting locals against the state in a similar conflict to that surrounding Thailand’s first natural World Heritage site, the Thungyai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries.

In 1991, the Thungyai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries — stretching more than 6,000 square kilometres across Kanchanaburi, Tak and Uthai Thani provinces — were declared a World Heritage site.

The nomination, made without local awareness, came after a series of threats to the area including the shelved Nam Choan Dam project and the 1973 discovery of wild animal carcasses among the debris of a military helicopter that crashed near the Thungyai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary (TNWS), which is part of the Thungyai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries.

The bodies of military officers and a film star were found in the debris and the incident sparked public outrage, contributing to the historic student uprising in Oct 14 the same year.

Just after the nation celebrated the World Heritage declaration for Thungyai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries, park officials revealed a plan to relocate two Karen villages, which was suspended after fierce protests.

One of the Karen, Nanwimol Sainitas, 40, found it hard to adjust to restrictions implemented by park officials following the declaration.

Local communities were prohibited from cultivation in existing farming areas. Some villagers were charged with forest encroachment.

The concept of local participation in World Heritage site management was not realised in the early years after the declaration.

“We were panicked. We didn’t feel comfortable under the presence of park officials,” said Mr Nanwimol.

Suphachai Poltip, 40, recalled an operation involving 1,200 officers, military and government officials at dawn one day in 1998 to tear down houses, including his own, in the forest. Part of his Karen village overlapped with the TNWS boundary.

He said the locals watched officers destroy more than 20 of their wooden houses. Some officers tied ropes to the columns of some houses and dragged them until the houses collapsed.

The locals suspected the operation may have been prompted by their opposition to an influential businessman who demanded the use of their land, rather than abiding by state policy to protect the World Heritage site.

Officials denied the claim, alleging the villagers were encroaching on the forest and that the locals were drug smugglers and illegal migrants despite holding Thai ID cards.

BUILDING COLLABORATION

Trust between locals and park officials was shattered after the incident until a non-profit organisation, the Seub Nakhasathien Foundation, offered to act as a go-between in the area.

The foundation ran the Joint Management of Protected Areas project between 2003 and 2014 to bring both sides to the discussion table. Peace came after the World Heritage status announcement.

“We’ve opened up opportunities for locals to continue their way of living,” said Veeraya Ochakul, chief of the TNSW since 2008.

“It was very difficult at the beginning, but we got through it.”

Park officials had to exempt local villagers from some laws, such as cultivation in forests, to create an atmosphere of reconciliation.

They conducted land surveys together to determine shifting cultivation zoning — which plots of land are cultivated temporarily, then abandoned and allowed to revert to their natural state while the cultivator moves on to another plot.

Farming zones are based on existing cropping areas. Farm extensions and single crop cultivations are prohibited under the agreement.

About 80% of park officials are from the local villages. This co-management approach reduces forest encroachment down to one or two cases per year.

“The World Heritage site encourages multiple stakeholders to see value in nature and in people. But in reality, the management wasn’t concerned with the value of people,” said Surapong Kongchantuk, director for the Karen Studies and Development Centre.

“Humans help guard the forest. So allowing them to participate in forest management will strengthen conservation.”

KAENG KRACHAN'S DIFFICULTIES

In contrast to the TNWS, co-management of the KKFC is facing difficulties.

Sponsored by a non-profit organisation, a group of Karen living in the KKFC travelled to the TNWS last month to learn about indigenous peoples’ lives within Thailand’s oldest World Heritage site.

Plu Jeebong, 39, was among the group. He was surprised to see the reconciliation between park officials and the local community despite the past tensions.

In 2010, 17 Karen families including Mr Plu were evicted from their houses deep in the forest of the Kaeng Krachan National Park. They claimed their houses were burned by park officials. The officials deny this.

The loss prompted six of them to file a lawsuit against the DNP and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment to demand 9.5 million baht in compensation and the right to return to their original settlement.

A Karen activist, Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen, who assisted locals in the suit, has been missing since April 2014. Park officials deny any involvement in his disappearance.

During the TNWS visit, Mr Plu and his friends were served rice that reminded them of their original home. The land in the lower part of the park where they are currently settled, arranged by officials, contains hard soil that can only produce small amounts of rice.

Many of them still don’t have farms because space is already occupied by another Karen population. But park officials have claimed that a reasonable amount of land was given to the Karen.

Unlike the enclosed TNWS, the Kaeng Krachan National Park is open, so there are concerns about an increase in tourists if the KKFC is declared a World Heritage site.

The local community has found junk and rubbish thrown away by visitors. They have also found human waste.

“Personally, I think the KKFC is not ready to be a World Heritage site now,” said Mr Plu. “We haven’t established collaboration with park officials.”

HERITAGE WITH MEANING

Beyond the KKFC, state agencies have discussed the possibility of nominating the Andaman Sea as another natural World Heritage site. But the nomination process probably won’t start any time soon. The area is also facing over-exploitation from tourism and coral degradation problems.

The news has concerned the Chao Ley (Moken) and some fishing communities over state policies limiting their participation in the management of natural resources and forbidding them to fish in certain areas.

“I support the KKFC as a World Heritage site, with enhanced co-management and respect for the local community,” said Chamniern Vorratnchaiphan, Thailand's representative to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the advisory body on nature for the World Heritage Committee.

“The IUCN used to give priority to only flora and fauna. But it’s realised that people and culture are priorities too. If locals are not involved, I don’t think the committee will grant the World Heritage status.”