TERRA Briefing Paper Summary of Analysis of the Report on Environmental Impact Assessment: The Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China- Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos, prepared by The Joint Experts Group on EIA of China, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand, (September 2001). 31 October 2001 In accordance with the decisions made at the Third TWG Meeting and the Quadripartite MOU, a joint Team on Environmental Impact Assessment and a Detailed Survey Team were established thereafter. The two Teams went to the working sites along the Upper River on April 18 and April 29, 2001 respectively for the purpose of a detailed survey and hydrological data collection. 1 The environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the 331 kilometre long stretch of the Mekong River in which the 21 reefs [rapids] and shoals that are to be dynamited and excavated for the navigation channel improvement project included TWO DAYS of field investigations. In October 2001, the Mekong River Commission employed independent experts to review and comment on the Report on Environmental Impact Assessment: The Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China- Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos, prepared by The Joint Experts Group on EIA of China, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand, September 2001 (hereafter referred to as the Navigation Project EIA ) (Please see endnotes for full references for the reports by the independent experts.) According to Brian Finlayson, Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, University of Melbourne, Australia (February 2002), 2 p.9, The cost of the EIA is not known but it was initiated in March 2001 and completed by September the same year. Given the poor data base for the upper Mekong, 5 months is a totally inadequate amount of time to spend on this important matter. A properly conducted EIA for this project would require a much longer time. In the case of water quality for example, which has been discussed earlier in this report, a minimum of one year s data is needed. Allowing time for establishment of the monitoring network and analysing the data after it has Technical Working Group on the Implementation of the Quadripartite Agreement on Commercial Navigation on the Lancang-Mekong River. Memorandum of Understanding, signed on 15 March 2001 by the four Transporation Ministries of the four countries, Concerning the Implementation of the Quadripartite Agreement on Commercial Navigation on the Lancang-Mekong River.
2 been collected then two years is a likely minimum for this aspect of the project alone. p.10, The haste with which this EIA has been prepared is obvious in the paucity of basic data and information and the sketchy and unsupported nature of the analyses carried out. A much more substantial analysis is necessary. In his analysis of the Navigation Project EIA, R.M. McDowall, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd., New Zealand (January 2002), writes that, p.4, The EIA includes country by country accounts of the existing environments of the Mekong River in each country. In each section there is mention of biological values: For China, the EIA devotes three pages (p.41-44) to biological values: 12 lines on plants, 5 lines on animals, 25 lines on fishes, 3 lines on river benthic organisms, 12 lines on phytoplankton, and 16 lines on zooplankton. With respect to Laos (p.46), there are only three lines on Natural resources, including the statement that there are abundant fish resources in Laos. On Myanmar (p.49) the only statement on aquatic fauna is that Myanmar is rich in freshwater fishes. And on Thailand (p.54) we are informed that Crocodiles are plentiful, soare fishes and birds. In addition (p.57) it is stated that: Many species of fish are found in Mekong River. The most important fish of Mekong River is the Giant catfish. There follows 20 lines of very sketchy and detail-free comment on phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthic organisms. This is essentially the entire background material upon which an analysis of environment impact is based. None of this minimal information has any scientific references indicating sources of information; who wrote the text and on what authority is unstated. There is no indication that there has been any significant investigation of biological values in and associated with the Mekong River in relation to the proposed channelisation, and no effort is made to quantify these biological values. p.6, It is proposed that the underwater works will be taken between December and March of the following year, a period that avoids the fish s migration and reproductive seasons. So negative impact will not be imposed on migratory species by the Project. [EIA, p.70] However, no data are provided and it is impossible therefore to verify this assertion. Nowhere is there provided any published species lists of fishes that can form the basis for analysis, let alone any explicit evaluation of the species, where they live, what habitats are critical for their survival, reproduction, development, food, or other life history stages and behaviours.
3 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 on such biological values. Put plainly, the EIA is manifestly totally inadequate. p.9, No mention is made of the potential impacts of the upper Mekong River navigation development project on any aquatic biota other than fishes. Crustaceans, insects and other organisms are ignored, as are any aquatic invertebrates that may inhabit the river (birds, turtles, water snakes, etc.). Effects on these organisms are simply ignored. p.9, CONCLUSIONS Basically, from the perspective of the fish fauna of the Mekong River, the virtual total absence of either investigation of biological values in the river, or the lack of any quantitative data on these values in the river, leaves a reader trying to evaluate the EIA without anything of substance to evaluate. Statements made are unsupported assertions which may or may not be correct. That being so, the EIA lacks credibility. In the absence of the reporting of such investigations, the lack of documentation of the biological values of the river, and in particular the total absence of quantitative information on the fish and other fauna of the Mekong River in the development zone of the river, it is the author s judgement that the environmental impact assessment of the navigation channel improvement project of the Lancang-Mekong River on biological values of the river is seriously deficient. Dr. Chris Cocklin and Ms Monique Hain, 3 of the Monash Environment Institute, Monash University, Australia, were also contracted by the Mekong River Commission to examine the Navigation Project EIA. p.2, Overall Evaluation The summary assessment of the EIA is that it is substantively inadequate and in many places fundamentally flawed. The EIA is inadequate in that it is not based on assessments of the full range of potential impacts. In general it omits assessment of long-term impacts associated with the operation of the waterway following the proposed works. Of utmost importance are projections of the long-term impacts on the hydrology of the river, impacts on river and riparian ecosystems, and the impacts associated with the actual use of the waterway. The EIA also overlooks the cumulative and secondary impacts that are likely to be associated with the project, including notably the impacts of increased economic activity that the EIA repeatedly refers to. The impact assessment pays scant attention to the downstream environmental, social and economic impacts. There are also likely to be significant changes arising from the potential for increased tourism and an increase in natural resource
4 exploitation. These will quite possibly have important implications I social, economic and environmental terms and must therefore be acknowledged in the report. p.4, The distribution of costs and benefits is not adequately analysed in the EIA. Almost inevitably, the positive and negative impacts of this project will be unequally distributed amongst the four riparian nations [I]t is quite possible that the nations which stand to benefit least from this project in economic terms will be the same ones that bear the greatest burden of the environmental and social costs. In particular, while Laos is unlikely to benefit to any great extent economically, the nation is likely to confront considerable issues relating to secondary economic development (especially forestry and tourism), it may be substantially burdened with ongoing costs associated with channel maintenance, and it will almost certainly experience the greatest environmental impacts, both within the construction area and downstream. In terms of the social impacts, what little actual analysis that is presented in the EIA appears to be based on a questionnaire/consultation process (pp.101-107). The methodology is not explained, the questionnaire is not presented in the report, and there is very little information presented about who in fact was interviewed, now how they were selected. Moreover, the consultation process appears only to have been carried out in China and Thailand, as no results are presented for either Laos or Myanmar. (see also, comments by Finlayson, below) p.8, SUMMARY The project works covered by this EIA constitute only the first phase in a much larger plan for navigation works on the Lancang-Mekong River. In relative terms, the environmental and social impacts associated with this first phase can probably be described as slight to moderate. The expected extent of impact, however, does not remove the obligation to conduct a thorough, comprehensive, and credible environmental and social impact assessment. This is all the more important, in light of the proposal to carry out further navigation works, which will almost certainly lead to more significant impacts. The EIA is unacceptable in many respects. Far too much of the content is based on speculation, the data that is used is patently inadequate, longer-term impacts are almost entirely overlooked, and the cumulative impacts (both social and environmental) are essentially ignored. Looking at the social impacts in particular, the report does not consider the ongoing effects that might arise, the analysis appears to be based on a flawed methodology, and the essential requirement of effective public participation has been overlooked. The report as presented could not be accepted as an adequate account and evaluation of the environmental and social impacts associated with the proposed channel navigation works.
5 Deep Pools of the Mekong River: Another (Un-reported, Un-assessed) Impact In April 2002, the MRC Fisheries Programme, published a research paper entitled Deep pools as dry season fish habitats in the Mekong River Basin. 4 Deep pools are areas of the Mekong River (and some of its tributaries) located between upstream and downstream rapids, with depths ranging from a few metres to dozens of metres. These deep pools are critically important dry season habitat for the migratory and non-migratory fishes of the Mekong River and its tributaries. According to the MRC Fisheries Programme report, p. 3. The spatial separation between dry-season refuges and flood-season feeding and spawning habitats forces most mainstream Mekong fishes to migrates [I]n the upper section of the basin, approximately from the mouth of the Loei River, the Mekong [is] a typical mountain river, crossing through steep river valleys with limited floodplain habitats. In this section, fishes mainly move from deep pool habitats along the Xayaboury-Luang Prabang to upstream spawning habitats [habitat upstream of Luang-Prabang and into Yunnan province, China]. Conspicuous examples of this movement is that of the Mekong giant catfish, Pangasianodon gigas, and its slightly smaller cousin, Pangasius sanitwongsei. p.5, [A]s the flood recedes at the ends of the monsoon season, it is crucial that fishes can seek refuge in appropriate dry season habitats Within the main river channels, certain sections are better suited as dry season habitats than others. In particular, deeper sections of the river are used by a large number of species during this period of the year. These deep sections are often referred to as deep pools (or deep holes), a term that is increasingly being used in the context of fisheries ecology of the Mekong Basin. p.6, [A] deep pool is simply a confined relatively deep area within a river channel, which acts as a dry season refuge for a number of important fish species. For some species, deep pools may also act as spawning habitats. p.9, Northern Lao PDR During a fisheries survey of Luang Prabang province in northern Lao PDR, 37 percent of the survey villages reported that they have a conservation zone near the village. These conservation zones were mainly associated with deep pools within the river, which are believed to be important breeding grounds for fish. p.10, It is also generally believed that the Mekong giant catfish, Pangasianodon gigas, spends the dry season in deep pools. Fishers in Xayabouri province, Lao PDR, 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 borders of Thailand, Lao PDR and Myanmar, also believe that the giant catfish they catch originate from Xayabouri.
6 p.13, [D]eep pools are used by a large number of species with different ecological characteristics This may be of importance in relation to future management options, because local management initiatives may, at the same time, serve both the management of local [fish] stocks and of migratory [fish] stocks (e.g., transboundary stocks). The destruction of the Mekong River rapids by the Navigation Channel Improvement Project will have two distinct immediate and long-term impacts on the deep pools and dry season habitat of the fishes of this stretch of the river. First, during the dry season, rapids are an important habitat and source of food for small-sized fishes, juvenile fishes, and other aquatic animals and plants. These aquatic life forms are also an important food source for the many species of fish (including surface-feeders, bottom-feeders, and predators the latter two groups usually of large-sized species) living in the deep pools. Furthermore, as water flows over and through the rapids, downstream (deep pool) dissolved oxygen concentrations are increased. Without the rapids, the food sources and oxygen of the fishes living in the deep pools will decline significantly. A second, long term impact on the habitat and fisheries of the Mekong s deep pools relates to the proposed mitigating measures of the Navigation Channel Improvement Project. According to the Navigation Project EIA, The construction of the underwater works [navigation channel] will be taken between December and March of the following year [2002-2003], a period that avoids the fish s migration and reproduction seasons. So negative impact will not be imposed on the migratory species by the Project. Although the Navigation Project EIA contains no referenced information and reports no field research regarding the timing of fish migrations, it is important to recognize that many species of fish inhabit the deep pools of the Mekong River during the dry season many of these fish do not, or can not, swim over/through dry season (low water level) rapids or to other deep water pools. The blasting will cause severe shortterm impacts on these fishes, and probably kill most of these fishes. The more important long-term impact of the dynamiting of the Mekong rapids is not considered in the Navigation Project EIA, or in the reports of the MRC s independent experts. According to the Navigation Project EIA (p.21), The selection of dumping area shall be as adjacent to the solid collection site as possible, to shorten the transportation distance and to take full account of impact upon environment. The site selected is normally the trough in the lower reach. And pages 112 to 113 of the EIA (Table 7.1 The Environmental Impacts mitigating measures of the Project ), lists as Impact mitigation method, Spoil matter to discharge to torrential deep ponds. To translate the Navigation Project EIA terms, trough in the lower reach and torrential deep ponds are the deep pools that are the habitat of most of the fishes of this stretch of the Mekong River during the dry season. Spoil matter is the tons of rocks that will be blasted out of the rapids to make the navigation channel.
7 These tons of rocks dumped into the deep pools of the Mekong River will have immediate and long-term impacts on the fisheries of the Mekong River from at least the China-Myanmar border downstream to Luang Prabang and Xayabouri provinces in Lao PDR. The massive amounts of rocks dumped in the deep pools will affect radically alter and destroy large parts of the dry season habitat for most of the bottom-feeding and predator large fish species of this stretch of the Mekong River. These fishes, and the rapid-dwelling fishes and other aquatic animals that will be impacted by the dynamiting to the Mekong River rapids and subsequent filling of the deep pools with the spoil matter blasted out of the rapids, are the single most important source of dietary protein for tens of thousands of people living along the Mekong River in Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand.
8 An EIA that violates the Law of the Lao PDR According to the Report on Environmental Impact Assessment: The Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China-Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos, p.15, 2.2.4.1 Principles, paragraph (2), The regulating program [dynamiting of Mekong River rapids to make navigation channel] shall be in line with the environmental protection laws and regulations of the concerned countries. 5 According to Brian Finlayson, Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, University of Melbourne, Australia (February 2002), 6 the Science, Technology and Environment Agency Assessment Regulation of Lao PDR, Article 12, Item 2, The 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. Item 4, requires an EIA to identify all Lao laws, regulations, and international treaty obligations, and land-use plans that are relevant and explain in detail how the project activities will comply with these governmental directives. According to Finlayson, This has not been done in the present EIA. Despite this, the Final Conclusions (Section 8.7, p.120) state that the project is acceptable according to the environment protection laws of Laos (and the other participating states).
9 Background and Long Term Planning : Waterway Transportation on China s Eastern Danube From February to May 1993, a joint survey on waterway transportation on the Lancang-Mekong River was organized by the countries of China, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand. The Report on an Investigation of Waterway Transportation Along the Upper Mekong River of China, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand by Upper Mekong Associated Survey Team of China, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand, May 19, 1993, survey a 360 kilometre stretch of the Mekong River (below the Myanmar-China border). The Survey Team identified all together 100 hindering rapids and shoals, in average of 1 [one] per 3.61 km Among the 100 hindering rapids and shoals [there are] no rapids or shoals which can stop navigation. Even on the most hindering rapids or shoals, boats if taking correct sailing line with proper operation by adopting a certain sailing aids and navigation measures, all can safely pass through. Merely the measures such as exploding reefs, dredging, building dykes to guide flow etc. can satisfy the requirements of whole year navigable to 300 tonnage autoboats. (p. 121, emphasis added) First phase construction : Whole year navigation to 100 tonnage boats and over 1 million tons annual passing capacity, therefore the measurements of navigation channel must meet the standards: minimum navigable width 30 metres, minimum navigable depth 1.5 metres, guaranteed minimum water level 95% [347 days of the year] Thus, 69 rapids must be regulated. Among them, 7 shoals on China- Myanmar boundary river, 50 on Laos-Myanmar boundary river, 12 on Laos- Thailand boundary river. (p.129, emphasis added) Second phase construction : The objectives of the second phase regulation project: whole year navigable to 300 tonnage boats and over 6 million ton annual passing capacity. Channel measurements must meet with the standards: minimum navigable width 40 metres, minimum navigable depth 20 metres, guaranteed lowest navigable water level 95% [347 days of the year] Therefore, 51 hindering rapids and shoals must be regulated. Among these, 1 shoal on China-Myanmar boundary river, 40 on Laos-Myanmar boundary river, 10 on Laos-Thailand boundary river. (p.130, emphasis added) Long term planning : Joint development plan between navigation and hydropower generation along upper Mekong shall make the river navigable to a fleet of four 500 tonnage boats [the channel will be wide enough to allow four 500 ton ships pass each other at the same time]. When all dams completed, annual passing capacity can be over 20 million tons. Objectives of this long term plan shall finally benefit the direct transportation along the waterway and between the river and the sea, in order to promote economic prosperity in six riparian countries i.e. China, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam. On 20 April 2000, the four Transportation Ministers of China, Burma, Laos and Thailand signed the Agreement on Commercial Navigation on the Lancang- Mekong River, also known as the Quadripartite Agreement, which is a legal guarantee to permit commercial navigation between the four countries. At a Senior
10 Officials Meeting in Beijing on 14-15 March 2001, the governments of the four countries agreed to establish the Joint Committee on Coordination of Commercial Navigation on the Lancang-Mekong River (JCCCN) to coordinate the implementation of the Quadripartite Agreement. One of its first tasks was to approve the Environment Impact Assessment for the construction of the navigation channel on the Mekong River. Endnotes/References: 1 The Joint Experts Group on EIA of China, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand (September 2001) Report on Environmental Impact Assessment: The Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China-Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Lao, p.4. 2 Brian Finlayson (February 2002), Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, University of Melbourne, Australia, to the Mekong River Commission on the Report on Environmental Impact Assessment: The Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China-Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos. 3 Dr. Chris Cocklin and Ms Monique Hain, Monash Environment Institute, Monash University, Australia, (December 2001) Evaluation of the EIA for the Proposed Upper Mekong Navigation Improvement Project: Report prepared for the Mekong River Commission Environment Program. 4 MRC Fisheries Programme (April 2002) Deep pools as dry season fish habitats in the Mekong River Basin, MRC Technical Paper No. 4, Mekong River Commission. 5 See also, R.M. McDowall, (January 2002) National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd., New Zealand Evaluation of: Report on Environmental Impact Assessment: The Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang- Mekong River from China-Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos: The fisheries impacts reviewed. 6 Brian Finlayson (February 2002), Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, University of Melbourne, Australia, to the Mekong River Commission on the Report on Environmental Impact Assessment: The Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China-Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos.