|
By Park Mee-na
Korea's rivers are alive. They support many specialized species and play a very important role in naturally improving water quality and reducing the dangers of flooding.
Natural stretches of rivers are often also extremely beautiful; a part of the cultural heritage and image of the nation. The proposed refurbishment plan for four rivers threatens much of this.
Our rivers are important for many bird species. In highland streams, there are nesting brown dippers and grey wagtails, while small numbers of the shy and exquisite scaly-sided merganser (a globally endangered species with a world population of only 1,800) spend the winter on meandering rivers in the hills.
In their floodplains, the rivers are used by nesting long-billed plovers and in Gumi on the Nakdong river, by roosting hooded cranes (world population: 10,000).
The estuaries of the Han, the Geum and the Nakdong are important for an even wider diversity of species, including shorebirds and the globally endangered black-faced spoonbill, or ``Korean spoonbill" as it is known in some languages, which in 2006 had a world population of only 1,500.
These bird species, and others like them, are both part of and also depend on the ecological character of rivers.
They are valuable bio-indicators, their abundance indicating healthy and important river-wetlands, and their rarity indicating the rarity of such wetlands. They are part of the natural culture of the nation, and many of them are listed as national natural monuments.
The Republic of Korea has already passed several laws and signed international agreements making clear that we, as a nation, understand the value of these species and the natural value of our rivers.
Our nation, for example, is a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity and is an active member of the United Nations.
As such, we have agreed to reduce the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010 ― Goal 7, Target 2 of the United Nation's Millennium Development Goals.
Further, our membership in the Ramsar Convention on wetlands means that we have agreed to include the conservation of wetlands (including rivers) in our national planning policy and to plan for the wise use of all wetlands (Ramsar Article 3.1).
We have agreed that the wise use of wetlands requires conserving their ecological character (Ramsar Resolution 9.1), and that ``ecological character" means the ``combination of the ecosystem components, processes and benefits/services that characterize the wetland" (Ramsar Resolution 9.1, Annex A).
Through all of the above and more, our nation has agreed to protect the ecological character and the biodiversity of our rivers. It has made a public promise to keep our natural rivers natural, and our living rivers alive.
As a nongovernmental organization working for the conservation of birds and their habitats, Birds Korea is therefore puzzled by recent announcements in support of the ``refurbishment" of four, or even five, of the nation's major rivers.
These announcements, which call for the dredging of rivers and the construction of dams, weirs and bicycle pathways, seem to overlook the clear (and legally-binding) obligations under Ramsar and the Convention on Biological Diversity.
In our understanding of Ramsar guidance, we would like to ask:
(1). Does the plan include the creation of wetlands to act as semi-natural water treatment facilities? With less pollution entering them, why would the rivers in their natural state then be unable to maintain good water quality?
(2). To store rainwater and to help reduce flooding, there is a need to set aside large, flood-prone areas that can be restored to natural flood-plain wetland. Is this being done?
(3). Many of the rivers are naturally shallow. What is the purpose of making them deeper, especially as such areas will then need constant and expensive re-dredging?
(4). Has analysis been conducted to assess the benefits of natural riverbanks compared to concrete riverbanks?
International experience suggests that vegetated riverbanks, supported where necessary by artificial structures, will be strong, and cheaper to maintain than concreted riverbanks, with more value for biodiversity, recreation and environmental education.
We believe that the refurbishment project in its present form has been poorly advised.
The wider scientific and conservation community already understands that massive construction projects, as proposed, will cause major, long-term damage to the ecological character of several of the nation's rivers through the removal of natural riverbeds and river-edges through the restriction of the movement of water through additional dams and weirs and by greatly increased disturbance.
River ``refurbishment" will therefore cause further decline in already threatened species. Loss of biodiversity is of concern to people in Korea and throughout the world.
Particularly during a period of economic slowdown, unsustainable development of this kind can also damage the international image of the Republic of Korea ― our ``national brand."
We therefore join with others to respectfully ask for the immediate suspension of the refurbishment plan. We believe that there is an urgent need for a full and independent assessment of anticipated impacts.
To achieve genuinely green growth in line with existing obligations and best practice, only the best part of the plan should be selected, and the worst part rejected. The rivers are alive ― let them always remain so.
Park Mee-na is the national coordinator of Birds Korea, an organization based in Busan that works for the conservation of birds and their habitats in Korea. She has co-authored and contributed to several reports and books on wetlands and biodiversity conservation, including ``Invisible Connections," published by Wetlands International. She can be reached at Park.Meena@birdskorea.org. The views expressed in the above article are those of the author and do no necessarily reflect the editorial policy of The Korea Times.
|
