Hi Glen, Good to get this alert.
We're fighting a similar dam proposal here in Aotearoa/NZ.
Its similar in the sense that the Mokihinui catchment is wild and almost untouched by development. It has rare wildlife like kiwi the whio/blue duck, magnificent rainforests and is regularly hit by huge earthquakes which ravage the landscape but replenish fertility.
However, this hasnt stopped "green' energy company Meridian wanting to dam it.
All the NGOs and big recreation NGOs are against it including the local fishermens association and some landowners.
In Cambodia they wont use qualified experts. Here they do, but they are compromised experts, people with Ph Ds who have sold their souls to mining, hydro companies. The ecology expert has bunched together a number of forest types as one and said this type is common elsewhere. It's nonsensical.
The company hasnt even done a seperate earthquake report. Its quake evidence is hidden away in the engineering, landscape and sediment reports.
This is how its done in a first world country, but its the same general scenario.
The dam will cost US$500m. This could put solar water heaters on 50,000 homes and free up a huge bloc of power.
But no, NZ still has the Big Plant mentality, which is really the Big Profit Centre mentailiy. They dont want households harnessing the sun or generating their own power.
Cheers, Pete Lusk

Dear Glen,

Having worked in the Cardamoms with Conservation International since 2003, your posting surprises me. Yes, this dam is not ideal for conservation, but only 3-4 globally threatened species will be affected by the dam in such a way as to jeopardise their populations (your figure of 31 species came from a report I drafted, but it fails to recognise that most of these species are terrestrial and will move away from the inundation zone). There will still be over 1M ha of pristine forest for these species to move into, and at least four other river systems. In fact, our detailed surveys since 2004 clearly show that over 50 GT species rely on the watershed for this dam, and that the dam will provide vital value to maintenance of this watershed. The EIA team, who we worked closely with to ensure their report uses excellent data, has produced a good report. The dam company has asked us for quotes for mitigation of wildlife conflicts, and has asked for a figure for annual expenses to cover management of the watershed. This could triple the funding for the montane forests, which is where the real biodiversity and the endemic species live.

Yes, the downstream impacts on the seasonally inundated forests is fairly high. I did the report for this (I believe you received much of your information from the International Rivers NGO, who used CI's reports to publicise this project). However, there is a crucial need to work closely with the NGOs who are on the ground, to ensure there are no mixed messages.

For example, the Areng valley only contains around 1,000 people (whose livelihoods we have been supporting for half a decade), which is not high density for Asia, and is actually negligible for relocation (there are good plans for relocation by the government and the communities) considering the vast power output from this dam and the positive returns for the development of Cambodia's economy. Cambodia has some of the most expensive electricity in the world and this leads to deforestation for charcoal and fuelwood. So the dam is not all bad.

At present, Cambodia's government has a very negative image of conservationists because we are so black and white, so polarised in our views. We also fail to fully appreciate the value economic development in a of poor country, which is the right of every country whether we accept it or not. We have to be realistic and work WITH the governments. We unfairly label their projects as 'dubious', even though they are actually supported by JICA and international governments.

In a fortnight we are hosting a meeeting between NGOs and the Cambodian ministries, in particular the Ministry of Industry, Mines and Energy. Our message is clear: it is possible to reconcile conservation and development in the same landscape. They can benefit from each other, in terms of watershed and biodiversity management and in terms of funding for conservation while supporting economic development. It has taken us months for the government to trust us at all, as they are tired of being told they are wrong and they are hurting their environment.

There are actually about 7 dams planned for the Cardamoms. The one with the most serious biological impacts is not the Areng Dam. It is arguably the Upper Stoueng Russei Chrum dam, which would require roads and workers deep in the protected forest. The power generated from that dam is also relatively very small. This is our concern, and is the dam we are trying to prevent being built. But it can only be done through open communication face to face with the government, and by providing sound arguments with scientific basis for the dams not being built. The government also needs alternatives to the dams, as they will not stop building a huge, economically viable dam because a handful of people will be moved 30km and a very few species will be displaced.

I hope your article can be revised to provide a fairer picture of the situation.

Best wishes,
David Emmett
Acting Regional Director
CI-IndoBurma

David,
We standby our biocentric analysis, and do not accept your premise that the world's last intact ecosystems can be both developed and protected. We have already surpassed the amount of biodiversity and ecosystems that can be lost and sustain an operable biosphere. Your apologist approach is part of the problem, impeding an ecological awakening at the magnitude required to sustain and restore global ecological systems. Then again, CI has more than one corporate sponsor, so why am I surprised.
Dr. Glen Barry

STOP THE DAMING

Dear Glen,

I found it very interesting to read your article about the Areng River dam. I was extremely surprised and disappointed to read Mr. Emmett's response to the article. It is clear that the Areng River is of global significance. I find it amazing and a poor reflection on Mr. Emmett and Conservation International, that they will go public on an issue like this in the manner they have. Mr. Emmett misses the point: is the Areng River dam a good thing or is it a bad thing from an environmental perspective? From what is discussed the answer is unquestionably "no it isn't".

Mr. Emmett attempts to discredit your article by attacking details (1,000 people relocated vs 1,500, 31 GT species, terrestrial species moving away, the number of dam sites, etc - all of which I'm sure could be counter-debated in their own right), but he fails to acknowledge the fundamental issue: that the upper Areng River is a unique site, that there are other alternatives available across the landscape; and from an environmental stewardship perspective it would be sensible for the Cambodian government to focus on the other sites, leaving the Areng and its people in tact. Clearly Mr. Emmett is incapable of seeing the forest through the trees.

He is correct, that on-ground conservation needs to work with government. The fact that the Cambodian government appears to carry a dim view of his organization surely brings into question their general modus operandi.

Conservationists need to pick their battles. To be watering down and backing away from something as clearly important as the Areng River dam, demonstrates a lack of judgement and capacity. CI's position on this issue will no doubt give the relevant government decision-makers a pocket full of ammunition.

Keep up the excellent work, Glen, the world needs dedicated people like you. Mr. Emmett, time to have a good hard think.

Kind regards,
Concerned

Dear ,
You are doing well job in this regard . Regarding my view dam should not be sonstructed on the river.
Becoze no one should be allowed to play with nature.

Well, i sign this petition and guess what was the answer?????

From: cambodianembassy Date: 10/7/2008 5:41:34 AM
To: Giovanna Villani

coward!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Giovanna Villani"
To:
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 11:41 PM
Subject: Please protect Cardamom Mountains

Dear Prime Minister Hun Sen,

I wish to express my deep concern regarding your
government's plans to construct the Areng River Dam, and
other dams as well, in the Cardamom Mountains. The Cardamom
Mountains are a natural area of national and global
importance. This is one of Asia's last unbroken, large
primary forest expanses with wild waterways linking
mountain-top and ocean, containing still intact extensive
tracts of lowland evergreen forest, and holding over 40
globally threatened species.

In an increasingly environmentally devastated Asia (and
world), this large intact natural ecosystem is worth far
more in an intact state than being flooded and logged. It
will provide water, soil, genetic materials, clean air,
forest products and tourism revenue forever if protected.
Your government has a responsibility to demonstrate
sensible stewardship of this invaluable ecosystem, and this
does not include wholesale destruction caused by ill-
conceived dams (and logging).

In a region that has a history of environmental
mismanagement, Cambodia's biodiversity and natural areas
are a tremendous asset around which the country can
sustainably develop. Experience in neighboring countries
and globally has shown large hydropower projects incur
significant environmental and social costs that undermine
sustainable development. There are many better-suited dam
sites outside of the Cardamom landscape than the Areng
River. I therefore respectfully add my voice to those in
Cambodia and around the world, imploring you to cancel the
Areng River Dam and other dams in the Cardamom Mountains.

Given the needs of your citizens, we agree sensible hydro-
electricity projects may be justified. Yet Cambodia's free-
flowing rivers and abundant natural resources are
invaluable irreplacable assets, the health of which is
vital to the well-being of Cambodia's rural population.
Poorly conceived hydropower development could irreparably
damage these resources and undermine Cambodia's sustainable
development. There can be no economic development without
water, biodiversity and ecosystems.

Please commit to long-term full protection for the Cardamom
Mountain ecosystems by making the Cardamom Mountains a
World Heritage Area. International donors must be
challenged to provide funding to identify dam sites that
will not destroy natural values, and to fund sustainable
development based upon standing rainforests and intact,
free-flowing rivers.

Your government must demonstrate wise leadership and fully
protect the Cardamom Mountains. The negative environmental
and social impacts of ill-conceived dam projects, and
continuing widespread industrial rainforest logging, must
not become your legacy. Do the right thing to ensure long-
term ecological sustainability in your great nation --
without ecology there can be no economy. The world is
watching and hoping for responsible leadership from you.

Yours sincerely,

Giovanna Villani
Brazil
gvillani@animail.net