Mekong River CommissionMekong River CommissionP.O. Box 1112, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia
l
Telephone: (855-23) 720 979
l Facsimile: (855-23) 720 972
11 July 2001
Mr Russell Peterson, Representative
& Mr Mak Sithirith, Environment Network Coordinator
NGO Forum on Cambodia
35, St 178, Phnom Penh
Dear Mr Russell Peterson and Mr Mak Sithirith
The NGO Forum is an important and respected source of development information and commentary on Cambodia. The Mekong River Commission is pleased to support the NGO Forum in this role, in line with our commitment to cooperate with civil society organizations active on natural resource planning and management in the Mekong region.
In this regard, I am writing to you regarding the factual accuracy of some of the material which is currently posted on the NGO Forum website. Please find attached some comments on your website material, based on feedback from the various programme specialists at MRC.
I trust these comments will be taken in the spirit of cooperation in which they are intended, and I appreciate very much if you would let us know what action would be taken to address them. I would also be happy to discuss ways in which we might be able to share information in the future.
Yours sincerely
Delia Paul
Communications, Partnerships and Public Participation Officer
CC: Joern
Kristensen, CEO
Chris Barlow, Acting Programme Manager, Fisheries Programme
This paper highlights over-fishing as the main factor leading to decline of fish stocks in the Tonle Sap. In fact, the greatest threat to Tonle Sap fisheries would be from potential habitat destruction.
Most Lower Mekong Basin fish species are adapted to high natural mortalities. They reach sexual maturity early, and lay a high number of eggs that develop rapidly. Fish stocks thus can “bounce back” rapidly even after heavy losses to fishers. However, their breeding, being highly inter-dependent with seasonal river flows and their propensity to migrate over long distances, depends very much on maintenance of environmental quality in the Basin.
Secondly, there is not conclusive evidence that fish stocks overall have declined. What is certain is that there are fewer large fish being caught, and that the fish catch per unit of effort is falling. Commercial pressure, as your paper notes, has no doubt affected the livelihoods of local people – but this does not mean there are less fish in the Tonle Sap than before, although some of the larger species, which reproduce later in life, are certainly under threat.
Assertions of supposed decline in fish species, referring to MRC research, are based on material taken out of context. The paper by Van Zalinge and Thouk, for example (endnote 25), focuses on 80 to 100 commercially important species in the Tonle Sap. It does not mean that these are “the only species now present in the Tonle Sap” as your paper claims. The most recent unofficial estimate indicates that up to 1,700 fish species may inhabit the entire Mekong river system.
Regarding siltation, it was previously thought that the Tonle Sap was silting up at great speed. However, newer surveys, including the MRC’s “Development Plan for Tonle Sap and Chaktomuk” have shown a much lower siltation rate. The misunderstanding about rates was caused by a lack of accurate data, and the use of different baselines in calculation. Also, according to the laws of physics, the water simply cannot carry such an amount of silt to the lake as was initially claimed. Your paper cites MRC research from 1999, which gives the lower rate, but then cites an older 1994 study as evidence of increased siltation, when in fact the old rate is no longer accepted as being scientifically valid.
Finally, comparisons with fish catches of earlier decades can only be speculative, as small-scale fisheries had never been seriously estimated before 1994. MRC surveys show that fish catch in the Lower Mekong Basin is in fact much higher than was previously thought, at 1.6 to 1.8 million metric tons with a retail value of about 1.4 billion US dollars.
This paper occasionally confuses the old Mekong Committee and its objectives with the current Mekong River Commission, which has the stated mission “To promote and coordinate sustainable management of water and related resources for the countries’ mutual benefit and the people’s well-being by implementing strategic programmes and activities and providing scientific information and policy advice.”
The Mekong River Commission was created under the 1995 Agreement on Cooperation for Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Basin. This agreement provides a firm basis for genuine cooperation between the four countries. No member country has the right to veto another’s project, but this freedom is balanced with State Responsibility For Damages under Article 8. There are very strong and clear requirements for notification and consultation under specified circumstances.
Your claim that “donors and lenders are circumventing the MRC altogether” is not borne out by actual funding trends. In the year 2000, multi-year funding agreements with donors reached an all-time high of USD 27.5 million, reflecting much increased donor confidence. Furthermore, as of October 2000, the four member countries have also decided to gradually increase their annual financial contributions to the MRC, reflecting their genuine ownership of the MRC as the main planning organisation for Mekong-related affairs. This decision makes it possible to reduce the need for additional support from donors to the infrastructure of the organisation and in a number of years should make the financing of MRC core functions a matter for the riparian countries themselves.
Since 1999, the MRC has increasingly adopted a programme
approach, whereby donors are invited to contribute towards a coherent basket of
objectives with a focus on transboundary planning and management issues. Such
issues are organized around the three core areas of a Basin Development Plan,
Water Utilisation Programme and Environment Programme.
___________________________________________________________________________