Phrae: In a fervent display of unity and discontent, approximately 1,000 residents came together to protest the Pheu Thai Party’s controversial plan to resurrect the Kaeng Suea Ten Dam project in Song district. The impassioned protest took place in tambon Sa Lab, where locals creatively expressed their dissent by parading three coffins labeled with the names of Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Phumtham Wechayachai, Public Health Minister Somsak Thepsutin, and former Deputy Prime Minister Plodprasop Suraswadi. These officials have been singled out as key proponents in reviving the contentious project.
The catalyst for this protest was a recent statement by Mr. Phumtham, highlighting the government’s renewed focus on a mammoth 200-billion-baht water management initiative, which includes the contentious dam. The primary objective, according to Mr. Phumtham, is to mitigate flooding in the Yom River basin, a goal that has stirred both hope and concern among the local populace.
The Kaeng Suea Ten Dam project has a long and contentious history. Initially proposed in 1980, it faced staunch opposition from local residents and environmentalists alike. The project was shelved, only to be revived again in 2012 under the Yingluck Shinawatra administration, before being suspended following the 2014 military coup. Now, the proposal has once again surfaced, thanks to Mr. Phumtham’s recent advocacy.
Mr. Phumtham argues that the dam would help control water levels in the Yom River, which is a crucial tributary of the Chao Phraya River, flowing through the Central Plains provinces including Bangkok before reaching the Gulf of Thailand. He finds an ally in Mr. Somsak, leader of the Wang Nam Yom group with a political foothold in Sukhothai, neighboring Phrae. Mr. Plodprasop, former permanent secretary for natural resources and environment, also supports the project.
However, not everyone is convinced. Harnnarong Yaowalers, president of the Foundation for Integrated Water Management, warns that the construction of the dam could devastate 40,000 rai of precious golden teak forests, one of the few remaining in the country. The ecological cost, according to Mr. Harnnarong, is too high a price to pay. Furthermore, he points out that approximately 2,000 families across three villages—Baan Mae Ten, Don Kaew, and Don Chai—could face displacement.
The tension was palpable in the air during the protest, with residents voicing their fears and frustrations over the potential environmental and social impact of the project. The scene was both somber and defiant, as the coffins symbolized not just the political figurines they were named after, but also the perceived death of sustainable living and community integrity should the dam be built.
As debates continue to rage, the struggle between development and conservation in Phrae remains emblematic of broader challenges faced across the globe. The Kaeng Suea Ten Dam project serves as a stark reminder of the complex, often contentious, intersection of environmental stewardship and economic progress.
What happens next in this heated saga is still uncertain. But one thing is clear: the people of Phrae are ready to stand their ground, blending tradition with modern protest tactics to make their voices heard. Whether through parades, petitions, or poignant symbolism, their message is unequivocal—they will not be silenced.
Building this dam is crucial for flood control. Given the damage flooding has caused over the years, this project could save lives and safeguard property.
But at what cost, Liam? Destroying golden teak forests and displacing thousands of families can’t be justified even for flood control.
Emily, developing infrastructure often requires sacrifices. The environmental concerns are valid, but finding a balance is essential.
Alex is right. Delaying necessary projects due to environmental concerns is impractical. We need to focus on the bigger picture.
Ignoring ecological consequences will just create more problems down the line. Isn’t there a better way?
This dam project is a blatant disregard for the well-being of local communities. Their protests should be a wake-up call!
Agreed, Joe. Displacement and destruction of forests shouldn’t be how we progress. Alternatives must be considered!
Samantha, sometimes alternatives aren’t feasible. The government has likely explored other solutions.
Oliver, feasibility shouldn’t justify decisions that devastate lives and ecosystems. Sustainable development is the way forward.
Joe has a point. Environmental and social impacts can’t be overlooked, especially in this decade.
Maybe these protesters don’t understand the long-term benefits. Sometimes you need a temporary disruption for lasting gain.
This dam is a disaster in the making. We’re sacrificing our natural heritage for questionable gains.
That’s an overreaction, eco_warrior. Managing water resources is critical for our country’s future.
Michael, maybe take a trip to Phrae and talk to the locals before dismissing their concerns. It’s not just overreaction.
People are so quick to dismiss indigenous and local concerns. This project feels like modern colonialism.
Sophie, that’s a bit harsh. Infrastructure development isn’t colonialism; it’s necessary for progress.
David, but when it ignores local voices and devastates communities, it certainly resembles colonial attitudes.
If residents are so against the dam, maybe the government should look for other solutions. Listen to the people first.
Other solutions might not be as effective. The government has to act in the interest of the country as a whole.
Effectiveness doesn’t justify everything, George. There has to be a balance between progress and preservation.
I wonder if these protesters were offered appropriate compensation, would their stance change?
This protest is symbolic of larger environmental battles worldwide. We need to rethink our approach to development.
Absolutely, Lucas. Prioritizing the environment and people over profits could lead to more innovative solutions.
Lara and Lucas, while idealistic, innovation can’t always solve immediate problems like flooding.
True, but innovation driven by necessity can be powerful. We need to adjust our priorities.
Another example of government officials pushing their agenda without considering long-term ramifications.
Politicians often miss the mark on environmental issues. They’re too focused on short-term gains.
Totally agree with you Climate_Critic and Nathan. Sustainable planning is non-existent in most government projects.
Environmental destruction in the name of development is never justified. This dam project should be stopped.
Nature’s importance far outweighs any temporary benefits from such projects. Think about future generations.
I trust the government knows what’s best for national interests. They wouldn’t push this project without good reason.
That’s blind faith. Governments are not infallible. Public and environmental interests should always be scrutinized.
Catherine, sometimes undue scrutiny paralyzes progress. Trust is necessary for governance.
Can’t believe anyone still supports this outdated project. Phrae’s unique ecology is priceless.
Destroying forests for a dam is an archaic approach. We need progressive solutions for environmental challenges.
The images of those coffins in the protest were powerful. They really drove home the potential loss awaiting these communities.