KKFC World Heritage Application

The sessions resumed after the coup attempt and ........ Thailand decided not to pursue the submission of the KKFC at the 11th hour and has withdrawn this years submission to submit a strengthened submission (possibly incorporating Myanmar) at the the next session.

I would expect to see quite a lot of progress on the a) local communities issues and b) incorporation of Thanintharyi, within the coming months.

Thanks for the update!

The World Heritage Committee is currently meeting in Baku, Azerbaijan. In the meeting they will review the case for inscription on the world heritage list for the Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex.

Updated information has been presented by the DNP (for the State of Thailand) and the IUCN (as assessors for the WHC). Wildlife photographs from Thailandwildlife.com form part of the DNP's presentation materials.

The IUCN report was released yesterday by the WHC secretariat so I have attached the Kaeng Krachan portion. To be honest with such a negative assessment I can't see it getting getting added to the list this time based on the report. I have attached a copy of the relevant section of the report so you can see it yourselves.

Yesterday the case was reviewed by the committee and it was agreed that it would be given a second review today (6 July) before the final decision on which way to go (some countries supported Thailand's nomination and some others voiced concern with the IUCN opinion). Now is the time when Thailand can submit additional information/clarifications and can try and make use of bilateral meetings to reinforce their case before the meeting today.

I am also quite disappointed when I see the list of properties that were added to the list this year. The general lack of the world's natural wonders and wildernesses on the list (both this time and on the whole list) is a sad reflection of a species that sees its own building projects and history as more important than natures wonders. I think the WHC needs to reassess the balance between cultural and natural sites on the list, obviously its too easy to get a cultural site approved in their system or alternatively too difficult to get a natural site added.

wvwv wrote:

This is the park where the rangers burned down a Karen settlement a while back and where a ranger had arrested a Karen resident for possessing wild honey who then went missing (a month before a trial into the burning where he was due to give evidence) and has never been found.

True and there has been a court case on this which had a verdict. Is Kaeng Krachan forever to live in the shadow of Chaiwat (who departed years ago) and his various accusers?

wvwv wrote:

The Karen that are there now had been living in Kaeng Krachan long before it was even a national park (the elderly residents anyway), so I sort of sympathise. Has the Thai Government not offered them any money to relocate yet? Money usually works?

Very true and funds plus replacement land has been offered and agreed to, but not by all. Pong Luek still remains an issue as does armed (incl AR15) poaching gangs being recorded exiting the village, this year, as well as poaching related murders Karieng on Karieng, this year as well, in this village. The DNP is stuck between hard rocks on this because Thai law prohibits hunting and deforestation in National Parks which is the main issue of contention. It's not their existence in the park which is an issue but expansion and activities not in-conformity with Thai law. The total allotment of land to the communities was increased this year but the desire/need for more and more land to farm/hunt for an Karieng population is not sustainable. There are active projects by KKNP (I don't have any knowledge regarding the whole FC on this) that include the Karieng in tourism related activities (the park helps arrange visitors and tourists to enter these areas which show Karieng culture to tourists) as well as temporary ranger posts (full time rangers usually do 5-10 years on a temp post first) being assigned to them - I have met some of the ones who took this up in the various ranger stations.

wvwv wrote:

You have to say that the national park hasn't handled the Karen issue well in this park and if they hadn't been so 'hands on' they might have a better relationship with the Karen and initiatives like this might have more chance of success. They've shot themselves in the foot.

IUCN notes in précis that the statement of 28th February
2019 raised a number of serious human rights issues.
Information received by the Special Procedures Branch
of UNOHCHR references “alleged attacks and renewed
harassment of the indigenous Karen peoples in KKFC,
by [national park officials].” These allegations mention
specifically the reactivation of the nomination
specifically highlighting “lack of consultation with
affected indigenous peoples, and the failure to seek
their free, prior and informed consent.” It further notes
that concerns have been raised over “how UNESCO
World Heritage status, if awarded, may impact on the
Karen communities’ land rights and livelihoods”.

True as well. KKNP has actively updated the public via the facebook medium on the joint meetings, projects and decisions but as to the whole complex (I am not talking about KKNP but about KKFC when saying the whole complex) I have not seen any publicly shared information from the various parks, sanctuaries or HQ.

I would presume that World Heritage status would not affect any land rights and livelihoods that are currently legal under Thai law (the IUCN have always noted this in their reports). Saying that I agree totally that the work between the two groups has not been publicized well. I think it should be to protect both sides in the public discourse.

wvwv wrote:

And the report doesn't just criticise the Karen problem but the boundaries of the park itself. There are too many settlements and farms cutting into the natural boundary of the park, particularly south of Kaeng Krachan and into Kui Buri. You can see it just by looking at the map. Yes there are wildlife corridors to most areas, just about, but it's not ideal.

Yes, it's the crook of the issue, I can tell you, first hand, those areas are lacking in wildlife biodiversity compared to the Thai core. And it does not stop there, the Burmese side is a massive issue for uncontrolled access. On one side I am glad the Thai side spilt from the Burmese (Myanmar sorry) side on this as the poaching/poachers on that side are by all accounts very prevalent BUT from a WORLD perspective it somehow saddens me that the whole Tenasserim range is not regarded as one irrespective of international borders.

My own concern is what does WH status mean in the natural perspective. Is it about wilderness, nature and universal importance to man and the planet, or is it about something political. Which is the priority? Both sides need to find a way forward on this that does not jeopardize the wildlife's future.

Its a fascinating case for me as I understand the inner workings of the various UN secretariats extremely well as I worked in them for 25 years - but I am now questioning the validity of the systems that the committees have imposed on the Secretariats. The Secretariats (and their employees like the IUCN) have to work to rigid rules and criteria in recommendations imposed on them by the member states but in such cases the member states must see what strange bureaucratic creatures they have created. The big issue for me here is how can natural sites such as KKFC (or any primary forest biologically diverse complex) be given the same platform, and arguably more scrutiny, than a coal mining site in Indonesia or a market in India (approved 30 minutes ago!) in terms of Universal Value.

... Back to Youtube now as the case is being televised live ;+)

A (stupid) question, but what exactly does it mean when a site is listed as a WHS?
Is there significant financial support?
Or is it just a status thing, that perhaps indirectly is financially interesting because of tourism or otherwise gaining funds?

No direct funding from UNESCO or the WHC, but as it has to uphold to a standard and its position on the list is monitored by external evaluations (if it fails evaluations it may be moved to the internationally shameful "in danger" list) it will get additional funding at host country level to ensure its compliance and not become an international embarrassment (which usually has a lot more weight than mere conservation sadly) ;+)

Some people, think there is a tourism boost but I am not sure this is in fact true.

As you eluded, its real value is in national pride. This pride is a vehicle for awareness and subsequently conservation efforts.

It did not get its hearing today, the hearings resume tomorrow. After seeing some of the items that were inscribed today I was at a loss to be honest, some of them may have met criteria but did not seem to make sense to me as an individual vis a vis my own view of what made them "world heritage". Austria for all intents and purpose put forward a road, it was one of only two cases I saw that did not get approved.

Seems the Karen's side had fired a broadside ........


"....... Meanwhile, the ethnic Karen people issued a statement through the IUCN, demanding that the nomination of the Kaeng Krachan forest complex as a Natural World Heritage site should be a joint effort by the Thai government and the Karen people.

The Karen have also demanded that they should be allowed to decide about the land to be used for crop rotation farming and that Huey Krasoo should be their land for research and study use."

Source www.thaipbsworld.com/thailand-lobbies-fo...n-listing-hits-snag/

It's an interesting gambit, go too far and the Government could just drop the idea of KKFC being a world heritage site and then the indigenous side have essentially lost their case. Push just enough and they could get something more out of the Government to get the case through the WHC.

It's now down to politicing within the WHC. Possible outcomes?

a) The WHC approve the inscription
b) The WHC approves the inscription but the Australian Gov could push for additional deferral measures in respect to the Karen's to be added to the approval text
c) The WHC refers the case to be presented again, with clarifications, at the 2020 or 2021 meeting
d) The WHC could defer the case, in which case Thailand would have to resubmit a new case.

Its an interesting case/scenario.

BTW ......Anyone know where "Huey Krasoo" (Huai Krasu) is?