On September 22nd, a benefit concert was held for Dr. Song Kang-Ho, who was violently arrested on his birthday, April 1. September 22nd was the 175th day of his imprisonment. The concert title was ‘A Song for Gangjeong and Hope.’
Dr. Song sent a lengthy letter from Jeju Prison where he is being held, to be read at the concert, briefly excerpted here:
The hope of Gangjeong is the hope for justice and peace. The people have sung a song of hope for more than six years. Your concert is to spread the song of hope. I think your concert is beautiful. It is because the most beautiful song is the song of peace.
[…]
The prison that confines me is what jails our church and nation. You are jailed with me, too. Please sing a song for freedom. Please call for justice. And please sing a song for peace. Please sing the most beautiful song in the world, which defeats the evil spirits of violence and war that bind us.
Song Saem, Dr. Song’s daughter plays cello at the concert. (Image: Lee Daegwi)
A book by Dr. Song, titled, “Peace, walking on hope from far-off: Song Kang-Ho’s Stories of Peace from Rwanda to Gangjeong” will be published by the Intervarsity Press Korea on Oct. 8, 2012.
(Information and pictures provided by Choi Hye-Young, Lim Ho-Young, and Abigail Yoo)
(17 September 2012, Gangjeong) The issue of Jeju naval base construction was one of the most important agendas during the World Conservation Congress (WCC). Only 7 km away from the WCC venue, environment has been seriously destroyed by the naval base construction. Unfortunately, the Motion 181: Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village was not passed at the WCC Assembly despite full support from many Korean and foreign NGOs. We are deeply concerned by unjustifiable interruption of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the IUCN Korean National Committee during the whole process of discussing and voting the Motion 181.
Open New Stage of International Solidarity Movement of No Jeju Naval Base Campaign!
During the WCC, a number of new information was revealed on the Jeju naval base construction. We found that the change of sea route turning angle to 30° interrupts four preservation zones including the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and the Natural Memorial Site. The National Assembly disclosed that the standard for designing Jeju naval base was based on the U.S. Naval Forces’ request on the entry of aircraft carrier. Independent Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which was conducted together with the Greenpeace East Asia proved that soft coral beds which need to be preserved are existing around the naval base construction site.
Also, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Frank La Rue), Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of associations (Maina Kia), and Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders (Margaret Sekaggya) sent an allegation letter to the South Korean government on alleged acts of harassment, intimidation and ill-treatment of peaceful protesters against naval base construction in Gangjeong village. However, the South Korean government has not yet sent their response or explanation to the Special Rapporteurs for more than 100 days while the Government is requested to submit their response within 60 days.
Since these facts were widely covered by national and international media, we raised awareness of the problems of Jeju naval base construction nationally and internationally.
Unjustifiable Intervention by the South Korean Government and the IUCN Secretariat
First, exhibition booth applied by Gangjeong Village Association to the WCC was rejected without any reasonable grounds. Local people’s right to environment is one of IUCN’s focus issues. Moreover, Gangjeong village, where the Jeju naval base is now constructed, is a buffer zone of the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and major habitats of the Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins which is on the IUCN Red List. In this regards, we are appalled by the fact that the exhibition booth application by Gangjeong Village Association was rejected while we have serious concerns on the environmental destruction by the Jeju naval base construction
Moreover, South Korean government denied entry of foreign human rights defenders and environmental activists who have been critical towards Jeju naval base construction without any reasonable explanation. Even though these people who were denied entry were registered WCC participants, the IUCN Secretariat did not take any firm stand against the Government but only explaining the Government’s formal response on their website.
In this regards, we have sent an open letter to Mme. Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN Director-General, request for a meeting to discuss rejection of exhibition booth application, environmental destruction caused by the naval base construction and denial entry of foreign WCC participants. However, the IUCN notified us that she cannot have a meeting with us due to her busy schedule. Instead of having a constructive dialogue with villagers, the IUCN Secretariat disturbed passage of the Motion 181 by making comments that are supportive to Korean government during major meetings. The IUCN was criticized by participants and members of the IUCN due to their biased position towards the Motion 181 which called for ending Jeju naval base construction and conducting independent environmental impact assessment.
Also, the IUCN Secretariat did not even notify the Center for Humans and Nature (CHN), a main sponsor of the Motion 181, and changed time and scope of the contact group meeting. On 14 September 2012, on the day and time that 2nd contact group was scheduled, the Korean National Committee urgently brought an agenda to the Assembly to drop the motion, rather than sincerely focusing on the contact group. Since the IUCN members voted against the Korean National Committee’s suggestion to drop the motion, the 3rd contact group was scheduled on the last day morning. However, both sides could not reach an agreement and the IUCN introduced the motion that was revised by the Motion Working Group, whose urging point was different from the original draft. We were surprised that the IUCN posted only a revised version of the Motion Working Group on their website. As a result, the original draft of the motion and suggested revisions during the contact group did not even have a chance to be presented during the Assembly.
The IUCN Secretariat was also biased while moderating the session. While giving two chances to speak to the Korean government, the Chair only gave one chance to sponsor groups and did not even give a chance to speak to Gangjeong Village Association President. The President of the IUCN, Mr. Ashok Khosla, made comments on the Motion 181 sponsor groups, implying the motion cannot be justified since most sponsor groups were not Korean. In response to this, Gangjeong Village Association, Jeju Pan-Island Committee for Stop of Military Base and for Realization of Peace Island (26 Jeju based NGOs), Korea Environment NGO Network (36 environmental NGOs), National Network of Korean Civil Society for Opposing to the Naval Base in Jeju Island (125 Korean civil society organizations) sent an open letter supporting the Motion 181 which was drafted by CHN.
Result of the WCC Motion 181: Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
Despite unjustifiable intervention and pressure by the Korean government and the IUCN Secretariat, the Motion 181 gained a lot of support from IUCN members. NGO members voted For 269(52%)/Against 120(23%)/Abstain 128(25%) while Government members voted For 20(13.5%)/Against 68(46%)/Abstain 60(40.5%).
At the WCC Assembly, it is required to get more than 51% of votes from both NGO and Government members to pass the resolution. According to this rule, the Motion did not pass because it did not get enough votes from Government members. However, almost 40% of Government members abstained the Motion which is similar number to those who were against the motion. In total, combining both NGO and Government members’ vote, members who voted For are 289 while Against are 188 only.
Meanwhile, the IUCN Secretariat’s biased and undemocratic decision making process and its dependency on hosting country and sponsor companies were heavily criticized during the WCC. The IUCN member organizations strongly criticised the Secretariat as it did not actively deal with Jeju naval base construction issue and limited speaking opportunities during the WCC. This is a serious violation of principles and values of the WCC and the IUCN. This behaviour will continue to bring internal and external controversies on the standing principle of the IUCN.
The South Korean government expected to use the WCC as a platform to unilaterally publish government’s ‘green growth’ policy. Instead, their anti-environmental policy was published as they used undemocratic, anti-human rights, and oppressive methods to suppress voices against Jeju naval base construction. During the contact group where both sides suppose to discuss environmental and scientific impact of Jeju naval base construction, the Government addressed issues of ‘national security’ and prevented rational discussion. It created doubts on their Environmental Impact Assessment which they proudly show off as an independent and scientific assessment.
Future Steps
We will consolidate our solidarity and cooperation by using international networks that we established from this WCC.
We will continue to raise our concerns on newly discovered negative environmental impact of Jeju naval base construction and the Government’s anti-environmental and anti-human rights strategies at the WCC during the Parliamentary Inspection of the Administration, deliberation on the 2013 budget and the Presidential Election period.
We sincerely appreciate to 35 sponsor groups of the Motion, especially Center for Humans and Nature, around 150 civil society organizations in Korea, members of environmental groups and 111 organisations around the world who endorsed our statements, and peace keepers in Gangjeong village.
For further questions or media inquiries, please contact: Ms. Gayoon Baek , Coordinator, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, +82 (0)2 723-4250 or peace@pspd.org
To: Ashok Khosla
President
International Union for Conservation of Nature
Rue Mauverney 28
1196 Gland
Switzerland
RE: South Korean Non-Governmental Organizations Endorse the Motion #181. Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
Dear Dr. Ashok Khosla,
We, South Korean non-governmental organizations, are writing to you today to show our full support and endorsement to the Motion #181 “Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village”. The naval base construction in Gangjeong has endangered rare marine and land species, destroyed local peoples’ lives and cultures while human rights violations are frequently occurring on environmental defenders.
We support recommendations to the Republic of Korea in the motion suggested by the Center for Humans and Nature, IUCN member organization. The construction of the naval base must be stopped immediately. A recommendation in the version that was modified by the Resolution Working Group reads, “Take appropriate measures to prevent adverse environmental and socio-cultural consequences associated with the construction of the Civilian-Military Complex Port Project”. It already implies and acknowledges the environmental and socio-cultural destruction by the enforced naval base project in Gangjeong, despite the opposition by the majority of villagers. We, as South Korean civil society organizations, do not agree with this recommendation because construction of naval base contradicts a core value of the UN World Charter for Nature and the Earth Charter.
On 30 May 2012, the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Human Rights Defenders, and Peaceful Assembly and Association sent a joint allegation letter to South Korean government on ongoing human rights violations in Gangjeong towards environmental defenders who peacefully protested. Unfortunately, even though the letter kindly requests a response within sixty days, the Government has not responded yet. We would like to kindly remind you that IUCN Res. 2.37 is on Support for Environmental Defenders indicating “UNDERSTANDING that the participation of non- governmental organizations and individual advocates is essential to the fundamentals of civil society to assure the accountability of governments and multinational corporations; and AWARE that a nation’s environment is only truly protected when concerned citizens are involved in the process;”
In this vein, we, as South Korean non-governmental organizations, firmly stand in solidarity with the Motion #181 “Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village” as originally suggested by the Center for Humans and Nature. If you have any questions or need a clarification, please do not hesitate to contact us at peace@pspd.org or +82-2-723-4250.
Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Dong-kyun Kang Village Mayor Gangjeong Village Association
Mr. Gi-ryong Hong Co-convenor Jeju Pan-Island Committee for Stop of Military Base and for Realization of Peace Island
(26 Jeju based NGOs: 곶자왈사람들, 노래패청춘, 서귀포시민연대, 서귀포여성회,양용찬열사추모사업회, 전국공무원노조 제주지역본부, 전국교직원노동조합 제주 지부, 전국농민회총연맹 제주도연맹, 전국민주노동조합총연맹 제주본부, 전국여성 농민회총연합 제주도연합, 제주 4.3 도민연대, 제주 4.3 연구소, 제주민족예술인 총연합, 제주여민회, 제주여성인권연대, 제주주민자치연대, 제주참여환경연대, 제 주통일청년회, 제주평화인권센터, 제주환경운동연합, 참교육을 위한 전국학부모회 제주지부, 천주교 제주교구 평화의섬 실현을 위한 특별위원회, 탐라자치연대, 평 화를 위한 그리스도인 모임, 한국기독교장로회 제주노회 정의평화위원회, 한국장 애인연맹 제주 DPI)
In response to individual complaints sent to the UN special procedure mandate holders, a joint letter was sent to South Korean government on alleged acts of harassment, intimidation and ill-treatment of peaceful protesters in Gangjeong village on 30 May 2012.
In the letter, the Rapporteurs ask questions on the cases for clarification and request the Government to send a response within sixty days so that it can be presented at the UN Human Rights Council. Unfortunately, according to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights until today which has passed almost 100 days since the letter was sent, the Government has not submitted any responses to the Rapporteurs.
The letter was jointly written by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Frank La Rue), Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of associations (Maina Kia), and Special Rapportuer on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders (Margaret Sekaggya). The letter is included in the Communications Report of Special Procedures (A/HRC/21/49) and is submitted to the 21st Session of the UN Human Rights Council which is now being held in Geneva, Switzerland (10 September~28 September 2012).
In the letter, three special rapporteurs expressed serious concerns regarding the physical and physiological integrity of all persons involved in the actions against the construction of the naval base. It also reminds the Government on principles and values in various international human rights standards including the UN code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individual, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally.
The Rapporteurs urged the Government “to take all necessary measures to guarantee that the rights and freedom of all persons involved in” the actions against construction of the naval base respected. They also requested that the Government “adopt effective measures to prevent the recurrence” of these violations.
We believe that the allegation letter and attention of the Special Rapporteurs on the human rights violations in Gangjeong shows that human rights violations on no Jeju naval base campaigners are grave. We would also like to remind the South Korean government that they will be soon reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review in October 2012. As the Government has shown their interest in running for the election to be a member of the UN Human Rights Council in 2013, we urge the Government to promote and protect human rights as enshrined in the international human rights standards and respect procedures of the UN Human Rights Council including Special Procedures. The South Korean government should responds to the joint allegation letter based on facts and immediately stop human rights violations on human rights defenders who are peacefully protesting against the naval base construction.
Please note that names of human rights defenders and sites where human rights violation happened are not made public in the UN document.
For further inquiries, please contact: Ms. Gayoon Baek, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, Coordinator, +82 2 723 4250, peace@pspd.org
Re: Improper Conduct at September 12 Contact Group for Motion 181: Protection of the People, Nature, Culture, and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
*********
Dear Mr. Khosla,
My name is Sukhyun Park. I am a Research Fellow with the Korean IUCN member organization, Citizens Institute for Environmental Studies.
This evening, September 12, a Contact Group was held for the deeply controversial issue regarding the construction of a navy base at Gangjeong Village. I’m afraid I must write to let you know that I am extremely offended by statements you made this evening concerning Korean environmentalists.
You spent much valuable time during our Contact Group discrediting the Open Letters to IUCN concerning the Gangjeong navy base. You said that because so few Koreans were included in the letter’s long list of signatories that the campaign to save Gangjeong is actually a colonial-style case of foreigners coming to a sovereign land to tell people what to do and how to do it. Wow! Talk about flawed logic! With all due respect, Mr. Khosla, you are thoroughly mistaken. Please do not project your own colonial experience on us. Instead, if you truly care about what the local people in this country want, as you say you do, then please listen to what WE have to say, instead of obsessing on the foreign colonials!
We told you, in our own open letter of July 10, 2012, signed by 125 Korean organizations totaling thousands of members, that we are opposed to the navy base that is slated to destroy Gangjeong Village. We told you that 3,000 university professors and five leading religious groups in South Korea oppose the Four Rivers Restoration project. We told you that we environmental organizations in South Korea are united in opposition to this project. We asked you if you were aware of the serious environmental and human rights violations that have been committed by the Korean government in the construction of the navy base at Gangjeong Village.
But we Koreans from civil society seem to be invisible to you, even when there are thousands of us signing. You did not once this evening acknowledge the open letter that we Koreans wrote. You only continued to discredit our brave international allies, notably the Center for Humans and Nature. You wasted a lot of our Contact-Group time with that. We are invisible to you. It appears we count for nothing.
We had already gotten a taste of being treated as second-class citizens by the IUCN. No, I’m not talking about when the Gangjeong villagers were denied their booth. I’m referring to Julia Marton-Lefevre’s August 28, 2012 letter stating that “no IUCN Members from Korea are signatories to this and previous open letters.” This remark was made in an effort to discredit the letter’s genuine pleas for the human dignity of the Gangjeong villagers. How cheap.
Actually, my organization is both an IUCN Member and a signatory to the open letter. But you, nor Julia, seem to be paying attention. When members of my group, Citizens Institute for Environmental Studies, read Ms. Marton-Lefevre’s letter, of course we felt like second class citizens. Then, tonight, your behavior at the Contact Group meeting confirmed our suspicions that we count for nothing in the eyes of the IUCN.
If you are interested, there is a reason that our open letter was separate from the internationals’ open letters. It is because when the internationals asked us to sign on, they also asked us to sign our personal names. Unfortunately, in our repressive nation, doing so would lead to employment blacklisting. South Korea is a democracy only in name. This is why we chose to write our own open letter, which has no individual signatories, only organization names, in order to protect people from government persecution.
So, Mr. Khosla, please don’t assume that every non-European fits into your specific experience as a colonized person. You have proven tonight that you know very little about the situation in Korea or the Korean people.
And if the Open Letter from 125 Korean civil society organizations could not convince you of the corrupt and oppressive human-rights violations that the Korean government levies on its people, then would you be convinced by the letter from the United Nations that was also cited at tonight’s meeting? At the meeting, the woman from Gangjeong Village spoke about a letter sent by three UN Rapporteurs: Frank La Rue, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; Maina Kiai, Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; and Margaret Sekaggya, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders. Their 30 May 2012 letter of inquiry was sent to the Korean government regarding numerous “acts of harassment, intimidation and ill-treatment of peaceful protestors in Gangjeong village,” requesting a response within 60 days. That was three and half months ago. The government never responded. But being ignored is nothing new to us.
The following statement is the 4th open letter mailed to the leadership and/or members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. It was originally posted here.
TO:IUCN Leadership, All Participants, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 2012 World Conservation Congress, Jeju Island
FROM:Jeju Emergency Action Committee
*********
UPDATE:
INDEPENDENT SCIENTISTS FIND MAJOR FLAWS AND OMISSIONS IN KOREA GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) FOR MILITARY BASE CONSTRUCTION ON JEJU
WE MUST JOIN IN DEMANDING THAT NAVAL BASE CONSTRUCTION BE HALTED
PLEASE VOTE “YES” ON MOTION 181: PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE, NATURE, CULTURE AND HERITAGE OF GANGJEONG VILLAGE
**********
IN PRIOR OPEN LETTERS TO IUCN, we referred to the unsatisfactory, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prepared by the Korean government to allow building a giant naval base to home-port Korean and United States missile-carrying warships. The South Korean Navy conducted the EIA, concluding that its construction would have little impact on the surrounding environment, including on the ecosystem of Tiger Island, a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. While the Navy’s 2,000-plus-page document appeared rigorous, external scientific reviewers found it excluded key impacts to endangered coral and wildlife species and ignored other significant factors.
As we also reported, over the last month, an independent team of researchers, including IUCN affiliated members, were doing a separate study to assess the accuracy and biases of the government report and to indicate its own findings and recommendations. The researchers felt they needed to operate secretly, even when diving along the reefs, because the government has been deporting people when it suspects they might shed light on the terrible impacts of the military base, or on the police brutalities visited upon the local indigenous villagers of Gangjeong. (More than two dozen researchers and scientists from several countries have already been deported by the government, including one member of our own team, Dr. Imok Cha, the highly renowned physician from the United States.)
Today we are pleased to provide links to two of the independent assessments and one communiqué from the researchers:
“An Independent Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Coral Communities Surrounding the Intended Site of the Gangjeong Naval Base—Including Analysis of Previous Research and Findings.” This report is by Greenpeace-East Asia, Green Korea United, and SaveJejuNow, based partly on the observations of a series of deep-diving units, was prepared by Simon Ellis, Dr. Katherine Muzik, , Sanghoon Yun, Boram Bae, Jinsoo Kim, and Dr. Imok Cha. http://savejejunow.org/eia-of-coral-communities-gangjeong-naval-base/
“Endangered Species Relocation Assessment—Civilian-Military Complex Port Development, Jeju Island, South Korea.” This report was prepared by Endangered Species International (San Francisco.) The individual authors of this report have asked not to be identified for the moment, as they continue work in Korea, and fear government sanctions. http://savejejunow.org/endangered-species-relocation-jeju-island/
MOTION 181 Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
Because of reports such as these, and others, an emergency motion (Motion 181: Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village) has now been introduced for an IUCN membership vote this week.
The Motion asks the Korean government to:
(a) Take appropriate measures to prevent adverse environmental and socio-cultural consequences associated with the construction of the Civilian-Military Complex Port Project;
(b) invite an independent body, to prepare a fully transparent scientific, cultural, and legal
assessment of the biodiversity and cultural heritage of the area and make it available to the public; and
(c) Restore damaged areas.
SELECTED INDEPENDENT FINDINGS
Below is an abbreviated summary of a few of our independent findings:
* Navy EIA Dismissed Designations to Protect Jeju Soft Corals: The government EIA made no mention of the great uniqueness, or spectacular attributes of the Jeju soft coral habitat being endangered by the Navy base construction. The base construction is underway in the midst of a large globally unique contiguous Jeju Soft Coral Community—-9264 hectares—-which is, presumably, already protected as Natural Monument 442, by the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea. The site is only 1.3km away from Tiger Islet, designated as the core area of a UNESCO Biosphere Reserves in 2002.
Dendronephthya gigantea (top, purple color) and Scleronephthya gracillma (bottom, orange color). These corals are part of one of many large colonies living in the vicinity of the base construction site. Meanwhile, the Navy EIA has asserted that there are no large colonies in this area.
What makes the Jeju Soft Coral Community possible is its adjacency to a nutritionally rich, tropical current flowing through northern waters, and its remarkable unique combination of ancient Andesite larva rock sea bottom, and abundant vertical walls, down to depths of 60 m. The Korean Navy report neglected to cite a seminal paper by the leading authority on Jeju soft coral, Dr. Jun Im Song. In her exhaustive three-year research of the entire Jeju Soft Coral Habitat, Dr. Song found 82 species of coral, including 42 indigenous species, 24 endangered species (out of 38 total protected species known in Korea.) (See full list in NOTE below.)
Dr. Song reports “Coral habitat plays a variety of important roles, not only in terms of ecological stability and structure, but also as an important resource for tourism.” In Korea, the great majority of such corals are found in the southern coast of Jeju. At a geo-biologic level, this region offers this rare coral community an ideal potential for continuous propagation. However its location within such a unique region, creates vulnerabilities for ecological stress.
Dr. Katherine Muzik, a member of the current team researching the Navy EIA, says this: “I can state unequivocally, based on my personal observations and a review of pertinent scientific literature, that Jeju’s octocoral assemblages are unique, spectacular, and worthy of special protection. They form the largest and most spectacular temperate Octocoral forests known on Earth.”
The Korean government designated this frog (Kaloula borealis) endangered, but refuses to protect it from construction impacts. It relocated some tadpoles, but left all the adult frogs to be crushed by construction. Then it failed to monitor the tadpoles. A year later there has still been no report on their survival.
* Ignored Endangered Species: The government EIA omitted two endangered species and one endemic species: the Boreal Digging Frog (Kaloula borealis), an IUCN Red List species; the Red Foot Crab (Sesarma intermedium); and also the rare, endemic Jeju Shrimp (Neocaridina denticulata keunbaei) found only on Jeju and nowhere else in the world. It was only after the Navy EIA was challenged by Korean NGOs, that the government indicated it would relocate the above threatened species. But the relocation process has been a failure. According to the independent researchers, no adult frogs were ever moved to safety. They are now being crushed under heavy construction machinery. Some tadpoles were moved, but the agency that was supposed to monitor them did not. When one of our team inquired about this, we were told, “Monitoring was not possible last year.” To date, no report is available.
Some shrimps were also moved to a new site, but it caused dangerous overpopulation in that location; and some crabs were moved to a new habitat, but that habitat is now being destroyed as well. So, all three species are seriously threatened, and there is no meaningful “monitoring” of the situation.
* Baseless Claims About Sea-Bottom Habitat: The government’s EIA asserted that the sea-bottom in areas of construction were completely sandy, and that therefore there are no coral colonies within the main construction area. Yet, the government conducted no research of the ocean floor in this area! These claims were only assumptions! The government then placed the area off-limits to outside diver/investigators. However, independent researchers have since pointed out that since Dendronephthya suesoni is found only 500m from the construction site, at the Gangjeong Lighthouse, then it is therefore highly likely that it and other endangered corals also inhabit the construction zone. Furthermore, local dive-masters, who’ve dived there as many as 7,000 times, strongly argue that the government’s assertion is wrong, and that significant coral colonies do exist, attached to rocky areas that can be found in many places within the main construction site.
Meanwhile, our independent team’s divers were able to dive along the edges of the construction site, and found 34% coral coverage at a depth of 12 meters. This finding flies in the face of another fallacious statement in the Navy EIA — that there are no significantly large coral colonies living in the vicinity of the base site. Our divers also found “dense groups of the spectacular endangered Dendronephthya putteri corals.”
* Omitted Three CITES-Protected Coral Species: Three other species of endangered corals were also found by our divers, omitted from the Navy EIA, despite that they are protected by the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES): Montipora spp, Alveopora spp., Dendrophyllia spp.
* Storm Threats: Typhoon Bolaven, hit the Gangjeong construction site on August 28, causing tremendous damage to the seven giant floating caissons used in construction of the sea wall and weighing almost 9,000 tons apiece. During the storm, all seven caissons were heavily damaged and two of them broke free and sank. The sunken caissons will have damaged coral and other benthic populations in and around the base. Now the government is in a quandary about how to clean up the mess. It has claimed it will use a “floating technique” to remove the sunken caissons, but how that can be achieved was not explained. Base construction workers were overheard discussing plans to blow them up, under the water! This would cause catastrophic damage to the entire underwater ecology. In any case, there is every indication that inadequate precautions have been taken by the base construction team to ensure the protection of the environment during the construction phase of the project, especially in this location known for being typhoon-prone. If there were no other reason to stop all construction, this would be sufficient. Functional ports should be built in protected harbors — not exposed to the open seas, as is the Gangjeong coast. Imagine what global disaster might unfold should a typhoon hit one of the nuclear submarines slated to be ported here.
* Omits Impacts of Maritime Traffic: The Navy EIA does not mention the effects of constant maritime traffic. It is expected that there will be trauma and mortality to ecologically important coral populations from the constant passing of large ships. A nearby unique and spectacular soft coral garden, measuring 73.800 sq meters (15 acres) is located only 14 m below the surface and many naval vessels have a draft of 10 m or more. Neither does the Navy EIA mention the routes through the shipping channel. The south eastern sea wall of the base is only 250 m from the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve buffer zone. The Navy EIA omitted the fact that cruise ships and aircraft carriers can measure 350 m in length, which is longer than the distance between the base and the buffer zone.
* Sediments/Heavy Metals: The Navy EIA indicated that there are concentrations of heavy metals in sediments around the Gangjeong Navy base. (This, despite that two key heavy metals, mercury and arsenic were not measured.) However, it confirmed that the heavy metal content of the sediment is high enough to be highly toxic to marine life, released into the water column through dredging or disturbance. The Navy EIA includes only a vague mention of long-term effects of sedimentation. Sedimentation is known to coat corals, increase stress, reduce growth and survival of corals and eventually kills them. Persistent siltation also coats rocks, prohibiting new colonies from taking hold and regenerating coral populations. Fine silt left from the construction may remain in the area for years and get stirred up into the water column whenever there is rough seas or large waves.
Long lasting sedimentation will eventually kill any corals that have not already been killed by the direct trauma of dredging, fill deposit, or wall construction. Thousands of coral colonies are at risk. These dangers are obviously ultimately unavoidable, and are sufficient to warrant cancellation of this base.
* Excludes Mitigative Measures Against Oil Spill Dangers: The Navy EIA states that measures should be taken to protect against fuel spills, but does not say what measures can be taken. Fuel, oil and other organic hydrocarbons can have serious effects on marine benthic organisms, even in small quantities. Corals are especially vulnerable to dispersed oils, especially lighter fuels such as gasoline, diesel and light crude. Other fluids associated with engine maintenance and function, such as antifreezes, lubricants and detergents, are also harmful. It is highly likely that once the base is operational there will be a constant release of small amounts of fuel into the environment. This contamination will have long-term negative effects on surrounding coral populations already stressed by other factors such as sedimentation, reduced flow and pollutants such as TBT and other heavy metals. Should there be a major spill or oil from the base site, the ramifications would be even worse, possibly leading to mass mortality in coral populations. The Navy EIA neglects to sufficiently address any of these problems, let alone mitigation.
* Toxic Paints, etc.: Navy EIA recommends discouraging Navy ships from using anti-fouling paint Tri-butyl Tin (TBT). TBT is banned on small ships. But Navy ships and large ships are currently exempt from this ban. A large ship such as a navy destroyer can add 200g of TBT into the environment over a 24 hr period. TBT is very stable and can remain in sediment unaffected for 7-30 years. TBT is highly toxic to corals, oysters, clams, and abalones. Coral reproduction and recruitment will be severely restricted by these chemicals as they leach into the water, accumulate and remain active. The Navy report does not suggest how to ensure that such a ban could be enforced, as ships will be arriving from all over the world.
* Ineffective Mitigation: The Navy recommends completely inadequate and ineffective mitigation measures. For example, it recommends “silt protectors” all around the construction zone. (Errant silt protectors from the base were already seen floating off Tiger Islet during moderately heavy seas on Aug. 23rd. Later, after the August 28 typhoon, every silt protector at the construction site had been ripped to shreds.) The Navy also recommends using “fall pipes” to lower rocks and other materials into the water, which have never proven adequate, and which workers don’t use anyway; workers have been seen recklessly dumping rocks and fill materials into the water.
* Inadequate Addressing of Water Flow Problem: Because soft corals cannot survive without clean, constantly flowing water, the water flow rate will be severely obstructed by the construction of a large navy base. The Navy EIA suggests that the water flow rate will not be significantly changed in areas 500 meters from the base. But once the base is complete, there will very likely be a significant drop in current flow rates around the East and West sites surveyed by our independent EIA team. This will mean fewer nutrients to corals and will cause sediment to drop down quickly, smothering corals and other bottom dwellers. The Navy suggests an “Ocean Water-Way Activation system” to regulate ocean water flow to protect corals. But there is no empirical evidence that such a process would ever be helpful to maintain coral populations east and west of the base. It is guesswork.
* Omits Fact that Large Ships Will Travel Through Core of UNESCO Biosphere Reserve: The Navy EIA omits crucial information regarding paths that large ships must take as they enter the port. And yet, this may be the most potentially destructive issue in the entire project. Neither is there is any mention of where ships will gather to wait while seeking entry to the port.
According to the Navy’s “simulation study” studying wind effects in the port area (February 2012), it was first determined that the sea route that would best avoid impacting the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve buffer zone, (Route #1) would be “too dangerous” for the ship, and might lead to devastating impacts on the sea walls. This is because entry would require a steep turning angle of more than 70 degrees. A safer sea route should be no more than a 30 degree turning angle.
Both proposed entry routes to the naval base present serious problems. Route #1, the originally route, turns out to be dangerous for ships, as it requires a 70 degree turn with risks of crashing. The Navy now contemplates route #2, which would send ships directly over and through rare spectacular soft coral reefs, with high risk for their destruction. Both are unacceptable.
Both proposed entry routes to the naval base present serious problems. Route #1, the originally route, turns out to be dangerous for ships, as it requires a 70 degree turn with risks of crashing. The Navy now contemplates route #2, which would send ships directly over and through rare spectacular soft coral reefs, with high risk for their destruction. Both are unacceptable.
Only last week it was announced by the Korean Department of Defense that the original route (#1) needed to be abandoned, and that a new route (#2) was preferred, especially in bad weather. However, in the new route, ships will invariably have to navigate through the UNESCO Biosphere core zone (See Map) http://savejejunow.org/reports-human-rights-environmental-destruction-naval-base/
The core zone of the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve contains a spectacular world of soft coral colonies, including one famous massive Coral Garden, measuring 73,800 square meters (15 acres). Alarmingly, this Coral Garden lives only 14m below the surface. But expected naval vessels may have a draft of up to 17m, bringing the prospect of a constant prop-wash from passage of large ships. This will surely bring trauma and death to amazing, ecologically-important coral populations. So, the conclusion can only be that while sea route #1 is unsafe for ships, sea route #2 will destroy an ecological paradise.
Better to move the base somewhere else.
*****
These are only a few of the many serious problems of the Navy EIA that disqualify it as an exhaustive meaningful study that can help mitigate all the problems that a Navy base will and already is bringing to Jeju. These are all aside from the dire effects upon an indigenous community which has lived sustainably in this area for thousands of years, in close economic and spiritual relationship to the local environment.
It will be a great step forward if the IUCN community votes to support the upcoming Motion 181: Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village.
Thank you so much for your attention.
EMERGENCY COMMITTEE TO SAVE JEJU ISLAND SaveJejuNow@gmail.com
Christine Ahn Global Fund for Women; Korea Policy Institute
Imok Cha, MD Physician; Save Jeju Now
Jerry Mander Inter’l Forum on Globalization; Foundation for Deep Ecology
Koohan Paik Kauai Alliance for Peace and Security
************
Numbers on the right indicate Conservation Status: 1) Endangered Species Level II, The Ministry of Environment of Korea 2) Natural Monument No. 456, The Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea 3) Natural Monument No. 457, The Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea 4) CITES II
Motion 181: Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
World Appeal to Protect the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
UNDERSTANDING that Gangjeong Village, also known as the Village of Water, on the island of Jeju, also known as Peace Island, is a coastal area home to thousands of species of plants and animals, lava rock freshwater tide pools (“Gureombi”), endangered soft coral reefs, freshwater springs, sacred natural sites, historic burial grounds, and nearly 2,000 indigenous villagers, including farmers, fishermen, and Haenyo women divers, that have lived sustainably with the surrounding marine and terrestrial environment for nearly 4000 years;
NOTING that Gangjeong Village is an Ecological Excellent Village (Ministry of Environment, ROK) of global, regional, national and local significance, sharing the island with a UNESCO designated Biosphere Reserve and Global Geological Park, and is in close proximity to three World Heritage Sites and numerous other protected areas;
NOTING that numerous endangered species live in and around Gangjeong Village, including the Boreal Digging Frog (Kaloula borealis) listed on IUCN’s Red List of Threatened Species; the red-footed crab (Sesarma intermedium); the endemic Jeju fresh water shrimp (Caridina denticulate keunbaei); and the nearly extinct Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins;
NOTING the global uniqueness of the Jeju Soft Coral habitats, designated as Natural Monument 422 of Korea: the only location in the world known to have temperate octocoral species forming a flourishing ecosystem on a substrate of andesite, providing ecological balance to the Jeju marine environment and the development of the human culture of Gangjeong Village for thousands of years;
UNDERSCORING that of the 50 coral species found in the Soft Coral habitats near Gangjeong, 27 are indigenous species, and at least16 are endangered species and protected according to national and international law, including Dendronephthya suensoni, D. putteri, Tubastraea coccinea, Myriopathes japonica, and M. lata;
THEREFORE CONCERNED of the Civilian-Military Complex Tour Beauty project, a 50-hectare naval installation, being constructed within and adjacent to Gangjeong Village, estimated to house more than 8,000 marines, up to 20 warships, several submarines, and cruise liners;
NOTING the referendum of Gangjeong Village on August 20, 2007, in which 725 villagers participated and 94% opposed the construction;
ACKNOWLEDGING that the construction of the military installation is directly and irreparably harming not only the biodiversity, but the culture, economy and general welfare of Gangjeong Village, one of the last living remnants of traditional Jeju culture;
NOTING the Absolute Preservation Act, Jeju Special Self-Governing Province (1991) and that Gangjeong Village was named an Absolute Preservation Area on October 27, 2004: a permanent designation to conserve the original characteristics of an environment from the surge in development, therefore prohibiting construction, the alteration of form and quality of land, and the reclamation of public water areas;
CONCERNED that this title was removed in 2010 to allow for the Naval installation, and that this step backwards in environmental protection violates the Principle of Non-Regression;
RECALLING the numerous IUCN Resolutions and Recommendations that note, recognize, promote and call for the appropriate implementation of conservation policies and practices that respect the human rights, roles, cultural diversity, and traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples in accordance with international agreements;
CONCERNED of reports that the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) for the naval construction was inaccurate and incomplete and may have violated well-known principles of international law concerning EIAs, transparency, public and indigenous participation, right to know, and free, prior and informed consent;
CONCERNED of the destruction of sacred natural sites in and near Gangjeong Village, noting that the protection of sacred natural sites is one of the oldest forms of culture based conservation (Res. 4.038 recognition and conservation of sacred natural sites in Protected Areas);
ACKNOWLEDGING that IUCN’s Mission is “To influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable;” and that “equity cannot be achieved without the promotion, protection and guarantee of human rights.”;
NOTING Resolution 3.022 Endorsement of the Earth Charter (Bangkok, 2004) that endorsed the Earth Charter as “the ethical guide for IUCN policy and programme,” and that the military installation is contrary to every principle of the Earth Charter;
NOTING the U.N. World Charter for Nature (1982), and that the military installation is contrary to each of its five principles of conservation by which all human conduct affecting nature is to be guided and judged;
AND ALARMED by reports of political prisoners, deportations, and restrictions on freedom of assembly and speech, including the arrests of religious leaders, for speaking against the naval installation and for speaking in promotion of local, national, regional and world conservation and human rights protections;
NOTING Res. 2.37 Support for environmental defenders, “UNDERSTANDING that the participation of non-governmental organizations and individual advocates is essential to the fundamentals of civil society to assure the accountability of governments and multinational corporations; and AWARE that a nation’s environment is only truly protected when concerned citizens are involved in the process;”
NOTING principles enshrined in the Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development such as those concerning military and hostile activities (Art. 36), culture and natural heritage (Art. 26), and the collective rights of indigenous peoples (Art. 15);
FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING that militarization does not justify the destruction of a community, a culture, endangered species or fragile ecosystems;
AND UNDERSCORING that IUCN’s aim is to promote a just world that values and conserves nature, and the organization sees itself as nature’s representative and patrons of nature;
The IUCN World Conservation Congress at its 5th session in Jeju, Republic of Korea, 6-15 September 2012:
1. REAFFIRMS its commitment to the UN World Charter for Nature and the Earth Charter;
2. CALLS ON the Republic of Korea to:
(a) immediately stop the construction of the Civilian-Military Complex Tour Beauty;
(b) invite an independent body, to prepare a fully transparent scientific, cultural, and legal assessment of the biodiversity and cultural heritage of the area and make it available to the public; and
(c) fully restore the damaged areas.
Sponsor – Center for Humans and Nature
Co-Sponsors
-Chicago Zoological Society (USA)
-International Council of Environmental Law (Germany)
-El Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental, CEDA (Ecuador)
-Sierra Club (USA)
-Fundacion Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Argentina)
-Center for Sustainable Development CENESTA (Iran)
-Asociación Preserve Planet (Costa Rica)
-The Christensen Fund (USA)
-Terra Lingua (Canada)
-Ecological Society of the Philippines (Philippines)
-Citizen’s Institute Environmental Studies (Korea)
-Departamento de Ambiente, Paz y Seguridad, Universidad para la Paz (Costa Rica)
-Coastal Area Resource Development and Management Association (Bangladesh)
-Fundação Vitória Amazônica (Brazil)
-Fundación para el Desarrollo de Alternativas Comunitarias de Conservación del Trópico, ALTROPICO Foundation (Ecuador)
-Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano (Ecuador)
-EcoCiencia (Ecuador)
-Fundación Hábitat y Desarrollo de Argentina (Argentina)
-Instituto de Montaña (Peru)
-Asociación Peruana para la Conservación de la Naturaleza, APECO (Peru)
-Coordinadora de Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica, COICA (Ecuador)
-Fundación Biodiversidad (Argentina)
-Fundacao Vitoria Amazonica (Brazil)
-Fundación Urundei (Brazil)
-Dipartimento Interateneo Territorio Politecnico e Università di Torino (Italy)
-Programa Restauración de Tortugas Marinas (Costa Rica)
-Corporación Grupo Randi Randi (Ecuador)
-Living Oceans Society (Canada)
-Instituto de Derecho y Economía Ambiental (Paraguay)
-Korean Society of Restoration Ecology (Korea)
-Ramsar Network Japan (Japan)
-The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel (Isreal)
-Chimbo Foundation (Netherlands)
-Endangered Wildlife Trust (South Africa)
The following motion was submitted to the IUCN WCC Jeju 2012 Motions Committee. It has 34 co-sponsors, reportedly the most in WCC history.
TO: Motions Committee
FROM: Kathryn Kintzele, Esq. Director, Global Programs, Center for Humans and Nature
Deputy Chair, Ethics Specialist Group, IUCN Commission on Environmental Law
with
Dr. J. Ronald Engel, founder of the IUCN Ethics Working Group (1984)
Dr. George Rabb, Honorary IUCN Member and former Chair of the IUCN SSC (1989-1996)
The Honorable Kang Dong-Kyun, Mayor of Gangjeong Village
DATE: September 9, 2012
RE: EMERGENCY MOTION SUBMISSION: MOTION ON THE GANGJEONG VILLAGE
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress, the Center for Humans and Nature as sponsor, and the 34 co-sponsors listed below, submit this emergency motion regarding the Civilian Military Complex Tour Beauty being built in and near Gangjeong Village, Seogwipo Province, Jeju Island, Republic of Korea:
World Appeal to Protect the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
As required, more than three of the following five criteria have been met and are explained as follows. Please note that what is listed is only a small part of what could be listed.
I. Subject is new, means that the issue which is the subject of the resolution or recommendation has arisen within ninety days before the start of the session of the World Conservation Congress;
Gangjeong Village, the party most directly affected by the naval construction, did not have access to information regarding the nature of IUCN or the process to bring their concerns to IUCN. They first learned about it from IUCN members responding to their July 11, 2012 Open Letter. They were never approached by the host country about membership, workshops, motions, etc., as was done with other NGOs, universities and government bodies.
IUCN members outside of the country were assured by the Union that everything was appropriately being carried forward, and new information emerged over the course of the last 90 days that this was not true.
The EIA was only completed after villagers filed suit, and did not involve input from the local community. It was released to the Gangjeong Villagers on July 18th, and the subsequent translations and/or disbursement to scientists and academics was around July 26th. Knowing the IUCN Congress was quickly approaching, well respected and dedicated scientists immediately flew to the country to make a proper assessment of the species at risk. The revised assessment from a team of scientists with Endangered Species International was received September 3, 2012, ENDANGERED SPECIES RELOCATION ASSESSMENT, CIVILIAN-MILITARY COMPLEX PORT DEVELOPMENT, JEJU ISLAND, SOUTH KOREA. (entire report available).
Findings from the habitat and species relocation assessments show failed relocation for the endangered K. borealis where all breeding frogs were left on site and only tadpoles were removed. The released tadpoles are thought to have a low survival rate due to the presence of potential predators.
The relocation of the C. denticulata keunbaei was incomplete, as a population still remained on site. Further, 5,300 shrimps were released downstream along Gangjeong Creek where a population of C. denticulata keunbaeis had already been established. This increased the risk of surpassing the carrying capacity of this area. Shrimps should have been released at other alternative suitable sites to increase the chance of their survival.
Also in August, a second scientific team conducted an underwater survey of Jeju soft coral habitat and completed four dives at three locations in two days, the Coral Garden, the light house vicinity, and Seo Gun Do. The lead scientist stated “As a specialist in Octocorallia (soft corals), it is my duty, and my honor, to help the local villagers defend their environment and their way of life, and their beautiful octocorals to which I am so devoted. I have been studying Octocorallia all around the world, in both the Atlantic (Florida, Puerto Rico, Belize, Mexico, Jamaica, Bermuda) and the Pacific (the Philippines, Australia, Fiji, New Caledonia,Thailand, Chuuk, Hawaii, Japan and Okinawa) for 42 years. I can state unequivocally, based on my personal observations and a review of pertinent scientific literature, that Jeju’s octocoral assemblages are unique, spectacular, and worthy of special protection. They form the largest and most spectacular temperate Octocoral forests known on Earth. Jeju’s soft coral habitat has not been reported outside of Korea. It’s existence is yet unknown to the international soft coral society.” (full report available)
The irrevocable nature of the damage has become apparent as the caissons were built in the last 90 days and cannot be removed without explosives.
The government currently gives the impression that this project has the consent of the citizens of Gangjeong. On April 26, 2007, the previous mayor held a small referendum where 87 villagers were present, and for the first time, counted a vote through clapping. However, only upon recent fact-finding was it discovered that there was a referendum on August 20, 2007: 725 villagers voted, 680 voted against, 36 voted for, and 9 votes were defective; therefore 94% of voters were in opposition of the project. This second referendum is not recognized by the government.
Dr. Imok Cha, a highly respected oncologist and registered participant of IUCN, was deported on September 4th for the first time in her life. She was invited as a panelist to the official CEL workshop on ethics. She was helping the villagers to understand the EIA and the scientific gaps of the document. No reason was given for her deportation.
Umisedo Yutaka and Matsushima Yusuke, members of Save the Dugong, a new IUCN member as of WCC4 Barcelona, were deported on September 6th. They are listed partners of Save Jeju Now.
In the past three months, numerous requests were made to the DG, President and other IUCN Secretariat leadership to create a space for the discussion of the naval base, and all requests were denied. When members modified their own workshops to give the issue a voice, and made it known during the weeks before the WCC, they were targeted and questioned by IUCN Secretariat.
The Korean Navy gave its first press conference on the naval base on September 6th, stating it as ‘eco-friendly.’ The level of green-washing taking place is something new, urgent and unforeseen. We are concerned that private and public sectors from around the world are misusing the term ‘green’, ‘green economy’, and ‘green growth’, similar to the misuse of the term ‘sustainable development’ historically (Res. 1.46 Use of the Concept of Sustainable Development, “CONCERNED THAT in practice environmental factors are not yet fully incorporated into all projects and programmes which are termed “sustainable development”).
II. Subject is urgent, means a matter in respect of which developments are about to take place soon after the World Congress and upon which a resolution or recommendation of the World Congress may reasonably be expected to have an impact;
Due to their protests, many villagers are in prison and awaiting trial.
Construction and dredging is taking place, and the pace is increasing, day and night.
Deportations are increasing, and includes nationals and internationals.
Over the past few months, arrests and police brutality have been increasing, from four raids a day, upwards to ten. 100-300 police a day march out to push the protesters aside and make arrests. In addition to the arrests, particularly of religious leaders, and the lack of transparency and indigenous participation in decision-making, a January 2012 report was made by the Asian Human Rights Commission “Case of Gangjeong: good example of worst governance.”
Unless action is taken immediately, the loss of biodiversity, the loss of this ecosystem, and the loss of this community, will be irrevocable.
The caissons are being set in place, and once they are placed, there is no way they can be removed except through explosives.
Water supply of this southern region of Jeju comes from an aquifer in the village that is being irrevocably destroyed.
The tangerine farms in Gangjeong and the soft corals are already seeing damage due to the settling dust from the construction. Entire fields of tangerines are rotting. This is directly impacting their economy today.
Registered Korean participants are being searched for Gangjeong Village materials when they enter the WCC which are then immediately taken away. In the DG’s letter, she stated that they would be able to hand materials out.
Registered participants and invited speakers from the village are afraid to enter the WCC, that they will be harassed by the alarmingly high levels of police, military and security. One registered participant had her sticker ripped from her IUCN badge after entering the conference center.
The construction has already fenced off coastline that is integral to the welfare and survival of the villagers: this winter, for the first time in 4,000 years, the villagers will not be able to gather the many seaweeds that grow on the Gureombi, a main source of sustenance.
III. Subject could not have been foreseen, means a matter which, while not itself new, has been the subject of developments within ninety days before the start of the session of the World Congress which call for action by the World Congress;
It would seem reasonable that IUCN would anticipate issues of this fundamental seriousness within the host country, and in such close vicinity to the Congress site, and prepare a vehicle by which it could be discussed and objectively assessed by the membership. It was unforeseen that IUCN did not inform the membership or provide a space for dialogue at the Congress.
Typhoon Bolaven hit the island around August 27, 2012, damaging all seven caissons and other structures, giving evidence to the scientific geographical inappropriateness of the base. Typhoons hit Jeju many times each year and are increasing in intensity due to climate change.
Samsung, the sponsor of WCC, was not promoted on the official IUCN WCC site until the WCC opened. Samsung funds the naval installation. This is the same concern for Hyundai. So, not only is IUCN not informing its participants of the issue, but they are taking financial support from one of the developers of the base. IUCN has a duty to investigate its partnerships.
The formal application of a booth was denied to the villagers, due to ‘on-site partners’ (August 28, 2012 IUCN Statement Responding to the Third Open Letter) on August 22. It was completely unknown to membership that a host country or ‘on-site partners’ could have any censorship role in the policy and programme of IUCN.
IV. arises out of deliberations of the World Congress, means a matter which has been discussed at any officially scheduled matter during the World Congress; including business and conservation sittings, technical meetings, Commission meetings, meetings of working groups or associated meetings;
The need for a motion was discussed at the IUCN CEL Commission Meeting, Days 1 and 2; the Knowledge Cafe on September 7th, A Case Study in Integrating Ethics into the Management of Water Ecosystems, “The Loss of Wild Rivers and Coastal Communities in Korea: reconciling IUCN partnerships and their vision of a just world that values and conserves nature” hosted by the Ethics Specialist Group, IUCN Commission on Environmental Law; Save Jeju Now; Gangjeong Village Association; the Water-Culture Institute; the Water Ethics Network; and the Center for Humans and Nature; and is the focus of the CEL Workshop on September 10th.
The Knowledge Café was the largest in the known history of any of the involved members, drawing numerous media and over 30 participants, all surrounding a single table. Our membership yearned for this information. They care about the issue and want a stop to the construction of the base, a stop to the destruction of the people and nature.
This motion needs to be voted upon, for the future of this village, for the future of this island, for the future of the people and species that live here, and for the future of IUCN as a leader in the international environmental forum. This is an issue of democracy, transparency, conservation, science, law and ethics. This is an issue of a small village, a unique and disappearing culture, surrounded by complex and fragile biodiversity, and all immediately and irrevocably threatened.
Thank you for your attention.
Sponsor – Center for Humans and Nature
Co-Sponsors
-Chicago Zoological Society (USA)
-International Council of Environmental Law (Germany)
-El Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental, CEDA (Ecuador)
-Sierra Club (USA)
-Fundacion Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Argentina)
-Center for Sustainable Development CENESTA (Iran)
-Asociación Preserve Planet (Costa Rica)
-The Christensen Fund (USA)
-Terra Lingua (Canada)
-Ecological Society of the Philippines (Philippines)
-Citizen’s Institute Environmental Studies (Korea)
-Departamento de Ambiente, Paz y Seguridad, Universidad para la Paz (Costa Rica)
-Coastal Area Resource Development and Management Association (Bangladesh)
-Fundação Vitória Amazônica (Brazil)
-Fundación para el Desarrollo de Alternativas Comunitarias de Conservación del Trópico, ALTROPICO Foundation (Ecuador)
-Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano (Ecuador)
-EcoCiencia (Ecuador)
-Fundación Hábitat y Desarrollo de Argentina (Argentina)
-Instituto de Montaña (Peru)
-Asociación Peruana para la Conservación de la Naturaleza, APECO (Peru)
-Coordinadora de Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica, COICA (Ecuador)
-Fundación Biodiversidad (Argentina)
-Fundacao Vitoria Amazonica (Brazil)
-Fundación Urundei (Brazil)
-Dipartimento Interateneo Territorio Politecnico e Università di Torino (Italy)
-Programa Restauración de Tortugas Marinas (Costa Rica)
-Corporación Grupo Randi Randi (Ecuador)
-Living Oceans Society (Canada)
-Instituto de Derecho y Economía Ambiental (Paraguay)
-Korean Society of Restoration Ecology (Korea)
-Ramsar Network Japan (Japan)
-The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel (Isreal)
-Chimbo Foundation (Netherlands)
-Endangered Wildlife Trust (South Africa)
Environmental Assessment recently released by Simon Ellis, Dr. Katherine Muzik, Imok Cha, Sanghoon Yun, Boram Bae and Jinsoo Kim, regarding the destructive impact the Jeju Naval Base will have on the soft coral communities of in and around Gangjeong. From the Report:
1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this EIA was to independently assess the health and threats to the unique coral communities in the Gangjeong area, which are threatened by the construction of the Gangjeong naval base. A field site visit was made to Gangjeong on Jeju, South Korea from August 20-25th, 2012. Six days of survey diving were planned but bad weather curtailed this work to the study of only two sites immediately adjacent, east and west of the base construction site. Results from the underwater surveys and a review of existing literature and reports pertaining the to base construction and Jeju’s coral populations were used to formulate the following findings and recommendations:
Construction of the Gangjeong naval base will cause immediate death to thousands of endangered coral species by being crushed or smothered with sedimentation.
Long term sedimentation caused by the construction of the base will reduce food availability and increase stress to the coral populations leading to a decrease in coral recruitment and population health.
Release of heavy metals and other pollutants into the environment from dredging and filling activities will also stress and potentially kill corals in the areas surround the base.
Reduced and changed current patterns around the base will lead to the demise of the coral populations directly east and west of the seawalls. In addition, changes to current patterns may alter water flow to ecologically important areas such and Train Rock and Tiger Islet.
Increases in concentrations of the biofouling agents TBT and copper can be expected with increased boat traffic in and out of the base. These biocides inhibit invertebrate reproduction and larval settlement, including corals.
Small and constant leakages of oils, fuels and other contaminants from machinery into the waters around the base can be expected. Once dispersed by wave action these poisons can affect coral growth and survival.
Propeller wash from the constant large boat traffic in and out of base has a strong potential to cause physical trauma to ecologically important coral populations around Train Rock.
Increased sedimentation and pollutants combined with current flow changes and trauma from propeller wash will decrease the coral populations and reduce biodiversity in the area. In addition, coral populations will have a reduced ability to spread to new areas due to loss of habitat from sedimentation and lower reproductive success.
A major oil leak from the base would cause long-term and possibly irreparable damage to the coral populations in the area.
Update: Format/Spacing Problems Fixed in PDF. Re-download Below
Environmental Assessment recently released by Endangered Species International (ESI), regarding the relocation of several endangered species found on the Gureombi Rock. From the Report:
1.0 Executive Summary
During 2010 and 2011, Sesarma intermedium (estuary crab), Caridina denticulata keunbaei (Jeju freshwater shrimp), and Kaloula borealis (boreal digging frog) were all relocated to three different sites from the navy base construction site in Gangjeong-dong Village, Seoqwipo City, Jeju Island, South Korea. Further investigations were carried outindependently by Endangered Species International (ESI) during August 2012 to assess the habitat and relocation of these three endangered species.
Findings from the habitat and species relocation assessments show failed relocation for the endangered K. borealis where all breeding frogs were left on site andonly tadpoles were removed. The released tadpoles are thought to have a low survival rate due to the presence of potential predators. Monitoring for K. borealis should have been conducted just after the release event in August 2011 but only started in part during 2012. Early observations of larval growth and development stages to metamorphosis were therefore not recorded. Finally, the lack of transparency from the government and those conducting monitoring activities preclude the need for adequate independent monitoring of the boreal frog relocation.
The relocation of the C. denticulata keunbaei was incomplete, as a population still remained on site. Further, 5,300 shrimps were released downstream along Gangjeong Creekwhere a population of C. denticulata keunbaei had already been established. This increased the risk of surpassing the carrying capacity of this area. Shrimps should have been released at other alternative suitable sites to increase the chance of their survival. Since no further monitoring is possible for shrimps, thesuccess of their relocation will remain unknown.
The endangered S. intermedium was released along Gangjeong Creek,but this area was later impacted by human activities. Suitable habitat protection was therefore not provided as stated in the relocation report as allrelocation sites should have been protected to allow for successful survival and establishmentof the species.
Immediate measures are urgently needed to insure survival of the three relocated species. Since a population of endangered K. borealis and C. denticulata keunbaei remain on site it is essential to stop construction activities until the frogs and shrimps are removed using appropriate survey method. The population should then continue to be independently monitored. Further important measures and recommendations are included in this report.
