Pak Nam-Choon (Democratic United Party), member of the Administration and Security Committee of the National Assembly, has compiled and released data received from the Police Office, as part of the National inspection on the Police Office on Oct. 15:
Approximately a total of 130,000 mainland police persons have been stationed in Gangjeong village between August of 2011 and the present. A budget of 4.2 billion Won (about $3.5 million USD) was spent for primarily for food, accommodations and transportation by ferry.
According to documents submitted by the police for the parliamentary inspection on October 15, a total of 194 police units have been mobilized and an average of 352 police officers per day have stationed in Gangjeong village, reaching a total of 128,402 officers
At the same time, [during the period between Jan. 2010 to Aug. 2012] , a total of 586 villagers and activists have been arrested, and among them 493 have been taken to court or put on trial.
Base opponents now have concrete and irrefutable evidence to back up what they have suspected and declared for a long time. Assembly Woman Chang Ha-na has found and disclosed the full record of the meetings between the Prime Minister’s office and the Technical Committee, revealing publicly the complete lie of the so-called “civilian military dual use port”, as well as the general deception, and poor and hurried planning behind the Jeju Naval Base Project.
Evidence Shows Government Ordered Data Doctored on Jeju Naval Base; Committee recommended simulation tests, but construction was rushed ahead
By Heo Ho-joon, Hankyoreh Jeju correspondent
Evidence suggests that the government ordered data to be doctored to allow for the construction of a controversial naval base on Jeju Island without conducting simulation safety tests for cruise ships entering and exiting the base.
Accounts from members of the technical committee examining the base, ostensibly a joint civilian-military “tourism harbor,” suggest it was designed as a military port, with the simulations planned only to give the appearance that it would also be accessible to 150,000-ton cruise ships.
Democratic United Party Rep. Chang Ha-na, who sits on the National Assembly’s Environment and Labor Committee, disclosed full records on Oct. 10 from four meetings of a technical committee under the Office of the Prime Minister that convened in January and February to examine the port’s suitability cruise ship entry and departure. The six-member committee had six members recommended by the ruling New Frontier Party, the opposition, the administration, and the province of Jeju.
At the fourth meeting on Feb. 14, one committee member hinted at government doctoring of the data for a simulation on the port’s safety for 150,000-ton cruise ships.
“The government’s telling us to come up with data that would allow construction to begin right away without a simulation,” read the records of the technical committee’s meetings.
Also, at the first meeting on Jan. 26, members of the committee made statements to suggest that the port was originally designed as a naval base, with no design changes to make it suitable for use as a civilian harbor.
Statements made at the second meeting on Jan. 30 indicate that the design changes in question were not made, showing the government’s pledge to have been false.
One committee member said, “I have no idea why [President Lee Myung-bak] gave that wild figure of 150,000 tons.”
“You would need to make the boats smaller,” a second responded. “It doesn’t work for that region. The problem is that they had to go claim it could accommodate two 150,000-ton boats and design it around that.”
A third said, “So the government was building a naval base and it went ahead and made the pledge [for a civil-military harbor capable of accommodating two 150,000-ton cruise ships] without examining the design at all. If they’d looked closely enough, then maybe this 150,000-ton stuff would never have been said.”
A fourth said, “If you’re building a cruise dock, the first thing you need is harbor facilities. . . . They’ve got boats that size [150,000 tons] coming in here, and nothing’s changed with the surface. . . . And the reason is there’s an underlying assumption nothing’s going to be changed.”
The committee was chaired by Sogang University professor Jeon Joon-soo and included Korea Maritime University professors Park Jin-soo, Kim Se-won, and Kim Gil-soo, Cheju (Jeju) National University professor Lee Byung-gul, and DY Engineering executive director Yu Byeong-hwa. The secretary was Im Seok-gyu, Jeju policy officer for the Office of the Prime Minister.
After four meetings, the committee concluded with the recommendation that a vessel simulation was needed to take into account the repositioning of harbor structures and placement of tugboats without major changes to the existing harbor design, and was then disbanded.
Since the committee’s fruitless discussions and non-binding conclusion, the government and Navy have pushed ahead with the construction, conducting no simulations and making no design changes to date. The project is currently 22% complete, according to the Navy.
Other evidence surfaced to suggest the committee members were told that the construction would continue and there would be no design changes.
One member said, “Ever since they set this [committee up], there has been the assumption that the construction would be going ahead all the while. They’re asking us to find some kind of technical alternative that wouldn’t require any design change.”
Another member responded, “Right now, the government’s worried that the construction is going to be delayed” by a simulation.
The same member said, “We advised [the Office of the Prime Minister] that a simulation was needed, and they said, ‘Can’t you just put a little phrase in there or something without messing up the construction timetable?’”
Chang declared that the meeting records bore out suspicions that the government and military planned the harbor as a military port and looked for a way around the 150,000-ton cruise ship issue after the President made his remarks.
“They need to halt the naval base construction and reexamine [the port] from square one,” she added.
Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]
Front Page of the Korean Print Edition of Hankyoreh.
A big smile from Dr. Song on his release from prison. Image: Jung Da-Woo-Ri
On September 28, in the late morning it was suddenly and unexpected announced that after 181 days of imprisonment, Dr. Song Kang-Ho would be released from Jeju Prison on bail. Dr. Song was originally very violently arrested on April 1st, his birthday and held ever since then in Jeju Prison, about an hour from Gangjeong village. Dr. Song had been refusing bail in protest of his unjust imprisonment and show trial and was only two weeks away from the legal prison limit without being convicted of a crime (Oct. 13 was his expected release date).
Father Moon and Dr. Song embrace. Image: Jung Da-Woo-Ri
Despite this, to everyone’s surprise, he was suddenly released in the late afternoon. Although many people were not in Gangjeong village because of the Chuseok Harvest Holiday, a small group of friends and supporters from Gangjeong gathered in front of the prison to greet him and celebrate his release. Upon his release he was embraced by Father Moon Jung Hyeon and then ate tofu, as is customary, and then greeted those that had eagerly gathered to celebrate.
Brother Song is free at last! Hurray!
Dancing while waiting for Dr. Song’s release. Image: Jang Hyun-WooMayor Kang helps Dr. Song eat the customary Tofu. Image: Jang Hyun-WooDr. Song embraces supporters and friends outside the prison. Image: Jung Da-Woo-Ri
(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
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
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.
Today, The National Network of Korean Civil Society for Opposing to the Naval Base in Jeju Island published two issue reports regarding the Jeju Naval Base construction.
Issue Report I is “Human Rights Violations on ‘No Jeju Naval Base Campaign’”. The report includes entry denials of foreign human rights defenders, freedom of peaceful assembly and associations, excessive use of force by the police and impunity for police violence, major human rights violations. The cases have been collected by the Gangjeong Human Rights Violation Investigation Team. The report gives recommendations to the Government of Republic of Korea and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). This report was also presented to the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association on 4 September 2012 during the 5th Asian Human Rights Defenders Forum which was held in Bangkok, Thailand. The full report will be published in September.
Issue Report II is “Environmental Disaster by Jeju Naval Base Construction”. The report is on how the suggested sea route creates environmental disaster, flaws in the environmental impact assessment conducted by the Government, and change of absolute preservation zone by the Governor of Special Self-Governing Province. It also includes recommendations to the Government of Republic of Korea and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) on the raised environmental concerns. This second report was jointly published by The Gangjeong Village Association, The Jeju Pan-Island Committee for Stop of Military Base and for Realisation of Peace Island, and the National Network.
On September 6th, the opening day of the 2012 WCC in Jeju, 5 anti-base activists climbed a 10 meter high, 8,800 ton caisson in Hwasoon Port, about a 40 minute car ride from Gangjeong village. Samsung is making these massive concrete caissons there and shipping them to Gangjeong, where they plan to use them to build the huge piers of the naval base.
Given that it is clear that the Jeju Naval base to be built in Gangjeong Village will be a military outpost of the United States, we cannot stand for our Gangjeong Village, Our Jeju Island to be in the middle of a conflict between an expanding China and the United States containment efforts. We know that the destruction of Gangjeong Village and Jeju, the Peace Island, will become the suffering of all our people. […]
Because of the recent typhoons, all seven caisson [brought so far to Gangjeong], the symbol of the Jeju Naval Base construction, were completely broken to pieces and left under the Gangjeong Sea. Still the Navy and [construction companies] Samsung and Daelim continue to eagerly produce new caisson in Hwasoon Port […]
Many villagers, religious figures, and peace activists have been injured, arrested, and imprisoned to stop this naval base construction (destruction) in the village.
Even though our power might be small, we will fight with all our strength against this enormous dominating power, symbolized by this caisson.
Therefore we will eventually REVOKE the Jeju naval base project, save the peace of Gangjeong and the peace of all humanity
The action began around dawn, with the 5 protestors scaling the caisson and displaying three large banners, two in Korean, on in English which said, “No! Naval Base in Jeju!” At approximately 7:30 a.m., construction workers violently assaulted the occupiers and began destroying the banners. The police began arresting the protestors by 8:30 a.m. 3 were arrested first as two of the protestors had chained themselves. Finally by 9 a.m. all were arrested and are, as of this posting, in police custody in the Seogwipo police station. Two of them are complaining of strong back pain as a result of assault by the workers. As of this time, the charges appear to be “Group Trespass of a Facility”.
The aforementioned caissons are a subject of major contention by the anti-base activists and Gangjeong villagers. In the late 90s, years before the Jeju Naval base construction was even begun, the South Korean Ministry of Construction and Traffic declared that, due to the topography and weather of the South Jeju Sea, caissons were not proper to be used for construction in this area.
Completely ignoring this statement, the Navy/Construction company plan calls for total of 144 caissons to be dropped in the total conservation area of the Gangjeong Sea of Southern Jeju. These massive caissons are also being dropped only 1km from a UNESCO World Natural Heritage Site and amidst Korean some of the worlds largest soft coral habitats. Soft coral is also a natural monument and endangered species in Korean.
When Samsung first began to bring the caisson to Gangjeong, it was discovered that they had not even done a simple and legally required inspection of the giant floating dock which is used to transport them. Samsung was later fined for this highly dangerous action.
Finally, two recent typhoons have been completely destroyed the 7 poorly made and dangerously placed thus far in the Gangjeong Sea. Their wreckage has litered the sea floor and contaminated the famously clean waters of Gangjeong. Learning nothing from this, Samsung continues to produce the caisson and will not change their plan. The Gangjeong sea is in a state of environmental emergency and if these unstable, unfit, and dangerous caissons continue to be dropped in this precious environment, the destruction could turn catastrophic.
In light of this new emergency, and the ongoing emergency of the illegal, unjust, and environmental destructive construction of the Jeju Naval Base in Gangjeong, the Gangjeong Village Association applied for a booth at the WCC 2012, to spread the word of this disaster. However, this booth was rejected by the IUCN under pressure from the South Korean Government and Samsung, a major sponsor of the WCC and primary destroyer of Gangjeong.
Please spread the word on this action and the Gangjeong Struggle. Especially, IUCN members, we appeal to you to listen to the cry of Gangjeong!
Specially published for those attending the IUCN’s World Conservation Congress 2012, held on Jeju from September 6-15 or for those visiting Gangjeong during that time. Contents Include:
Summary of the struggle against environmental destruction and human rights violations in Gangjeong, Jeju, schedule of Gangjeong related events during the WCC 2012, information on visiting Gangjeong, information about historical relics discovered inside the naval base construction site, fact vs. hype refutation of ROK government myths, and more!
