Peter, I have some land on the Mae Salong road close to the northern Thai border with Burma. During sporadic visits since January I have witnessed massive burning on the land surrounding our’s, the last date being the 27th February. Excepting our 120 rai patch (we cut firebreaks and prohibited burning) there is almost no unburned land within a ten km radius. Although the neighbouring countries are also to blame, this is very much a home grown problem. Firstly there is no education programme from the local Chiang Rai authorities. There have been no directives on burning from provincial down to village level. There have been no visits from agricultural extension officers to advise the local villagers, mostly Akha, to promote sustainable agriculture. To summarise the government effort to control the problem of the annual haze blanket is zero. Most of the land ‘owners’ in the area are absentees, many from Bangkok, who are purely speculators. The locals have sold their traditional rights to the land for cash. Although there is no formal land title the speculators are still willing to buy the usage rights hoping to either move it on or to get title at some time. They also sometimes rent the land back to the original owners. The crux of the problem is that as long as the locals are not given land rights they see no point in planning long term agriculture since their land can be expropriated at any time. They only plan for the next crop. One can assume the same problem applies to the neighbouring state controlled countries and until it is seriously addressed we will be inflicted with the annual haze. The attempts by western nations to mitigate climate change are a drop in the ocean when put beside the burning, and other uncontrolled emissions, on five continents. John H. —–

Reading the Regional Haze Map & ASEAN Regional Haze Action Plan – by Peter Hoare

Note: Peter has a background of many years work with farmers in Laos & Lanna thanks for this Peter,

To Gum Hak Doi Suthep, The Singapore Meterological website given in this e-mail is a useful tool in understanding the current smog ( haze ?) problem in Chiang Mai at http://www.weather.gov.sg – go to satellite imaging, hotspot maps and haze information. The satellite hotspot maps on 9th March showed the large number of fires in northern Laos to the NE of Chiang Mai yesterday and also along the Myanmar border to the SW of Chiang Mai. Most of these fires are in upland and highland areas, from farmers burning upland fields to grow susbsistence hill rice. From the geographic distribution the ethnic groups are probably mainly Khamu in northern Laos and Karen in Thailand. In the next few weeks we are likely to get winds changing between the NE monsoon to SW so it is likely ( once the winds start to blow ! ) that some of the smoke from these fires will be transported to Chiang Mai. It is likely the air quality PM-10 index will stay in the unhealthy level above 120 in the near future. Research from Darwin in northern Australia shows that smoke from scrub and grass fires can be transported up to 1,000 km by weather systems. What can we do to improve Chiang Mai air quality ? Year round reduction of urban pollution through cleaner vehicle emissions, dust control etc. is necessary. The other part is reducing the smoke from forest fires in the dry season. 1. ASEAN regional cooperation over the long term with sustained funding showing the health and environmental benefits from a reduction in forest fires will need to be an important part as smoke can be transported over long distances by weather systems. 2. Provincial enforcement such as prohibiting burning will have little effect where farmers are burning biomass for subsistence farming. However, a sustained educational programme could over a number of years -:2.1 Reduce the area burnt by strengthening exsiting community rules to keep agricultural fires from spreading to surrounding forest areas2.2 Delay the burning of upland fields to the end of March by strengthening community networks.There are some local initiatives underway in Chaing Mai province in 2009 where lessons could be learnt for planning aproaches in 2010 3. Provincial enforcement could concentrate more on reducing the early burning in the “urhan wastelands ” ( from early February ) – formerly agricultural areas now contained within the ring roads. The owners ( often land speculators ) do not have to slash the wet season weed growth and fires from these areas contribute greatly to the early season smoke pollution. Lessons can also be learnt from some local ( Tambon or sub-district level ) initiatives in 2009 to reduce burning of rubbish in and around Chiang Mai. These Tambon and community initiatives could be important to reducing dry season fires so an evaluation after the fire season ends in May could be helpful for future planning. Peter Hoare