Here is a nice example of the hydrological mythology that often informs discussions of forest in southeast Asia, and elsewhere. This is from a Voice of America piece about forests in Laos:
The shrinking of forest areas has affected the country’s energy production. Officials say electricity produced by their country’s numerous dams was down 15% last year because there were not enough water in dam reservoirs, forcing Laos to buy back electricity from Thailand.
Forests use lots of water, they don’t produce it!
5 responses so far ↓
1 The Careful Observer // Jun 30, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Forests don’t produce water, but they are an integral part of ecosystems that protect the water supply.
From the US National Forestry Service: “Many of California’s National Forests were created to protect the mountain watersheds so essential to life in California’s semi-desert climate.”
And from the FAO: “The World Water Development Report touches on the role of forests and forestry only briefly. It notes that poor forest management practices can lead to sedimentation. Given the challenge of providing adequate clean water supplies in the rapidly growing urban areas of many developing countries, the recognition that “a third of the world’s largest 100 cities rely on forests … for a substantial proportion of their drinking water” is significant.”
So, the loss of forests could very well lead to lower water levels in dams.
2 Kate G. // Jul 1, 2008 at 5:03 am
Have you seen Larry Hamilton’s early piece on the four Ms of watershed forestry and hydrology? It dates from the early 1980s, as I recall (published 1983)? His idea that forests actually USE water was so radical at the time. It’s interesting and exciting to see these more complex understandings of watershed becoming dominant in SE Asia.
3 Andrew Walker // Jul 1, 2008 at 8:36 am
Thanks Careful Observer. Your quotes are good examples of how this sort of forest mythology is perpetuated. The first quote is so general as to be meaningless. And the second seems to relate to water quality not quantity. So, how does your conclusion follow?
4 The Careful Observer // Jul 2, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Both statements were part of larger pieces that had lots more detail. I don’t feel the need to post an entire US Foresry or FAO report here. Sedimentation doesn’t just make water unclean for consumption, it can stop it from flowing at all. Therefore, forests protect our water supply. What both pieces are pointing to, however, is obvious and commonly accepted science: while forest may use water, they also play important roles in the ecosystems that generate and protect water resources.
If I’m going to have to choose between the FAO, the US Forestry Service and dozens of other reputable sources and you, I’m not going to choose you, as you haven’t demonstrated to me that your expertise on this matter is superior. This is widely accepted science. You’re saying it’s mythology. The onus is on you to prove that it is a myth. You certainly haven’t done that in what you posted.
5 Fisherman // Jul 10, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Well, glad that has all been cleared up now.
Problem ‘closed’.
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.