The final plan calls for 30 percent of the 401 square kilometres (160 square miles) to be used for farming, a sea change from its original plan to use the entire area for agriculture.
The remaining 70 percent would eventually be developed and include a "premium multi-functional city" with a new harbour and airport.
Kwon Tae-Shin, minister in the prime minister's office, said Saemangeum would serve as "Northeast Asia's new growth engine" under the project, which he said would require a time span of 50 to 100 years to be fully completed.
"Approximately a quarter of Saemangeum will be developed into a global business hub and a beautiful waterside leisure city that comes second to Venice and Amsterdam," the minister said.
. . .
Environmentalists say the project deprives migratory birds of a key habitat and poses water pollution risks.
Yes, me and others have noted the irony of Korea hosting international conferences promoting wetland conservation while destroying its own. In fact, here are some of the plans for the area, as related in an International Herald Tribune article last fall:
[Developers] will replace natural wetlands with artificial ones and turn riverbeds into lakes. They will build a park along the road on the sea dyke and try to attract tourists with a theme park, convention center and even perhaps a casino.
I'll note again what the Minister of the Environment said ahead of the much-anticipated RAMSAR Convention in Korea last fall. The Minister
adapted his pragmatism to the ``wise use of wetlands,'' the No.1 priority of the Ramsar Convention. ``What must be protected must be protected, but it would be even better if wetlands are utilized as eco-tourism sites because that could result in not only their protection but also the revitalization of the local economy,'' he said.
Certainly not conserving the land for the sake of conservation. If a tree falls in the forest, but there are no tourist hotels or casinos or theme parks to notice, does it make a sound? Well, if this city ever gets built, and if I live long enough to see it become "Northeast Asia's new growth engine," I'll add it to my list of "Korea's __________," which includes Korea's Naples, Korea's Hawaii, and Korea's Bangalore.
14 comments:
Re-creating Venice? It didn't work for Los Angeles, and it likely won't work too well in Korea.
I wonder how they plan to "re-create" wetlands. At least they're not going the route of Bush41 and just re-defining wetlands as non-wetlands so they could be developed over.
Sounds like the B.S. developments Korean's been practicing in Cambodia and other countries for the last few years. About time they do it on their own soil!
fattycat, do you have a link to one of these projects?
But I thought Mokpo already was the Venice of the east. Or maybe it was the Naples of the east.
Don't they have enough ghost airports already? They built a big "International" one a year or two back in the boonies of Muan - 20 mins from Mokpo which already had it's own frigging airport. I tried to get my friend to fly into it when she visited me for Christmas last year. To no avail - the only flights landing there where domestic or one a week from Shanghai.
Via the BBC - South Korea's Abandoned Airports (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8055957.stm)
This 'development' has got to be the most shameful thing Korea has done.
See more about it at www.birdskorea.org
@ Kushibo
Here's one editorial I read a couple of months ago about the Philippines
http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/opinion/12312-the-south-korean-invasion-.html
...I'm having problems finding an article about the same stuff in Cambodia since they seem to be "carefully worded". But when we were there reciently there were all sorts of "development" projects being done by Korean's that the government was praising but the locals told a different story of bribes, corruption, maffia and fees being charged after completion.
Yes, BuzuBuzu, Brian and myself are familiar with the "ghost airports."
As I mentioned before, though, the airports are not quite the boondoggle they may be made out as, since they generally are former military airports converted for civilian use. Maybe they're not all needed, but it's not as if they're clearing trees and buying up valuable land to build each of them. Still, some of that land could be sold and converted to something else, I suppose, but that might have to wait until there's no more North Korean threat.
Your comment prompted me to check for flights from Honolulu to Yangyang. Well, as it turns out, there is no way of flying commercially between these two cities by azure seas. But if I want to fly to Ch'ŏngju (Cheongju), home of another "ghost airport," I can do so for just $3350 ($4607 if I want to arrive five hours earlier). Each requires only three stops (Beijing, Cheju, and somewhere else).
Sounds like a deal, especially since they charge no booking fees!
Contrast that with the $990 I can get if I fly to Incheon through Taipei.
I would like to read more about that fattycat, but for now I'll say the problem is at least two-sided: your description of the Cambodian project and the editorialist's description of the South Korean "invasion" are both "with the full blessings of the provincial government."
I'd like to know how the South Korean mafia operates down in Cambodia. Not saying they can't or don't, just that I wonder how they do.
Anyway, South Korea's construction conglomerates never saw a tree they didn't dream of uprooting.
Well, I just left korea after a year and worked in Italy the year before Korea. Now I'm back in Italy and all I can say is, HAHAHAHAHA! Korea is so far from ANYTHING close to an Italian city, much less Venice, that it makes me laugh out loud. And I say that looking out my window onto the streets of Florence. As for the wetlands, Koreans can't even manage to not litter their streets with refuse and broken umbrellas, so it is no surprise they are destroying their wetlands. Too bad they haven't learned from all the other countries mistakes on that one. Oh well, Thank God I'm out of there!
Saemangeum is the worst project failure in South Korean industrial history. No plan and no organization.
It's true that people will care more about eco sites that they can visit, but when I read that IHT article last year around the time of the RAMSAR Convention I was like "damn, again with the casinos and hotels." There are a ton of "development" projects underway that involve casinos and hotels, including in Haenam and Yeosu, Jeollanam-do, and they'll be putting in more hotels into the Dadohae Maritime Park---collection of islands off Jeollanam-do---so more people can visit.
Can't people just appreciate it for what it is, without making it a damn tourist theme park?
BuzuBuzu, if you follow the link I posted, you'd see they consider Tongyeong Korea's Naples. I don't think you can have a Venice without canals. Or history. Or culture. Or class. So looks like Saemangeum is out.
Janis, thanks again for that link. Somebody else posted it before---I think in an entry where I said there's little wildlife in Korea---so it's nice to be reminded there are at least some wild animals to be seen. Suncheon is especially popular for its migratory birds, though as I noticed when writing a piece for the Korea Times last year, it's not as significant as it advertises:
http://briandeutsch.blogspot.com/2008/10/global-love-of-reed-and-hooded-crane.html
I think it is important to note, too, that the areas where there are casinos and hotels are so economically depressed that all there is are casinos and hotels.
Example: Jeju. In the south part of the island (which I will refer to as "the resort area") my boyfriend and I booked a hotel. It was a shithole. The entire town was deserted and dirty. There wasn't a single restaurant open at 9 on a Friday night.
So we moved into one of the big resorts. The place was stunning. We walked away from the beach about a block to where we saw a Hooters sign only to discover... NOTHING! The Hooters was closed and all of the businesses in the development were closed too (except for a coffee shop).
This was during the peak season. There is no reason that an area with 2000-3000 people visiting every weekend (conservatively) should look like that. I can't imagine Naples or Miami or Honolulu or Napa Valley simply shutting down and becoming a barren hellhole of dirt and grime.
Korea should "develop" the areas they already "developed" that have become "undeveloped" before they "develop" any more "developmental" areas.
A few years back, in spring, I stayed at one of the major hotels in the Chungmun Resort area. Everything was dead, including the casino. Even the hotel was probably only 30% filled.
We needed food so we hopped into a taxi and asked him to take us to the nearest convenience store. He drove us about 100 meters and said "there it is." Then he demanded the basic fare.
Normally I would have argued, and I did ask him why he didn't just point out where it was, but I felt bad for him so I paid him.
Post a Comment