The water that bears a boat is also the water that swallows it. It's a saying that makes a lot of sense when a typhoon causes catastrophic flooding.
The nation's water policies are full of contradictions. Despite an annual rainfall of 2,500mm, rivers experience considerable difference in flow across the wet and dry seasons, and the mountainous landscape and steep slopes produce short but rapid waterways. Under such circumstances, the government in theory should restrict development and conserve as much forest and green space as possible. It should also try to slow runoff into the ocean by retarding river speed and enhancing downward filtration to conserve ground water.
The problematic method of cementing riverbanks and river beds, however, is widely used. Even Lanyu, Green Island and remote mountain villages are not spared. This method not only makes streams and creeks uninhabitable for water life but also loses at least 60 percent of precipitation. Cemented rivers tend to accumulate water from torrential rain in a very short time, leading to devastating effects downstream.
Other than serving as a means for defense, rivers are also traditionally viewed as natural dividing lines for administrative areas. Most counties and cities, for example, are separated by rivers. But because of this division, local administrations feel no responsibility for damage done to them -- the result being overdevelopment, excessive release of sewage and the dumping
of waste. Sections of rivers
are supervised by different
authorities. With their interests embedded in embankment projects, water conservancy agencies and local administrations compete with each other for benefits and credit, while blaming each other when problems occur.
The Wild Duck Nature Park, located between Huachiang Bridge and Fuho Bridge in Taipei, embodies this irony. East of the middle line of the river is the jurisdiction of the Taipei City Government, which views the river as a conservation area, but once birds move west beyond the middle line and enter the jurisdiction of Taipei County, they are not protected anymore.
US river-protection laws have introduced a "zero damage" policy to conserve public water areas and wetlands. To develop these areas, not only are reviews of applications extremely stringent, but an artificial wetland must also be created to compensate Mother Nature for her loss.
In Taiwan, rivers are rarely seen as valuable resources that deserve proper respect and protection. If we cannot plan and adjust administrative areas with an eye to drainage of entire basins and to a comprehensive environmental strategy, then rivers are unlikely to be clean. With everyone unclear about their responsibilities, counties and cities merely find more excuses to pass the buck.
We are still rigid and arrogant in the way we treat waterways. Rivers up and down the land are exploited by politicians as props or as tools to enhance their campaigns. Rivers that don't need embankments are overwalled and overdecorated. In cities and in the countryside, rivers are uniformly cemented. Ugly dikes block access to water. They also make it a difficult and dangerous journey for elderly farmers trying to gather water.
Despite the praise handed out for the development of Tamsui and Pali on the Tamsui River, it is still doubtful that such a development is appropriate. Is "local prosperity" with bumper-to-bumper traffic what locals truly want? What they really want is nothing less than a high-class, tranquil and comfortable living environment close to the water. Is the gimmick of policemen patrolling on horseback relevant to local culture? Does building endless stretches of bicycle paths alongside the river or parkland, drawing tens of thousands of people, truly show respect for the river's ecology?
And are we going to insist
on transforming the wetlands
and riverbanks close to the Shihsanhang Museum on the Tamsui in the same fashion? Embankments along part of the Hsintien River, where Chungho and Yungho meet, have been pushed further towards the river, turning the newly formed land into a residential area. Isn't this typical of the mindset of punishing the river to reclaim land? Doesn't this action ignore the safety of residents? Many rivers
in this country have been overdeveloped simply to satisfy human desire, and this short-sighted reasoning scorns coexistence and the ecological perspective.
Rivers can be a precious resource for a city. A country
or a city's level of culture can be represented by the importance it attaches to its rivers' conditions and functions. The Seine in Paris, the Thames in London and the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia are notable examples of rivers that enrich the life and the culture of a city. These beautiful rivers are highly accessible, without high-rise embankments blocking the view of local residents, whose lives are intertwined with the river, nor of the tens of thousands of foreign visitors, who come a long way to visit these renowned waters and linger on, enchanted by them. To restore their riverscapes, the US cities of Oakland and San Francisco have shown their determination by removing overpasses and encouraging the public to participate in restoration activities so that the citizenry can develop a sense of how to live with them.
In the ancient Indian city of Varanasi, houses are built by the Ganges with stairs leading down to the water. No embankments are in sight. Such respect for a river reflects the profound wisdom of an ancient civilization.
In Taiwan, however, the practice of "water management" has prevailed for decades. And not just in remote townships: Taipei's efforts to realign the Huang Creek have destroyed its natural appearance. Dikes built around it are not only an eyesore but also a laughing stock as they have proven unable to stop any flooding. With overpasses and arteries such as Huanho South Road, the Pahsin Expressway (Provincial Highway 64), and the No. 2 Special Expressway already lining the Hsintien River, the Taipei County Government has plans to extend overpasses outwards by another 10m to 20m. That move will further cut off public access to the water.
Because it suffers from the havoc of typhoon-related flooding, Taiwan should establish new laws prioritizing the protection of natural rivers and streams of significance. The country should view rivers as precious resources and living organisms and avoid construction of roads, embankments or other major projects that deny public access to the water. People should also try to understand the characteristics of rivers as well as their value and historic relevance to local communities. Thinking from an ecological perspective, we should stop fighting against rivers, instead gradually restoring their natural appearance and the abundant life with which they were endowed. Let people and rivers live and prosper together.
Chiau Wen-yan is head of the Laws and Policies Division at the Center for Water Resource Studies at the National Sun Yat-sen University.
Translated by Jennie Shih
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations