Rivers & Rights

3 Days to Go
Peace Walk for Rivers
Dhamma Pilgrimage to protect the Kok, Sai, Ruak, Mekong, and Salween
Tha Ton to Chaing Rai,

Here's an agenda for 31 May 2026

Our Rivers are not sacrifice zones for irresponsible mining
Rivers are No-Go Zone for mining
Stop Toxin Mining

Peace Walk for Rivers,
Dhamma Pilgrimage to Protect the Kok, Sai, Ruak, Mekong, and Salween Rivers
Tha Ton to Chiang Rai 31 May – 5 June 2026

Register to join https://forms.gle/iEpE54D93NUjo44T7

📌 31 May 2026

08.00 hrs. Opening ceremony at Tha Ton Bridge over the Kok River, Mae Ai, Chiang Mai
09.00–11.00 hrs. Walk from Tha Ton Bridge to Wat Hat Chomphu (6.2 km)
11.00–13.00 hrs. Lunch
13.00–15.00 hrs. Activities with the local community
15.00–17.00 hrs. Walk from Wat Hat Chomphu to Wat Mai Mok Cham (6.4 km)
18.00–19.00 hrs. Dinner
19.00–21.00 hrs. Visakha Bucha Day activities and panel discussion: “One Year of Transboundary Contamination in the Kok River”
21.00 hrs. Rest at Wat Mai Mok Cham

📌 1 June 2026

06.00 hrs. Breakfast
08.00–11.00 hrs. Travel from Wat Mai Mok Cham to Chotikunakasem School, Mueang Ngam Tai (7.1 km)
11.00–13.00 hrs. Lunch
13.00–16.00 hrs. Cultural forum and dialogue: “Listening to the People: Concerns about Toxic Contamination in the River and Directions for Solving the Problem for Communities”
16.00–17.00 hrs. Travel from Chotikunakasem School, to Pha Tai School (4 km)
18.00–19.00 hrs. Dinner and rest at Pha Tai School

📌 2 June 2026

06.00 hrs. Breakfast
08.00–11.00 hrs. Travel from Pha Tai School to Ban Ton Phueng (6.5 km)
11.00–13.00 hrs. Lunch at Ban Ton Phueng
13.00–16.00 hrs. Walk from Ban Ton Phueng to Pha Kwang School (6.5 km)
16.00–18.00 hrs. Activities with the local community at Pha Kwang School
18.00–19.00 hrs. Dinner and rest at Pha Kwang School

📌 3 June 2026

06.00 hrs. Breakfast
08.00–11.00 hrs. Travel from Pha Kwang School to the home of flood-affected residents at Ban Khwae Wua Dam (7 km)
11.00–13.00 hrs. Lunch
13.00–17.00 hrs. Walk to Ban Khwae Wua Dam School (2 km)
19.00–21.00 hrs. Cultural forum and discussion: “A Crisis upon a Crisis and the Role of Citizens in Flood Warning at Khwae Wua Dam”
21.00 hrs. Rest at Ban Khwae Wua Dam: (1) participants stay at Ban Khwae Wua Dam School; (2) monks stay at Wat Pong Pham Pattana (monks travel by car from Ban Khwae Wua Dam School to Wat Pong Pham)

📌 4 June 2026

06.00 hrs. Breakfast
07.00–11.00 hrs. Travel from Wat Pong Pham Pattana to Ban Huai Sai Khao (9 km)
11.00–13.00 hrs. Lunch
13.00–17.00 hrs. Discussion forums (2 sessions)

Forum 1: “The problem situation and community proposals from Mae Yao Subdistrict”

Forum 2: “The situation of transboundary river problems and civil society proposals in the Mekong and Salween basins”
18.00–19.00 hrs. Dinner
19.00–21.00 hrs. Cultural program
21.00 hrs. Rest at Wat Huai Sai Khao

📌 5 June 2026

07.00–08.00 hrs. Travel by boat from Mae Yao Municipality to the Kok River Bridge in front of Chiang Rai Provincial Hall
08.00–10.00 hrs. 🌏 World Environment Day activities

Art Parade, Procession of the Five Rivers, from the public park at the Mae Fah Luang Bridge to Chiang Rai Provincial Hall. Public statement

Submit a letter to Chiang Rai Members of Parliament and Senators

11.00 hrs The People’s Network for Protecting the Kok, Sai, Ruak, Mekong, and Salween Rivers meets to discuss solutions to transboundary river contamination with the Prime Minister, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry of Public Health, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Finance, and the National Human Rights Commission
13.00–16.00 hrs. National Health Assembly forum
16.00 hrs. World Environment Day stage at Chiang Rai Contemporary Art Museum

6 Days to Go
Please join Us
Peace Walk for Rivers
31-5 June 2026
From Tha Ton Chiang Mai to Chiang Rai, Thailand

Peace Walk for Rivers,
Dhamma Pilgrimage to Protect the Kok, Sai, Ruak, Mekong, and Salween Rivers
Tha Ton to Chiang Rai 31 May – 5 June 2026

Our Rivers are not a sacrifice zone for irresponsible mining.

Rivers are a No-Go Zone for mining

Rights of Rivers Now

https://www.irrawaddy.com/video/toxic-overspill-why-thailand-can-no-longer-ignore-myanmars-poisoned-rivers.html

Toxic Overspill: Why Thailand Can No Longer Ignore Myanmar’s Poisoned Rivers Unregulated mines in Myanmar’s lawless borderlands are poisoning downstream Thai communities. Rivers and Rights director Pianporn Deetes explains why Bangkok holds the power to solve this escalating regional crisis.

https://bkktribune.com/photo-essay-phou-ngoy-dam-the-recurring-fear/

PHOTO ESSAY: Phou Ngoy Dam, The Recurring Fear | Bangkok Tribune Fear is spreading downstream. It is now recurring in communities along the Mun and Mekong Rivers in Ubon Ratchathani province in the northeast as well as in southern Laos, especially Champasak Province, where the latest hydropower dam project on the Lower Mekong mainstream is being advanced toward t...

📍 Coming up next week event

Launch Event for the Photo Exhibition GEN-F: Living in Fear amid Ecocide

🎤 Launch Event & Panel Discussion
📅 Date: 5 May 2026
🕒 Time: 5:30 PM
📍 SEA Junction, Room 407–408, BACC

From toxic rivers and forest fires to collapsing ecosystems and disappearing livelihoods, GEN-F: Living in Fear amid Ecocide reveals the human cost of environmental destruction across Thailand and Southeast Asia.

Through four years of reportage, photographer Sayan Chuenudomsavad documents lives shaped by pollution, climate disasters, and unchecked development—reminding us that ecocide is not distant, but unfolding around us.

Join us to reflect, question, and demand accountability.

Toxic Contamination in the Mekong River: Accumulating Risks That Policy Has Yet to Confront

Professor Kanokwan Manorom
Mekong Sub-region Social Research Center (MSSRC)
Faculty of Liberal Arts, Ubon Ratchathani University, Thailand............................
New questions must be raised about the abnormalities of the Mekong River

The Mekong River continues to serve as a vital source of water and food for people across the basin region. Images of small fishing boats, riverside fish markets, and ways of life closely tied to the river are still visible in everyday life. However, beneath this apparent continuity, there are signs of change that can no longer be ignored.
In recent years, some riverside communities have begun to observe abnormalities in water quality and fishery resources. At the same time, academic studies and environmental quality monitoring in certain areas have pointed to contamination by heavy metals in sediment and freshwater ecosystems.
The key issue, therefore, is not the “discovery of a new problem,” but rather the “understanding of a problem that is becoming increasingly visible.”In other words, the risk has already become visible, but it has still not been adequately acknowledged at the policy level.

The nature of the risk: From acute impacts to cumulative effects

The problem of heavy metal contamination has distinct characteristics that differ from environmental impacts seen in the past, particularly in the case of large-scale development projects that created clearly visible physical effects.
In the case of heavy metals, the impacts tend to occur in a “cumulative” manner rather than suddenly. Contaminants can remain in sediment, move through the food chain, and enter the human body over the long term. This means that the risk does not appear in the form of an immediate crisis, but rather gradually takes shape and expands over time.
From a policy perspective, this type of risk is often overlooked because it does not generate short-term political pressure. However, many environmental studies have shown that cumulative impacts tend to create much higher social and health costs in the long run.

The gap between “data” and “decision-making.”

Although evidence and empirical data on contamination in the Mekong River ecosystem are increasing, policy responses remain limited. This situation reflects a crucial gap between“recognition” and “decision-making.” At the local level, communities and scholars have increasingly begun to recognize the problem and raise questions. But at the policy level, clear acknowledgment has still not taken place.
In some cases, the response has remained at the level of waiting for more data or assessing the situation cautiously.

While this may be understandable from an academic standpoint, in the case of cumulative risk, delaying decisions may lead to higher costs in the future. It could be said that “not making a decision is another form of decision-making.”

The management of transboundary pollution is constrained by limited governance

The Mekong is an international river that flows through several countries in the region. Managing contamination is therefore institutionally and politically complex because the sources of pollution and the areas affected are often not located within the same jurisdiction.
This creates what may be called a “responsibility gap,” meaning that those who are affected may not be the ones with the authority to regulate. Meanwhile, current international cooperation mechanisms remain limited in both enforcement power and information sharing, resulting in pollution management that continues to be fragmented.

Impacts at the household level and the security of everyday life

At the local level, contamination does not affect only the ecosystem; it also directly affects people’s livelihoods, especially in communities that depend on water resources for their survival. Uncertainty about water quality and food safety affects everyday decisions, from consumption to health security.
This type of impact is important because it shows that environmental problems are not merely technical issues, but are closely tied to people’s quality of life and household security.
Structural limitations: Old problems in new forms
Although the nature of the problem has changed, the structural limitations remain much the same. These include centralized decision-making power, limited community participation, and a greater emphasis on economic growth than on sustainability. The current situation may therefore be seen as a new form of an old problem.” which, if there is no change at the conceptual and institutional levels, is likely to reappear in other forms.

A decision that can no longer be postponed

The Mekong River still flows, but that flow does not mean the ecosystem remains in its original condition. The crucial question is therefore not simply whether the river still exists, but rather how we will deal with the risks that are emerging at a time when the evidence is becoming clearer.
“Delaying decisions may carry higher costs than taking action.”
Acknowledging the problem, therefore, is not the end of the debate, but the starting point for managing toxic substances in the Mekong River, which are no longer confined to Chiang Rai but have also spread into the northeastern region.

Policy recommendations: From recognition to action

As the risk of contamination in the Mekong River becomes increasingly evident, policy responses should not stop at downstream monitoring or waiting for additional data. They must move toward seriously addressing the sources of pollution as well. Lessons from many transboundary river basins around the world point in the same direction: river restoration can only succeed when states are able to identify pollution sources, regulate discharges, establish warning systems, and ensure that polluters are held concretely accountable for the damage they cause.

First, management should be upgraded from simply monitoring water conditions in affected areas to compiling an inventory of pollution sources and accident-prone hotspots throughout the river basin, especially activities likely to release heavy metals or toxic substances, such as mines, ore-processing plants, tailings ponds, industrial zones, and major wastewater discharge points. Downstream data alone are not enough.
If we do not know where the pollution comes from, who is responsible, and which activities should be prioritized for control, effective action will remain limited. Lessons from the Danube River Basin clearly show that establishing a database of “risk points” and accident-prevention systems is a crucial condition for reducing transboundary damage.

Second, there should be greater development of real-time transboundary pollution warning and disclosure systems, going beyond technical annual reporting. Although the Mekong River Commission already has Procedures for Water Quality and a water quality monitoring network in place, the nature of toxic and heavy metal contamination requires warnings that are rapid, transparent, and accessible to local agencies, communities, and downstream water users. The Rhine River Basin provides an important example of how cross-border warning systems can significantly reduce damage when acute contamination occurs, and how river management should not depend on delayed recognition.

Third, the polluter pays principle must be turned into an operational measure, not left as a mere statement of principle. In other words, if any activity poses a high risk of releasing pollutants into public waterways, that activity must bear the costs of prevention, monitoring, restoration, and compensation. The burden of health costs, environmental degradation, and food insecurity should not be shifted onto the state or affected communities. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) clearly states that the Polluter Pays Principle is intended to ensure that the costs of pollution are borne by the polluter rather than transferred to the public.

Fourth, the role of communities should be strengthened from being merely “watchers” to becoming co-designers of monitoring and response systems. In practice, communities are always the first to notice changes in water, sediment, fish, and food safety. If information systems remain controlled solely by central authorities, problem management will continue to be detached from realities on the ground, and community knowledge will be used only to confirm the existence of a problem, rather than being counted as part of decision-making power.

Ultimately, toxic contamination in the Mekong River is not only a matter of water quality. It is also a matter of responsibility, justice, and the future of people who still depend on this river for their livelihoods. If states continue to wait until the damage becomes even more visible before taking action, the cost may not be limited to ecosystem restoration alone, but may also include health, food security, and lost public trust. The time for recognition has already passed, and the time for serious action can no longer be postponed.

Open Letter to Anutin Chanweerakul, Prime Minister of Thailand
By 12 community organizations and environmental civil society groups

On April 22, 2026, fishermen in Chiang Khan District, Loei Province, caught a *Pla Kae* (fish species known by its scientific name as Bagarius bagarius) in the Mekong River exhibiting severe physical abnormalities. Specifically, the fish was covered in several small and large tumors scattered across its body, barbels, fins, and tail. Such anomalies have never been observed previously. This condition is notably identical to that found in *Pla Kae* caught in the Chiang Rai along the Mekong River in early 2025, which preceded the detection of widespread heavy metal contamination in the Kok, Sai, Ruak, and the Mekong River

Currently, the water quality inspections conducted by the Regional Environmental and Pollution Control Office 9 (Udon Thani) revealed arsenic contamination in the Mekong River across the provinces of Loei, Nong Khai, Bueng Kan, and Nakhon Phanom last year, exceeding standard levels as early as August 2025.

In Chiang Rai Province, the upper reaches of the Mekong River found the arsenic contamination ( a known carcinogen) persists in both water and river sediment far above levels considered safe. Other heavy metals have also been detected in fish and agricultural produce, and while these detected concentrations remain within standard limits, these findings unequivocally demonstrate the gradual accumulation of arsenic and other heavy metals within the food chain.

Although a direct causal link between the toxic levels of contamination in the Mekong and the unprecedented abnormal tumour growths found in "Pla Kae", the northeast, Thailand, cannot yet be definitively established, this occurrence mirrors the heavy metal contamination crisis previously identified in the northern region. Therefore, on behalf of the organizations listed at the bottom of the open letter, we urgently and respectfully demand that the Prime Minister instruct all relevant government agencies to immediately execute the following comprehensive monitoring and surveillance measures, which are imperative to guarantee public health, a healthy environment, and the sustained economic stability of the local communities:

1. Conduct water and sediment quality testing across the 7 provinces along the Mekong in northeast Thailand. The water and sediment quality testing must be conducted at a minimum of three distinct points in each province along the Mekong River and the sampling locations should correlate with the confluence of major tributaries from both Thailand and the Lao PDR and the entire length of the Mekong River in the northeast in each province, must be performed regularly, (at least twice a month) consistent with the monitoring frequency in Chiang Rai, northern Thailand

2. Ensure water quality testing for all tap water systems utilizing water from the Mekong River. This must cover both the Provincial Waterworks Authority systems and local village water systems, with regular testing performed at least once per month.

3. Conduct testing of fish, aquatic life, benthic organisms, and riparian vegetation, at a minimum of three points per province, mirroring the requirement set forth above.

4. Conduct blood, urine, and comprehensive health checks, specifically for all community residents considered high-risk for heavy metal toxic contamination across all 7 provinces in the Northeast.

5. Investigate the definitive sources of heavy metal contamination, encompassing origins from the northern part of the Mekong River and its tributaries within Lao PDR. Furthermore, all measures must be taken to urgently control and close off all sources generating these heavy metal toxins, including those that require cross-border coordination.

Respectfully

23 April 2026

1. The Mekong Butterfly
2. Hug Chiang Kan Group
3. Hug Nam Loei Group
4. Hug Nam Kong Association
5. Human Rights and Environment Association
6. ETOs Watch Coalition
7. Community Resources Center Foundation: CRC
5. Investigate the definitive sources of heavy metal contamination, encompassing origins from the northern part in the Mekong River and its tributaries within Lao PDR. Furthermore, all measures must be taken to urgently control and close off all sources generating these heavy metal toxins - including those which require cross-border coordination.
10. Nature Care Foundation
11. Pra Klang Tung Community Council
12. People Network of Kok-Sai-Ruak-Kong

Upcoming event

“Clearly, this is the headwater of a river system that is a vital source of life for millions of people and also significant for the ocean. How can we allow this to happen?”

Asia’s longest free-flowing river contaminated by arsenic linked to Myanmar mines MAE HONG SON, Thailand — Saw Si Paw Rak Salween guns the wooden fishing boat’s engine and steers along the river that inspired his family name. He is ethnic Karen — his parents migrated from Myanmar’s side of the Salween River to the Thai side. When he acquired Thai citizenship, Saw Si Paw h...

Sediment samples from the Mekong River contained arsenic levels as high as 296 milligrammes per kilogramme, which is nine times above the level considered severely hazardous.

Mining is killing region's rivers Last week, Thailand's Pollution Control Department (PCD) released a report on its tenth round of water quality monitoring tests on three rivers in the northern region. The report is based on samples taken from the Kok, Sai, Ruak, and Mekong rivers in the country's northernmost area.