On February twenty first 2025, Science printed the next letter.
“Sura, a tidal flat within the Mangyeong estuary in South Korea, has survived one of many world’s largest coastal reclamation tasks. Now, a proposed airport threatens this vital refuge (1).
The airport’s development, deliberate to happen between 2025 and 2029, would result in an irreversible lack of the biodiversity and sociocultural actions that Sura helps (1, 2).
The reclamation website through which Sura is positioned, Saemangeum, was as soon as an unlimited estuarine ecosystem (3, 4). Saemangeum served as a key stopover alongside the East Asian–Australasian Flyway, supporting a minimum of 330,000 shorebirds yearly (5). Nevertheless, the development associated to the reclamation undertaking disrupted its biodiversity and ecosystem companies (3, 4, 6).
Amid this environmental upheaval, Sura nonetheless helps endangered natural world, particularly migratory birds, together with 59 nationally protected species and 27 globally threatened species (1).
The airport proposal claims socioeconomic advantages, however the plan was exempted from the preliminary feasibility evaluation, so no proof is obtainable to show that the anticipated advantages outweigh the environmental dangers (7). Gunsan Airport is positioned about 1.3 km from the proposed website and is underused, placing the necessity for a brand new airport in query. Furthermore, environmental impression assessments verify the conservation worth of Sura and point out that chicken strikes would pose substantial aviation security dangers, as they do at different airports close to chicken habitats (1, 8).
This growth would undercut the South Korean authorities’s efforts to persuade the worldwide group of the excellent common worth of their tidal flats, half of which have been designated as United Nations Academic, Scientific and Cultural Group (UNESCO) World Heritage websites in 2021 (9). Sura is simply 7 km away from the heritage website location. The nation was additionally among the many 188 nations on the 2022 UN Biodiversity Convention (COP15) that dedicated to halt world biodiversity loss by 2030 and to take pressing actions to stop the extinction of endangered species (10). Sacrificing Sura to create one other unjustifiable airport would put the nation’s dedication to environmental objectives in query.
To resolve this controversy, the South Korean authorities should pause the airport undertaking till a radical and impartial feasibility and environmental impression evaluate has been carried out. UNESCO and the Worldwide Union for Conservation of Nature ought to assess the impression of the airport on the integrity of heritage properties. Scientific specialists ought to present options that promote conservation and show the irreplaceable socio- financial and ecological worth of Sura. Organizations such because the Conference on Organic Variety ought to develop worldwide authorized mechanisms to cease ecologically harmful and dangerous tasks of this sort.
The dire scenario in Sura challenges mainstream conservation paradigms that depend on authorities goodwill, which is commonly compromised by competing growth priorities, and highlights the destiny of numerous tidal flats misplaced in South Korea and globally in latest many years (2, 11, 12).”
Taejin Park1*, Younger Rae Choi2, Yekang Ko3, Nahee Kim4, Dongpil Oh5, Nial Moores6
1 Bay Space Environmental Analysis Institute, Moffett Discipline, CA, USA.
2 Florida Worldwide College, Miami, FL, USA.
3 College of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA.
4 Joint Motion for Cancellation of Saemangeum New Airport, Jeonju, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea.
5 Saemangeum Citizen Ecological Investigation Crew, Gunsan, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea.
6 Birds Korea, Busan, Republic of Korea.
REFERENCES AND NOTES
1. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport, “Saemangeum Worldwide Airport development undertaking strategic environmental impression evaluation report” [in Korean] (2021); https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.14799451.
2. Y. R. Choi, J. Hist. Geog. 82, 23 (2023).
3. N. Moores, D. I. Rogers, Ok. Rogers, P. M. Hansbro, Emu 116, 136 (2016).
4. J. Ryu et al., Ocean Coast. Manag. 102, 559 (2014).
5. M. Barter, “Shorebirds of the Yellow Sea: Significance, threats, and conservation standing,” Wetlands 461 Worldwide World Sequence 9, Worldwide Wader Research 12 (Atmosphere Australia, 2002).
6. J. Ok. Lee et al., Chicken Conserv. Intl. 28, 238 (2018).
7. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport, “Saemangeum new airport prefeasibility examine” [in Korean] (2019); https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.14799463.
8. I. C. Metz, J. Ellerbroek, T. Mühlhausen, D. Kügler, J. M. Hoekstra, Aerospace 7, 26 (2020).
9. UNESCO, “Resolution 44 COM 8B.6 Getbol, Korean Tidal Flats” (Republic of Korea) (2021); https://whc.unesco. org/en/choices/7925.
10. Conference on Organic Variety, The Kunming- Montreal World Biodiversity Framework (2022); https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/e6d3/cd1d/ daf663719a03902a9b116c34/cop-15-l-25-en.pdf.
11. N. J. Murray et al., Nature 565, 222 (2019).
12. D. Sengupta et al., Earth Futur. 11, e2022EF002927 (2023).
COMPETING INTERESTS
N.Ok. and D.O. are members of the Joint Motion for the Cancellation of Saemangeum New Airport, a company main a litigation case to halt the airport plan. Y.R.C., Y.Ok.,
and N.M. have participated within the case as skilled witnesses.
10.1126/science.adv5597
