Dam vs. weir — recipe for failing government

In doing English journalism in Korea, finding a proper English word that matches the Korean word is essential.

A challenge to that was felt very strongly earlier this week when I was trying to find the right English word for “bo,” a Korean word used to refer to 16 cement structures built across Korea’s four major rivers. They were built to change the water level and create small reservoirs as part of the Four Major Rivers Project (2007-2012). The government said they would effectively prevent flooding and droughts.

“Bo” were invented for irrigation purposes and have been in use for centuries in the Korean Peninsula, until the word “dam” arrived from abroad. As research continued, I encountered an almost decade-old fray over the English word for “bo.”

A group represented by environmentalists and some scholars claimed they should be called dams, yet another group represented mainly by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport argued they are “weirs.” In conclusion, The Korea Times has decided to use dams and here is why.

Dams and weirs are similar in that they refer to structures to raise water levels and retain water, but there is a difference — dams release surplus water only through gates, while weirs let the water above a certain level flow over them. All 16 “bo” have gates to release water.

Secondly, Shin Jae-eun, an activist from the Korea Federation for Environmental Movements, said a majority of the new “bo” are large dams by international standards.

The International Commission on Large Dams defines a large dam this way: One “with a height of 15 meters or greater from its lowest foundation to crest, or a dam between 5 meters and 15 meters impounding more than 3 million cubic meters” of water.

According to the government’s Water Resources Management Information System website wamis.go.kr, all but three — Jooksanbo, Baekjebo and Sejongbo — meet the large dam requirements. The remaining three are under five meters in height but all contain more than 3 million cubic meters of water. The government’s argument for weirs is pathetic, with no facts to back it up.

“They should be weirs because the OECD also says so in its recent environmental report,” an official from the land ministry said. It is no secret that the OECD didn’t form an independent panel of experts when they wrote the report. It relied on data provided by the Korean government.

Also, an allegation raised by Kim Jung-wk, professor emeritus from Seoul National University, made a more convincing case that they are dams.

“I was suppressed by the government for calling them dams,” Kim said, referring to a radio commercial he helped make. He was critical of the government’s refusal to call them dams and “the government pushed the Korean Broadcasters Association to reject the commercial from being broadcast.” Shin is not surprised by the allegation.

“From the government’s point of view, had they been dams, the project would have looked much bigger and could have made more people oppose it,” Shin said.

“The government needed to make the project not a big deal.” Unfortunately, 10 years later, the project is still a big deal. It is becoming more evident the 22.2 trillion won project was a failure in delivering its stated goals and damaging the environment. The project is likely to be audited again soon, for the fourth time, and could be reversed completely over the next five years.

What I won’t forget is how the government failed its people hard.