Myths on Lake Sarez risk mitigation and realities

05.08.2007 22:06 msk Leonid Papyrin Analytics Tajikistan

Comments (0)

Failure o t!e "orld #ank $nternational Project on t!e Lake %are& 'isk (iti)ation or 2000*2006. 'ussian +ersion ,urin) -.67*-..- in t!e area o Lake %are& t!e or)ani&ations o t!e P/ 0Tadjik)eolo)ia1 2 an en)ineerin)* )eolo)ical team o t!e %out!ern 3ydro)eolo)ical 45pedition6 Pamir )eop!ysical team o t!e %out!ern 7eop!ysical 45pedition6 topo)rap!ic sur+eyin) team o t!e Tadjik 7eolo)y %ur+eyin) 45pedition * !a+e 8een carried out a )reat amount o ield in+esti)ations. A relati+ely small part o ield 9orks t!ere 9as ul illed 8y :%47$;74/ <All*'ussian 'esearc! $nstitute o 3ydro)eolo)y and 4n)ineerin) 7eolo)y= <(osco9 'e)ion=6 0%oyu&)ipro+odc!o&1 >ompany <(osco9=6 >ompany 07idroprojekt1 <Tas!kent=6 (.:.Lomonoso+ (osco9 %tate ?ni+ersity6 )eodetic and !ydro)rap!ical teams o t!e %tate >arto)rap!y ,epartment o t!e ?%%'6 !ydrolo)ical team o 3ydro*meteorolo)ical %ur+ey <Tadjikistan=. T!e in+esti)ations 9ere stopped in -..- due to t!e 8reakdo9n o t!e ?%%'.

%are& Lake !as reminded o itsel in -..@ 8y an a8normal increase in its 9ater le+el durin) t!e lood. T!usA t!ere 9as appeared t!e necessity to 8e)in t!e in+esti)ations a)ain. T!ey 9ere started in -..7A 9!en t!e $nternational (i)ration /r)ani&ation and 7o+ernment o Tadjikistan con+ened in ,us!an8e an international con erence on Lake %are&. $n Bune -... t!e %ecretariat o t!e ?; $nternational ,ecade or ;atural ,isasters 'eduction and ot!er or)ani&ations !a+e carried out a +ery s!ort reconnoiterin) e5amination o Lake %are&. #asin) on t!e results o t!is e5amination an $nternational Project on t!e Lake %are& 'isk (iti)ation or 2000*2006 9as prepared. T!e participants o t!e project 9ere t!e %9iss >ompany 0%T?>CD1 and T$%%> A; 'T <Tadjik $nstitute or %eismolo)y and Antiseismic >onstruction o Tadjik Academy o %ciences=.

T!e participants presented t!eir +ision o t!e )i+en pro8lem on t!e joint %9iss*Tadjik 9e8site 999.sare&.8y.ru <999.sare&.tj= t!at 9as or)ani&ed and sponsored 8y t!e %9iss / ice or >ooperation in Tadjikistan. T!e administrator o t!e 9e8site is #ak!tier Fai&ie+ * t!e Pro)ramme >oordinator o t!e a8o+e* mentioned / ice. A 8i) part o )eolo)ical in ormation 9as prepared 8y A.'. $s!c!uk 2 a 9orker rom T$%%> A; 'T. T!e Project is descri8ed in t!e 8ros!ure o ;.'. $s!c!uk 0Lake %are&: Project on 'isk (iti)ation1. All t!ese in ormational materials 9ere discussed at t!e >on erence !eld in ,us!an8e in 200E. $n 200@ t!e T$%%> A; 'T ,irectorA %.3.;e)matullae+ presented a report at t!e Anni+ersary >on erence de+oted to Academician (.A. %ado+skyA at t!e $nstitute o 4art! P!ysics in (osco9.

A major part o t!e report concerned t!e $nternational Project 0Lake %are& 'isk (iti)ation1. T!e results o t!e Project 9ere presented in t!e article o American )eolo)ists 'o8ert %!uster and ,onald Al ord: 0?soi Landslide ,am and Lake %are&A Pamir (ountainsA TadjikistanF <200@= and in t!e article o Patrick ,ro& * ?soi /8ject >!ie (ana)er rom %T?>CD >ompany: GLAC4 %A'4H '$%C ($T$7AT$/; P'/B4>T: A 7L/#AL '$%C A;ALD%$%F.

/n (ay 22*2E t!is yearA t!e second international con erence 9as !eld in ,us!an8eA 9!ic! 9as de+oted to t!e %are& Lake sa ety. Participants o t!e con erence 9ere aut!oritati+e representati+es rom TadjikistanA e5perts rom 7ermanyA $ranA Cir)!i&iaA 'ussiaA TurkmeniaA Turkey and ?&8ekistan. T!e >on erence summari&ed and appro+ed t!e results o t!e "orld #ank Project 0Lake %are& 'isk (iti)ation or 2000* 20061. A special attention 9as paid to a proposal o t!e Tadjik Aut!orities on usa)e o 0-7 cu8ic km o t!e purest 9ater rom Lake %are&1.

$ 9ould like to tell in my paper a8out myt!s and realities o a ne9 p!ase o in+esti)ations o t!e %are& Pro8lem.

MYTH 1: Results of all the investigations carried out during more than 20 years (since 1997 till 1990) in the area of Lake Sare ! this is a mi"ture of miscellaneous facts differently inter#reted $y different researchers% a com$ination of various hy#otheses and su##ositions&' T!is statement can 8e ound on t!e 9e8site 999.sare&.8y.ru $t sounds like a re rain in all t!e listed pu8lications. ?suallyA in order to carry out any ield )eolo)ical in+esti)ationsA one needs a 9orkin) !ypot!esisA and t!en planned in+esti)ations s!ould con irm or deny it. T!is is an ordinary process durin) any researc!. $t is natural t!at an aut!or o any !ypot!esis must precisely indicate 9!at to do or con irmation o !is !ypot!esisA and only a ter t!e con irmation is o8tainedA t!is !ypot!esis 9ill 8ecome a act. A !at o to t!e aut!or o t!e !ypot!esis i !e could )i+e at least a ri)!t direction or t!e in+esti)ations.

T!ere is a type o )eolo)ical 9orks 2 )enerali&ation o researc! results o past years. (ulti*year in+esti)ations o any o8ject accumulate acts 9!ic! c!an)e t!e outlook o aut!ors on t!e o8ject under in+esti)ations. $n parallelA t!e same o8ject is studied 8y specialists o +ersatile pro essions and ot!er or)ani&ations. ;e9 data o similar in+esti)ations in ot!er re)ions are 8ein) accumulated. ;o9 it is c!anced so t!at aut!ors o in+esti)ations are pro+ided 9it! time and unds in order to analy&e once more all t!e in ormational materialsA discuss t!e o8tained results 9it! e5perts o +ersatile disciplinesA treat ield data 9it! t!e use o ne9 computer tec!nolo)ies and so onA and only a ter all t!is to prepare a ne9 report * t!is is a 9ell*taken and 9idely used practice. At t!e con erence o -..7 a proposal 9as e5pressed: to )i+e t!e possi8ility to t!e ormer researc!ers to )enerali&e t!eir materials. $t 9ould 8e o sense to make )enerali&ations on )eolo)icalA )eop!ysicalA !ydrolo)ical and )eodetic in+esti)ationsA to carry out an analysis o en)ineerin) projects. T!en t!e summari&ed results s!ould 8e translated into 4n)lis!A 8ecause it 9as planned to recruit 4n)lis!*speakin) participants or in+esti)ations. $t 9as neededA in order ne9 participants 9ould kno9 9!at 9as doneA 9!at 9ork 9as startedA 8ut not yet completedA and 9!at more must 8e done. /nly in t!is case t!e reports could 8e re+ie9edA and ne9 researc!ers 9ould !a+e a moral ri)!t to critici&e t!em.

As an aut!or and e5ecutor o all t!e )eop!ysical in+esti)ations per ormed in t!e area o Lake %are&A $ personally o ered at t!e >on erence o -..7 and se+eral times later my assistance in )enerali&ation o )eop!ysical and !ydrolo)ical dataA 8ut did not ind any support. T!e "orld #ank and Federal 7eolo)ical %ur+ey o ?%A pro+ided unds or t!e 9orks on data )enerali&ation. #ut t!e irst*!and e5ecutors did not o8tain any )rants. T!usA t!e or)ani&ers o ne9 in+esti)ations t!emsel+es !a+e created t!eir di iculties 9!ic! t!ey did not o+ercome till no9. MYTH 2: (n a$sence of the Right) *ank Landslide& T!e 'i)!t*#ank Landslide is one o t!e !a&ards or t!e slide*rock dam o Lake %are&. T!e si&e o t!e landslide and +elocity o its displacement determine t!e !ei)!t and si&e o an o+er lo9 9a+eA 9!ic! 9ill appear i t!e landslide is collapsed. T!e +olume o o+er lo9ed 9ater and t!e de)reeA to 9!ic! t!e slide*rock dam 9ill 8e dama)edA depend just on t!e a8o+e*mentioned parameters. T!e irst prediction o 9ater +olume <%!ekoA-.68=A 2 kmEA 9as made 8asin) on t!e results o route and aero+isual o8ser+ations. A ter t!at a comple5 o 9orks 9as per ormed: en)ineerin)*)eolo)icalA topo)rap!ical and crack sur+eyin)s o t!e landslide sur aceA stationary )eodetic o8ser+ationsA )eop!ysical in+esti)ationsA drillin) o a 8ore!ole. $n -.8- :.%. Fedorenko determined t!e si&e o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide as eIual to 0.. kmE. $n -..0 Du.(. Ca&ako+A ;.'. $s!c!ukA Du. Akdodo+ <Tadjik;$$;T$ $ssue 0(odelin)A determination o si&es and Iualitati+e assessment o slidin) slopes1= !a+e calculated t!at t!e si&e o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide is 0.6EE kmEA its a+era)e t!ickness 2 -@- m. $n 2002 A.'. $s!c!ukA ;.'. $s!c!uk and %.3. ;e)matullae+ <A report in t!e $nstitute o 4art! P!ysics in (osco9= !a+e reported on t!e 8asis o t!e same data t!at no landslide e5ists. 3o9e+erA t!ey 9ere not pioneers in makin) suc! a statement: D?.A. (amae+ * t!e ormer )eolo)ist o 0%oyu&)ipro+odk!o&1

>ompany 2 in t!e cloakroom o t!e con erence o -..7 9as assertin) t!e same ideaA 8ut did not )i+e me any e5planations or t!isA !a+in) promised to 9rite an article on t!is topic. #ut no article !as 8een 9ritten yet.

'o8ert %!usterA ,onald Al ord and Patrick ,ro& accepted t!e landslide to 8e eIual to 0.5 kmE. T!e (inistry o 4mer)ency o t!e 'epu8lic o Tadjikistan <$n ormation or 4uropean*Asian ?nion countriesA 2006= considers t!at t!ere are t9o landslides on t!e slopeA eac! eIual to 0.6 kmEA 9it! a !a&ard comin) only rom t!e nort!*9estern one. And t!e )i+en conclusion is also made on t!e 8asis o t!e same data. All t!e )eolo)ical ideas on t!e structure o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide are usually 8ased on t!e 8iased opinions. As many are )eolo)ists and so many are !ypot!eses. Furt!ermoreA i one )eolo)ist <likeA or e5ampleA ;.'. $s!c!uk= looks t9ice at t!e 'i)!t #ank LandslideA !e 9ill !a+e already t9o !ypot!eses. ;on* 8iased in ormational materials on t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide are only t!ose data t!at are o8tained rom t!e sin)le 8ore!oleA seismic cross*sections or se+en pro iles and )eodetic measurements 9it!in a net9ork o ran)in) marks. ?n ortunatelyA t!ese materials 9ere i)nored 8y )eolo)ists as considered to 8e contradictory to t!eir o9n !ypot!eses. Accordin) to )eop!ysical data o -.8E*-.85 and -.76A t!e displacin) <or slidin)= sur ace o t!e 'i)!t*#ank and ?soi landslides is t!e roo o !ard metamorp!osed rocksA 9!ic! is clearly re)istered 8y t!e intensi+e re racti+e 8oundary <9it! a +elocity o lon)itudinal seismic 9a+esA eIual to 6500 mJsec=. T!e steepness o t!is sur aceA like at t!e ?soi %lide*'ock ,amA in t!e upper !al o t!e slope reac!es @0K*@5KA in t!e lo9er !al * 22K*25K. T!e si&e o t!e landslide is -.25 kmEA a+era)e +ertical t!ickness is 250 mA t!e ma5imum one * E50 m. T!e similar idea on t!e ?soi landslide displacement and on all t!e landslides o t!e ri)!t*!and s!ore o Lake %are& alon) t!e roo o dense metamorp!osed rocks 9as reported 8y :.4. (inae+ at t!e con erence o -..7. #y t!e 9ayA !e 9as not amiliar 9it! t!e )eop!ysical data and made t!e )i+en supposition only on t!e 8asis o )eolo)ical o8ser+ations. T!e e5pected displacin) <slidin)= +elocity o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide is not less t!an 2@ mJsecA i.e. t!e same as o t!e ?soi landslide. $n t!e upper part o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide t9o intermediate slidin) sur aces are re+ealed 9it! slo9er 8oundary +elocities. T!e total si&e o t!e co+er composed o looser sediments is 0.5 kmE.

/n t!e 'i)!t*#ank slopeA t!ere 9ere carried out stationary )eodetic measurements 8y a net9ork o ran)in) marks. ?n ortunatelyA )eodetic specialists did not )enerali&e t!ese measurements. T!e aut!ors o t!e !ypot!esis on a8sence o t!e )i+en landslide state t!at only t!e top layer is displacin)A just 9it!in 9!ic! t!e 8enc!*marks are installedA 8ut t!ey do not )i+e any mat!ematical su8stantiation o t!is. PersonallyA $ did not mana)e to ind any correlation 8et9een t!e 8earin)s o t!e 8enc!mark displacement +ectors and 8earin)s o ma5imum slope o t!e sur ace relie in t!ese points. T!e sin)le 8ore!oleA drilled in -.86A !as a casin)A installed to a dept! o o+er 50 m. At 8enc!*marks -00 and -0- 2 t!e nearest ones to t!e 8ore!oleA t!e annual <in plane= displacement is 0.--0*0.-20 m. ,urin) a period o -.86 to 2006 it s!ould reac! 2.2*2.@ m. %uc! a displacement o t!e top layer 9ould cause a 8ent o t!e casin) and a rock de ormation near t!e 8ore!ole mout!. $n /cto8er 2006 'ustam Dusu o+ 2 a )eolo)ist rom t!e %out!ern 3ydro)eolo)ical 45pedition * and me e5amined t!e 8ore!ole mout! and did not ind any rock de ormation and casin) 8entA i.e.A t!usA no displacement o sur ace sediments !appened. $n -.86 a ca8le 8enc!mark 9as installed in t!e 8ore!ole at t!e dept! o -78 m. T!e ca8le 8enc!mark did not s!o9 any 8endin) durin) se+eral years o o8ser+ations. T!is act indicates t!at t!e displacin) <slidin)= sur ace in t!e 8ore!ole lies at t!e dept! o o+er -78 mA and t!e si&e o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide is not less t!an 0.. kmE. $n t!is case t!e +olume o t!e o+er lo9 9a+e durin) t!e landslide collapse 9ill 8e appro5imately -00 million mEA 9!ic! 9ould mean a )i)antic catastrop!e e+en i t!e ?soi %lide*'ock ,am 9ould not collapse.

All t!ese contradictions 9ere clear in -..7. T!ere oreA i t!e aut!ors o ne9 in+esti)ations 9ould 9ant to analy&e t!e !a&ard o t!e 'i)!t #ank LandslideA t!ey 9ould rely not on a ne9 +isual e5amination o itA 8ut on t!e up*date tec!nolo)ies or determination o displacin) sur aces. T!e 8ore!oleA t!at 9as drilled in -.86A 9as not suita8le or carryin) out any in+esti)ations in it e+en at t!at time. T!ere oreA it 9as necessary to drill in t!e same site a ne9 8ore!ole to a dept! o E00 mA usin) a modern demounta8le ri). T!e top part o t!e 8ore!oleA 9!ere t!e rock is t!e loosestA s!ould 8e immo+a8ly cased in metallic tu8es to a dept! o 50 m and t!e most detailed lo))in) in+esti)ations and seismic 9orks 8y t!e met!od o +ertical seismic pro ilin)

9ould 8e conducted in it. A ter t!atA t!e 8ore!ole s!ould 8e cased 8y plastic tu8es up to t!e 8ore!ole ace and t!en periodically carried out inclinometric and ca+ernometric measurements alon) t!e entire 8ore!ole len)t!. T!e 8ent o t!e 8ore!ole and a c!an)e in its diameter 9ill make it possi8le to determine precisely t!e position o t!e displacin) sur ace. T!is tec!nolo)y is used no9 to study landslides t!at :itter a t!reat to a +ery important o8jects. Lo))in) in+esti)ations 9ill ena8le o8tainin) a detailed c!aracteristics o stren)t! and dynamic properties o rocks alon) t!e 8ore!oleA per ormin) o )eolo)ical re erencin) o re racti+e 8oundaries esta8lis!ed 8y means o seismic sur+eyin).

A ne9 8ore!ole s!ould !a+e 8een drilled or precise determination o t!e displacin) sur ace positionA +olume and displacement +elocity o t!e landslide 9it!in t!e 0Project on t!e Lake %are& 'isk (iti)ation or 2000*20061. MYTH 3: +rguments on a full colla#se of the ,soi -am and a gigantic flood s.ee#ing a.ay the valleys of the *artang)/ian0)+mudaria Rivers and demolishing everything on its .ay u# to the +ral Sea ) are sim#ly groundless conclusions of 1s#ecialists1 .ho are far from understanding the real sco#e of the #ro$lem&' $n reality t!e matter o acts is ar rom trut!. T!e pro essional researc!ers ne+er said suc! a nonsense.

T!ere are t9o !ypot!eses on ormation o t!e ?soi slid*rock dam. T!e aut!ors o t!e 8ot! !ypot!eses outlined t!at t!e dam is )enerally sta8leA 8ut a 9ater o+er lo9 9ill cause a closure c!annel in its nort!ern 9eakened part. T!e +elocity and time o 9as!in) out o t!e closure c!annel 9ere proposed to 8e di erent. At t!e same time t!e supporters o t!e 8ot! !ypot!eses su))ested to conduct t!e most detailed in+esti)ations and drillin) 9orks in t!e nort!ern rear 9eakened &oneA 9!ere a closure c!annel is e5pectedA and outlined t!at only t!en a inal conclusion could 8e made on t!e sta8ility o t!e landslide. >losure c!annels in all t!e ancient slide*rock dams e+er !appened in t!e Pamirs are located in t!eir rear part. #ut it is not kno9n 9!at +elocity t!ey !ad. $n order to create a catastrop!ic 9ater 8reakt!rou)!A a closure c!annel o 20*E0 m 9ide or a series o lar)e cracks 9ould 8e enou)!.

T!e aut!or o t!e irst !ypot!esis 9as ,r. %ci. A.$.%!eko 2 t!e 3ead o 4n)ineerin) 7eodynamics %ectorA :%47$;74/ $nstitute <-.70=. 3e supposed t!at a ter t!e ?soi landslide stoppedA its 8asic rock mass 9as 8roken in t9o parts. $ts nort!ern part 8e)an mo+in) in t!e opposite directionA 8ut did not reac! t!e sur ace o tearin) o . T!usA a rear sink 9as ormed t!ereA 9!ic! t!en 9as illed 9it! collapsed and mud lo9 sediments. $n case o 9ater o+er lo9A a closure c!annel appears in t!is sink 9it! a dept! Iuickly reac!in) -00 m < rom t!e present*day lake le+el= and may 8e muc! deeper. T!is is a pessimistic +ariant. #ased on t!is !ypot!esis and analy&in) t!e results o )eolo)ical and topo)rap!ical sur+eyin)sA decodin) o aerop!otos and aero+isual o8ser+ationsA A.$. %!eko and A.(.Lek!atino+ !a+e compiled t!e map o ?soi Landslide dynamics on a scale o -:5000. T!is detailed map is t!e illustration o t!e irst !ypot!esis.

T!e second !ypot!esis 9as su))ested in -.8- 8y ,r. %ci. Fedorenko 2 t!e >!ie 'esearc!er o 4n)ineerin) 7eolo)y %u8*FacultyA (.:. Lominoso+ (osco9 %tate ?ni+ersity <(%?=A 8asin) on t!e same data used or t!e irst !ypot!esis. ,r. Fedorenko considered t!at a ter t!e 8asic rock mass !ad stoppedA t!e collapsed sediments 9ere mo+in) up* and do9n9ard t!e +alleyA 8ut not in t!e re+erse directionA and t!at t!e ?soi Landslide !adA instead o a rear sinkA rat!er a more denser core in t!e crest place o its lo9ered part. T!e 9eakened &one is composed o 8i) 8locks and rocks o+erlain 8y mud lo9 sediments. 3e considered t!at a 9ater o+er lo9 9ill 8reak t!e dam crest in t!e mostly lo9ered partA 9!ic! 9ill 8e ollo9ed 8y a slo9 erosionA 9as!out o t!e dense core and )radual liIuidation o t!e lakeA i.e. t!e same closure c!annel 9ill

appearA 8ut 9ater dra9in) rom t!e lake 9ill proceed slo9ly. T!is is an optimistic !ypot!esis. T!e !ypot!esis 9as appro+ed 8y t!e 7eolo)ical %u8*>ommission o t!e ?%%' 7/%PLA; durin) e5aminin) t!e researc! results on Lake %are& in -.88. A ter t!at many )eolo)ists 8e)an to consider t!e !ypot!esis as a actA t!ou)! :.%. Fedorenko !imsel 9rote: 0T!is is a 9orkin) !ypot!esis o (%? 4n)ineerin) 7eolo)y %u8*Faculty and %out!ern 3ydro)eolo)ical 45pedition o P/ 0Tadjik)eolo)ia1. #ut :.%. Fedorenko did not compile a mapA 9!ic! illustrates !is !ypot!esisA and did not take into account t!e results o t!e )eop!ysical in+esti)ations o -.75*-.76. %oA t!e directionA in 9!ic! 8i) 8locks 9ere mo+in) a ter t!e 8reak o t!e 8asic rock massA is still unkno9n. 3o9e+erA t!is small detail completely c!an)es t!e sta8ility assessment o t!e nort!ern 9eakened &one and determines t!e scale o an e5pected catastrop!e.

$nte)rated )eop!ysical in+esti)ations o t!e ?soi Landslide 9ere carried out in -.75*-.76 on a scale o -:-0000. "it! t!e aid o )ra+imetric sur+eyin)A t9o 9eakened &ones 9it! a lo9ered density and a !i)! rock porosity 9ere distin)uis!ed at t!e dam. T!e nort!ern &one coincides 9it! t!e a8o+e*mentioned rear part o t!e landslide. T!e second &one located in t!e dam center is linked 9it! t!e 9ays o 9ater iltration. $n -.77 8ased on t!e analysis o t!e data o t!e Tadjik 7(%A $ !a+e made a prediction t!at t!e a+era)e multi*year 9ater le+el o Lake %are& increases annually 8y 0.2 m and t!at e+entually it 9ill reac! permea8le sedimentsA causin) a natural 9as!out o t!e dam andA !enceA t!e catastrop!ic lood. $n -.87 in t!e lo9ered areas o t!e ?soi dam at t!e joint o t!e rock massesA )eolo)ists rom t!e %out!ern 3ydro)eolo)ical 45pedition !a+e re+ealed disconnected perma rost areas and t9o linear &ones o t!e ice mani estations concentration. $ce meltin) can also pose a dan)er or t!e dam sta8ility. All t!ese rele+ant pro8lems concernin) t!e dam sta8ility 9ere clearly seen 8e ore -..7. To sol+e t!emA carryin) out inte)rated in+esti)ations o t!e dam areaA co+erin) a8out 5 km2A on a scale o -:2000A 9ere needed. All t!ese pro8lems could !a+e 8een settled 9it!in t!e 0Lake %are& 'isk (iti)ation Project1A 8ut t!ey remained open.

MYTH 4: 2here is a certain danger% $ut it is much smaller than it has $een #reviously sus#ected& For se+en years already t!is p!rase is tirelessly repeated 8y 7!ulsara Pulato+a 2 a 9orker o t!e "orld #ank. ;e9 researc!ers did not o8tain any ne9 data on t!e structure o t!e ?soi ,am and 'i)!t #ank LandslideA 8ecause no ne9 real ield in+esti)ations 9ere carried out. And till no9 t!ey do not kno9 any ot!er dan)ers t!at 9ould t!reaten to t!e ?soi damA 8utA ne+ert!elessA t!ey declare a8out a decrease o t!e dan)er accordin) to t!e results o t!eir acti+ity. (oreo+erA t!e aut!ors 8e)an to declare t!eir 0ac!ie+ement1 8e ore t!e 9orks on t!e Project 9ere actually started. $n realityA t!ey ur)ently per ormed t!e mo8ili&in) actions in t!e +alleys o t!e #artan) and Pianj 'i+ers 9it!in t!e 7#A/ /8last: at leastA t!ey arran)ed an o8ser+ation and 9arnin) system. All t!is is 9ell and all ri)!tA 8ut 9!y to 8lu orL 'ecently in (osco9 $ !a+e read t!e in ormation on t!e Lake %are& stateA prepared 8y t!e Tadjik (inistry o 4mer)ence in Bune 2006 or t!e countries*mem8ers o 4uropean*Asian 4conomic ?nion. T!e in ormation lists t!e pro8lems t!at 9ill arise i a catastrop!ic lood !appens on t!e territory o ?&8ekistan and Turkmenia. $ can tell rankly t!at dama)in) conseIuences 9ill not 8e small. T!ou)!A t!ey do not open t!e trut! t!at t!e lood o suc! si&e 9ill interrupt t!e rail9ay communication 8et9een ,us!an8e and >$%*counties. $n t!e end o -.70s a )roup o e5perts rom t!e

%/D?H:/,P'/B4>T $nstitute under t!e leaders!ip o L.$. Polad&ade 9ere 9orkin) or a e9 years on t!e e+aluation o dama)es t!at could 8e 8rou)!t to t!e national economy o t!e ?%%' rom an out8urst lood

rom Lake %are&. T!e prediction o t!is )roup o e5perts 9as muc! sadder as compared 9it! t!e last conclusion o t!e (inistry o 4mer)ency o Tadjikistan. $ndeedA it is presently impossi8le to determine 9!en t!e %are& catastrop!e 9ill !appen 2 tomorro9A in !undred years orA may8eA muc! later. T!ere is no one amon) t!e li+in) people 9!o could 8e eye*9itnesses o a similar catastrop!eA andA !enceA all t!ese 9arnin)s seem unreal. $ s!all )i+e an e5ample a8out a landslide o t!e same name near t!e #aipa&inskaya 3ydro*4lectrical Plant on t!e :a!s! 'i+er. $n -..E and 2005 $ took participation in t!e )eop!ysical in+esti)ations o t!is landslide. ,isplacements o t!e slidin) rocks 8locked t!e ri+er in -..2 and 2002 and posed a real t!reat to lood t!e mac!inery room o t!e Plant. T!e landslide is no9 under continuous en)ineerin)*)eolo)ical and )eodetic o8ser+ations. $t 9as studied 9it! t!e aid o 8ore!ole drillin) and 8y )eop!ysical met!ods6 t!e upper part o t!e landslide 9as released. 3o9e+erA in spite o !a+in) t!is in ormationA still no one 9ill undertake to )uarantee t!at no ne9 motions or displacement o t!e 9!ole landslide 9ill !appen. An e5treme caution can 8e ound in all t!e predictions o e5pertsA as t!ey !a+e already 9itnessed t!ese e+ents. T!ere oreA t!e people responsi8le or t!e sa ety o t!e #aipa&inskaya 3ydro*4lectrical Plant say: 0"!y to 9aitA make optimistic or pessimistic predictionsA to carry out o8ser+ationsA to 9orryL $t is necessary to di) a s!ort dry tunnel o a lar)e cross*section on t!e opposite 8ank o t!e :a!s! 'i+er. $n case i t!e ri+er c!annel is 8locked a)ain 8y slidin) rocksA t!e 9ater lu5 9ill mo+e t!rou)! t!e tunnelA 9it!out causin) any !a&ard1. T!e scale and comple5ity o t!e %are& pro8lem is not compara8le 9it! t!e #aipa&inskaya oneA 8ut still it reIuires to ind en)ineerin) solutions t!at could pro+ide t!e sa ety in any case. T!usA no9 t!ere are no reasons to speak a8out an ac!ie+ed decrease o t!e risk or to state t!at no catastrop!e 9ill !appen in t!e nearest years. %imply t!e lo9 pro8a8ility o a catastrop!ic e+ent make t!e peopleA likeA or e5ampleA 7!ulsara Pulato+aA eel inspired and make irresponsi8le statements and predictions.

MYTH 5: 17 cu$ic kilometers of the #urest .ater& 'ecentlyA journalists o Tadjikistan and ?&8ekistan started e5citedly speak a8out t!e use o -7 cu8ic kilometers o t!e purest %are& 9ater or 9ater supplyA makin) a point 8ased on t!e representation o t!e aut!ors o t!e Project. $t is already planned to construct a 600 km pipeline to Lake %are& and to pro+ide 25 million people 9it! 9ater6 a !u)e pro it 9as calculated. $ 9ould like to disappoint t!e ent!usiasts o t!is idea. T!e purest 9ater e5istsA 8ut t!e +olume or a lon) time is not -7 kmE already. $n -.76A -.8. and -..0A usin) special eIuipmentA !i)!ly precise measurements o 9ater temperature and minerali&ation 9ere carried out in t!e %are& and %!adau Lakes. T!e 9ater minerali&ation in Lake %are& 9it!in a dept! inter+al o 0 to 50 m 9as eIual in -.75 to 280 m)Jl. $t 9as increasin) 8elo9 t!is dept! le+elA reac!in) --E0 to --50 m)Jl at a dept! o 250 m and deeper. ,urin) t!e past E0 years t!e +alue o minerali&ation increased. ;o9A it is eIual to -E80*-@.0 m)Jl in t!e sta)nant &one o t!e lake.

T!usA t!e ultra res! 9ater 9it! a minerali&ation o 250 to 280 m)Jl in 8ot! lakes !as already not a +olume o -7 kmEA as earlier e5pectedA 8ut only @*5 kmEA and it is located in t!e upper 9ater*runnin) parts o t!e lakes. $ t!e 9ater le+els in t!e lakes decrease 8y 50 m or sa ety purposesA t!en no res! 9ater 9ill remain in t!em. #ut t!e Iuality o e+en t!is remained 9ater can soon 8e considera8ly deteriorated. Lake %!adau is !ydraulically linked 9it! Lake %are& t!rou)! a co erdam. T!e 9ater color in Lake %!adau is )reenis!6 is! in it is in ected 9it! tape9ormsA 9!ic! is typical o sta)nant or lo9* lo9in) 9ater 8odies. T!is means t!at t!e lake is a source o in ectionA 9!ic! is kno9n or a lon) time <$ kno9 it or E0 years=A 8ut Tadjik 8iolo)ists keep silence a8out t!is.

T!ere is one pro8lem more. T!e 7o+ernment o Tadjikistan !as issued a license or de+elopment o t!e lar)e sil+er deposit Ak*,jil)a on t!e ;ort!*Alic!ursky 'id)e. T!e deposit de+elopment 9ill cause a t!reat o penetratin) industrial 9aste 9aters into t!e Ak*,jil)a 'i+erA t!en into ;ort! #a&ardaru 2 a le t*!and tri8utary o t!e (ur)a8 'i+erA and inally into Lake %are&. And a)ain Tadjik ecolo)ists keep silence. T!usA a)ain t!ere is a (yt!A and a)ain t!e precise data on t!e nature and natural resources are i)noredA 8ecause t!e trut! prejudices t!e 0 li)!t1 o amateuris! antasies. Reality 1: + system of early .arning and monitoring T!e system o early 9arnin) and monitorin) 9as arran)ed at t!e ?soi Landslide ,am and in t!e 9estern part o Lake %are&. Location o t!e monitorin) station is +ery con+enient or +isual o8ser+ations 8e!ind t!e dam and controllin) t!e measurin) )au)es. >onstant communication is set 9it! an operator in ,us!an8e. #ut it is necessary to mention t!e ollo9in) t!in). T!e location o t!e o8ser+ation station 9as selected proceedin) rom t!e assumption t!at t!e si&e o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide and +elocity o its displacement are small and t!e out8urst 9a+eA caused 8y t!e landslide collapseA 9ill 8e 9eak. #ut t!ere are some reasons to dou8t t!is assumption. $ t!e collapsed rock mass rom t!e 'i)!t #ank is more t!an 0.E kmE t!e 9ater 9a+e 9ill destroy t!e o8ser+ation stationA radio*station and antenna. T!usA t!e 9arnin) si)nal 9ill not 8e transmitted 8ecause o interruption o communication 9it! t!e stationA and t!e entire 9arnin) system 9ill not 9ork. T!e same 9ill !appen due to allin) t!e Le t #ank Landslide into t!e lake and landslides in t!e sink!ole o t!e ?soi %lide 'ock ,am. %oA t!e 9arnin) system is not intended to 9arn a8out a ull*scaled catastrop!e. #y t!e 9ayA t!e !ei)!t o t!e 0sa e islands1 a8o+e t!e 9ater line is not enou)! in case o ull* scaled catastrop!e.

Reality 2: 3eological results of investigations

3a+in) read t!e article o American )eolo)ists 'o8ert %!uster and ,onald Al ord 0?soi Landslide ,am and Lake %are&A Pamir (ountainsA Tajikistan1 <200@=A $ 9as pleased to learn t!at t!ey kno9 a8out my proposal !o9 to decrease t!e 9ater le+el in Lake %are& 28y increasin) t!e iltration. And moreo+erA t!ey consider t!at t!is is t!e simplest and t!e c!eapest tec!niIue to increase sa ety. #ut t!ey learnt a8out t!is tec!niIue not in TadjikistanA 8ut in Bournal 0%cience in 'ussia1. T!e idea appeared E0 years a)o. $ tried to a9ake Tas!kent 3ydroproject >ompany and %oyu&)ipro+odk!o& interest in t!e proposed tec!niIue6 $ reported a8out it at t!e con erence o -..76 $ 9rote letters to t!e %are& A)encyA (inistry o 4mer)ency o t!e 'epu8lic o TadjikistanA and to t!e Project >oordinators. $ did not ind a support any9!ere and understood t!at Tadjikistan did not need c!eap tec!niIues or keepin) Lake %are& in sa e state. $ am also )lad t!at Patrick ,ro& <Article GLAC4 %A'4H '$%C ($T$7AT$/; P'/B4>T: A 7L/#AL '$%C A;ALD%$%F= kno9s a8out t!is tec!niIue. $ do not a)ree 9it! t!e aut!ors o 8ot! articles concernin) t!e assessment o t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide. %oA t!e article o Patrick ,ro& presents t!e modelin) results or t!e si&e o t!e landslide as eIual to 0.5 kmEA 8ut t!e +elocity o its displacement is underestimated. $t is not kno9n 9!y no modelin) results are indicated or a lar)er landslide si&e and lar)er +elocities o displacement. Fi)ure 5 in t!e same article s!o9s a relations!ip 8et9een t!e 9ater le+el in Lake %are& and 9ater rate at t!e #arc!adi+ !ydropost. T!e aut!or !as re+ealed t!at at t!e same 9ater le+els in t!e lakeA t!e 9ater rates are di erent dependin) on 9!et!er t!e lake is 8ein) illed 9it! 9ater or it under)oes depletion. 3o9e+erA E0 years a)o in t!e report o -.77 $ descri8ed t!is p!enomenon in more details 9it! indication o t!e reasons e5plainin) it. AlsoA $ reported a8out t!is p!enomenon at t!e con erence in -..7.

T!ere are no special claims to t!e rest materials. #ut all 9!at is 9ritten in t!e articles !ad 8een already kno9n 8e ore -..7A and t!ere is none undamentally ne9 in ormation in t!em. (oreo+erA t!e aut!ors le t 8eyond attention t!e lon) kno9n Le t #ank LandslideA 9!ic!A in spite o its smaller si&e <0.-5 kmE=A !as or t!e ?soi ,am and o8ser+ation station not lesserA 8utA may8eA a lar)er dan)erA as compared 9it! t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide. T!ere 9ere not mentioned t!e landslides in t!e sink!ole o t!e ?soi ,amA t!at 9ere

re+ealed 8y L.L.Co&lo+skyA a )eolo)ist rom %oyu&)ipro+odk!o& in -.88A 8ased on t!e results o t!e route e5amination <8y se+eral alpinist ascents up to t!e 9aters!ed part o (u&kol 'id)e=A treatment and decodin) o aero* and cosmic p!otos. /n t!e upper 9estern slope o t!e sink!ole t9o potentially unsta8le areas 9ere distin)uis!ed 9it! a total si&e o a8out 0.7 kmE and a !ei)!t o )ra+ity centers a8o+e t!e sunken part o t!e dam o o+er -000 m. $t 9ould 8e di icult to estimate conseIuences o t!e dynamic in luence upon t!e ?soi ,am in case i t!ese areas collapse. T!eir collapse can !a+e 8ot! positi+e and s!arply ne)ati+e actions on t!e dam 9it! destruction o it and ma5imum catastrop!ic conseIuences or t!e +alleys o t!e #artan)*Pianj* Amudaria 'i+ers. #esidesA t!e collapse o t!e unsta8le areas may result in t!e same eart!Iuake as in -.--. Reality 3: Long)term solutions

7enerali&ation o data o t!e earlier en)ineerin) projects 9as not carried out. T!ere oreA t!e aut!ors o t!e Project represent t9o sc!emes as t!eir o9n: <-= decrease o t!e lake 9ater le+el 8y means o tunnels and <2= increase o t!e dam !ei)!t. 3ereA t!e Project aut!ors do not take into account t!e e5istin) )eolo)ical pro8lems. $n t!e %o+iet time t!e sc!emes 9ere studiedA 8ut later t!ey 9ere rejected as unreal. Proposals appeared in t!e recent time to decrease t!e 9ater le+el in Lake %are& 9it! t!e aid o a loatin) pump station and t!e met!od o a interceptor. $n t!e %o+iet timeA in order to reali&e t!ese sc!emesA t!e projects 9ere preparedA 8ut t!ey 9ere also rejected 8y e5pertise as unreal. T!e aut!ors do not kno9 a8out ot!er more prospecti+e sc!emes or en)ineerin) solution o t!e pro8lem. Reality 4: 4e$site ...'sare '$y'ru T!e 9e8site 9as created to ad+ertise t!e $nternational Project. T!e 9e8site contained arro)ant statements and clear disrespect to t!e ormer researc!ers o Lake %are&. All t!e )eolo)ical ac!ie+ements 8ecame suddenly nameless. ,ue to t!e criticismA t!e )eneral c!apters 9ere repeatedly c!an)ed. $n (ay 2006 in

,us!an8e $ !a+e met 9it! t!e administrator o t!is 9e8site #ak!tier Fai&ie+ in t!e %9iss / ice or >ooperation in Tadjikistan. #elo9 is my talk 9it! !im. LP: "!ic! actions 9ill 8e carried out to miti)ate t!e Lake %are& risk 9it!in t!e ad+ertised ProjectL #F: ;o any actions are planned to miti)ate t!e Lake %are& risk 9it!in t!e )i+en Project. T!e Project 9as simply named like t!at. LP: "!y t!ere is suc! an insultin) relation to t!e ormer researc!ers on your 9e8siteL #F: Dou !a+e carried out a )reat amount o in+esti)ations and it 9as easier or you to o8tain at least some results. "e cannot ad+ertise your results or our o9n money instead o t!e results o our researc! 8e)inners. LP: >!apters G7eop!ysical in+esti)ations1 and 03ydrolo)y1 are 9ritten totally unpro essionally. $ you !a+e no specialistsA t!en 9!y not use my reports presented at t!e con erence o -..7 or my ot!er articles on t!is topic instead o t!emL #F: "e do not !a+e t!e ri)!t to pu8lis! ot!erMs article 9it!out t!e permission o t!e aut!or. T!at is 9!y 9e decided to mana)e 9it! our o9n orces. LP: $ demand to remo+e t!is nonsense a8out my 9orks rom t!e 9e8site immediatelyN #F: At t!e present time $ cannot do itA as 9e !a+e already passed t!e 9e8site to t!e (inistry o 4mer)ency o Tadjikistan. And t!e )eolo)ical in ormation on t!e 9e8site is under responsi8ility o 9orkers o T$%%> A; 'T. $ could not clari y at t!e (inistry o 4mer)ency o Tadjikistan 9!o is no9 t!e administrator o t!is 9e8site. ;o9A $ s!all try to make a s!ort o+er+ie9 o t!e in ormation )i+en on t!e 9e8site 8y (ay EA 2007. For e5ampleA A.'. $s!c!uk rom T$%%> A; 'T decided to pro+e t!at t!e 'i)!t #ank Landslide is a8sent or almost a8sent and t!at 9it! its collapse into t!e lake t!e out8urst 9a+e 9ill 8e minor. $n t!e time o $nternet pro+ides t!e possi8ility to communicate Iuickly 9it! t!e aut!orsA ask or t!eir permission and pu8lis! t!eir in ormation on t!e 9e8site and t!en to conduct de8atesA re errin) to conclusions and opinions o aut!orsA or simply to indicate e5act addresses 9!ere one can ind t!is in ormation and readA and t!en to re er to it durin) t!e de8ates. #ut instead o t!e actual articlesA 9e !a+e to read t!e comments o A.'.$s!c!uk on t!e )eodetic measurementsA )eop!ysical in+esti)ationsA models o 9a+e ormation 9it!out re erences to ori)inals <9it!out !a+in) any permission rom aut!ors and not 8ein) a specialist in )i+en sp!eres=. And a ter ar)uments 9it! !imsel A A.'. $s!c!uk makes a conclusion t!at t!e slidin) sur ace o t!e landslide is not re+ealedA t!at is 9!y it is a8sent. Bust t!is is typical o t!e %ection 0'ecent $n+esti)ations1. T!e present*day met!ods or mana)ement o serious projects recommend at t!e irst p!ase o 9orks to create an electronic data 8ank. $ t!e 9e8siteA instead o containin) illiterate commentsA contain articles and reports o t!e researc!ers 9!o carried out real ield in+esti)ations in t!e %are& areaA t!enA e+entuallyA suc! data 8ank 9ill 8e created. /nly t!en it 9ould 8e possi8le to conduct t!e 9e8site de8ates on t!e aspects o t!e pro8lem at t!e pro essional le+el. %oA t!e le+el o culture o t!e ad+ertisement o t!e $nternational Project does not di er rom t!e ad+ertisement o some sorts o milky 8arsA i&&y drinks and so on.

Reality 5: Results of the 5nternational /ro0ect T!e system o 9arnin) and monitorin) 9as created. T!e system cannot 9ork durin) a ull*scaled catastrop!e. T!ere ore t!e system must 8e up)raded. For t!isA it is necessary to install a duplicatin) o8ser+ation station 9!ic! 9ould continue to 9ork in case 9!en t!e 8asic one 9ill 8e destroyed in a pointA a8solutely inaccessi8le or an action o t!e as !i)! as possi8le out8urst 9a+e. T!e Project is called internationalA 8ut no8ody kno9s 9!y it does not !a+e any direct radio*communication 9it! t!e ,epartments o t!e (inistry o 4mer)ence in Terme&A >!ardjouA ;ikus and A )!anistan.

;o any ne9 in ormation 9as o8tained on t!e 9orks carried out. T!e aut!ors o a ne9 p!ase o in+esti)ations could not mana)e 9it! all t!e )eolo)ical data a+aila8le 8y -..7A and many o !a&ards or t!e landslide dam o Lake %are& 9ere remained 8eyond t!e ield o t!eir +ision. T!e proposed +ariants o en)ineerin) solutions o t!e pro8lem !a+e 8een already studied earlier 8y 'ussian or)ani&ationsA 8utA 8ased on )eolo)ical conditionsA t!ey 9ere rejected 8y t!e e5pertise as unreal.

Reality 6: 2he reason of /ro0ect failure Till -..7 t!e coordinators o t!e Project 2 t!e 9orkers o t!e %9iss %T?>CD >ompany and T$%%> A; 'T did not !a+e an e5perience in t!e )i+en kind o 9orks and undamentals o t!e pro8lem o Lake %are&. PresentlyA due to mass departure o specialistsA t!e %out!ern 3ydro)eolo)ical 45peditionA %out!ern

7eop!ysical 45peditionA Tadjik 7eolo)y %ur+eyin) 45pedition <i.e. t!e or)ani&ations o P/ 0Tadjik)eolo)ia1= cannot continue in+esti)ations in t!e Lake %are& area. %ince -..7 t!e nic!e o t!ese or)ani&ations in t!e %are& pro8lem is occupied 8y T$%%> A; 'T. ,urin) a period o -.68 to -.88 t!e Administration o P/ 0Tadjik)eolo)ia1 not once su))ested to T$%%> A; 'T to carry out seismolo)ical 9orks in t!e area o Lake %are&A as at t!at time t!e practical or)ani&ations 9ere not dealin) 9it! seismolo)y yet. #ut t!e $nstitute Administration e+ery time completely re used to do it. $n -.88 :.%. Fedorenko as a scienti ic leader o t!e %are& in+esti)ations rom t!e (inistry o 7eolo)y o t!e ?%%' decided personally to con+ince %.3. ;e)matullae+A 9!o 9as s!ortly 8e ore appointed t!e ,irector o T$%%> A; 'TA to participate in inte)rated in+esti)ations on t!e pro8lem o Lake %are&. %.3. ;e)matullae+ ans9ered t!e ollo9in) to t!e )i+en proposal: 0/ur $nstitute is academicA dealin) 9it! )lo8al seismolo)y. And %are& is a re)ional and purely researc! pro8lem. "e do not 9ant to sIuander our resources on suc! tri les1. T$%%> A; 'T is really an academic institutionA and t!e %are& area reIuires to carry out practical in+esti)ations t!ere in a +ery di icult conditions 9it! t!e use o t!e most ad+anced eIuipmentA 9!ic! T$%%> A; 'T does not !a+e. T!e in+esti)ations in t!e %are& area reIuire specialists in en)ineerin) )eolo)yA en)ineerin) )eodynamicsA en)ineerin) )eop!ysics <i.e. seismic e5plorersA electrical e5plorersA lo))in) e5pertsA )ra+imetric 9orkersA etc.=A en)ineerin) )eodesyA !ydrolo)yA prospectin) seismolo)yA instrumental microseismic &onin)A calculation o slope sta8ilityA mat!ematical modelin) o landslide displacementsA !ydro*9orks. T!e specialists o suc! pro essions can not 8e ound and ne+er 9ere in t!e sta o T$%%> A; 'T.

%T?>CD is a %9iss intermediary irm. $t is a communicatee 8et9een t!e sponsors <"orld #ankA 7o+ernment o %9it&erlandA etc..= and t!e researc! specialists <see 9e8site 999.stucky.c!=. T!e salary o American )eolo)ists is !i)!. T!ere ore t!ey 9ere recruited to 9ork only or se+eral days or t!e purpose o ad+ertisement o t!e Project. $n order to understand )eolo)ical pro8lems in any )eolo)ically complicated re)ionA any specialist s!ould 9ork t!ere or at least se+eral years. T!usA t!e Americans p!ysically could not conduct any in+esti)ations in t!e area o Lake %are&. For data o8tainin) and carryin) out t!e )eolo)ical part o 9orks t!e %T?>CD >ompany used t!e specialists rom T$%%> A; 'T. ,ue to lack o inancin) o t!e academic in+esti)ations on )lo8al seismolo)yA t!ey a)reed to conduct in+esti)ations in t!e %are& area and 8ecame 0e5perts1 in all t!e issues at once. T!ese 0e5perts1 replaced t!e ield in+esti)ations and )enerali&ation o t!e old data 8y an elementary P'. T!e coordinators and leaders o t!e Project turned out to 8e unctionally illiterate to carry out t!e complicated in+esti)ationsA 9!ic! just !as led to t!e ailure o t!e Project.

A8out t!e aut!or: Leonid P. Papyrin is a minin) en)ineerA )eop!ysicist. ,urin) -.67 to -..@ !e li+ed in ,us!an8e and 9as t!e 3ead o t!e Pamir 7eop!ysical Team. 3e tra+eled 8y a motor car and le9 8y a !elicopter around t!e entire Tadjikistan. For t!e period o 27 years t!e 9orkers o !is Team !a+e carried out )eop!ysical in+esti)ations at more t!an -00 o8jects located in t!is country. T!e ield )roups o t!e Team !a+e 9orked in t!e %are& area -0 summer and 2 9inter seasons. $n -..@ !e !ad to depart rom Tadjikistan as a re u)ee due to liIuidation o t!e Pamir Team 8ecause o departure o all its specialists. %ince 200E Leonid P.Papyrin is a mem8er o t!e #oard o 0Fer)ana.'u1 $n ormation A)ency e5perts

/t!er articles on same t!eme: Lake %are& in t!e Pamirs as +ie9ed 8y Tajik journalists