The water has actually becomes clearer, a local told me. After all, this time two years ago, the killer wave washed ashore a large amount of black sand residue.

Anyone visiting Phang Nga province would definitely like to roam around the beaches near Khao Lak-Lamru National Park, for the mountains serve as a wonderful backdrop to the sea. However, all this might change if the proposal to build the tsunami memorial gets approved.

Nestled right at the top of the hill that juts out into the ocean, at around 100 metres above sea level, is the proposed site of the Bt600-million memorial. It will include a tower, museum, amphitheatre, restaurant, shops and learning centre. The total land area including the memorial and parking space at the entrance of the park covers 15 rai.

Is the project so essential that a national park needs to be intruded upon? And does Thailand need such a gigantic memorial?

While the logic of building one central memorial site is understandable, the actual location is a real concern. Most of us would think of the spot where the police boat got washed ashore, almost two kilometres from Bang Niang Beach.

An official explained that that particular piece of land is too expensive and would use up most of the budget. Therefore, a piece of land owned by the state was a much easier solution. How convenient!

Most important of all, the blueprint shows five white pagoda-like domes ranging from 10 to over 30 metres in height. That means they would stand above the trees and could be spotted from any beach below. Imagine what an eyesore it would be!

The project is now in the assessment process regarding its impact on the environment, and modifications to the blueprint might be made to minimise impact. Nevertheless, no matter how stringently environmental guidelines are written, how Thailand actually performs in preserving nature is obvious for anyone to see. The most annoying argument is that the memorial will become another tourist attraction. Phang Nga doesn't need a circus on the hill. It doesn't need any more structures to lure in tourists because it is a destination famed for its pristine natural beauty. Furthermore, shouldn't Bt600 million be spent in other, more useful ways? Mind you, that figure has already been cut in half from the original proposed expenditure.

A hotel owner at Bang Sak Beach said there is still room for improvement on infrastructure, such as water management and roads, while a local at Baan Nam Khem said villagers wouldn't mind more money to buy fishing equipment.

The memorial area at Baan Nam Khem is a valuable lesson: between Bt40 million and Bt50 million was spent constructing it, but it is of no real use to the locals. The exhibition hall is closed most of the time. Only the toilet stays open. It also takes up a considerable beach front area where locals used to picnic.

What the villagers are asking for is a tsunami shelter. Baan Nam Khem village is situated right next to the beach, and should there be another tsunami, they want some tall tower to run to. There is currently only one shelter in all of Phang Nga, on Bang Niang Beach.

And even though the locals know where to run, from experience, more practice for the evacuation plan should be carried out. Since the tsunami, most communities have practised only a couple of times.

Meanwhile, the National Disaster Warning Centre has spent only around Bt100 million in setting up a warning system in the southern provinces on both the Andaman and Gulf of Thailand coasts. There are 18 towers in Phang Nga, but the centre's chairman, Smith Thammasaroj, says more are needed as the towers only cover "high-risk" areas.

The centre is also waiting for approval to build 144 disaster-warning towers in 57 provinces in the North, Northeast and Central regions.

Thailand now has one tsunami detection buoy up and running in the Indian Ocean about 1,000 kilometres from the Phuket coast. It was sponsored by the United States government and cost around Bt60 million.

The centre wants to install three more in order to have an even more accurate indication of a possible future tsunami.

We should be spending on crucial lifesavers like these and not on more huge memorials. It's time officials realised that enough is enough. We don't need additional buildings in Thailand's natural landscape, but rather more money to preserve it. They seem to care a lot about the economic side, like drawing in more tourists, but they are the ones who continue to destroy the most valuable asset Phang Nga has to offer - nature.

Important lessons in sustainable tourism and the power of nature should have been learned two years on from the tsunami, but the relevant authorities are obviously still living in oblivion.

Veenarat Laohapakakul