While cities and municipalities are flooding in North Negros, affecting thousands of citizens and damaging millions worth of property, it is natural to ask where the water came from.
The first culprit will often be denuded uplands – deforested to make way to industry and development – and current and future threats all the way up to the heart of our remaining primary rainforests in the North Negros Natural Park and Mt. Kanlaon Natural Park.
Then there are other interconnected, probable causes in rivers being altered and solid waste clogging the sewers. Add to those the overarching reality of the climate crisis, with changing weather patterns, high rainfall intensity, and rising sea level along coastal communities.
It is, thus, reasonable to question all development projects within protected areas such as the NNNP. Infrastructure, roads, human activities, ‘stewardship’ claims – existing and proposed – should be under public scrutiny when they happen within any zone of a protected area, whether for ‘strict protection’ or ‘multiple use’.
When news about the proposed DPWH Silay-Patag-Cadiz-Calatrava Road broke out, the narrative of impending (and already happening!) disasters cannot be easily dismissed by involved government agencies and politicians (especially those in the LGUs affected by the floods) as alarmist noise. It is not a concern of only those unfairly called as ‘anti-progress’ environmental activists, or worse, purveyors of ‘fake news’.
Publicly made information seems to be scarce about this national road project. The reason for writing this article, in the context of the floods, is then to ask the government to bring light into this concern when many people are in the dark. Is such a road going to cut through the strict protection zone of NNNP?
Even if it remains in multiple-use zones, isn’t it necessary to make an assessment if this road is going to usher in threats to the protected areas’ ecosystem services such as water storage or natural flood control? Why is it that the project details are given in piecemeal, and did the LGUs involved truly see the bigger picture? Are infrastructures within the NNNP to be blamed for the suffering of flood-stricken victims?
There is a response I often hear: We lack compelling science-based evidence to pinpoint the causes of the floods, so NNNP management may not have to be brought into the discussion as of yet.
However, from collective experience, we know it takes investments of time, money and effort to conduct scientific studies for conclusions on what (or who) are responsible for the flooding last January. There is also an urgency for measures to prevent further flooding.
I have been involved in pitching and writing proposals to conduct this kind of investigation efforts or support for scientific research, and it could take years, even decades, to get to the conclusion that indeed, a road cutting through a protected area will affect the forest’s natural ability to control flooding. Of course by then the interpretation of such evidence may already be too late.
In the conservation sector and environmental law, there is something we call the “Precautionary Principle”. It is invoked in legal cases, international agreements and declarations. Here in Negros, we ask it to be integrated and operationalized in local policy and management instead of limiting flood control projects to dredging.
“The uncertainty surrounding potential threats to the environment has frequently been used as a reason to avoid taking action to protect the environment… The Precautionary Principle recognizes that delaying action until there is compelling evidence of harm will often mean that it is then too costly or impossible to avert the threat,” quoting from the 2007 Guidelines for Applying the Precautionary Principle to Biodiversity Conservation and Natural Resource Management of the International Union for Conservation of Nature Council.
“The Principle is based on the recognition that a false prediction that a human activity will not result in significant environmental harm will typically be more harmful to society than a false prediction that it will result in significant environmental harm.”
Science is long overdue for us to blame anything as a root cause of the floods. Enter complex politics and socio-economic factors, we have no choice but to recognize The Precautionary Principle. In other words, we cannot wait any longer.
We need to be proactive as a community by not only pushing for urgent studies of the ecological costs of projects advertised for economic progress. We need to demand now for more transparent information and educated consultation for development in places like the NNPP, from the very leaders who scramble for help when their constituents are starting to drown. – NWI
