University of the Philippines Manila College of Arts and Sciences Padre Faura, Ermita, Manila
FIGHT OR FLIGHT: A critical study on the perceived effects of the planned Aerotropolis of San Miguel Corporation—a reclamation project—to the community of fisherfolk and the environment of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to the Department of Social Sciences College of Arts and Sciences University of the Philippines Manila
In Partial Fulfillment of the Course Requirements in Development Studies 199.2 for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts in Development Studies
Prof. Reginald S. Vallejos, MPA Thesis Adviser
Presented by: Gabrielle Louise Serrano 2015-46117
May 2019 Department of Social Sciences College of Arts and Sciences Fight or Flight | 1
University of the Philippines Manila Padre Faura, Ermita, Manila
APPROVAL SHEET
This thesis, entitled “FIGHT OR FLIGHT: A critical study on the perceived effects of the planned Aerotropolis of San Miguel Corporation—a reclamation project—to the community of fisherfolk and the environment of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan”, prepared and written by Gabrielle Louise Serrano, in partial fulfillment of the requirements in Development Studies 199.2 for the Degree of Bachelor in Arts in Development Studies, is hereby recommended for approval.
______Prof. Reginald S. Vallejos, MPA Thesis Adviser Development Studies Program Department of Social Sciences
This thesis is hereby accepted and approved as partial fulfillment for the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor in Arts in Development Studies.
______Prof. Jerome A. Ong, MA Chairperson Department of Social Science
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Fight or Flight | 2
First and foremost, I would like to thank my thesis adviser, Professor Reginald
Vallejos, for his inputs and suggestions. Without his help, I would have been lost for the whole duration of my research. He gave my thesis the direction it needed. Moreover, I am grateful to him for his unending patience and understanding. He never gave up on all of us, his thesis advisees, and understood our legitimate excuses for having backlogs.
Second, I would like to thank my parents for helping me with my thesis expenses, and for supporting me all the way. I would also like to thank my family for understanding me when I did not have time for them because of my school requirements. Accomplishing this thesis is partly for them.
Third, I would like to thank the professor who not only fulfilled his role as our professor in certain subjects but also became like a fatherly figure to us, Professor John
Ponsaran, for always checking up on me as my thesis progressed. I am also grateful for his suggestions during the initial phase of my thesis. I am most grateful for his motivational messages; his messages always reminded me that I could and should finish my thesis.
Fourth, I would like to thank my college best friend, Janessa Cervo, for lending a hand and spending an exhausting weekend of field research with me despite the danger of travelling only by a small boat. Without her help, I would not have accomplished much in my community data gathering. I am also grateful for her generous help with the printing of my thesis. I would also like to thank my friend Jonerie Pajalla for her creative input and for her willingness to help me in whatever way she could. She saved me both time and money by making long distance calls for me to follow up on my requests from various offices in Bulacan. I would also like to thank my friend, Kate Sultan, for always cheering for me.
Fight or Flight | 3
Fifth, I would like to thank my friend, Celezthine Lappay, for suggesting the topic of my thesis. While I already had this topic in mind before she suggested it to me, her suggestion made me decide to pick this topic among the list I had. I would also like to thank my organization, UP Saribuhay, for introducing me to various environmental issues, and for making me passionate about helping not only the environment but also the people most vulnerable to the effects of environmental degradation. I would also like to thank our parent organization, Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment, for inviting our organization to the 2nd People’s Summit on the Impacts of Reclamation. I was able to gather various professional perspectives on the possible effects of reclamation to the environment and community. Finally, I would like to thank AKAP KA Manila Bay for assisting and providing me with the documents they have gathered about the planned Aerotropolis.
Sixth, I would like to thank the following offices: Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (DENR) Environmental Management Bureau – Region 3, DENR
Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office – Bulacan, and DENR Community
Environment and Natural Resources Office – Bulacan, for providing assistance and relevant documents. Special thanks to CENRO Rolly Mulato and his staff for referring me to the right office where I could get the information I needed. Finally, Special thanks to
PENRO Emelita Lingat for granting my request for an interview and discussing everything she knows about the issue, and to her staff Ofelia Conag and Winlove Bernales for providing me with the documents I requested.
Seventh, I would like to thank Bulakan’s Municipal Planning and Development
Office for providing me with documents about the town, and for allowing me to conduct my survey in Barangay Taliptip. I would also like to thank Barangay Taliptip’s chairperson,
Fight or Flight | 4
Michael Ramos, for allowing me to do the survey, and Barangay Secretary Epifania Samat for assisting with the processing of my request and for referring me to a trusted boatman.
Finally, I would like to thank Kuya Eteng, our boatman, for bringing us safely to our destinations, and for serving as our guide in the community. I would also like to thank
Ka Charlie, Ka Joy, and Ka Meriam for warmly welcoming us to their sitio, and for providing an in-depth discussion about their woes about the impending project. I am grateful for their insights and assistance. Finally, I am grateful to each and every one of the people of the coastal sitios of Taliptip I have visited for their willingness to participate, time, and courage to express their sentiments about the issue. This thesis was made mainly and especially for them. May their rights be protected and upheld against the greed of the few.
Fight or Flight | 5
ABSTRACT
The Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) is the main gateway to the
Philippines. It has been catering to millions of Filipinos and foreign nationals going in and out of the country. Its efficiency must be consistently good because it holds the greatest number of inward and outward flights in the country. Because of its importance, the country cannot afford to experience magnanimous problems as these would disrupt the operations of the country’s most important international airport. Unfortunately, NAIA has been experiencing major issues in the past few years that have cause major disruptions to operations ultimately stranding thousands of passengers. The clamor for effective solutions to NAIA’s problems continues to intensify as NAIA’s efficiency declines. San Miguel
Corporation (SMC) has given an unsolicited proposal that seeks to address these issues.
SMC proposed building an entirely new airport in the municipality of Bulakan in a form of an Aerotropolis, an airport complex that would also house public and private offices, housing, shipping and storing facilities, and other business establishments. The proposal includes 4 parallel runways with a capacity of a maximum of 200 million passengers per year. The study assessed the impacts of the airport project to the residents and environment of the area. Case study questionnaires were distributed to and unstructured interviews were done with the residents. There are also scientific studies discussed from statements and papers of reputable Filipino scientists. Government officials were also consulted.
Descriptive statistical analysis, thematic analysis, and triangulation of sources were used to analyze the data gathered. The study revealed that there are negative impacts on the socio-economic well-being (e.g. displacement and loss of livelihood) of the residents and on the area’s biodiversity. There are also hazards that would place the residents and the airport project at high risks for disasters. Fight or Flight | 6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Figure 1: Map of Bulacan.………………………………………………………………14 Figure 2: Conceptual Framework………………………………………………….……27 Figure 3: Façade of the Bulakan Municipal Hall……………………………...………..34 Figure 4. Map and logo of Barangay Taliptip…………………………………………..36 Figure 5: Sitio Pariahan………………………………………………………………....37 Figure 6. Sitio Kinse………………………………………………………………....….38 Figure 7. Sitio Dapdap……………………………………...…………………………...39 Figure 8. Sitio Capiz…………………………………………………………………….39 Figure 9. Pie chart (sitio of residence)………………………... ………………………..40 Figure 10. Bar graph (age)………………………………….……………………………41 Figure 11. Pie chart (home ownership)……………………………………….………….41 Figure 12. Bar graph (number of people in their homes)………………………………..42 Figure 13. Blue crab caught by a resident……………………………………………….43 Figure 14. Pie graphs (income and social status perception)……………………………44 Figure 15. Pie graph (whether consulted or not)………………………………………...45 Figure 16. Graph (initial reaction)……………………………………………………….46 Figure 17. Pie chart (agree or not with the project)……………………………………...46 Figure 18. Pie chart (promise of a better life)……………………………………………47 Figure 19. Opening slide of San Miguel Corporation’s presentation……………………50 Figure 20. Integrated masterplan of the Aerotropolis……………………………………51 Figure 21. Zoning map of Bulakan………………………………………………………53 Map of impact areas………………………………………………………….54 Figure 22. Bulakan Mangrove Ecopark………………………………………………….55 Figure 23. Mangrove assessment in Sitio Capiz…………………………………………56 Figure 24. Earthquake-related liquefaction (sediment model)…………………………..58 Figure 25. Earthquake-related liquefaction (effect to Dagupan)………………………...59 Figure 26. Liquefaction hazard map……………………………………………………..60 Figure 27. Tsunami modelling…………………………………………………………...60 Figure 28. Ground subsidence satellite image…………………………………………...61 Figure 29. Satellite image (increase in the number of houses, increase in sea level rise).62 Figure 30. Groundwater extraction process……………………………………………...63 Figure 31. Manila Bay subsidence from 2003-2006……………………………………..64 Figure 32. Flood hazard map of Taliptip………………………………………………...65
Fight or Flight | 7
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………1 Background of the Study………………………………………………………….. 2 Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………………. 3 Research Objectives………………………………………………………………. 5 Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………. 6 Scope and Limitation of the Study…………………………………………………8 Definition of Terms………………………………………………………………...10 CHAPTER 2 Review of Related Literature……………………………………………………………12 Barangay profile…………………………………...…………………………….13 Aerotropolis……...………………………………………………………………14 Relevance of Aerotropolis………….……………………………………………15 Criticisms of the proposed aerotropolis………….………………………………16 Attack on policies..………………………………...…………………………….20 Reclamation projects.…………………………………………………………….21 Development, the community, and the environment.……………………………22 Theoretical Framework……………………………………………….………………….24 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………….………………….27 CHAPTER 3: Methods…………………………………………………………………28 Research Design………………………………………………………………………….29 Study Site Selection……………………………………………………………………...29 Study Instruments……..…………………………………………………………………30 Data Analysis……………………………………………………….……………………31 CHAPTER 4: Results and Discussion…………………………………………………33 Municipality of Bulakan………………………………………………………………....34 Barangay Taliptip………………………………………………………………………...36 Description of communities visited during the study……..…………...…...……………37 Profile of the residents…………………………...………………………….…………...40 Perception of the residents on the proposed airport project……………………………...45 Impacts of the Aerotropolis on the coastal sitios of Taliptip……..…………...…………48 San Miguel Corporation’s Aerotropolis……………………………….…….…………...50 Mapping of the area………………………...……………………………………………53 Impacts of the Aerotropolis on the environment of Taliptip……………...……………..54 Geological and meteorological hazards………………...………………………………..57 Latest updates on the project……………………………………………………………..66 CHAPTER 5: Conclusion and Recommendation……………………...…..…………68 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………...…………………………………….75
Fight or Flight | 8
APPENDICES Work Schedule and budget….……………………………….…………………………..78 Endorsement Letter……………………………………………………………….……...79 MPDO Letter…………….….……………………………….…………………………..80 DENR EMB Letter……………………………………………………………….……...81 Barangay Letter………….….……………………………….…………………………..82 PENRO Letter…...……………………………………………………………….……...83 DENR EMB R3 Letter…………...………………………….…………………………..84 Administrative Map of Bulakan………………………………………………….……...85 Case study questionnaire…...…………………………………………………….……...86 Vito Hernandez Transcript….……………………………….…………………………..88 Ansie San Gabriel Transcript…...………………….…………………………….……...92 SMBO Transcript………………...………………………….…………………………..94 PENRO Transcript……………………………………………………………….……...96 DENR Mangrove Assessment Report....…………………….…………………………..99 Narrative Report for PCRA...…...………………….…..……………………….……...101 Photo Documentation Mangrove Assessment……………….…….…………………..104
Fight or Flight | 9
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Fight or Flight | 10
Background of the study
The planet that serves as habitat for humans and for millions other forms of species.
The planet earth is usually referred to as ‘Mother Earth’. The concept of a mother is normally associated with care and nurture. The Mother Earth is supposed to nurture her children and it has been doing so ever since despite her children’s seemingly lack of regard for her.
The environment does not need humans to thrive, but humans need the environment to survive. Despite this fact, humans have a history and a continuing strong tendency of exploiting and in the process, destroying the environment for their needs and wants. As the society, and subsequently, technology progressed, humans discovered more needs, wants, and more means of filling these needs and wants.
Development should be one of the top priorities of the government as part of its responsibility to the people. The government does not fail in providing “development” projects that are supposed to be in line with the objective of improving the lives of its citizens. Numerous infrastructure projects aimed to boost the economy are on the works or at the planning process as part of the Build Build Build project of the Duterte administration. One of these projects is the proposed Aerotropolis of the San Miguel
Corporation.
According to the on-going research of AGHAM – Advocates of Science and
Technology for the People, Center for Environmental Concerns – Philippines, and
KALIKASAN People’s Network for the Environment, "should the Aerotropolis continue with this misdemeanor in implementation, the mangrove forests along Taliptip and its adjacent environs that serve as the habitat of various valuable marine life would be decimated. Migratory birds which depend upon the habitat and subsistence from the Fight or Flight | 11 mangrove forests would also be driven away from the destruction and disruption associated with the project. Poor fisherfolk who also depend upon the mangroves and the open coasts for their livelihood will also be deprived of their source of income." (“SMC Aerotropolis, other reclamation projects threaten Manila Bay with ecological collapse”, 2018, June 11).
Statement of the problem
In any form of development project, it is important that all factors concerning the project are considered. All stakeholders must be consulted for prospective issues before pushing through with a project.
There have been objections against this proposed airport project. The news regarding the concrete plans of the San Miguel Corporation has been met with protests from the members of the community in Taliptip and environmental advocates. While there are oppositions, the idea of an alternative airport that would lead to the decongestion of the
Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) seems to have a positive connotation for
Filipinos frequently flying in and out of Metro Manila. The project may also seem to be an ideal solution from all the complaints about the country having one of the worst airports in the world. It is a matter of question whether the planned Aerotropolis will really be of greater benefit than a damaging.
To further understand the answers to this question, the researcher will investigate on the following specific questions:
1) What are and will be the effects of a land reclamation project as big as the Aerotropolis
to the marine ecosystem in the area?
Land reclamation projects involve dumping of large amounts of soil on bodies of water, specifically oceans. Normally, this would entail clearing of coral reefs, mangroves, Fight or Flight | 12 sea grass, and other obstructions. With all these changes comes a significant change in the marine ecosystem of the area. To fully explain the effects on the entirety of the environment in Taliptip, the study will investigate what kind of and up to what extent the effects the
Aerotropolis will have on the marine ecosystem of the area.
2) What are and will be the effects of the project to the community, especially to their
livelihood?
The airport project is expected to cover an area of 2,500 hectares (de Vera, 2018,
September 10) therefore also covering some parts of the residential area. Some parts of the residential area will be cleared thus displacing the residents.
The community of Taliptip is primarily a fishing community because of its proximity from the ocean. With the expected effects in the marine ecosystem, it is the highly probable effects in the livelihood of the fisherfolks of Taliptip.
To be able to consolidate the effects of the project to the community, the study will determine the effects to the residents and their livelihood, and to the residents who will remain but will have to deal with the subsequent effects of the change in the marine ecosystem.
3) What will be the implications of having this big public-private partnership (PPP)
project?
The Aerotropolis is part of the Duterte administration’s Build Build Build project, but the funding of the project will come from the private company San Miguel Corporation
(Padilla, 2018, March 2). The project is estimated to cost Php 700 billion (Padilla, 2018,
March 2). Past public-private partnerships have revealed that projects done out of this kind of partnership results in commercialization of the services offered by the projects.
Considering that the airport will not be entirely government owned, the study will also Fight or Flight | 13 uncover the possible specific implications of having a private entity as co-owner to the operations and management of the project.
4) Will there be a significant decrease in the congestion of NAIA?
The primary justification for the proposed project is the need for a solution to the worsening condition of NAIA. It is important for the country’s main airport to function efficiently because it is the gateway to the country. Recent events such as the Xiamen
Airlines have highlighted the increasing need to decongest the airport. Thousands of overseas Filipino workers (OFW) and tourists have been inconvenienced by the issues in
NAIA. As such, the San Miguel Corporation proposed a project that creates an alternative solution for the congestion in NAIA. The project, which is located approximately 35 kilometers away from Metro Manila, is expected to have a capacity of 100 million passengers (Rada, 2018, April 5).
Research Objectives
The proposed project is surrounded by conflicting views coming from different members of the society. On one hand, some support it and view it as the perfect solution to the existing airport problems. On the other hand, some oppose it and view it as a problem because of its possible effects to the community and environment of the area where it will be built. In line with this, the study aims to:
• Determine the significant effects of reclaiming a coastal area in Taliptip, Bulakan,
Bulacan for the mega project Aerotropolis to the environment and the community
Fight or Flight | 14
• analyze the effects of the reclamation project to the marine ecosystem and fish
supply in Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan, and subsequently to the livelihood of the
fisherfolks
• analyze the effects of displacing fisherfolks from the coastal areas to their overall
social and economic well-being
• determine the consequences of entering a public-private partnership with San
Miguel Corporation
• categorize the positive and negative effects of the project and critically analyze
using the micro and macro perspective if the positive outweighs the negative
• recommend an alternative solution to the worsening condition of NAIA
Significance of the study
Residents of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
To help the residents further their cause by helping them justify why their welfare must be considered first and foremost in the planning of the project.
For the residents to receive the social justice they deserve through championing their rights as fisherfolk and as human beings.
Environment of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
For the marine ecology to be shielded from the possible damages brought by reclaiming the waters in Taliptip.
For the environment of Taliptip to be saved from further environmental destruction that would be caused by the mega project.
Local government
Fight or Flight | 15
For the local government of Bulakan to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of supporting the project.
For the LGU of Bulakan to prioritize the long-term welfare of the town and its citizens.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
For the DENR to be more aware of the possible implications of mega development projects to the environment.
For the DENR to be more critical in selecting the projects that it will allow to materialize.
For the DENR to be more careful in granting permits to questionable projects and companies.
National government
For the national government to align their development goals with the needs of the masses.
For the national government to realize that putting the national interest must always outweigh capitalist interests.
Development Studies program
For the Development Studies program to raise more awareness among its students on the plight of the country’s fisherfolk.
For the Development Studies program to support the studies concerning the relationship between the fisherfolks and the environment, and between the fisherfolks and the capitalist businesses occupying the coastal areas.
Fight or Flight | 16
For the Development Studies program to actively campaign against massive and destructive projects that have long-term negative impacts on the local communities and the environment.
Future researchers
For the future researchers to watch out for the developments of the project in the years to come.
For the future researchers to expound on the issues being faced not only by the fisherfolk community of Taliptip, but also by the other fishing communities across the country facing similar or greater problems.
Scope and limitation
The study covered the surrounding area where the project is going to be built. This involves the main area affected by the project namely the barangay of Taliptip, Bulakan,
Bulacan. It did not, however, intensively cover the other barangays and towns also to be affected by the project.
The study focused on the possible socio-economic impacts of the project, should it fully materialize, on the community of Taliptip. The study also dealt with the current environmental impacts, specifically on the marine ecology, of the initial phase of the project, and the predicted environmental impacts after the project starts its operations.
Finally, the study considered the geological and meteorological hazards that showed potential risks because of the project.
The research was not able to cover majority of the residents of the coastal sitios of
Taliptip due to limitations in time and funding for transportation and other expenses. The sitios were far apart from one another and would only be reached through boat. Fight or Flight | 17
The researcher failed to interview Bulakan’s Municipal Planning and Development
Officer (MPDO) because the office said that no information or documents about the project have reached the office yet. The MPDO felt that an interview would not be necessary thus refusing the interview. The office, however, supplied the researcher with documents about the municipality.
The researcher failed to conduct a focus group discussion with Barangay Taliptip’s official because of their refusal to give on-record statements about the project. They remained silent about it because they do not want their possible statements to be taken against them, especially since the project was approved by the National Economic
Development Authority and was as good as being approved by the president himself.
The researcher failed to interview Bulacan’s Community Environment and Natural
Resources Officer (CENRO) because according to him, information about the project has not yet reached their office. However, he referred the researcher to the Provincial
Environment and Natural Resources Officer (PENRO) of Bulacan where an interview and request for documents were granted. The researcher was then referred to the Region 3
Environmental Management Bureau in Pampanga, the office that received and primarily process the Environmental Clearance Certificate of San Miguel Corporation’s project proposal. Due to time constraints, however, the researcher was not able to interview formally and acquire documents from the office as the ECC is still undergoing processing.
Finally, the researcher was not able to get statements from San Miguel Corporation because the request remained unanswered. However, the researcher was able to acquire the presentation of both the San Miguel Corporation and Silvertides Corporation (the subcontractor) presented during the public hearing held in February of 2019.
Fight or Flight | 18
Definition of terms
Aquatic Resources — includes fish, all other aquatic flora and fauna and other living resources of the aquatic environment, including, but not limited to, salt and corals.
Fisherfolk — people directly or personally and physically engaged in taking and/or culturing and processing of fishery and/or aquatic resources.
Fisheries — refers to all activities relating to the act or business of fishing, culturing, preserving, processing, marketing, developing, conserving and managing aquatic resources and the fishery areas, including the privilege to fish or take aquatic resource thereof
Food Security — refers to any plan, policy or strategy aimed at ensuring adequate supplies of appropriate food at affordable prices. Food security may be achieved through self-sufficiency (i.e. ensuring adequate food supplies from domestic production), through self-reliance (i.e. ensuring adequate food supplies through a combination of domestic production and importation), or through pure importation.
Land reclamation — the process of creating new land from ocean, riverbeds, or lake beds by dumping large amounts of soil on the water
Mangroves — a community of intertidal plants including all species of trees, shrubs, vines and herbs found on coasts, swamps, or border of swamps.
Fight or Flight | 19
Sustainable development — refers to a form of development that provides for the needs of the present without compromising the ability of nature to provide the needs of the future generations
Fight or Flight | 20
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE &
FRAMEWORKS
Fight or Flight | 21
Barangay profile
Barangay Taliptip is one of the 14 barangays in the municipality of Bulakan in the province of Bulacan. The Philippine Statistics Authority classified Barangay Taliptip as one of the 12 rural barangays in the municipality. According to the 2015 census conducted by the Philippine Statistics Authority, the population of Barangay Taliptip is 5,490. The coastal barangay of Taliptip is composed of 9 sitios namely Pariahan, Baluarte, Sapang
Buhangin, Camansi, Kinse, Bunutan, Habulan, Wawang Dapdap, and Capol (Reyes-
Estopore, 2018, October 27). The barangay has several public elementary schools, and one public high school. The primary livelihood of the residents are fishing, salt-making and fishnet-making (Dulce, 2018, May 20).
Figure 1 shows the map of the province of Bulacan. The town of Bulakan where
Barangay Taliptip can be found is among the coastal towns of the province including
Hagonoy, Paombong, and Obando. Barangay Taliptip shares the water of Manila Bay with
Pampanga, Bataan, and Metro Manila. The map also shows that the barangay is found in the middle of two international airports, the Ninoy Aquino International Airport and the
Clark International Airport.
Barangay Taliptip seems to be a viable area for the project because its waters is part of Manila Bay, a main passageway for sea transport of goods, thereby connecting the airport to main ports. Its proximity from Metro Manila makes it a better alternative than the Clark International Airport.
Fight or Flight | 22
Figure 1. Map of Bulacan retrieved from https://www.bulacan.gov.ph/municipalities/index.php
Aerotropolis
The advancing world has led to various developments in the urban setting. Urban areas have been arranged in a way that caters to the corporate world. Dr. John D. Kasarda
(2006), the person who coined the term, described the aerotropolis as something similar to a metropolis which is made up of a central city, and in the case of aerotropolis, an airport city core with an extensive surrounding area of aviation-oriented businesses and their residential developments.
Building an aerotropolis will result in changes in demand for commercial rent space. These changes will ultimately result in veering the demand away from the central business district toward the urban development built around the airport within the aerotropolis (Charles, Barnes, Ryan, Clayton, 2007).
Fight or Flight | 23
San Miguel Corporation has sent the government an unsolicited proposal of building a 2,500-hectare Aerotropolis that will allot 1,168 hectares for be the main airport complex, while the remaining 1,332 hectares will be developed into a township (Balbin,
2018). The mega-airport will have six parallel runways (Global Anti-Aerotropolis
Movement, 2018) with 60 aircraft movements per hour per runway (Gonzales, 2018) that is said to accommodate 100 million passengers annually (Padilla, 2018). The proposed
Aerotropolis in Bulakan, though, has yet to have a concrete list of establishments to be built around the airport.
Relevance of Aerotropolis
According to Kasarda (2006), the Aerotropolis is much desired because of a number of advantages. Aerotropolis provides businesses, specifically the goods manufacturing industries, easier logistics by containing the businesses and the shipping in one network.
The aerotropolis helps firms cut costs, increase productivity and expand market reach through rapid long-distance accessibility, making them more competitive and effective in the international division of labor (Kasarda, 2015, May 13). It also becomes a viable area for the establishment of corporate headquarters and other information-intensive firms that require executives and employees to travel frequently for business. Finally, commercial services such as hotels, condominiums, malls, fitness centers, and entertainment facilities thrive in the aerotropolis as it attracts both foreign and local travelers.
However, in the case of the planned Aerotropolis in Bulakan, these business motivations did not surface to be the main goal. Ramon Ang of San Miguel Corporation has been cited by Calsado (2018) that the aerotropolis will solve multiple issues such as transportation issues in Metro Manila, and flooding and economic issues of Bulacan.
According to him, creating an international airport near Manila will decongest traffic in the Fight or Flight | 24 metro, especially air traffic. With the ever-increasing number of tourists and the recent
NAIA fiasco, the need for an alternative airport seems to be extremely needed. Clamor for a better international airport resulted from the flight disruptions for at least 200 flights that left at least 100,000 passengers stranded caused by the runway accident of Xiamen Airlines last August 16, 2018 (Gonzales, 2018). The aerotropolis is expected to be finished in six years, making it a viable option for the quick relief of the NAIA problem. Once built, the airport will not only alleviate the country’s airport woes but is also said to increase the influx of tourist to 12 million every year (Balbin, 2018). Ang also have mentioned that the flooding in Bulacan can be addressed by the establishment of the aerotropolis through the integrated spillway that comes with the project that would drain excess water from Angat and Ipo Dams directly to the Manila Bay (Gonzales, 2018). Lastly, San Miguel
Corporation also justified the planned Aerotropolis by stating its economic contribution of as much as Php 395 billion and 1.8 million jobs by 2025 (Gonzales, 2018).
Criticisms of the proposed aerotropolis
Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (PAMALAKAYA-
Pilipinas) criticized the Aerotropolis project as threat to the livelihood of around 700 fishing families in seven coastal villages of Barangay Taliptip, further degradation of the marine biodiversity in Manila Bay, and food security of the country (Pinpin, 2018). The fisherfolk of Taliptip also claims that the reclamation of the sea will block the flow of water coming from the mountains, and will cause flooding not only in Bulakan but also in its neighboring towns (Tecson, 2018). The mega-project does not only threaten the livelihood of the community in Taliptip; it also threatens to displace the approximately 700 families of the community from their homes without any assurance on where they will be relocated
(Global Anti-Aerotropolis Movement, 2018). The seas surrounding Taliptip is the source Fight or Flight | 25 of livelihood of around 5,000 fisherfolk, salt-makers, and fishnet-makers (Bridger, 2018).
According to the Fernando Hicap, chairperson of PAMALAKAYA, the totality of the fisherfolk that would be affected by the project reaches up to more than 20,000, including not only from Bulakan but also those from the neighboring towns (Global Anti-
Aerotropolis Movement, 2018).
The reclamation project is also expected to damage the marine ecosystem in the area, as any reclamation project would have. Land reclamation involves dumping a huge amount of sediments on the sea. This would eradicate coral reefs, coastal flats, and mangroves (Global Anti-Aerotropolis Movement, 2018). Bounty of fish, mussels, crabs, shrimp, and krill are found in the waters of Taliptip (Dulce, 2018). Mangroves are also a vital part of the ecosystem because it is a habitat for bird species such as egrets, terns, kingfishers and swallows, along with shellfish found among its roots (Bridger, 2018).
Mangrove clearing operations has already begun in April 2018, where San Miguel
Corporation allegedly cut down 600 mangroves in Taliptip (Calsado, 2018). AGHAM-
Advocates of Science and Technology for the People and Center for Environmental
Concerns-Philippines had conducted a resource mapping and discovered that 22 mangrove species, including Avicennia officinalis, a natural wave barrier and habitat of marine organisms, will be cleared to give way to the project.
The Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment (2018) lambasted the claims of the San Miguel Corporation that the Aerotropolis project would solve the flooding problems in Bulacan. According to Leon Dulce, National Coordinator of Kalikasan, the reclamation project would further aggravate the flooding problems of Bulacan's coastal towns because of the threat of clearing mangroves (a natural wave barrier), construction of infrastructure, and land subsidence. The environmental organization has estimated a total Fight or Flight | 26 population of about 1.24 million residents from the flood-prone cities and towns of Bulacan including Paombong, Hagonoy, Malolos, Bulakan, Bocaue, Marilao, Meycauayan,
Balagtas, Guiguinto, and Obando, as indicated by the Mines and Geosciences Bureau. The group was also not convinced by San Miguel Corporation's claim that the construction of the spillway, which is part of the proposed project, will solve the flooding problems of
Bulacan. Leon Dulce, as quoted by Kalikasan (2018), justified, “The waterways coursing from Bulacan’s ridges down to its reefs are complex systems that cannot be simply resolved by just a spillway. If we take the recent torrential monsoon rains as a concrete example, flood comes not only from the headwaters in Sierra Madre but also from extreme rainfall directly falling on Bulacan’s river basin and from coastal floods.” Geologist Mahar
Lagmay explained in the "Ang Islang Walang Lupa" (2018) episode of iWitness that land subsidence could cause flooding due to groundwater extraction that causes the land to sink by 4 centimeters per year. This would also expose the Aerotropolis to flooding, should it materialize, due to land subsistence.
Food security of the country is threatened by the project. The reclamation project is planned to cover the 24-hectare fishing reservation in Taliptip which will disrupt seafood production (Calsado, 2018). Based on the Coastal Resource Management Project done by
AGHAM, 670 kilos of fish catch will be lost for every hectare of mangrove that will be damaged (Pinpin, 2018). The province of Bulacan, specifically Bulakan and 4 other neighboring coastal communities, account for 41 million metric tons of marine products, primarily bangus and prawn (Pinpin, 2018), yearly supplied to nearby cities such as Metro
Manila (Calsado, 2018).
Skepticism of San Miguel Corporation's Aerotropolis did not only come from the residents and progressive organizations; there had also been apprehensions from the side Fight or Flight | 27 of the government. The Department of Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III expressed his reservations on the project (de Vera, 2018). He believes that San Miguel Corporation might not be able to build the Php 735.6-billion aerotropolis. He stated that in 2016, that the company had only Php 60 billion in total equity. Dominguez III, as quoted in de Vera
(2018), said that “Considering the usual financing mix of 70-percent debt and 30-percent equity in a public-private partnership (PPP) project, the construction of the Bulacan airport will require San Miguel Holdings to infuse around P200 billion inequity, which we are not sure is going to happen.”
The mega-airport project is also criticized for being irrelevant as another mega- airport project supposed to be an alternative to NAIA is already in the works. The existing
Clark International Airport is in the process of expansion, and was approved earlier than the Bulacan Aerotropolis. The Clark airport is also being developed as an aerotropolis expected to have an increasing passenger capacity almost the same as the Bulacan
Aerotropolis (Global Anti-Aerotropolis Movement, 2018). The two aerotropolises are predicted to cater to similar markets, thus overlapping in purpose.
Finally, the Aerotropolis project is criticized for being a money-making scheme of the San Miguel Corporation, instead of actually being a genuine development project meant to improve the lives of the Filipinos. The grand plan of Aerotropolis does not only involve the construction of the airport and the infrastructures within the metropolis; it also involves the construction of infrastructures outside that would enhance the purpose of the
Aerotropolis. This includes an MRT Loop with an elevated train express that would connect Aerotropolis to EDSA non-stop (Gonzales, 2018). Aside from the MRT Loop, there will also be a construction of an expressway that would link the Aerotropolis from the North Luzon Expressway and to the MRT Loop (Global Anti-Aerotropolis Movement, Fight or Flight | 28
2018). The expressway project, an 8.4-kilometer airport toll road, was revealed to bring a stream of revenue to the San Miguel Corporation (Global Anti-Aerotropolis Movement,
2018). Revenue is also expected from the MRT Loop considering that it will not be a free transportation system.
Attack on policies
The State must always be for the improvement and development of the country’s economy. However, the people and environment must be considered as stated in the Article
II, Section 16 of the 1987 Constitution, “The State shall protect and advance the rights of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.” With the proposed Aerotropolis, which is part of the Build Build Build development program of Duterte, this clause in the Constitution seems to be disregarded.
The project is predicted to harm the environment of Taliptip causing in an imbalance in the ecology. The people would be prevented from enjoying their rights to a healthy environment.
Republic Act No. 8550, more commonly known as the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, has several causes that deal with the protection of the country’s fisheries and aquatic resources, and fisherfolk which ultimately lead to the goal of achieving national food security. Also, under this law is the role of the State of ensuring that these objectives are attained. The approval of the National Economic and Development Authority, and the awaiting signature of President Duterte which will serve as the go signal for the project would mean the abandonment of the State of its role in protecting the rights of the fisherfolk, and the fisheries and aquatic resources of Taliptip.
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources has established a 24.64- hectare mangrove eco-park known as the Bulakan Mangrove Eco-Park found in Sitio Fight or Flight | 29
Wawang Capiz, Taliptip, Bulakan (Baltao, 2015). Aside from the eco-park, various other stretches of mangroves can also be found across Taliptip's waters (Dulce, 2018, May 20).
These measures are means to protect and rehabilitate mangrove forests in Bulacan (Baltao,
2015). The proposed project would entail clearing a large area of mangrove forest which will be in clash with the mangrove rehabilitation project in the province.
Reclamation projects
Tokyo Bay has been facing the negative impacts of extensive coastal reclamation that has been going on for decades now. According to Kawabe, Kohno, Ishimaru, and Baba
(2013), Tokyo Bay is currently experiencing habitat degradation associated with the loss of natural tidelands resulting from continuous coastal reclamation for many years, and contamination by organic substances coming from excessive human activity. In the 1960s, many fisherfolk had to give up their rights to fish in Tokyo Bay to give way to the reclamation projects. The reclamation projects in the bay are blamed for the decline in the supply of various marine species.
Montenegro, Diola and Remedio (2005) conducted the study "The Environmental
Costs of Coastal Reclamation in Metro Cebu, Philippines. The study assessed the environmental cost of a large coastal reclamation project such as the Cordova Reclamation
Project which would reclaim almost 3,000 hectares of coastal area in Mactan Island, Cebu.
The study was conducted in 2005 yet the project is still yet to be materialized upon the approval of President Duterte. The study discovered that the total environmental costs were estimated to reach around USD 59 million. In reality, the figure would be much higher since it does not include yet the negative effects that would arise temporarily during the reclamation construction. The increased levels of pollution that would be caused by the increase economic activity on the reclamation area were also not included. The study was Fight or Flight | 30 only able to cover impacts such as the loss of on-site fisher, loss of reef flag gleaning, damage from landfill quarrying, and damage to corals.
Lastly the case of land reclamation projects along the Pasay and Parañaque areas, also had negatively caused a lot of siltation in the nearshore areas of these two cities (Perez,
Feir, Carandang & Gonzales, 1999).
Development, the community, and the environment
The State is mandated by the constitution to promote and ensure the development of the country. As such, the State formulates policies that are in line with its development objectives. Aside from the State, there is also one giant actor playing a role in the development of the country alongside with the State; this is called the private sector which consists of the corporations and the businesses (Cernea, 2004). Because of the involvement of the private sector in the national development, some development policies are more inclined to upholding the interests of the corporations instead of the masses. Often, the welfare of the people and the environment are threatened by mega-development projects that are nothing but money-making schemes for the corporations disguising as development projects for the people.
Corporate-backed development is highly focused on urbanization and modernization. Development managers are aggressively pushing for urbanization which results to the loss of the natural environment and is replaced with an artificial one (Barry,
1999). Beck, as cited in Barry (1999), reveals that there are risks in using modernization as a 'development path'. These risks or costs of modernization are little by little outweighing the benefits. It poses harm on both the people and the environment. These risks can be divided into four categories:
1) Ecological risks – biodiversity loss, ecosystem destruction Fight or Flight | 31
2) Health risks – pollution-related illness
3) Economic risks – unemployment and decline in job security, loss of livelihood
4) Social risks – decline in personal safety, breakdown of community, displacement
According to Lipietz (1995), when formulating an economic policy, four values must be realized: solidarity, autonomy, ecological responsibility, and democracy.
Solidarity means providing each citizen with opportunities all the time. Autonomy is being in control of the consequences and conditions of one’s actions. Ecological responsibility is choosing means to fulfill one’s needs through methods that takes into consideration the environment and the future generation. Finally, democracy is systematically being open to all individual opinions and aspirations, and looking for a negotiated solution for the contradictions.
According to Serrano (1994, p.1), sustainable development is broadly defined as
"on which answers the needs of the present and the future." Any development policy must be guided and aligned with these three core elements of sustainable development:
1. Integrating environment and development – human activity must always consider the environmental capacity or ecological space
2. Equity – equity in international relations, equity within nations and societies, equality between men and women, equity between present and future generations
(intergenerational equity)
3. Quality growth – Inevitable growth must be focused on bringing about a better quality of life. Example of this is increased public expenditure for education, housing, and health.
Lipietz (1994) summarized the way to attain sustainable development:
Fight or Flight | 32
“The only way to fight effectively for sustainable development, that is, for the rights
of nature and future generations, while respective the right of present generations to
establish the material conditions of their welfare, and the only way to reconcile
‘environment’ and ‘development’, is if these rights are organized to allow the most
direct possible confrontation between them. The best way would be for this
confrontation to replace direct political regulation – in any event this is the ideal we
should strive for. In other words, tropical forests would be better protected by the
confrontation of the short- and the long-term interests of those who live from them,
than by intervention by some High Authority of a Security Council type, armed with
green helmets.” (p. 19)
Maybury-Lewis (2004) emphasized that responsibility of the consequences of the development projects must be the burden of the development planners, and must not be imposed on the community in the area of development. Social and ecological costs of development must be accounted for from the beginning in order to make growth equity-driven instead of market-driven (Serrano, 1994). Maybury-Lewis
(2004), however, argued that possible alternative programs are usually avoided because while they impose fewer costs on the community, these programs also offer fewer benefits to the corporations controlling the development process.
Theoretical framework
The current and possible problems in the environment of Taliptip are not solely ecological in nature. Man-made contributions to environmental degradation must be considered to fully understand the cause, effects, and possible solutions to the environmental problems. This is consistent with the political ecology approach which
Fight or Flight | 33 according to Blaikie and Brookfield (1987), as quoted in Nygren & Rikoon (2008), is defined as a combination of ecological concerns with a broadly defined political economy.
The term 'political ecology' is an interplay of the terms 'political economy' and 'ecology'. It emphasizes the interaction and dynamics between political forces and ecological process which result to social and environmental changes (Nygren & Rikoon, 2008). Those in power and control will be the ones to decide on the future of the marine ecology in Taliptip.
It is in their hands whether or not they will allow the degradation of the marine ecosystem by massively destructive projects.
The proposed Aerotropolis, once materialized, is expected to displace hundreds of families from the community of Taliptip. This displacement is the "sacrifice" the community must make in the name of "development". This belief is consistent with the managerial approach (Dwivdedi, 2002, cited in Penz, Drydyk, Bose, 2011) which treats displacement as a normal consequence of development. The study, however, is veered toward the movementist approach which is in contrast with the managerial approach. The movementist approach (Dwivdedi, 2002, cited in Penz, Drydyk, Bose, 2011) shows how development unjustly distributes costs and benefits, and disempowers the community from protecting their land, livelihood, and social ecology. The members of the community of
Taliptip would have to face the burden of losing their homes and source of livelihood to give way for the mega-project. While the Aerotropolis is meant to improve the transportation issues of the country, specifically the airport situation, this kind of
"development" must not be done at the expense of the fisherfolk community of Taliptip.
In line with this, the rights-based approach to development must be used by the country's policy makers. This approach to development prioritizes achieving human rights as part of any development goal (Overseas Development Institute, 1999). The rights-based Fight or Flight | 34 approach to development also emphasizes that development must be about helping the poor overcome their struggles (Offenheiser & Holcombe, 2003). This approach assumes that the poor has dignity and aspirations that are being blocked and held back by persistent systemic challenges (Offenheiser & Holcombe, 2003). In this case, the systemic challenge being faced by the community of Taliptip is their impending displacement due to the government- approved project. The social and economic rights of the fisherfolk of Taliptip seemed to be disregarded when the Aerotropolis project was planned and when it was approved by the government.
Fight or Flight | 35
Conceptual framework (figure 2)
FIGHT OR FLIGHT: A critical study on the effects of the planned Aerotropolis of San Miguel Corporation—a reclamation project—to the community of fisherfolk and the environment of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
AEROTROPOLIS
a reclamation
project
POSSIBLE EFFECTS
ENVIRONMENT COMMUNITY Loss of marine habitat Displacement Disruption of Loss of livelihood ecosystem Flooding
ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
Fight or Flight | 36 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Fight or Flight | 37
Research design
The issues arising from the planned Aerotropolis is multifactorial and could not be looked at using only one lens. Analyzing the effects of the project would entail considering at various factors. Thus, in order to achieve the desired results of the study, the research used case study design, specifically descriptive case study method and explanatory case study method.
Using the descriptive case study method, the specifics of the problem, the who, what, when, where, and how was laid out in a narrative framework. This aims to build up the case of the issue at hand. This method was used to describe the current situation of the community and environment of Taliptip amid the impending construction of the
Aerotropolis.
Using the explanatory case study method, the interrelationship between the factors was explained and analyzed. This aims to elucidate the interplay of the relationship between the causes, in relation to the construction of the Aerotropolis, and their possible effects to the community and the environment of Taliptip.
Study site selection
The study was conducted primarily in Barangay Taliptip, municipality of Bulakan, province of Bulacan where the proposed Aerotropolis will be constructed. Aside from the barangay offices in Taliptip, municipal and provincial offices of Bulakan and Bulacan, respectively, were also be consulted for information. On-site data gathering started on
February 2019 and ended on March 2019.
Fight or Flight | 38
Study instruments
Community profile questionnaire
This form of questionnaire includes specific questions about the members of the community. This includes personal information such as age, sex, educational attainment, source of income, number of family members, duration of residence, and the likes in order for the researcher to build an up-to-date community profile of Barangay Taliptip. This gave the researcher a general overview of the lives of the members of the community of Taliptip.
The questionnaire also includes a few questions regarding the Aerotropolis issue.
A few questions about their knowledge on the issue were included. This shows the awareness of the general community about the planned construction of the Aerotropolis.
Mapping
Mapping of the barangay and the neighboring coastal towns which are believed would be affected by the mega-project will be done. This includes mapping of both the residential and the ecological landscape of the area. This helped the researcher asses the magnitude of the impact of the Aerotropolis once it gets constructed.
Key Informant Interview
Key informant interview was conducted with Bulacan’s Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Officer about the environmental assessments and risks that the project would pose. The PENRO-Bulacan have also clarified information based on what the Department of Environment and Natural Resources currently knows about the project.
Key informant interviews with chosen experts in marine ecology, geology and archaeology were replaced by attending a two-day summit on reclamation. These experts were affiliated with neither the government nor the proponent company of the Aerotropolis ensuring unbiased professional opinion on the issues. Fight or Flight | 39
Unstructured interview
Unstructured interviews were conducted with the members of the community to gather information about their perceptions, knowledge, and overall feelings about the planned construction of the Aerotropolis which would possibly have irreversible impacts on their lives. Through unstructured interview, the flow of discussion between the researcher and the interviewee did follow any strict format. The conversation flowed naturally. This helped the interviewee be at ease and give away information without the discomfort of having to answer in a structured manner. Conducting unstructured interviews will more likely elicit raw and candid answers compared to structured interviews as it does not have the stiff environment structured interviews entail. Unstructured interviews was conducted in a comfortable setting within the community such as in the homes of the residents.
Instruments for data analysis
Descriptive statistical analysis
Descriptive statistical analysis was used to analyze data gathered from the community profile questionnaire. This consolidated the data in figures are organized using charts and graphs. The charts and graphs revealed patterns showing realities in the lives of the members of the community of Barangay Taliptip. The figures are accompanied by a descriptive analysis based on the most notable patterns revealed by the study.
Thematic analysis
The thematic analysis was utilized for analyzing information gathered from the key informant interviews and unstructured interviews. The researcher had to go through every statement uttered by the interviewees to find similarities or common themes. Through this instrument, common themes and patterns was derived from the statements of the Fight or Flight | 40 interviewees. These common themes and patterns consolidated to form a conclusion regarding the issue.
Triangulation of sources
Triangulation of sources will highlight relevant in the study because the research will be dealing with several perspectives coming from different sources. The researcher will not only be dealing with primary data but also secondary data from prior and related studies. Information from the different perspectives coming from the different sectors interviewed will be matched to find a credible conclusion while still considering underlying social, economic, and political motives. Results gathered from the study will also be cross- referenced from existing studies to see if the generally known and accepted concepts are consistent. With all the sources of information available for the research, triangulation will be vital in building the credibility of the conclusion formed from the study.
Fight or Flight | 41
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Fight or Flight | 42
Municipality of Bulakan
Figure 3. Façade of the Bulakan Municipal Hall
According to the municipality’s current Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the municipality of Bulakan is one of the 24 towns of the Province of Bulacan. It is about 35 kilometers away from the City of Manila. Bulakan is one of the oldest towns in the
Philippines. It was originally the capital of the Province of Bulacan before it was replaced by Malolos shortly after the American occupation.
The name 'Bulakan' was derived from the Tagalog word 'bulak' (cotton). When the
Spaniards came, they found an abundance of cotton growing in many places in Luzon, particularly in Bulakan.
The municipality of Bulakan is bounded on the south by the town of Obando, on the west by Manila Bay, on the north by the City of Malolos and on the northeast by the town of Guiguinto. It has rank tenth in size in the entire province with an approximate area of 72.90 square kilometers or 2.7284% of the total land area of the province of Bulacan.
The town’s terrain is generally flat having a coastline with portions touching Manila
Bay. It is intersected by several tributaries of Manila Bay which serve as outlets of the rain water. These outlets are oftentimes heavily silted causing flood in the municipality. Its soils Fight or Flight | 43 vary from hydro soil in the swamp areas, clay loam in the central lowlands and quiqua silt loam in the northwestern part of the municipality.
It is comprised by 14 barangays namely: Bagumbayan, Balubad, Bambang,
Matungao, Maysantol, Perez, Pitpitan, San Francisco (formerly Tabang), San Jose, San
Nicolas, Sta. Ana (formerly Daddaya), Sta. Ines (former Pariahan), Taliptip, and Tibig.
Bulakan is still predominantly rural, however, with Barangay San Jose, Bagumbayan,
Matungao and Bambang classified by Sangguniang Bayan and NSO as urban barangays with the following population of 3,060, 3,135, 14,749, and 12,097 respectively. About
57.94% of its population in 2010 account for the rural population while nearly 42.06% goes to its urban population. The Community Based Monitoring Base report in 2010 shows a total of 18,136 households surveyed.
Fishing is the main industry in the municipality due to its strategic geographical location bordering west of Manila Bay. Bulakan has the largest inland fishing area
(Brackish and Fresh) in the Province of Bulacan. The town consist of 4,297.20 hectares of developed and productive privately-owned fishponds and 600 hectares of fishpond owned by the municipality. The 600 hectares of fishpond was acquired under LOI 1313 by Pres.
Ferdinand E. Marcos, & Executive Order 288, signed by Pres. Fidel V. Ramos, under
Republic Act. 4701, for proprietary use & disposition of the Municipal Government of
Bulakan.
Fight or Flight | 44
Barangay Taliptip
Figure 4. The map of Brgy. Taliptip (left) and the barangay logo (right) posted on the wall of the barangay
hall.
Barangay Taliptip is a rural coastal barangay of the municipality of Bulakan. It has an area of 26.8027 square kilometers. In 2010, it had a population of 6,340. The number of households were 1,544 with an average household size of 4.11. It has a population density of 2, the lowest in the town of Bulakan. The population was project to increase to 7,835 in
2019.
The barangay’s logo shows a boat, shrimp, and fish symbolizing the primary livelihood in the barangay. There are currently 11 barangay staff and officials headed by the barangay captain Michael M. Ramos.
Fight or Flight | 45
Description of communities visited during the study
Figure 5. One side of Sitio Pariahan
The barangay has 9 coastal sitios with a total estimated population of 400. These sitios are Sitio Capiz, Sitio Baluarte, Sitio Pariahan, Sitio Kinse, Sitio Camansi, Sitio
Bunutan, Sitio Capol, Sitio Pinagkahipunan, and Sitio Dapdap. The sitios are far apart from one another, and from the main land of Taliptip. The sitios are only reachable by boat from the boat terminal on the side of the provincial road bridge. Some sitios (e.g. Sitio Dapdap,
Sitio Capiz, portions of Sitio Kinse) are elevated on lands while some (e.g. Sitio Pariahan) are directly situated on waters and are only elevated by stilts.
The residents say that decades ago, there was land in Sitio Pariahan. The sitio was featured in a GMA-7 iWitness documentary “Ang Island Walang Lupa” at the midnight of
November 25, 2018. In the documentary, it was discussed that Sitio Pariahan used to be the most famous sitio in Taliptip. It had a public elementary school and a church. Because
Fight or Flight | 46 of storms and sea level rise, the sitio was eventually washed out in 2011. At present, there remained 30 families in the community on stilt houses of Sitio Pariahan.
Residents of the sitio shared that they have received guests (usually students) who would like to immerse and live with them to learn their community’s way of life.
Figure 6. One side of Sitio Kinse.
Sitio Kinse is a mixed of houses on lands and houses on stilts. This side of the sitio is strategically situated behind mangroves, protecting them from the harsh storms and strong tides. There is another area of Sitio Kinse that was not reached by the researcher. In this sitio, there are residents who became leaders of their local organization Samahan ng mga Mangingisda ng Bulakan at Obando that actively opposes the proposed airport project.
Fight or Flight | 47
Figure 7. One side of Sitio Dapdap.
Sitio Dapdap is the most populated sitio visited during the study. It is situated on an elevated land. Inside the sitio are private fishponds within a few meters from its shores.
It has its own newly built church sponsored by a religious organization. There are already residents of the sitio who are vocal in their stance against the proposed airport project in their barangay. Residents of the sitio encourages guests who would like to see how their life is in the sitio to live with them for free even for a few days.
Figure 8. One side of Sitio Capiz
Fight or Flight | 48
Sitio Capiz is situated on a land. It has the biggest land area in all the sitios visited because of the hectares of privately-owned salt farms. Mountains of salt could be seen even from the river. Although fishing is also one of the livelihoods of the residents, the sitio stood out because unlike the other sitios visited, the primary livelihood of the residents is working in the salt farms.
Most houses in all the sitios visited are makeshift houses made out of light materials
(bamboo stilts, plywood, galvanized iron sheets) that are vulnerable to disasters. However, they claimed that these houses would cost them less to rebuild and less losses if ever a strong disaster hits them.
Profile of the residents
Figure 9. Pie chart of responses of their sitio of residence Out of the 9 coastal sitios of Taliptip, only 4 sitios were visited by the researcher during the study. These sitios are Sitio Pariahan, Sitio Kinse, Sitio Dapdap, and Sitio Capiz.
30 residents were interviewed about their basic profile, and perceptions about their lives and on the proposed airport project. Heads of the families were chosen as respondents. Of
Fight or Flight | 49 the 30 respondents 9 are from Sitio Pariahan, 4 from Sitio Kinse, 13 are from Sitio Dapdap, and 4 are from Sitio Capiz.
Figure 10. Bar graph of responses of their age The ages of the respondents range from 18 to 65 years old. 60 percent of the interviewed residents are female. 71.4 percent of the respondents were not able to reach high school. The remaining 28.6 percent have reached at least 1st year high school. None of the respondents have reached college level. Respondents have reported to have lived in
Taliptip for 3 to 59 years. Those who have answered that they have only lived there for a few years clarified that their spouses were the ones who really lived there since birth.
Figure 11. Pie chart of responses of their type of home ownership
Fight or Flight | 50
93.3% responded that they own their houses but not the land. They do not have a land title of the parcels of land on which their houses are built on, leaving them with no legal claim on the lands.
Figure 12. Bar graph of responses of the number of people of in their homes The number of people living in a house ranges from 1 to 8, with a mean average of
4.29. 76.4 percent of the residents are fisherfolk. They either use fishing nets or nangangapa when the tides are low. The rest are sari-sari store owners, on the business of buying and selling of crabs, shrimp paste makers, boatmen, fish pen workers, salt farm workers, and factory workers.
Fight or Flight | 51
Figure 13. Blue crab sold for more than a thousand of pesos caught by one of the residents of Sitio Dapdap
The common produce and catch of the fisherfolk are mud and blue crabs, shrimps, oysters, and a variety of fish. They either sell their catch at the Obando fish port or wholesale buyers go directly to their community to buy all their catch. The fisherfolk earn as low as 200 pesos and as high as 4,000 pesos per day. 96.7 percent said that they have their own boats and materials for fishing. 70.7 percent of the respondents have been fisherfolk for more than 10 years; some even started as young as school age. 60% of the respondents answered that being a fisherfolk is their first job. Those who were not originally fisherfolks were previously construction, factory, and salt farm workers.
Fight or Flight | 52
Figure 14. Pie graphs of responses on their perception about their income and social status 86.7 percent claimed that their income is enough for their day-to-day needs. 53.3 percent do not see themselves as poor because they see their income to be more than enough for them to survive.
70 percent and 73.3 percent believed that their lives will not improve in the next 5 and 10 years, respectively. This is their view because of their awareness of the possible displacement they will face once the airport project is built in their area.
Fight or Flight | 53
Perception of the residents on the proposed airport project
Figure 15. Pie graph of responses 100 percent of the respondents are aware of the proposed airport project in their barangay. 66.7 percent said that they have not been consulted for the project. These residents said that no representative from the project proponents formally asked them whether they agree with the project or not. They attested that there were people going around surveying the area and asking residents questions that could formulate a census of the area, but none of these people asked for their opinion on the issue. While the rest that responded that they were consulted said that their knowledge on the airport came only from hearsays.
Fight or Flight | 54
Figure 16. Graph of responses on their initial reaction upon learning about the project 73.3 percent of the respondents were saddened by the news of the impending project. None of the respondents reacted positively on the news. All of the respondents did not want to leave their homes because of their livelihood. They claimed that they are used to their lives in the sitio and displacing them would force them to form a different way of life.
Figure 17. Pie chart of responses of whether they agree or not on the project
Fight or Flight | 55
93.3 percent of the respondents disagree with the project and 100 percent believed that the project would not benefit them in any way. However, majority felt that there is nothing they can do to prevent the project from pushing through. They believe that as ordinary citizens, they have no say in matters pushed by the government or a big private company. 86.2 percent believed that the project would not be beneficial for the country.
Figure 18. Pie chart of responses on whether they were promised a better life after the project
63.3 percent of the respondents revealed that there were promises of a better life after the airport is built. However, the promises did not formally come from SMC. Some say they heard it from their neighbors, and some said from the barangay officials. It is said that there would be a relocation site with free housing and jobs for the residents. When asked where they plan on residing after they have to leave their homes, majority responded that they would transfer to the relocation site. Some answered that they do not know yet.
Some would live wherever there is work. While those who have relatives from other towns and provinces would transfer there with their families. When asked what they plan on
Fight or Flight | 56 making their livelihood, most answered that they do not know yet as fishing is the only job they know. Some would take the construction job if ever there would be an offer. Some insisted that they would still be fishing. Some plan on putting up a small business. Despite all these plans, 90 percent responded that these plans are not yet definite.
Impacts of the Aerotropolis on the coastal sitios of Taliptip
Building an airport project in the coastal sitios would inevitably entail displacement of the residents. The residents, however, do not want to leave their homes because of their livelihood and the way of life they have been used to. The residents of the coastal communities of Taliptip claimed that their life is easier in their sitios because they earn enough, and they have less expenses than the people living on the main land Taliptip. They could get an abundance of seafood just a few steps away from their doorstep. Their expenses do not include electricity and water because they use solar panels and deep well respectively. They boast about how they could use their televisions and videoke sets without having to pay so much for their electricity consumption. They fear that once they are displaced from their sitios and relocated on the mainland, they would have to pay for every need. On top of that, they also fear that their income would drastically decrease. They were told through word-of-mouth that San Miguel Corporation would offer them jobs in the construction of the airport. Some residents had already experienced working as construction workers and attested that the pay is far lower and job more difficult than being a fisherfolk. As fisherfolk, they earn as little as 200 and as high as more than 2,000 pesos a day. As construction workers, in contrast, they only earn below 400 a day. They prefer working as fisherfolk because aside from the better income, their time at work is flexible.
The older members of the community also worry that there would be no available jobs for
Fight or Flight | 57 them because their bodies could not do hard manual labor anymore. They pride that even the children in their community have their own income because they could collect crabs when the tides are low and add these to the family’s produce sold at the market. The children are able to buy whatever they want with their own income.
Majority of the residents who responded claimed that there was no formal consultation. They were not asked by representatives from San Miguel Corporation whether they would agree with the project or not. They were not consulted; they were merely informed that there would be an airport built in their area. The news spread from hearsays and was formally relayed to them by the barangay captain. A public hearing called for by Silvertides Holdings Corporation, the subcontractor of San Miguel Corporation, also occurred on February 4, 2019 at the Bulakan Evacuation Center, San Jose, Bulakan,
Bulacan. Here they presented their environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the area where they are to build the Aerotropolis. According to Ansie San Gabriel of Alyansa para sa Pagtatanggol ng Kabuhayan, Paninirahan at Kalikasan sa Manila Bay (AKAP KA
Manila Bay), that during the presentation of Silvertides, it was not explicitly stated that the project will be a reclamation project and that it will be an aerotropolis. Instead, they simply stated that it will be a backfilling project (2nd People’s Summit on the Impacts of
Reclamation, March 26, 2019, Bayleaf Hotel Intramuros). According to a resident of the coastal community in Taliptip and a representative of the Samahan ng mga Mangingisda ng Bulakan at Obando, they attended the public hearing, but they had little understanding of what was presented to them because the presentation was in English (2nd People’s
Summit on the Impacts of Reclamation, March 26, 2019, Bayleaf Hotel Intramuros). They claimed that it was difficult for them to understand because “aside from the noisy setting
Fight or Flight | 58 during the public hearing, many members of the fisherfolk community were not able to go to school.” [own translation] At first, the people thought that it was development for all because they were not able to understand every detail presented to them. It was only when they asked someone to translate the presentation for them that they were able to understand and absorb the magnitude and gravity of impacts of the proposed project to them. Up to date, no public consultation has been done.
San Miguel Corporation’s Aerotropolis
Figure 19. Opening slide of SMC’s presentation
Aside from Barangay Taliptip, the project was revealed to cover the neighboring
Barangay Bambang in Bulakan, Bulacan. In their presentation on February 4, 2019 during the public hearing on the “proposed land development project” held at the Bulakan
Evacuation Center in San Jose, Bulakan, Bulacan, they described their project New Manila
International Airport as a “game-changer.” The company believes that the solution to the worsening airport problem of Metro Manila is “to build an entirely new airport.”
San Miguel Corporation also believes that their proposal ticks all the boxes:
Fight or Flight | 59
✓ High capacity – It promises an estimated capacity of 200 million passengers per year.
✓ Accessible – The location of the airport will be made accessible through multiple
expressways directly connecting the airport to Metro Manila, Bulacan, and Bataan, and
therefore making the airport accessible to many parts of Central Luzon.
✓ Able to begin operations in the shortest possible time – The company promises a six-
year timeline from approval of the project, with 2 runways operational in 5 years.
✓ Will not strain government resources – Funding would come solely from the company.
There would be no funding from the government as the project would be on a Build-
Operate-Transfer System.
Figure 20. Integrated masterplan of the Aerotropolis According to the integrated masterplan presented, the New Manila International
Airport will house not only an airport with 4 parallel runways; it will also house a residential zone, institutional zone, and government center. There will also be a seaport and industrial zone, and ferry services to Manila and Bataan will also be offered. The airport will be connected to the North Luzon Expressway, McArthur Highway, and Radial Fight or Flight | 60
Road 9 Extension through the Airport Expressway. There will also be a Shoreline
Expressway passing through the airport that will connect Malabon to Bataan.
It prides itself for being accessible from any point in Metro Manila and Bulacan under 45 minutes. It estimated that coming from Alabang, south of Metro Manila, to the airport, it would only take 36 minutes. If coming from business districts such as Bonifacio
Global City, Ortigas, and Makati, it would take 35 minutes, 27 minutes, and 23 minutes respectively. Travelling from the north of Metro Manila would be much easier. If coming from Balintawak, Quezon City to the airport, it would take only an estimate of 17 minutes travel time. Finally, coming from nearby Bulacan towns such as Bocaue and Marilao, travel time would only take less than 10 minutes.
San Miguel Corporation believes that aside from solving the problem of airport congestion, the project would also be economically beneficial to the country. "Without capacity limitations, NMIA contribution to national economy will continue to grow," raising the country's GDP to an estimate of P395 billion in 2025, and P 516 billion in 2030.
It also promises to directly and indirectly generate more jobs. It estimates to directly generate 1.8 million jobs by 2025, and 2.4 million by 2030. With 20 million tourist arrivals, the airport could indirectly create 40 million more jobs.
Fight or Flight | 61
Mapping of the area
Figure 21. From Bulakan’s CLUP. Based on the zoning map of Bulakan, the project location would cover a portion of the municipality’s fishpond zone, mangrove zone, and Manila Bay Conservation Zone.
Fight or Flight | 62
From Silvertides’ Environmental Impact Assessment. In terms of biophysical impact, the direct impact areas would cover the 2,372 hectares currently acquired properties for the project, adjacent coastline area, and surrounding barangays within the 2-kilometer radius. The indirect impact areas would be the adjacent communities within the 3-kilometer radius outside the direct impact area. In terms of socio-cultural impact, the direct impact areas would be Barangays Taliptip and Bambang, and adjacent communities whose livelihood will most likely be affected.
Impacts of the Aerotropolis on the environment of Taliptip
Bird species found during the fieldwork. From L-R common tern, black crowned night heron, little egret, unidentified The coastal area of Taliptip is home to a rich biodiversity. There is an abundance of crabs, shrimps, fish, and seashells. Bulakan alone has been contributing 41 million tons of fish produce (San Gabriel, 2nd People’s Summit on the Impacts of Reclamation, March
26, 2019, Bayleaf Hotel Intramuros). At least 4 species of birds were also abundantly seen
Fight or Flight | 63 to be flying all over the coastal area, especially above the waters of fish pens. The presence of the birds signifies an abundance of fish supply enough to become the feeding area of different kinds of birds. Marine life is thriving in the area. Building an infrastructure on
Taliptip’s waters would significantly destroy the marine ecosystem and drive away the marine and bird species. Disrupting any existing thriving ecosystem could create an imbalance that could also affect ecosystems in nearby areas.
Figure 22. Bulakan Mangrove Ecopark The residents also take pride over the mangroves they, as supported by the local government, have planted over the years. According to San Gabriel (2nd People’s Summit on the Impacts of Reclamation, March 26, 2019, Bayleaf Hotel Intramuros), there are 22 species of mangroves in the area of Taliptip. Taliptip even has its Mangrove Ecopark that serves not only its purpose for the ecosystem, but also as a popular tourist spot of the town.
Part of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for 2010-2020 is the restoration and proper management of the mangroves in the coastal area of Taliptip under the local government unit and Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Included in the proposed land
Fight or Flight | 64 use map of 2010-2020 is the addition of 8 hectares to the 24-hectare mangrove forest, extending to the Wawang Dapdap and portion of Taliptip river. There are also patches of mangrove forests scattered all over the coastal area of Taliptip. During the Participatory
Coastal Resource Assessment (PCRA) conducted by Provincial Environment and Natural
Resources of Bulacan (PENRO-Bulacan), together with the Bureau of Fisheries and
Acquatic Resources (BFAR), LGU of Bulakan represented by the Municipal Environment and Natural Resources Officer (MENRO), a representative of Barangay Taliptip, and the leaders of the coastal community of Sitio Wawang Capiz completed on October 27, 2017, it was discovered that the mangrove forest measures at 20.5 hectares.
Figure 23. One side of Sitio Capiz The forest is dominantly covered with Avicennia marina Forsk. Vierh., locally known as Api-api, Bungalon, or Miapi. This species covers more than 90 percent of the area. Other species found include Rhizophora mucronata Lam. (locally known as Bakawan babae), Excoecaria agallocha L. (locally known as Buta-buta or Lipata), and Lumnitzera racemosa Willd. (locally known as Culasi or Tabao). There is obviously an effort from both the residents and local government to preserve the mangroves of the town. However,
Fight or Flight | 65 with the impending airport project, these mangroves would inevitably be affected and cleared to give way to the infrastructure to be built in the area.
The community of fisherfolk conducted their own environmental impact assessment to counter that of the Silvertides’. They assessed the areas in Obando and
Taliptip. In their assessment they discovered the impacts of the project not only to the environment but also their lives. The results of their EIA included 1) loss of the fishing industry in the areas, 2) flooding, and 3) fish kill. The project was also discovered to bring hunger to them.
While there is no formal and final plan yet on where the residents will be relocated, there are rumors passed on through word-of-mouth that the relocation site will be on the main land of Taliptip. This area, however, is predicted by experts to be submerged by flood once the project is completed. Aside from displacing the residents from their homes, the residents are further put into danger by placing them in a location that is expected to be submerged in flood because of the project. This could be worsened during storms which could lead to fatalities.
Geological and meteorological hazards
The areas surrounding Manila Bay is faced with numerous geological and meteorological hazards, most of which are earthquake related. With the threat of ‘The Big
One,’ these hazards must be taken into consideration, especially since the planned airport would be built on a portion of Manila Bay, a vulnerable area for earthquake-related hazards located just about 26 kilometers from the West Valley Fault.
Fight or Flight | 66
1) Earthquake-related liquefaction
Figure 24. From Rodolfo, 2014, in Philippine Science Letters Vol. 7: “Left: Under normal conditions, grains of sediment rest on top of each other, and the spaces between them are filled with water. Right: Shaking during earthquake prevents grains from resting top of each other. The shaking mixture of sediment and water behaves as a “slurry” like freshly mixed concrete, a liquid without strength. Buildings on the sediment sink or topple.” Seismologists have long known that ground movements are amplified in artificially reclaimed sites during earthquakes (Aki, 1993 in Rodolfo, 2014). The natural or man-made bay-fill materials are composed of rock pieces in various sizes ranging from tiny clay particles to large rocks, with the spaces between them filled with water. The solid particles are in contact under normal conditions, so that the lower ones bear above them the weight of other grains as well as the weights of any buildings on top of them. However, during the time that an earthquake occurs, the shaking breaks the contact between grains. The solids and water act together as a liquid without strength. Buildings topple or sink into it.
According to Professor Kelvin S. Rodolfo (2016) in his presentation about the dangerous aspects of reclamation along Manila Bay and Laguna de Bay, the reclaimed coastal areas are very susceptible to liquefaction and enhanced ground movements during earthquakes. The solid grains in water-saturated material such as reclamation materials are normally touching. The lower grains in the material bear the weight of grains and buildings above them. But when an earthquake occurs, the shaking prevents the grains from touching, so the solids and water become slurry, making the buildings topple or sink. There is also
Fight or Flight | 67 the occurrence of “sand boils”, which happens when liquefied sand comes up to the surface during earthquake. The coastal areas are particularly susceptible to liquefaction during earthquake because these areas are underlain by natural sediment and artificial reclamation fill.
According to Professor Vito Hernandez (2nd People’s Summit on the Impacts of
Reclamation, March 27, 2019, Bayleaf Hotel Intramuros), an environmental archaeologist and a member of the AGHAM Scientist for the People, in the river basin around the coastal area, the land there is poorly consolidated, so the land will surely subside in the occurrence of an earthquake. In his study about fisheries, he saw that there are beach ridges that get deposited because of the tides and the poorly consolidated land. Based on the current available data, the liquefaction hazard exposure of Manila is so high that it will cause the land to subside, especially when a 7.1 magnitude earthquake hits it.
Figure 25. Images of the effects of earthquake-related liquefaction to structures in Dagupan during the 1990 earthquake from Rodolfo (2014) It should be kept in mind the lessons taught by the 1990 Luzon earthquake. Its epicenter was Rizal, Nueva Ecija; despite being 100 km away, the coastal Pangasinan city of Dagupan suffered widespread liquefaction that caused multiple buildings to topple, tilted, sink into the ground, and unusable (Adachi et al., 1992, in Rodolfo 2014). The intensities attributed solely to these likely scenarios should be enough reason to prohibit
Fight or Flight | 68 any reclamation in Manila Bay. It should be realized that reclaimed areas in Manila Bay do not require a nearby earthquake to cause severe damage.
Figure 26. Liquefaction hazard map from Silvertides Corporation’s EIA presentation Even Silvertides Corportation, the subcontractor for the project, recognized in their
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) presented during the public hearing last February
4, 2019 that project area and the nearby towns are susceptible to liquefaction.
2) Tsunami
Figure 27. Tsunami modelling of Manila Bay from United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction - Regional Office for Europe (2009) Fight or Flight | 69
According to Hernandez (2019), aside from the West Valley Fault, there are two major trenches in the Philippines: the Manila Trench and the Philippine Trench (also known as Marianas Trench). Possible movement from these would move the crust. Since the soil of Greater Manila Area, especially surrounding Manila Bay is soft, it would easily slide forming a tsunami. This places the airport project at high risk of being damaged or even washed out when a strong earthquake produces a tsunami.
3) Land subsidence
Figure 28. Ground subsidence from 2003-2009 of the project location taken from Silvertides Corporation’s EIA presentation According to Professor Rodolfo (2014), the coastal plains around the north part of
Manila Bay are built on sediment columns of many hundred meters thick, primarily river-
Fight or Flight | 70 delta muds with fewer layers of sand and gravel. These sediments “autocompact” as they accumulate. The weight of the newly accumulated deposits over each layer of mud squeezes water out of it and compresses it. Thus, the surface of land subsides a few millimeters per year. However, with the overuse of groundwater, subsidence becomes more rapid.
Figure 29. Satellite images that show the correlation between increase in houses (therefore increase in population) and sea level rise from Rodolfo (2014) As population increases, the use of groundwater also increases. This is a problem comparable to the global warming as groundwater withdrawal causes land to subside.
Pumps are used to extract water from aquifers, which are layers of sand and gravel soaked with water. The rapid pumping of water to the aquifer reduces the pressure between grains of sand and gravel. Because the water is removed, grains crowd together, making the volume reduced, and the land sinks as the sand is now loosely-packed and cannot compact very much. Then, the water in the clay layers is sucked into the aquifer. Clay deposits contain much more water and can shrink much more. Due to this, the clay layers shrink and the ground surface sinks. Clay shrinkage and the associated land subsidence are both permanent.
Fight or Flight | 71
Figure 30. Process of groundwater extraction from Rodolfo (2014) Sandy and gravelly aquifer layers, where groundwater is stored in and recovered from, are in between aquitards (clayey layers that contain more water and are more porous).
The pore-water fluid pressure partly supports the deltaic sediment columns. By extracting water from an aquifer, the support is then transferred to its framework of sediment grains that are somewhat compressed, causing the ground to subside a little. The fluid pressure of an aquifer, when exploited excessively, is diminished below the adjacent aquitards, reducing its volume and thickness. This reduction and loss of surface elevation are permanent.
It is not surprising if the reclamation planners enhance the risks by ignoring subsidence to minimize costs and maximize profits. It is also expected that compression of the substrate and the resulting subsidence will speed up because of the increased pressure from the weight of new buildings in reclaimed areas.
Fight or Flight | 72
Figure 31. Manila Bay subsidence in mm/y from 2003 to2006, as determined from satellite-borne Permanent Scatterer In-terferometric Synthetic-Aperture Radar (PSInSAR). From Lagmay (2011) and Eco et al. (2013) in Rodolfo (2014). Based on the satellite data of Narod Eco, a remote-sensing specialist, there is a rapid land subsidence, 4 centimeters per year, in the areas of Malabon, Navotas, and nearby areas
(Hernandez, 2019, 2nd People’s Summit on the Impacts of Reclamation, Bayleaf Hotel
Intramuros). Not far from these very vulnerable areas is where the biggest reclamation projects are being proposed.
The marginalized living in coastal areas, deprived of their right to clean and accessible water, are being dismissed by various water concessionaires as they are told to resort to the use of deep wells. Since the people in coastal areas rely on deep wells for their daily ration of water, the floor of the deep wells subsides every year. This is because groundwater is extracted, making the land compact resulting in land subsidence. So, to prevent these problems, the government should do its part in tapping these water concessionaires to provide accessible water supply to coastal areas.
The Manila Bay coastal plains slope very gently, that is why even a small rise in sea level or land subsidence must be taken into account. The rapid subsidence of coastal
Fight or Flight | 73 lands enhances the risks of flooding and high tides, and makes the area increasingly vulnerable to storm surges. Land subsidence, which is the lowering of the surface closer to sea level, also delays runoff from rains and increases both flooding and tidal incursions.
4) Flooding (geological) and storm surge (meteorological)
Figure 32. Flood hazard map of the project location from Silvertides Corporation’s EIA presentation Towns surrounding Manila Bay are highly susceptible to flooding naturally because these towns are situated directly beside the body of water. With the country’s experience in heavy rains and strong storms, these areas experience worsening flood throughout the years. Furthermore, with the growing number of fishponds, the flooding in coastal areas take more time to subside; and when more barriers such as reclamations projects are added in areas with bodies of water, the flooding situation worsens.
Storm surges are most dangerous if the seafloor slopes gently, as in the Manila Bay coastal plains. These storm surges have also frequently deluged the coastal Manila Bay in the past and is such a great threat to the lowered land. With climate change lurking, the strength of typhoons increases, thus making large storm waves ride on top of the storm surges (Rodolfo, 2014).
Fight or Flight | 74
Scientists have documented that Manila Bay’s coastal areas are sinking as fast as 9 centimeters per year because of the effects of sea level rise because of global warming and rapid land subsidence (Rodolfo et al. 2003, Siringan and Rodolfo 2003, Rodolfo and
Siringan 2006 in Rodolfo, 2014). With an elevation of 1 meter above sea level (Silvertides
Holdings Corporation, 2019) and following the speed of the sinking of coastal areas, the project would be submerged in less than 20 years. Even if they elevate the project a few meters more, its ultimate fate of being submerged eventually would be inevitable.
Latest updates on the project
As of May 2019, the proponents of the project have only classified their project as a land development project, not an airport. According to Emelita P. Lingat (personal interview), Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Officer of Bulacan (PENRO
Bulacan), the project is not considered as a critical project anymore because what SMC has proposed is only a land development project for the titled lands they bought. The submission for the requirements for the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) will be done online, and the process for approval will not be as strict as when it comes to approving big reclamation projects. The land development project plan has a timeline of until 2022. According to the PENRO, the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) particularly the Mines and Geosciences Bureau, recommended the proponent to consider the geohazards looming in the area of their project. The DENR recognizes the risk factors of building a project in the area, but the approval of SMC’s project would depend on how they propose their land development project. As of this writing, there are no final plans yet that the PENRO of Bulacan knows as to what the area will be converted to. The department sees the airport project as mere speculations for now
Fight or Flight | 75 until SMC has submitted to them a proposal specifying an airport project in the area. The
PENRO of Bulacan believes that until the end of the land development project timeline on
2022, there may not be an airport project rising in the area. What happens after will be another issue and another set of process before approval.
Fight or Flight | 76
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Fight or Flight | 77
The airport of a country’s capital is important for the country’s growth and development. It serves as a gateway for the boom of tourism and investments in a country.
It is a tourist’s first and last sight of the country, and the last view of a local transferring to another country. It is highly important that an airport effectively serves its purpose. With
Manila’s problems with its airport, the Ninoy Aquino International Airport, both locals and tourists have expressed their dismay over the inefficiency and congestion in the airport, especially during peak travel seasons. An ever-increasing number of passengers further escalates the problem because the airport has not significantly improved throughout the years.
With the San Miguel Corporation’s unsolicited proposal, there came hope that the airport situation of Manila would improve by diverting the flow of people in another nearby airport. The planned Aerotropolis named New Manila International Airport would seem like the perfect solution considering how close it is to Metro Manila and other parts of the
Greater Manila Area. This would also become the country’s biggest airport, promising an annual capacity of 200 million passengers with its 4 parallel runways, a far cry from
NAIA’s annual capacity of 35 million with 2 runways.
This study, however, have shown that there are many critical considerations before pushing through with this project. This airport project is planned to be built on a residential coastal area. For an airport to be built and developed there, the area would have to be cleared of any existing infrastructure. This means that residents would have to be displaced of their homes. The project set to be located in Barangay Taliptip and Barangay Bambang could directly affect more than 20 thousand residents; not included yet are the other nearby barangays and towns that could be affected by the other projects, such as additional expressways, meant to be built in support of the airport. One of the most vulnerable sectors Fight or Flight | 78 that would experience the greatest effect of displacement would be the fisherfolks living in the coastal area. Most of the fisherfolks were not able to at least reach college level and have been fisherfolks their whole lives. Displacing them would mean loss of the only livelihood they know. Because jobs for people who have only reached elementary and high school are few, their options for a livelihood would be limited to skill-based and manual labor. These forms of labor are compensated with only minimum wage and often without proper benefits, unlike in fishing where they can earn more than a thousand on a day of good catch. The elderly would not be able to work anymore because manual labor requires physical strength. There would be lesser opportunities for women, especially if it is true that the jobs offered would be construction jobs. The children would also have to either rely on their parents completely or find something else to get profit from. The adjustment of moving out of their coastal sitios would take a toll on their mental and economic wellbeing.
A big reclamation project such as this would also disrupt an existing and thriving ecosystem. The coastal area has a rich biodiversity as shown in the amount of seafood supply, the growth of different species of mangroves, and the presence of different species of birds. Developing the 2500 hectares of coastal area would entail clearing not only of infrastructures but also of the thriving flora and fauna. Dumping of sediments would result to the loss of habitat and death of sea creatures. Mangroves would have to be cut down and uprooted; resulting in a loss of habitat for species living in the mangrove forests, loss of natural barrier against waves and surges, and loss of natural hold for the soil.
The most important considerations would be the geological and meteorological hazards that could potentially bring severe harm not only to those in the project location but also to the other surrounding towns. Land subsidence, earthquake-related liquefaction, Fight or Flight | 79 tsunami, and flooding are geological hazards that could not be avoided. Storm surge, a meteorological hazard, could also not be avoided. The effects of these hazards could be worsened by building the Aerotropolis in the coastal area of Bulakan.
With all these things to consider before finalizing and building an airport in the coastal areas of barangays Taliptip and Bambang, it would perhaps be a smarter move not to proceed with the airport project. While it could significantly improve the country’s airport situation and subsequently boost the country’s tourism and economy, it would not be worth it to rob people of their honest livelihood, displace them, permanently damage the environment of the area, and risk the lives of hundreds of residents of Bulakan and nearby towns for a project built on a hazard-prone area. The uncertainty of natural disasters also puts the project itself and the investments at risk of being put to waste. If a deadly disaster such as the “The Big One” hits during a time when the airport is already operating, the risk of the airport getting damaged is high. Also, in the long run, there is a high chance that the airport would naturally become flooded because of the continuous sea level rise and land subsidence. Once operational, the project would not only harm the residents, it could also harm the airport staff and people inside the airport, and damage not only the buildings but also the aircrafts situated in the airport if a disaster happens. Building an infrastructure worth billions of investments, thousands of lives, and permanent damage to the environment should be able to overcompensate for its costs for a long period of time.
But with the projected risks by reputable scientists, it is highly likely that the benefits that the Aerotropolis would bring would only last for a short period of time and would not outweigh the harm that it could bring.
Both the private sector and the government should listen to experts from different concerned fields before pushing through with a project. There have been plenty of existing Fight or Flight | 80 studies discouraging big reclamation projects in Manila Bay such as SMC’s Aerotropolis.
Building this project does not concern only engineers, architects, and economists; it also concerns environmentalists, geologists, biologists, and many other specialized experts.
This project also greatly concerns the public, most especially those living in the direct impact zones. The experts from various fields are knowledgeable on the many technical considerations. The public are knowledgeable on a lot of things about the are from their experiences living there. The public are also the ones to be directly affected therefore they must be consulted on the matter. Project proponents and the government must listen to all these people for them to be able to form an informed planning and decision. Projects that would have great impact on the area and on the country must be meticulously studied and planned before implementing.
If the government genuinely wants to address the country’s airport, it should exhaust all possible alternatives and means to solve the problem, other than resorting to building an entirely new airport. The solution to the airport situation may not be building and developing an entirely new airport. The solution might be completely improving and upgrading the two airports in Greater Manila Area that the country currently has. There has been a proposal by the NAIA Consortium, a consortium of the country’s largest conglomerates, to upgrade NAIA by increasing its annual capacity to 65 million passengers and hourly takeoff and landing movements to 52, up by a third of its current movements
(Camus, 23 April 2019). There is also an ongoing project of expanding and upgrading
Clark International Airport that is expected to be operational by 2020. The expansion and upgrade would increase the annual capacity of the airport to 8 million passengers, doubling its current capacity (Amojelar, 01 January 2019). If expansion becomes impossible due to the limited space in the areas of NAIA and CIA, upgrading the airport and the personnel’s Fight or Flight | 81 efficiency must also be done. The airport personnel must be trained to troubleshoot problems immediately and efficiently so that the disruption in the operations would not be long and severe. They must be rigorously trained so that they may be able to easily address any issue they may face in the airport.
Finally, infrastructure projects such as airports should be an initiative of the government. Airports play a huge part in a country’s overall economy, tourism, and image.
By leaving an airport project in the hands of the private sector, it opens an opportunity for putting business interest first before the public’s interest. An airport developed by a company could help transport and store the company’s products more cheaply and efficiently. A company could also use the airport spaces for other businesses it owns. It could also impose fees at its discretion. Big companies could use the country’s immediate needs to push for projects that would cover up their main objective of furthering their self- interests and maximizing profit by assuming a messianic role. While the projects companies would like to materialize are beneficial in significant ways for the country, there should be no motive of profiteering off the people through these projects. It would be very opportunistic to take advantage of the public’s needs. Therefore, for projects for the public, the government must ensure that it is the one that funds and manages the project so it could regulate and ensure that the country and its people’s needs are addressed without having profit maximization as a goal.
Fight or Flight | 82
NO TO AEROTROPOLIS!
NO TO RECLAMATION!
Fight or Flight | 83
Bibliography
1-M jobs for 1-M displaced by Bulacan Aerotropolis ‘no deal’, says Kalikasan. (2018, September 2). Kalikasan. Retrieved from http://kalikasan.net/articles/1-m-jobs-for-1-m- displaced-by-bulacan-aerotropolis-no-deal-says-kalikasan/
Amojelar, D. (2019, January 1). Clark International Airport’s new terminal expected to open in 2020. manilastandard.net. Retrieved from http://manilastandard.net/business/biz- plus/284300/clark-international-airport-s-new-terminal-expected-to-open-in-2020.html
Angeles, F. (2018, May 15). 16 more reclamation projects are underway. Opinyon. Retrieved from http://www.opinyon.com.ph/index.php/3334-16-more-reclamation-projects-are- underway
Baltao, D. J. C., San Pedro, E., & Marcelino, R. R. (2015). A. State of the Mangroves in Bulacan. State of the Mangrove Summit, 16-18.
Balbin, M. (2018, November 6) Proposed Bulacan airport seen to triple tourist arrivals in PH. Philippine News Agency. Retrieved from http://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1053054
Barry, J. (1999). Environment and social theory. London: Routledge
Bridger, R. (2018, August 29). Bulacan Aerotropois threatens fishing livelihoods, Philippines. Environmental Justice Atlas. Retrieved from https://ejatlas.org/conflict/bulacan- aerotropolis
Bulacan Aerotropolis threatens fishing livelihoods. (2018, May 25). Global Anti-Aerotropolis Movement (GAAM). Retrieved from https://antiaero.org/tag/taliptip/
Campos, O. (2018, August 22). ICCP supports Bulacan airport project amid the congestion problems at Naia. manilastandard.net. Retrieved from http://www.manilastandard.net/business/transport-tourism/273658/iccp-supports-bulacan- airport-project-amid-the-congestion-problems-at-naia.html
Camus, M. (2019, April 23). Tycoons move to save plan for Naia expansion. inquirer.net. Retrieved from https://business.inquirer.net/269037/tycoons-move-to-save-plan-for-naia- expansion
Calsado, C. (2018, August 19). More harm than good: The case of Bulacan Aerotropolis. AGHAM. Retrieved from http://www.agham.org/prometheus-bound/more-harm-good- case-bulacan-aerotropolis
Cernea, M. (2004). The promise of the future: New territories for development anthropology In Y. Kikuchi (Ed.) Development anthropology: Beyond economics (p. vi). Quezon City: New Day Publishers.
Fight or Flight | 84
Charles, M. B., Barnes, P., Ryan, N., & Clayton, J. (2007). Airport futures: Towards a critique of the aerotropolis model. Futures, 39(9), 1009–1028. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2007.03.017 de Vera. B. (2018, January 29). Dominguez welcomes SMC Bulacan airport plan. Inquirer.net. Retrieved from https://business.inquirer.net/244948/breaking-business-san-miguel-corp- airport-naia-carlos-dominguez-iii-ernesto-pernia-ramon-ang-bulacan-aerotropolis-neda- investment-coordination-committee-icc-bulakan de Vera, B. (2018, September 10). DOF chief: SMC subsidiary ‘incapable’ to build P735.6B Bulacan ‘aerotropolis’. Inquirer.net Retrieved from https://business.inquirer.net/256979/dof-chief-smc-subsidiary-incapable-build-p735-6-b- bulacan-aerotropolis
Dulce, L. (2018, May 20). Save Taliptip. Bulatlat. Retrieved from http://bulatlat.com/main/2018/05/20/save-taliptip/
Gonzales, I. (2018, August 31). SMC plans MRT Loop to link Bulacan airport. Philstar Global. Retrieved from https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/08/31/1847264/smc-plans-mrt- loop-link-bulacan-airport
Kasarda, J. (2006). Airport cities and the aerotropolis. Unpublished paper. Retrieved from http://aerotropolis.com/airportcity/wp- content/uploads/2018/10/2006_07_AirportCitiesAndTheArotropolis-1.pdf
Kasarda, J. (2015, May 13). Welcome to Aerotropolis, the city of the future. Huffpost. Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-d-kasarda/aerotropolis-city- future_b_7269152.html
Kawabe, M., Kohno, H., Ishimaru, T. & Baba, O. (2013). A university-hosted program in pursuit of coastal sustainability: The case of Tokyo Bay. Sustainability 2013, 5, 3819-3838; doi:10.3390/su5093819
Lipietz, A. (1995). Green hopes: The future of political ecology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Maybury-Lewis, D. (2004). Development and the human rights of the minorities In Y. Kikuchi (Ed.) Development anthropology: Beyond economics (pp. 40-41). Quezon City: New Day Publishers.
Montenegro, L., Diola, A. & Remedio, E. (2005). The environmental costs of coastal reclamation in Metro Cebu, Philippines. Research report no. 2005-RR5.
Nygren, A., & Rikoon, S. (2008). Political Ecology Revisited: Integration of Politics and Ecology Does Matter. Society & Natural Resources, 21(9), 767–782. doi:10.1080/08941920801961057
Fight or Flight | 85
Offenheiser, R. C., & Holcombe, S. H. (2003). Challenges and Opportunities in Implementing a Rights-Based Approach to Development: An Oxfam America Perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32(2), 268–301. doi:10.1177/0899764003032002006
Padilla, A. (2018, March 2). Unsolicited projects for favored business interests to rise under Pres. Duterte? IBON. Retrieved from http://ibon.org/2018/03/unsolicited-projects-for-favored- business-interests-to-rise-under-pres-duterte/
Penz, P., Drydyk, J. & Bose, P. (2011). Displacement by development: Ethics, rights and responsibilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Perez, R., Amadore, L., & Feir, R. (1999). Climate change impacts and responses in the Philippines coastal sector. Climate Research, 12, 97–107. doi:10.3354/cr012097
Pinpin, J. (2018, October 16). Planned ‘Bulacan Aerotropolis’ to bring perpetual hunger – fisherfolk. Bulatlat. Retrieved from http://bulatlat.com/main/2018/10/16/planned- bulacan-aerotropolis-to-bring-perpetual-hunger-fisherfolk/
Rada, J. (2018, April 5). Neda endorses P735-billion Bulacan airport project. Manilastandard.net. Retrieved from http://www.manilastandard.net/business/transport- tourism/262449/neda-endorses-p735-billion-bulacan-airport-project.html
Reyes-Estrope, C. (2018, October 27). Pariahan, a community sent to extinction by climate. Inquirer.net. Retrieved from https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1047256/pariahan-a- community-sent-to-extinction-by-climate#ixzz5ZRat5DwW
Serrano, I. (1994). Pay now, not later: Essays on environment and development. Quezon City: Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement.
SMC Aerotropolis, other reclamation projects threaten Manila Bay with ecological collapse. (2018, June 11). Kalikasan. Retrieved from http://kalikasan.net/articles/smc-aerotropolis- other-reclamation-projects-threaten-manila-bay-with-ecological-collapse/
Tecson, Z. (2018, April 16). Bulacan town residents, fisherfolks oppose SMC’s proposed airport. Philippine News Agency. Retrieved from http://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1032138
What can we do with a rights-based approach to development? (1999) Overseas Development Institute. Briefing Paper 1999 (3) September.
1987 Philippine Constitution
Fisheries Code of 1998
Philippine Statistics Authority
Fight or Flight | 86
Appendix A
Work Schedule (Gantt Chart)
2018 2019
Au Activities g Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Literature Review
Planning and Proposal Drafting
Revision of Proposal
Selection of Study Site & Target Groups
Key Informant Interviews
Distribution of Questionnaires to Community Members
Utructured Interviews
Focus Group Discussion
Data Analysis
Thesis Drafting
Thesis Revision
Submission of Final Thesis
Budget
MOOE Amount (Php) Transportation Expenses 2,500 Communication Expenses 500 Food Expenses 1,000 Supplies & Printing 1,000 Token for Participants 1,000 Total 6,000
Fight or Flight | 87
Appendix B
DEVELOPMENT STUDIES PROGRAM Department of Social Sciences College of Arts and Sciences University of the Philippines Manila
ENDORSEMENT LETTER
This is to certify that MS. GABRIELLE LOUISE D. SERRANO is a student and currently enrolled at the Development Studies Program, University of the Philippines Manila for the 1st Semester of Academic Year 2018-2019. She is currently doing her undergraduate thesis entitled: “TO FLY OR TO SINK: A critical study on the effects of the planned Aerotropolis of San Miguel Corporation—a reclamation project—to the community of fisherfolk and the environment of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan”.
She will conduct interview, survey and document analysis on the said topic.
Rest assured that all the information that she acquired will only be used for her study.
Thank you.
REGINALD S. VALLEJOS, MPA Research Adviser Development Studies Program University of the Philippine Manila
Fight or Flight | 88
Appendix C
13 March 2019
______Municipal Planning and Development Officer Bulacan, Bulacan
Dear ______,
Greetings!
I am Gabrielle Louise D. Serrano, a graduating student of BA Development Studies from the University of the Philippines-Manila. I am currently conducting my undergraduate thesis entitled: “Fight or flight: A critical study on the effects of the planned Aerotropolis of San Miguel Corporation—a reclamation project—to the community of fisherfolk and the environment of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan”. In this light, I would like to request your good office to kindly allow me to gather pertinent information coming from existing data on the residents’ demographics, a copy of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, disclosable documents submitted to you for the airport project, and any other documents that you may find relevant to my study.
Finally, I would also like to request about an hour of your time either next week or the week after for a short interview regarding the airport project. Rest assured that the data gathered will be used solely for educational purposes.
I look forward to hearing a positive response from you.
Thank you very much.
Respectfully yours,
Gabrielle Louise D. Serrano 4th Year BA Development Studies University of the Philippines-Manila
Noted by:
REGINALD S. VALLEJOS, MPA Research Adviser Development Studies Program University of the Philippines-Manila Fight or Flight | 89
Appendix D
27 March 2019
Virgilio Edralin L. Licuan Provincial Environmental Management Unit - Bulacan Environmental Management Bureau DENR Region 3
Dear Mr. Licuan,
Greetings!
I am Gabrielle Louise D. Serrano, a graduating student of BA Development Studies from the University of the Philippines-Manila. I am currently conducting my undergraduate thesis entitled: “Fight or flight: A critical study on the effects of the planned Aerotropolis of San Miguel Corporation—a reclamation project—to the community of fisherfolk and the environment of Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan”. In this light, I would like to request your good office to kindly allow me to gather pertinent information coming from existing data on the environment of the municipality, disclosable documents submitted to you for the airport project, and any other documents that you may find relevant to my study.
Finally, I would also like to request about an hour of your time either next week or the week after for a short interview regarding the airport project. An online interview may also be an option should you prefer it for your convenience. Rest assured that the data gathered will be used solely for educational purposes.
I look forward to hearing a positive response from you.
Thank you very much.
Respectfully yours,
Gabrielle Louise D. Serrano 4th Year BA Development Studies University of the Philippines-Manila
Noted by:
REGINALD S. VALLEJOS, MPA Research Adviser Development Studies Program University of the Philippines-Manila Fight or Flight | 90
Appendix E
Fight or Flight | 91
Appendix F
Fight or Flight | 92
Appendix G
Fight or Flight | 93
Appendix H
Fight or Flight | 94
Appendix I Pangalan: ______Edad: ______Kasarian: Babae Lalaki Iba pa: ______
Edukasyon: Paaralan Huling natapos Elementarya Hayskul Kolehiyo Iba pa
Trabaho: Kung pangingisda, ano ang mga nahuhuli? ______Saan ibinebenta ang nahuhuli? ______May sariling bangka at mga kagamitan? Meron Wala Unang trabaho? Oo Hindi Kung oo, gaano katagal na sa trabaho? ______Kinikita sa bawat araw: ______Kung hindi, ano ang unang trabaho? ______Bakit lumipat ng trabaho? ______
Bahay: sarili at may titulo sarili pero walang titulo inuupahan nakikituloy naki- iskwat Bilang ng taon ng paninirahan sa barangay: ______Bilang ng nakatira sa bahay: ______
Mga nakatira sa bahay: Pangalan Edad Kasarian Natapos sa paaralan Trabaho
Fight or Flight | 95
Persepsyon: Sapat ang kinikita bawat araw Oo Hindi Tinuturing ang sarili bilang mahirap Oo Hindi Bakit oo/hindi? ______Mga pangarap para sa mga anak/nakababatang miyembro ng pamilya: ______Naniniwalang giginhawa ang buhay sa susunod na limang taon Oo Hindi Naniniwalang giginhawa ang buhay sa susunod na sampung taon Oo Hindi
Persepsyon sa planong airport: Alam ko ang tungkol sa pagpapatayo ng airport sa aming barangay Oo Hindi Kinonsulta kami para sa proyekto Oo Hindi Ano ang unang naramdaman noong nalaman ang tungkol sa proyekto? natuwa nalungkot nagalit nagulat nagtaka wala Iba pa ______Bakit? ______Sang-ayon ako sa proyekto Oo Hindi Bakit oo/hindi? ______Naniniwala akong mabuti ang maidudulot nito sa amin Oo Hindi Naniniwala akong mabuti ang maidudulot nito sa bansa Oo Hindi Pinangakuan kami ng mas maayos na buhay pag naitayo na ang proyekto Oo Hindi Kung oo, ano ang mga pangako? Pabahay Trabaho Edukasyon Pera Iba pa ______Alam ko ang mga posibleng epekto sa amin pag naitayo na ang airport Oo Hindi Kung oo, ano ang mga naiisip na epekto? ______Kung sakaling paaalisin sa tirahan, 1) saan plano lumipat? ______2) ano ang magiging hanap-buhay? ______3) may kasiguraduhan ba ang mga planong ito? Meron Wala
Fight or Flight | 96
Appendix J Emcee: Tawagin na po natin si Prof. Vito Hernandez, isang environmental archaeologist ng UP Diliman at member ng AGHAM Scientist for the People. Palakpakan po natin si Sir Vito. Vito: Maraming Salamat. Magandang umaga po sa ating lahat. Hindi po ako dapat ang magpepresenta today; dapat po ay ang aking kasamahan sa AGHAM, isang geoscientist na si Mr. Narod Eco. Makikita niyo sa presentasyon na magkasami sila ni Dr. Kelvin Rodolfo na siguro kilala ng karamihan na matagal nang gumagawa ng pag-aaral tungkol sa masasamang epekto ng reklamasyon. Kasama rito, kaming 1,2,3,4 ay matagal na ring gumagawa ng iba’t ibang pag-aaral partikular tungkol sa geohazards na kaakibat ng reklamasyon. So nakita na po natin ‘to kahapon at ipapakita ko po ulit para alam natin ang mga lugar na may mga proposed projects for reclamation. So bakit nga ba mapanganib? May apat na dahilan ang binigay ng dalawang scientist, si Mr. Eco at Professor Rodolfo, pero ang pagtutuonan natin ng pansin sa umagang ito ay itong dahil ilalagay natin ang maraming tao sa mapanganib na sitwasyon at itong mga epektong to ay karamihan ay mabagal ang pagdating---slow onset. Pero makikita rin natin mamaya habang ako ay nagpepresenta na may mga pangyayari na medyo abrupt, itong tinatawag nating calamitus disastrous. Yung paggising mo sa umaga, wala ka ng bahay. I-frame po natin. Ano po ba ang tinatawag nating disaster or mga sakuna? So ano ba yung risk? Yung posibilidad na tamaan ng mga disaster. Unang-una ano yung hazard? Pag sinabing hazard, mga pangyayaring nakakasama, nakakapinsala o mapanganib. Ang paglantad ng tao, indibidwal o komunidad sa pinsalang ito; kumbaga gaano ka ka-exposed at kung gaano ka may kawalan o pagkukulang sa proteksyon o kaya maging maingat sa harap ng panganib. Itong tatlong ‘to ang nagdidikta ng posibilidad or risk na ikaw ay tamaan ng isang sakuna. Sa umagang ito, magpo-focus ako sa tinatawag na geological hazards sa tabing-dagat ng Manila Bay, partikular dito yung earthquake-related liquefaction, enhanced ground-shaking nung lupa, tsunami, subsidence (pagbaba ng lupa), pagbabaha mula sa ilog at dagat. Kasama yan sa geologic hazards. Kahit nasa tabing-dagat ka, may panganib pa rin ng pagbabaha galing sa ilog; at storm surges, hindi siya geological hazard per se, pero isa siya sa tinatawag na meteorological hazard. Ang area ng Manila, mapapansin natin isa sa tinatawag na geologic control. Ito ang dahilan kung bakit name-maintain ang floodplain ng Manila ay dahil dito sa faultline na ito na kilala bilang west Marikina valley fault. Mahilig tayong manood ng TV at palaging nababalita yun “Get ready for the big one.” Malaking earthquake at yung the big one, ayon sa mga geologist, ay manggagaling sa paggalaw na major ng West Marikina Valley Fault na matagal nang hindi gumagalaw sp medyo overdue pero marami ring di nakakaalam na itong West Marikina Valley Fault ang siyang dahilan kung bakit tayo merong Greater Manila Area. Ito ay mula sa pag-aaral ni Dr. Carol Haraula, isang marine geologist. Pinapakita rito na 6,000 years ago or more na ang laguna lake at manila bay ay isang malaking katubigan. 6000 years ago wala pa ang Manila, wala pang kinalalagyan itong Bay Leaf Hotel. Kelan lang nagkaroon ng kalupaan ang Greater Manila Area? Ayon sa modelling ni Dr. Jaraula, sometime around 4000-3000 years ago nagkaroon ng lupa. By 3000 lalong mas dumami at until present, patuloy lang ang pag-erode o pagguho ng lupa na nagdedeposito sa mga ilog papuntang dagat. May erosion nadedeposito dito at nabubuo ang greater manila area. Greater manila area ay nabubuo sa pagguho ng lupa sa mahabang panahon at nadedeposito sa ilog, nadedeposito sa dagat eventually. Ito ay hindi lamang nangyayari sa manila area; ito ay galing sa pag-aaral ko kasama ng ibang mga geologist doon sa area ng Pampanga
Fight or Flight | 97 kung saan Nakita natin na kung dito sa Manila area ay tectonic o mga earthquake ang gumawa ng greater manila area, dito po sa Pampanga, nakita po naming na ang kalupaan ng Pampanga ay nabubuo sa mahabang panahon na pagsabog ng Mt. Pinatubo at erosion mula sa Sierra Madre. So makikita niyo na 4700 years ago, may isang malaking look o malaking bay na tinawag ng aking kasama na si leah sorria, isang geologist, na tinawag niyang paleo Pampanga Bay, old Pampanga Bay. Tapos sumasabog ang Mt. Pinatubo, nagdedeposito ng lahar mga lupa at nabubuo konti- konti sa alam na nating ngayong Manila area. So pagdeposito niyan, doon sa katubigan, soft siya, malammbot na lupa at through time nagko-compact yan, soft sediment. Unang hazard: liquefaction. Ang mga taong nakatira sa tabing dagat at tabing ilog, makikita niyo dito, ayon sa isang pag-aaral ng isang geology department sa US, kinuha natin online, ito ang river basin, ito ang coastal area, babasahin niyo sa baba: poorly consolidated, hindi siya tunay na matigas. Pag tinamaan yan ng lindol, anong mangyayari? Gagalaw dahil malambot ang lupa, katulad dito sa Lingayen Gulf, nakuha ko yan sa isang pag-aaral ng Fisheries. Nakita ko meron mga beach ridges na nadedeposito dahil sa mga tides at malambot ang lupa. So dito sa Lingayen Gulf, nandiyan ang Dagupan na kung kayo ay nasa tamang edad, matatandaan niyo ito. Yung liquefaction, yan ang hazard kung saan ang dagat o tabing-ilog, yan ang pwedeng mangyari. Nakalap na ang datos, ito ang liquefaction hazard exposure ng Manila. Yung red, high; moderate, yung purple; low, yung yellow. Nasaan nga ba tayo? So kugn magkaroon ng lindol right now, nandito tayo sa area na maaari tayong mapailalim sa lupa because of liquefaction. It is entirely possible with a 7.1 earthquake. Paano nangyayari yun? Marami kaming mga projects sa AGHAM sa mga community at sinasabi nilang parang nagiging tubig ang lupa kaya nga liquefaction. Bigyan natin ng mas konting linaw pa ito. Yung mga kalupaan po natin ay sediments, particles na di natin nakikita dahil sobrang microscopic. Pero yan kungyari clay, burak, silt, pag naglalakad tayo sa Manila kahit di natin nakikita sa hangin, pero at the end of the day pag-uwi niyo kuha kayo ng tissue paper basain niyo konti, ganyanin niyo, yun ang clay at silt, sobrang pino. Siyempre dito po sa tabing-dagat, ang sediments diyan, buhangin at siya ay magkakadikit dahil sa friction, natural molecular bonds. Pag nagkaroon ng earthquake, mayayanig yan, gagalaw yan at doon between sa puwang niya or pores, may tubig so pag nagkaroon ng mas malaking puwang yan, magkakaroon ng mas malaking paggagalaw ng tubig at alam naman natin na yung mga sedimentong mas mabigat ay babagsak, yung mas malambot o mas pino, andun sa taas kaya nagkakaroon ng liquefaction. Ngayon, dumako naman tayo sa tsunami. Kasi malambot ang lupa, ano ba naman yung tsunami. Makikita natin rito, ito ang Manila Bay, nandiyan yung West Marikina Valley Fault pero may dalawang malalaking fault lines or trenches ang Pilipinas: yung isa ay yung Manila trench, yung isa ay Marianas trench o Philippine trench. Ibig sabihin, pag gumalaw yan, posible naman gumalaw talaga, ito ay mapapailalim, gagalaw yung tinatawag na crust. Kung ito yung Manila area na malambot ang lupa, anong mangyayari? Magsa-slide siya at pag nag-slide siya, magkakaroon ng tsunami. Ito ang datos mula sa Phivolcs. If I’m not mistaken, ang nagsulat pa nga nitong news brief na to ay mismong undersecretary si Dr. Solidum. Sabi nga niya, in 1994 may malaking tsunami sa Mindoro kung saan may 38 taong namatay o nalunod. Pero ang pinakamalaking nasa kasaysayan natin ay nangyari noong 1976 sa Mindanao kung saan may 8,000 tao ang namatay dahil sa tsunami. Gusto kong ipakita sa inyo ulit ito. Saan dito ang pinakatatamaan ng tsunami? Ito yung datos mula sa iba’t ibang government agencies, DOST, Project Noah, makikita natin mukhang ang pinakamalalaking tsunami ay tatami diyan sa Malabon, Navotas, Obando, Taliptip, yun ang datos. Kahapon noon nag-uusap kami ng mga tiga- Taliptip, meron na kasing EIA na ginawa. Yung EIA ng land developer na Silvertides,
Fight or Flight | 98 magtatambak daw sila ng mga isang metro doon sa mga lupang palaisdaan, tirahan, and so on so forth. Yung isang metro, mukhang hindi yata uubra yan pag tinamaan ng tsunami yan. Pagbaba ng lupa/land subsidence. Ito ay kasalukuyang inaaral ni Mr. Narod Eco bilang pagtatapos ng kanyang masterado. Isa siyang remote-sensing specialist. Makikita po natin, ayon sa kanyang satellite data ang pinakamatinding pagbaba ng lupa, 4 centimeters per year ang pagbaba, dito sa area ng Malabon, Navotas, doon ulit. Mukhang alam na natin ang pinaka- vulnerable na mga area. Alam nating dito rin ang pinakamalalaking reclamation projects na pinopropose. Pag tinanggal naman natin yung maliliit dun, magpapasok tayo ng mixed-use, pasok tayo ng mga may kakayahang bumili ng mixed-use housing, pwede lumipad sa airport at kung ano-ano, eh di ayos, inilalagay mo naman yung mga mayayaman sa pinsala. Kaya naman siguro nila. Mas lower siguro yung risk nila, hindi ba yun naman ang social science data. Anyway, kung wala tayo high-tech satellite imagery, ang unang nag-aral tungkol sa land subsidence, ang unang mga nag-report dito sa Pilipinas ay si Rodolfo at Serinan. So si Dr. Fernando Serinan ay kasalukuyang director ng Marine Science Institute. Itong data na ito ay groundbreaking dito sa Southeast Asia na sila ang unang nagsabi niyan. Nagsimula sila, simple lang. Diba yung mga tiga-coastal areas, mga tiga-tabing-dagat, diba mayroon kayong mga deep well? Nakikita niyo diba kada taon bumababa. Ang tao rin mismo ang may kagagawan ng ng pagbaha through extraction ng ground water, ibig sabihin, kung saan may tubig, pag naglagay na tayo ng deep well diyan at kinuha natin yung tubig, anong mangyayari? Magko-compact siya, bababa siya. Hindi ko naman sinasabing kayo ang masasama. Tanong: saan sa tingin niyo dito binibigyan ng tamang water service? Umaabot ba diyan ang Manila Water? Umaabot ba diyan ang Bulacan Water? Umaabot ba diyan ang mga concessionaire? Wala di’ba? Kasi pag nasa tabing-dagat ka, sasabihin sayo “Hindi namin kayo mabibigyan ng serbisyo. Mag-deep well kayo.” So nandiyan yung bulnerabilidad ninyo, so para maiwasan natin yan, mag-provide ng water supply. Hindi madaling humupa ang pagbaha sa mga coastal area dahil sa mga fishponds. Pag nagdagdag pa tayo ng harang sa mga tubig, grabe ang pagbabaha. Ito ay datos mula sa looban, sa Sta. Ana. Ito ay noong 18-kopong-kopong. Pag ikaw ay nasa kapatagan, tabing-ilog, umaapaw talaga ang tubig sa ilog tapos huhupa yan. By 19-kopong-kopong, makikita niyo na nag-iba na. Yung tubig galing sa Pedro Gil ay mas mataas, ibig sabihin yung tubig galing sa daan papuntang ilog. By mid-20th century, grabe na. Ibig sabihin nanggagaling na sa daan ang pagbabaha. Hindi yan natural na pagbaha galing ilog o pag-apaw ng ilog. And then, kung hindi siguro ito tinambakan para sa construction ng isang condominium sa dating Jesuit house, makikita natin nag rabe talaga ang pagbabaha in the last few decades. Gumawa ako ng pagbabasa o isang review of related literature. Nakita ko tong Philippine Planning Journal kung saan sa Chapter 2 pinag-uusapan ang City Beautiful Plan ni Daniel Burnham noon para sa city of Manila. Meron pang isang pag-aaral dito, pwede niyo i-search, Volume I, number 1, October 1969. Anong sinabi? Salaysay ng mga plano ni Burnham at mga nagawa mula 1094 hanggang 1910. The river and the oceans: proposals affecting these assets and recreational objectives included the extension of the bay boulevard to Cavite City, so yung mga tiga-Cavite alam niyo yung kasaysayan ninyo kung bakit kayo binabaha; the construction of shaded drives on the banks of Pasig River; the waterfront reclamation for the New Luneta. Sa mga susunod na paragraph, pagkatapos ng 60 taon noong dekada 70 sa programang pangdevelopment ni Marcos, pati estero tinabunan. At yan ang dahilan at nakikita mismo sa mga hukay. Ebidensiyang-ebidensiya, klarong-klaro, masama at mapaminsala ang reklamasyon. Don’t forget, may climate change pa tayo. Storm surge, recent lang po yan, Manila Bay po yan. So makikita niyo po yang storm surges, very high, mas mataas pa sa tao. At ito yung mungkahe ng Fight or Flight | 99 propersor: “Commercial and residential areas in the proposed reclamation sites will mean more people in high harm’s way.” Whether mangingisda yan, informal settler, o mayaman, sobrang mapaminsala yan. Ukol sa siyensiya, marami pa tayong hindi alam kaya wag tayo magpadalos- dalos, masyadong sigurado sa mga ginagawa natin. Pag-aralan nating mabuti.
Fight or Flight | 100
Appendix K Ansie San Gabriel Akap Ka Manila Bay (Alyansa para sa pagtatanggol ng kabuhayan, paninirahan at kalikasan sa Manila Bay) – Bulacan Ito pong AKAP KA ay isa pong malapad na alyansa ng mga mangingisda, taong-simbahan, mga nasa academe, ilang mga manananggol na sumasaklaw sa Pampanga, Bulacan, at Bataan. Nandito po ako para magbahagi tungkol sa Aerotropolis na plano po nilang ipatupad na proyekto bago po matapos ang taong ito. So ano po ba ang Aerotropolis? Hindi rin po namin ito nalaman not until pumutok ito sa mga balita na meron nga pong isasagawang airport dito sa bahagi ng Bulakan, Bulacan. Hindi lang po siya basta airport, ang tawag po sa kanya ay Aerotropolis. Sa pandaigdigang saklaw, ang aerotropolis daw po ay nagsisilbi para sa interes ng malalaking mga negosyante kung saan lahat ng transaksyon ng kanilang negosyo ay doon gagawin. Nandoon ang airport, tulad ng sa ibang bansa, doon niya gagawin lahat ng konperensya, nandoon ang kanyang negosyo, commercial complex, industrial complex, nandoon ang kanyang libangan, ang kanyang tirahan, mayroon siyang residential area at meron din po siyang sea port, may daungan din po siya ng barko. So ito pong aerotropolis ay isang unsolicited proposal o panukalang suhestiyon sa pamahalaan na bahagi ng metropolitan subregion. Yun pong sinasabi pong airport city, yun pong pinangalan ni Ramon Ang na siya pong may-ari ng San Miguel Corporation, na ito raw pong aerotropolis sa Bulacan ay magiging pinakamalaki kung hindi man sa buong Asya ay sa buong daigdig. Kung ang pinakamalaki daw po sa ngayon sa passenger capacity na airport ay sa Atlanta sa US na kaya pong mag-accommodate ng 19 million passengers per year. Ang pangarap po ni Ramon Ang ay kaya po nitong mag-accommodate ng 100-200 million passengers a year. Ito po ay magkakaroon ng apat na runways kontra sa existing na dalawa. So magkano po ang halagang nilalaan dito? 735 billion pesos. Nasasaklaw po sa 2500 hectares. Of the 2500 po sa aerotropolis, ang airport area would cover 1168 hectares. Ano po ang nandiyan? Nandiyan po ang komunidad. Sa Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan alone, mayroon po diyang 7 coastal sitios. May tao po diyan. Bakit ko po binibigyan diin na may tao diyan? Batay po sa presentation ng San Miguel, sinasabi po nila na yan po ay purely palaisdaan; na ang nabili nila ay palaisdaan lang. Sa tinalakay po nilang mapa, wala pong komunidad sa kanila pong presentation. Ibig sabihin, wala pong tao diyan. Yun po ang kanilang pananaw. Ano po ang aerotropolis? Ito po ay bahagi ng Manila Bay Coastal Strategies. Hindi po siya nag-iisa; parte po siya ng isang malawakang plano ng Manila Bay development, kasama sa Build Build Build program at parte ng Ambisyon 2040 ng kagalang- galang na presidente. Skema po siya ng public-private partnership at parte ng build-operate- transfer operate-manage scheme. Liban po sa aerotropolis, meron pa pong Manila Bay Integrated Flood Control, Coastal Defense and Expressway Project na magkokonekta mula Manila hanggang Bataan. Sabi po ng San Miguel na kung ang biyahe mula Manila to Bataan ay may 4 hanggang 5 oras, pag natuloy po ang coastal highway, it would take you only 30 minutes. Actually nabili na po ng San Miguel to date ay mahigit 3000 ektarya na po. Kung bakit po ang Akap Ka ay sakop mula Bataan hanggang Bulacan dahil hindi lamang po sa Bulacan nagaganap ang malawakang bilihan ng pangisdaan. Sa Mariveles, Bataan po ay meron na ring 1000 ektaryang pag-aari ng San Miguel. Mamaya po ay malalaman natin ang magiging epekto ng aerotropolis. Makikita po natin sa larawan ay isa lamang sa daan-daang punong naputol na noong April 2018 courtesy of San Miguel Corporation. Ayan po ay isang klase ng bakawan: api-api po ang local na katawagan. Ito po ay isang type ng Indian mangrove. Ayan po ang tanging shield ng mga sitio laban sa storm surge at tidal waves. By the way ang pinakamalaking asinan po sa Bulacan ay nasa Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan at doon po itatayo yung aerotropolis. Bakit po Taliptip? Sa buong coastal po ng
Fight or Flight | 101
Bulakan, ang pinakamataas na bahagi ay Taliptip. So kaya po doon sila dahil hindi siya nilulubog kaya yun po ang ire-reclaim nilang area para sa aerotropolis. So you could just imagine pag tinambakan mo yung mataas na bahagi, anong mangyayari sa mas mababang bahagi? Lulubog po sila. Kung dati nang bahain, lalo na. Sabi nga po ng mga tao, hindi namin kayang languyin yung posibleng maging epekto po nito. Ano po ang epekto niyang sa kabuhayan, paninirahan at kalikasan? Meron pong 22 tipo ng mangroves at sakop po ito ng key biodiversity areas. In fact meron po siyang produksyon na 41 million tons sa buong fish production ng Bulacan. Ito pong nakikita niyo sa picture ay ilan lamang sa pang-araw-araw na huli ng mga mangangapa. And yet sabi po ng San Miguel wala pong economic life diyan. Meron din po diyang proyekto ng gobyerno na 20 ektaryang mangrove eco park diyan po sa mismong site kung saan po itatayo ang aerotropolis. So eto po yung isang sample noong palaisdaan na sabi nilang sakop nila. Totoong kwestyon ng mga mangingisda, “Okay, tanggap po namin na pribadong pag-aari na po itong palaisdaan, nabili na po ng San Miguel.” Ang tanong nila, “Paano po yung ilog at sapa, kasama rin po ba sa nabili? Kasali po ba yun?” Kasi sa pagitan po ng mga palaisdaan, ilog at sapa po yan. For the record, yung mga pinutol po nilang mangroves ay nasa sapa, nasa ilog. Wala po yang permit. Nasa gilid po kasi ng mga palaisdaan ay mga mangroves. So nung pinutol nila yun, isa pong sitio, sitio Bulacan po ang tawag, nung nakita pong pumutol ng mga bakawan, pumunta siya sa munisipyo kasi bantay-dagat siya. “Pinuputol po yung mga bakawan namin.” “May basbas po ni mayor yan.” Hindi siya naniniwala. Tawag siya sa PENRO. [unclear sentence]. So yun po ang ginawa ng local government natin nung nagkaroon ng pagpuputol sa atin ng mangroves. Anyway, nasa proseso na po ito ng swiss challenge. Lumabas po ang approval ng swiss challenge noong December 24, 2018. Batay sa modalities ng PPP, in 3 months time, after ma-approve ng swiss challenge, dapat merong mag-challenge. Today is March 26. March 24, nag-lapse na po ang 3 months, wala pong nag-submit. In effect, pwede na pong ibigay ng gobyerno ang final notice of award sa San Miguel Corporation. Tanong ng mga tao bakit di namin alam, bakit walang public consultation? Sabi nila, that will come after. So yun pong Silvertides ay isa pong kompanya na cinommission, siya raw po ang sub-contractor para magpatawag ng public hearing, magsagawa ng environmental impact assessment sa area, at ang kanila pong project ay may view backfilling. Pero ang kanilang pinakita na mapa ay exactly the same location ng aerotropolis. Hindi pa po nila sinabing reclamation area, hindi pa sinabing aerotropolis. Kita po natin yung pula, ito po yung direct impact areas. Sa kanila pong illustration, pinakita nila yung tsunami hazard map, yung mga possible pong matamaan ng storm surge, lahat po yan pula. Ibig sabihin po ay lahat sila nailagay sa bulnerableng kalagayan. Just the same, ang sabi nila ay walang tao diyan. [discussion ng presentation ng Silvertides] So mula sa kasalukuyang lebel niya, papatungan po siyang 3 metro, 2772 hectares. Ang tanong, saan niyo kukunin ang lupang panambak? [39:00 next speaker]
Fight or Flight | 102
Appendix L Maganda umaga po sa inyo. Kami po yung Samahan ng SMBO, mangingisda ng Obando at Bulakan po. Ipe-present po naming ngayon ang amin pong EIA po laban sa EIA din po ng Silvertides po na subcontractor ng San Miguel Corporation. Ito po yung mapping po naming sa Bulakan na ito po yung pinakamalaking area po na pinaka-direct pong tatambakan sa pino- propose nilang proyekto ng Aerotropolis. Dito po ang aming lugar at ito naman po yung area ng Bulakan na mga paligid po na nasasakupan ng Taliptip na sinasabi po ng San Miguel Corporation na ito raw po ang pinakatarget nilang tatayuan ng kanilang proyekto. Dahil po dun, sa kanila pong EIA, hindi po naming masyadong naintindihan yun dahil po sa maraming pamayanang mangingisda ang hindi rin po nakapag-aral at hindi po nila naintindihan yung nakasulat sa kanilang EIA bukod po kasi sa maingay ang public hearing sa Bulakan evacuation center po doon po sa malapit sa munisipyo. Siguro po, ang pagkakaintindi po ng mga tao ay kaunlaran po para sa lahat. Pero hindi po nila naunawaan ito, ang bawat detalye po ng pino-propose po ng Silvertides po dahil ito po ay English. Pagdating po sa mga pamayanan po sa mga mangingisda, ang tanong po namin, “Naintindihan niyo ba?” kasi marami po kaming nandun. Sabi po naming, “Hindi namin naintindihan. Ano ba yun? Yan na nga po yung pino-propose ng Silvertides. Bakit po kamo?” Ito po yung area ng pino-propose ng Aerotropolis: 968 hectares hanggang 2000 hectares ang pino-propose nilang area ng coastal ng Bulakan. Tatayuan po ito ng airport at iba pang mga project. Dahil po dun, ayon po sa balita, ang Bulacan Airport po ay isa po sa 7 projects na inapruba ng NEDA. Ito po yung inattedan naming hinihiling naming paglilinaw sa aming mayor. Nandito po kami sa Barcie Hotel sa Malolos, Bulacan at inaasahan po naming mangingisda ng Bulakan na darating po ang aming butihing mayor para po linawin sa amin ano po ang magiging tindig niya bilang mayor ng Bulakan at ano po ang paninindigan niya sa kanyang nasasakupang mamamayang mangingisda na mawawalan ng hanapbuhay. Dahil po doon, naghintay po kami mula alas-nuwebe hanggang ala-una wala pong mayor na dumating. Ito naman po, lumapit-lapit na po kami baka sakali dahil ito po ay sa Bulakan, ito po ang Catholic church ng Bulakan; ilang hakbang lang po makakarating ang mayor at malaki po ang chance na makausap po namin ang mayor nang personal. Sa awa naman po ng Diyos, may pinadala po sila engineer daw po at secretary ng mayor. Wala raw po si mayor, umattend daw po ng binyag. Yun po ang paalam sa amin at darating daw po alas-tres. Hinintay po namin hanggang sa nakapaglugaw na po kaming lahat; wala pong mayor ang dumating. Marami pa po kaming inattendan na forum. Ganoon po kami kapursigido upang mahingan din po namin ng panindigan ang aming mayor para po hindi naman sila magmukhang masama para po sa mamamayan ng Bulakan. Napag-aralan na po ng komunidad ang Aerotropolis at tungkol sa mga epekto nito. Ito po ay napag-aralan po namin ito sa Salambao na nasasakupan po ito ng Obando. Ang napag-aralan po namin ay environmental at social impact assessment at epekto ng proyekto. Ano-ano po ang magiging epekto ng proyekto? May pagbaha at fish kill po. Marami po ang magiging epekto ng kanilang proyekto. Pagkatapos po ng sa Obando, pinag-aralan din po namin sa lugar namin sa Taliptip kasama ang mga scientist ng UP. Ayon po sa aming napag-aralan, kaugnay po sa lakas, takot at pangamba bilang magiging resulta sa kanilang proyekto. Pagkatapos po namin diyan, ito po gumawa po kami ng implementasyon kung ano po ang paninindigang politika dahil kami pong lahat ay related sa politika dahil lahat po kami ay bumoboto. Dahil lahat ay bumoboto, dapat lahat ay binibigyan ng karapatan at hinihingan ng pananaw at tagapagsalita kung ito bang proyektong ito ay nakabubuti ba sa aming mga mamamayan o para lang sa iba na nangangailangan ng kanilang pagkaunlad. Dahil po rito, yung mga tao pong nangingisda sa amin, gumawa po sila ng report po ng kita nila sa hanapbuhay. Kumikita po sila ng 7000 pesos a week. Less na po yung mga pangkain namin sa araw-araw dahil po doon po, hindi na po kami bumibili ng ulam maliban na lang po kung kami ay Fight or Flight | 103 nasasabik sa karne saka po kami bumibili pero ang mga seafoods po, hindi na po. Marami po ang magpapatunay diyan dahil marami na pong mga ahensiya ang nakapunta sa amin at pinapakain po namin ng libreng alimango at alimasag. Iniimbitahan po namin kayo para kayo ay manindigan na ang lugar po ng Bulakan ay sagana sa seafoods. Ito na po yung pag-aaral naming EIA konta po sa Silvertides. Gusto po namin pag gagagawa kami ng kontra EIA, yung pasok po sa mamamayan ng nasasakupan ng Manila Bay, kung ano po ang magiging epekto nito. Iniimbitahan po ang mga mangingisda na hindi lang basta tumango-tango kung dapat ba nila tanggapin ang proyekto o hindi. Hindi naman po namin naintindihan yung public hearing dahil mababa lang po ang napag- aralan namin kaya sabi po namin kila Sir Vito kung pwede i-translate sa Tagalog. Dahil sa pag- translate sa Tagalog, naintindihan na naming mga mamamayan ng Bulakan kung gaano kalaking pinsala ang tatanawin naming mamamayan at sa mga susunod pang henerasyon kung ito pong proyekto ay matutuloy. Sana po maisip nila ang magiging---opo, kaunlaran po sa taong mamamayan, sa buong Pilipinas. Marami po ang nagsabi na uunlad po ang Bulakan, magkakaroon ng eroplano, gaganda ang Bulakan magiging international. “Gaganda ang buhay niyo, hindi na kayo mangingisda. Hindi na masusunog ang balat niyo sa pangingisda at ang magiging skill niyo ay magiging construction boy kayo.” Ano po ba ang magiging skill ng taong 60 years old? Kaya pa po bang tanggapin yan sa proyekto bilang tagahalo ng semento? Hindi na po sila tatanggapin. Alam niyo po kung bakit? Dahil kulang na po ang kakayahan niyo; lugi sila sa ibinabayad sa inyo. Kaya ang sabi po namin sa mga matanda dahil marami na po ang matanda doon, sabi po naming “Ay wala na pala kayong skill. Magtinda na lang kayo ng balut, pampalakas sa mga nagtatrabaho.” Pero bakit eh kumikita kami ng isang libo isang araw nangangapa kami. Bakit kami magtitinda ng balut? Alam niyo po itong bata na to? 9 years old lang po yan. Ang nahuhuli niya pong alimango pag lumusong po yan sa dagat, nakakahuli sila ng dalawa, tatlong kilo. Magkano po ang halaga ng alimango? Pinakamababa po 400. Ang pinaka- good na size ng alimango, 1000 mahigit. Kaya po nakakabili sila ng cellphone na ayon sa gusto nila. Pero pag natuloy po ang pagtayo ng proyekto ng Silvertides, yang mga bata po na yan, maging sakit po ng ulo ng gobyerno. Dadaan po kayo, hablutin po wallet niyo. Aakyat po sa jeep i-snatchin po cellphone niyo kasi nasanay po sila na malaki ang kita nila. Hindi po sila sanay na walang kita. Patuloy po kaming gagawa ng EIA na malinaw at makatotohanan po sa sambayanan upang ito ay maunawaan bago po ito pag-usapan at hihingin po dapat ang aming permiso kung payag ba kami sa proyekto nila.
Fight or Flight | 104
Appendix M
PENRO:…may mga titulo pala so ang inadvise ng…ng ano ng EMB is hindi siya considered as critical project kasi nga land development lang kaya online lang ang submission. Kaya the best that we can, hindi naman ako ang ano, sa EMB kasi sila ang nagpa-process ng sa ECC G: Wala pa po dito mismo sa…? P: Wala pa dito kasi iniimbitahan lang kami kasi stakeholders kami so iniimbita yung mga concerned na… So yun nga, land development. Yung pino-propose nila, hindi naman airport dahil sabi ng EMB, hindi kami mag-a-approve ng ECC kung may ma-propose na sila. Kung land development lang, land development lang. G: So hindi pa po sinabi? P: Wala pa. Hanggang 2022 yun G: Ah hanggang 2022 pa po P: Oo, hanggang 2022 so ayun kaya dahil nga yung area nabili nila. Kaya yung study mo, hindi naka-ano kasi hindi na airport. Hindi natin alam kung airport pa yung ipo-propose nila kasi land development lang yun inano G: Pero yung specifics po ng land development, wala po pong sinasabi kung anong klaseng development? P: Ano bale dumaan naman siya ng lahat ng study kasi. Ang sabi ng mines, dahil yang area na yan ay malapit sa dagat, marami ring iko-consider in terms of vulnerability. Kailangan ang project mo may projection na 10 years, 20 years. Marami kang konsiderasyon. Una yung sa dahil malapit siya sa dagat, maaaring magkaroon ng tsunami o storm surge. Regarding flood, lahat yun kino-consider. Tapos yung mga study sa previous ano, yun ang sina-suggest namin in terms of vulnerability assessment, marami siyang dapat i-consider dahil sa vulnerability. Nandun pa lang sila sa land development, yun pa lang na-propose nila. Yun lang ang inihain nila. Kasi sabi ng EMB, hindi naman daw nila agad i-a-approve yun; dapat pa-isa-isa depende dun sa kanilang ibibigay. So hindi yun yung sinasabing airport; wala pa. G: Bale ano pa lang po yun hearsays pa lang po P: Kasi nung una, titingnan nila kung gagawing airport tapos noong marami na ang nagtatanong kung talaga bang airport, sa sunod naman nilang plan out, hindi na airport. Dapat pag magpa-plan kayo lahat kino-consider. G: Opo kasi marami pong affected doon sa area P: Yes, tapos yung kung magtatambak tapos magho-hole ng ano. Pag tinanong kung saan manggagaling yung itatambak: sa Pampanga, yung mga binabahang lugar doon. Pero mapapaganda yung ano dahil doon ilalagay sa development. So talagang naka-plan out in terms of engineering siguro. Kasi kung gagastusan mo, so dapat yung plano mo hindi lang i-consider 10-20 years kasi ang area mo, nung prinesent, yung area daw dati is agricultural. Through time, naging fishpond. Tapos ngayon parang ibabalik mo sa dati kaya hindi siya reclamation, sabing ganun. Ibabalik mo lang yung dating ano niya. Kaya sinasabing dapat marami kang konsiderasyon kasi pagdating ng araw, ano yung mangyayari sa area? Dapat yung mga study sa ibang lugar, i-consider nila. Mga ganun yung pinag-usapan. G: Sabagay po baka mamaya magtayo sila tapos ma-wash out din ng storm surge P: Oo, so pag-aralan mo tapos ide-develop muna. Tapos sabi nung during discussion, saka na lang later on yung kung ano talaga ang plan of development pero ngayon, ito muna yung pwedeng i- approve. So di na siya kino-consider as critical project. Kaya parang di naka-ano yung study mo. G: Kasi di pa po siya dinadala doon sa pag gagawing airport P: 2022 siguro retired na ako nun. Ang projection nila, hanggang 2022. G: Pero nakapag-submit na po sila ng requirements sa EMB?
Fight or Flight | 105
P: Oo, nag-submit na sila. Kaya kung gusto mo makakuha, sa EMB. Mas mabuti nang dumaan sa ano. Kaya dahil hindi na critical, pa-online pero dineliberate din naman lahat. Kasi marami rin naman sa study like sa earthquake, sa lahat ng consideration. G: Inaral naman po nila? P: Oo, inaral naman. Kaya lang sa ngayon hindi mo masabi kung ano talagang plano diyan. G: Kasi wala pa po silang binibigay na final plan P: Oo, wala pa. G: So di na po aabot doon sa mga isla isla yung project nila? P: Yun lang nabili nila lalo na yung status noon ngayon is mga fishpond. Tapos isa sa mga suggestion naming is magtanim sila ng mangrove. Magtanim para proteksyon din sana nila dapat magtanim silang mangroves doon. G: Para po may natural protection sila P: Para may proteksyon kasi kung halimbawa magkaroon ng nature na ano, yun naman yung sinuggest namin na dapat yung area taniman kahit sa paligid para sa protection ng kanilang gagawin na development. Kinonsider naman nila yun. Para sa kanila din naman yun eh. G: Opo, sayang naman po yung project nila. P: Yun yung mga suggestion. Ang maraming ano yung mines, kasi sila yung nag-ano sa vulnerability. In terms of vulnerability, yung area compared sa other areas, ano kasi dahil malapit sa dagat. Maraming iko-consider everything: yung flood. Tapos ang in-advise din na dapat ang kukuning lupa ay yung hindi siya mag-ano ng dust. Dapat may takip, yung maayos yung holing nila. Isa yun sa mga pinalagay na dapat konsiderasyon na dapat gawin nila. G: Pwede po kaya ako makahingi ng yung data po kahit sa environment po nung lugar, sa biodiversity po nung lugar, kung anong species po meron? P: Isa din yung sinabi ko sa ano, dapat kako sa ano ninyo, i-consider in terms of biodiversity, iyon bang lugar meron bang baka may tatamaan sa ano, may species bang andun. Yun yung sinabi ko na dapat tingnan niyo. Tapos they assess. G: Opo, kasi parang wala pong masyadong lumalabas tungkol po sa ganun eh. P: Suggestion namin yun ng PENRO pero ang sabi nga sa amin, iyong lugar ay dati nga raw ano yun agricultural naging palaisdaan. Kaya siguro noong naging palaisdaan, para siguro proteksiyon na rin, nagtanim ng mangrove species yung mga may-ari. So yun ang sina-suggest namin dapat kung iaayos siya, magtatanim pa rin sila ng mangroves for the protection so kailangan yun. Mahirap kasi magpalabas ng mga ganyan-ganyan lalo na yung media sine- sensationalize nila. G: Oo nga po, doon ko po nalaman yung tungkol doon tapos parang lahat din po iyon ang alam nila. P: Ngayon, nagkaroon ng public hearing tapos ayan yung mga katanungan, hindi naman nila sinasagot. Ang sinasagot lang nila, for development yung area dahil nabili nila yung area, kailangan i-develop. G: Wala pa po talagang dini-disclose… P: So far, wala pa talaga kasi isang konsiderasyon, ang laki talaga ng gagastusin nila. G: Opo, malaking project po ‘yon kung sakali. P: Oo, malaki kasi kung matuloy ‘yan, 2000 hectares eh. Di’ba ang laki? Pero by that time siguro retired na ako. G: Opo, matagal po ‘yon. P: Oo. G: Tapos kung hanggang ngayon wala pa pong mga plano--- P: Wala, walang maayos na plano. -G: --matagal pa po talaga lalo. P: Wala, kasi yung pina-plan nilang development hanggang 2022 pa so after pa ng 2022 saka mo masasabi kung ano talaga plano. Hindi nga ako naka-attend nung sa public consultation pero lahat ng output kinonsider din nila ‘yun, tiningnan din nila. Lahat ng mga comments, tiningnan at
Fight or Flight | 106 kinonsider nila. ‘Yong mga madi-displace na mga tao, maaari silang matulungan, kino-consider nila ‘yun. G: Sino-sino po ‘yung mga kasama noong public consultation? P: Public talaga. G: Nag-consult po sila sa mga residents? P: Oo, nagpaano talaga sila sa public, may hearing talaga bago nag-ano. ‘Yung una siguro may mga katanungan kung airport pero di naman nila sinagot basta ang sabi for development. Tinatanong ko ano feedback, “Wala naman pong sagot,” sabi nila. Kino-consider lang nila lahat. G: Baka po hindi pa po nila gusto gawing airport kung hindi pa nila sure na magiging maayos po. P: Ang daming study na inaano nila… G: Parang i-discourage po… P: Oo, in terms doon sa earthquake, baka meron diyang maano na faultline. ‘Yung mga ganoon. Maraming konsiderasyon kaya siguro medyo ano sila na hindi kaagad-agad. Iyon nga ang suggestion ng Mines na dapat pag magpa-plan sila, dapat ang planning, 10-20 years kasi ngayon, ganito na ‘yong area. Eh paano kapag 10-20 years? Sayang naman ‘yong investment G: Bilyon-bilyon pa naman po ‘yon. P: Oo, bilyon-bilyon ang gagastusin. Tapos inaano rin sila na i-consider ‘yong sa ibang countries na ganiyan din ang sitwasyon. So ‘yon lang ang masasabi ko sa’yo. Wala naman akong maibibigay sa’yo na input kung hindi iyan. G: Opo, kasi galing din po ako sa CENRO tapos sa level daw po nila, wala pang nakakarating kaya parang pataas po nang pataas ‘yong pinupuntahan. P: Ganoon nga ‘yong napag-usapan, so pinag-a-apply pa lang sila ng ECC. Dahil nga development medyo hindi ganon ka-critical ang project kasi ‘yon lang muna. G: Medyo mas maluwag pa po kapag land development pa lang. P: Kasi anytime na may mangyari, land development pa lang. Mahirap kasi pagka-airport. G: Opo, butas po ng karayom dadaanan nila. P: Ganoon nga. G: Sige po, thank you po, ma’am.
Fight or Flight | 107
Appendix N Republic of the Philippines DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES PROVINCIAL ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE Citta Di Oro Subdivision, Brgy. Sta. Rita, Guiguinto, Bulacan Tel. No.: (044) 794-7090; Email Address: [email protected]
November 7, 2017
MEMORANDUM
FOR : THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR DENR - REGION 3 DMGC, BRGY. MAIMPIS, SAN FERNANDO CITY, PAMPANGA
THRU : THE MANILA BAY COORDINATOR
FROM : THE PENR OFFICER CITTA DI ORO SUBD., BRGY. STA. RITA, GUIGUINTO, BULACAN
SUBJECT : REPORT ON THE CONDUCT OF FIELD WORK ON MANGROVE ASSESSSMENT AND GROUND VALIDATION
The field work on mangrove assessment in So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan was successfully undertaken and completed from October 10 to 27, 2017. The approved Work & Financial Plan for 2017 indicated a target of 17 hectares of mangrove to be assessed and validated in line with the rehabilitation of ecosystem under the Habitat and Resources Management Component, but the assessment team was able to cover 20.5 hectares. Preparatory activities systematically undertaken were site reconnaissance, orientation on Participatory Coastal Resource Assessment (PCRA), and field assessment activity planning.
The assessment was jointly participated in and implemented by DENR-PENRO Bulacan, Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) of the Department of Agriculture Region 3, Local Government Unit of Bulakan, Barangay Taliptip and the coastal community in So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan.
Socio-demographic survey was conducted in significant areas while the subject 20.5-hectare mangrove forest was assessed by dissecting it with several transects of
Fight or Flight | 108 sampling quadrats from one edge cutting through the very internal portion of the forest up to the other edge of the mangrove acquiring biometrical data on estimated total height, two readings of crown diameter, girth-at-breast height, and other observation such as fauna and the condition of surroundings using a prepared field data sheet. The total number of 10 meter x 10 meter sampling quadrats along the seven transects established on the ground was 104 exceeding the 5 % Sampling Intensity (SI) which further provided for 312 1 meter x 1 meter sampling plots for seedlings/saplings count.
The site is generally a grey mangove forest stand where Api-api (Avicennia marina Forsk. Vierh.) dominates and found to be naturally growing in the area. Other species recorded were Bakawan babae (Rhizophora mucronata Lam.), Buta-buta (Excoecaria agallocha L.) and Culasi (Lumnitzera racemosa Willd.). Bakawan babae trees were only planted in the area though they were seen growing well and vigorously. Observed fauna were snake, egret and crabs (dakomo). A drone equipped with camera was also flown over the area for video coverage to have a recent bird’s eye-view on the vegetation.
One of the problems verified on the ground was the accumulation of all sorts of solid wastes including toxic waste brought to the area by water flowing from the upstream of Taliptip river and trapped inside the mangrove.
A writeshop is being organized and scheduled to be held this November for the final comprehensive mangrove assessment report.
For information and record.
CELIA D. ESTEBAN
Fight or Flight | 109
Appendix O NARRATIVE REPORT ON THE FIELD ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED FOR PARTICIPATORY COASTAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT (PCRA) So. Wawang Capis, Barangay Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan October 10 to 27, 2017
The field work on the assessment of 20.5 hectares of mangrove forest in So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan was successfully undertaken and completed from October 10 to 27, 2017 exceeding the target area of 17 hectares for the year. The entire mangrove assessment was systematically done from its preparatory activities to the actual field assessment itself dissecting the subject mangrove area by several transects of sampling quadrats from one edge cutting through the very internal portion of the forest up to the other edge of the mangrove acquiring all the required field data.
The coastal activities on mangrove site assessment and ground validation were implemented in line with the rehabilitation of ecosystem under the Habitat and Resources Management Component of the approved Work and Financial Plan (WFP) for 2017.
For proper activity planning, site reconnaissance was conducted on August 16- 17, 2017 wherein pre-mapping of the mangrove area subject of assessment was done and the determination of materials/supplies, tools, and other needs as well. Then on September 25, an orientation on Participatory Coastal Resources Assessment (PCRA) with the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) was held at the Conference Room of PENRO-Bulacan in Citta Di Oro Subd., Brgy. Sta. Rita, Guiguinto attended by DENR personnel, LGU of Bulakan represented by the MENRO, representative of Barangay Taliptip, and leaders of coastal community in So. Wawang Capis.
On the first day of field assessment, October 10, staff of DENR-Bulacan and the community participants assembled at the Mangrove Ecopark rest-house for final briefing by SEMS Ofelia Conag, Manila Bay Focal Person, and presentation of methodology and grouping by Forester Aristeo Medina V, Database Management Officer. All ladies were grouped as one crew to undertake the socio-economic/demographic survey while the male technical personnel were tasked to focus on mangrove forest assessment with representatives from the community.
For mangrove forest assessment, the pre-determined transect lines projected in pre-mapping as a result of site reconnaissance were only used as guide to ensure a well distributed transects of sampling quadrats all over the 20.5 hectares forest area and achieve a 5% sampling intensity. Seven (7) transect lines were established on site as planned with very minimal adjustment made depending on the actual situation on the ground. It was done by navigating the beginning and end point of a transect using Global Fight or Flight | 110
Positioning System (GPS) receiver apparatus backed-up with box compass and highly visible poles to maintain a straight line. In each transect, the survey crews established a series of 10-meter x 10-meter quadrats contiguously along the transect creating a straight line of quadrats traversing from one edge to the other edge of the mangrove.
Inside each quadrat, all mangrove species were identified with corresponding recorded biometrical data on estimated total height, two readings of crown diameter, girth-at-breast height, and other observation using a prepared field data sheet. Also noted were the number of seedlings (wildlings) and saplings found inside the three 1-meter x 1- meter plots established in two corners and middle of the quadrat. Traversing all the seven transects, the assessment crews were able to establish a total of 104 10m x 10m sampling quadrats exceeding the required 5% Sampling Intensity (SI). Thus the corresponding total number of 1m x 1m plots was 312 for seedlings/saplings count. Observation on fauna element recorded snake, egret and crabs (dakomo).
The site is generally a grey mangove forest stand with Avicennia marina (Forsk.) Vierh. or locally known as Api-api, Bungalon or Miapi as dominant mangrove species naturally growing occupying more than 90 percent of the area. Other species found were Bakawan babae (Rhizophora mucronata Lam.), Buta-buta or Lipata (Excoecaria agallocha L.) and Culasi or Tabao (Lumnitzera racemosa Willd.). Bakawan babae trees were only planted in the area though they were seen growing well and vigorously. In order to have a recent bird’s eye-view on the vegetation covering the entire 20.5 hectares mangrove forest, a drone equipped with camera was also flown on site for video coverage.
Each and every member of the mangrove assessment crew was strictly required to comply the wearing of protective gears such as hard hat, rash guard, pants, mud/diver’s booties, gloves, etc. Accidental bumping of head on hard objects in line of duty actually happened several times. The crew members were also exposed everyday to hazards such as close encounter with snake and direct contact with hazardous toxic wastes trapped, deposited and piled up inside the mangrove. There were also cases of miscalculation of substrate being stepped on that certain members of the crew were almost submerged under quicksand but the teamwork was fortunately smart enough to deal with such danger. A member was wounded on his left leg but was treated immediately using the first aid kit provided.
One of the problems verified on the ground was the accumulation of all sorts of solid wastes including toxic waste ranging from plastic, styropores, foams, bottles, rubber, almost all forms of synthetic materials, old corroded incandescent light bulbs, compact flourescent bulbs and tubes, syringe, etc. Feces and several bloated corpses of animals were also seen with some already in advance stage of decomposition. These trapped wastes were brought to the area by water flowing from the upstream of Taliptip river.
All field activities were completed on October 27, 2017 including the socio- economic-demographic survey. A writeshop shall be organized and conducted within the month of November for the final comprehensive mangrove assessment report. Fight or Flight | 111
For information and reference.
Prepared by: Noted:
Forester ARISTEO N. MEDINA V SEMS OFELIA S. CONAG Database Management Officer, Manila Bay Project Focal Person, Manila Bay Project
Fight or Flight | 112
Appendix P PHOTO DOCUMENTATION Mangrove Assessment Field Activity So. Wawang Capis, Barangay Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan October 10-27, 2017
Forester Aristeo N. Medina V, Database Management Officer, Manila Bay Project (right, wearing orange hard hat) reads the GPS receiver navigation as one method to help maintain the bearing of the chain of sampling quadrats along the transect.
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
The mangrove assessment crew establishes series of sampling quadrats along transect line from one edge of the mangrove all the way to the other edge adjacent the sea, cutting through the very internal portion of the forest.
Fight or Flight | 113
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
Neil Mendoza and Forester Dennis Cernadilla of PENRO Bulacan measure the crown diameter of Api-api tree during field work on mangrove assessment..
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
Fight or Flight | 114
Climbing a tree sometimes was necessary to avoid the danger of submerging into quicksand and acquire accurate measurements.
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
The local community takes its role in Participatory Coastal Resource Assessment (PCRA). Karl Laxamana, a religious leader in the locality, does the measurement of Girth-at-Breast Height (GBH)
in an Api-api tree inside a sampling quadrat.
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
Fight or Flight | 115
ISA Rommed Cabuya of PENRO Bulacan (right) flies a drone during mangrove assessment to acquire a bird’s eye-view coverage of the mangrove vegetation.
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
Photo shows Bakawan babae (trees on the right) already present in the quadrat near the edge of the mangrove on the sea side. The bakawan trees are found to just have been planted on the outer portion of the grey mangrove forest though they are seen to be growing well and vigorously.
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
Fight or Flight | 116
Accumulation of solid wastes including toxic waste was validated on the ground as shown in this photo. Wastes found ranged from plastic, rubber, almost all forms of synthetic materials, old corroded incandescent light bulbs, compact flourescent bulbs and tubes, syringe, etc. Several bloated corpses of animals were also seen with some already in advance stage of decomposition. These wastes were brought
to the area by water from the upstream of Taliptip river.
-Mangrove Assessment, So. Wawang Capis, Brgy. Taliptip, Bulakan, Bulacan
10-27 October 2017
Fight or Flight | 117