|
|
| Table 1. Impacts of development activities
on the coastal zone. |
| Aquaculture development.
The primary impacts of concern in the Philippines related to aquaculture
development are the conversion of coastal ecosystems, primarily mangrove,
to fish or shrimp ponds. This activity alone has replaced more than
60 percent of the original mangrove forest in the country. Another
significant impact results from various kinds of pollution generated
by aquaculture because it is essentially a farming system that uses
fertilizer, feeds, and chemicals. In concentrated form, these substances
are detrimental to nearshore water quality, natural fisheries, and
human health (Pullin et al. 1993).
Foreshore land use and development. Coastal areas
all over the Philippines are being developed rapidly since people
like to live and do business near the sea. The consequence is that
beaches and foreshore land areas are in demand and are being utilized
for industry, construction, dumping, boat landings, recreation,
habitation, and many other uses.
Inadequately regulated foreshore development has resulted in several
issues:
1. Inadequate development setbacks from the water
line. Suitable setbacks are essential to create an open space
for access, to minimize negative impacts on the nearshore marine
systems such as reefs and seagrass beds, to minimize erosion caused
by structures on the beach, to better control what is dumped into
the sea, and to create a visually attractive area, uncluttered
with haphazard development, as a transition area to the sea (Sullivan
et al. 1995);
2. Increased pollution in nearshore waters that often emanates
from shoreline areas where there is a lack of control on activities.
Domestic waste generated in shoreline communities all goes to
the sea. Septic systems constructed too close to the beach drain
to the sea and pollute the nearshore areas, especially in densely
populated areas. Dumping of solid waste in nearshore areas is
a related problem. Construction activities near the beach and
sea often cause silt to wash into marine waters and smother reefs
and seagrasses or affect nearshore fisheries;
3. Erosion of beach sand, usually resulting from the construction
of structures on or near the beach. Although sandy beaches will
normally replenish themselves after a storm, once a beach wall
or perpendicular jetty is in place, the natural movement and return
of the sand is prevented (Maragos et
al. 1983). Thus there is a need to control all construction
in the foreshore areas. Examples of this problem can easily be
seen along developed shorelines such as on Mactan Island or in
Lingayen Gulf, where natural beaches have disappeared; and
4. Squatting and illegal structures in the foreshore areas. Such
settlements are difficult to eradicate because the squatters are
usually aware that their presence is illegal so they try to minimize
opportunities for arrest and are adept at making excuses about
why they are there. Squatters in particular have the excuse that
they are poor, landless people with few alternatives. Unfortunately,
the continued prevalence of squatting only encourages more people
to do the same, mostly to the detriment of foreshore and beach
areas and any hope of environmental integrity.
Coastal habitat conversion and land filling. The
competition for space in coastal areas is encouraging more projects
designed to create new, usable land by converting coastal habitats
such as estuaries, shallow reef flats, beaches, and mangroves to
other uses through land filling. Several large and well-known reclamation
areas in the Philippines are located in the urban centers of Manila
and Cebu. The economic justification for these is strong given the
tremendous need for quality land for urban expansion and renewal.
However, these land reclamation efforts should be viewed as exceptions.
There is often little justification to fill a coastal habitat because
reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses are naturally valuable and their
existence is finite. For every square meter of seagrass bed destroyed,
we lose a lifetime of natural production of invertebrates and fish
that feed many people and support their livelihood (Fortes
1989). Whenever an area is lost to human encroachment, it will
never return and can never be recreated somewhere else. In short,
the implications of habitat conversion and land filling are:
1. Total and permanent loss
of the natural habitats and their ecological and economic functions;
2. Permanent decreases in localized fish catch and traditional
livelihood opportunities for society’s most economically
vulnerable;
3. Significant pollution in the form of sediments that can spread
for many square kilometers and last for years after the construction
is completed;
4. The potential for increased risk of sinking and flooding; and
5. The potential for disrupted drainage patterns that will change
the natural mixing of fresh water and sea water and thus affect
marine organisms not tolerant of fresh water.
Mining and quarrying. Mining and quarrying in
coastal areas of the Philippines are subject to environmental impact
assessment in all cases. Nevertheless, these activities continue
illegally, without proper assessments, in many areas as small-scale
and sometimes large operations. Upland mining is regulated but can
have well-known impacts in coastal areas such as the mine tailing
spill in Marinduque Island that smothered several square kilometers
of seagrass beds and polluted the waters along kilometers of coastline.
Coastal mining, which is the primary concern here, has impacts that
are not always obvious but can significantly change shoreline dynamics
and beaches if not properly regulated. The mining activities and
their most important impacts are:
1. Sand mining from beaches
causes beach erosion and eventual disappearance of the beach.
All white-sand beaches in the Philippines are generated from the
natural erosion of reef corals and shells which, when deposited
on a beach, are ground into sand. The rate of beach formation
is slow; mining of beach sand removes a finite resource that takes
hundreds to thousands of years to rebuild through natural processes;
2. Sand mining from submerged reef or sandy areas stirs up silt
in the water column and changes water-flow patterns. Also, the
sand removed from a submerged area can easily be part of a yearly
wave and current cycle that places the sand on the beach for part
of the year and under the water for another part of the year.
The obvious result of sand mining is that the beach will not return
during the next cycle; and
3. Mining for any material in a foreshore area always causes some
polluting silt and runoff material that smother nearshore habitats.
Tourism development. Tourism-related activities
in the coastal zone are increasingly common in the Philippines.
The coastal areas and all their resources are one of the primary
attractions for tourists. Most people come for a beach, swimming
or scuba-diving holiday or some variation of this theme. Consequently,
the amount of economic development supported by tourism, including
resorts, shorefront developments, roads, boating, and diving, has
escalated in recent years. The lack of planning in much of the tourism
sector is a major issue and is causing many problems. Although it
is in the interest of tourism developers to maintain the environmental
quality most tourists come to enjoy, the opposite is occurring in
many instances. Good intentions in the tourism sector are not an
adequate replacement for good planning and the anticipation of irreversible
environmental impacts.
Many of the impacts of tourism are not much different from those
discussed above in sections on pollution, foreshore development,
mining, and others that involve construction in beach and shoreline
areas. Its unique impact is more related to certain forms of recreation
that cause both biophysical damage to the environment and social
disruption within the communities where tourism flourishes. The
recent introduction of motorized recreation vehicles, such as jet
skis and speedboats, has added new dimensions to the need for regulation
in shore areas. The age-old problems of social corruption and prostitution
associated with tourism can only change with better education and
planning, and most of all, marketing tourism for the country in
a manner that attracts “eco-friendly” tourists.
|
References
Fortes, M.D. 1989. Seagrasses: A resource unknown
in the ASEAN region. ICLARM Education Series 5, 46 p. International Center
for Living Aquatic Resources Management, Manila, Philippines.
Maragos, J.E., A. Soegiarto, E.D. Gomez and
M.A. Dow. 1983. Development planning for tropical coastal ecosystems.
Chapter 5. In R.A. Carpenter (ed.) Natural systems for development: What
planners need to know. Macmillan, New York.
Pullin, R.S.V., H. Rosenthal and J.L. Maclean,
editors. 1993. Environment and aquaculture in developing countries. ICLARM
Conference Proceedings 31, 359 p. International Center for Living Aquatic
Resources Management, Manila, Philippines.
Sullivan, K., L. De Silva, A.T. White and
M. Wijeratne, editors. 1995. Environmental guidelines for coastal tourism
development in Sri Lanka. Coastal Resource Management Project and Coast
Conservation Department, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 78 p.
|
