a situational report on the human settlement suitability in cebu watersheds

7/29/2019 A Situational Report on the Human Settlement Suitability in Cebu Watersheds

1/7

GISdevelopment.net --> Application --> Urban Planning

Print

A situational report on The Human Settlement

Suitability in Cebu Watersheds

E.A.L. Salas, S. Arguillas, R.J. Cua Ho, H.L. Torres

Abstract

Pursuant to Presidential Proclamation Nos. 932 and 581, the Mananga, Kotkot, Lusaran watersheds in

Cebu Philippines were proclaimed as major watersheds in the country, thus making these areas

environment protected zones. However, still a lot of people are still settling in the said areas since even

before these proclamations were passed.

This study thus aimed at studying the different factors and consequences of the human settlements in

specific areas of the Mananga, KotKot and Lusaran watersheds using GIS maps in the analysis.

Results proved that indeed many of the settlements on the watershed areas already coincided with what the

National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) act of the Philippines provides, since majority, if not

almost all, are situated either in the multiple use or the restoration zones - zones allowed for human

settlements.

1. PROJECT INTRODUCTION

Rationale

Pursuant to Presidential Proclamation Nos. 932 and 581, the Mananga, Kotkot, Lusaran watersheds in

Cebu Philippines were proclaimed as one of the major watersheds in the country, thus making these areas

an environment protected zone. However, still a lot of people are still settling in the said areas since even

before these proclamations were passed. This issue leads us to question: Are these areas where these

people are situated suitable for human settlement or safe? Whether they are and will continue to be safe as

time goes by is a primary concerns that this study intends to answer using.

The National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) act provided specific areas for human settlement

to be allowed in the area mentioned (Mananga, Kotkot and Lusaran watersheds). Whether the residents are

situated in the designated areas remains to be proven.

Objectives of the Study

This project mainly aims to study the different factors and consequences of the human settlements in

specific areas of the Mananga, KotKot and Lusaran watersheds using GIS in the analysis. A map with all

the data will be generated to facilitate the analysis of the findings.

Significance of the Study

Primarily, the study would benefit the government and non-government organizations in assessing and

evaluating the existence of the settlements in the watershed areas. GIS will produce comprehensive maps

that will aid all possible plans to address the settlement situation. Any possible change for the betterment

that might occur as a result of this project would certainly help, not only the residence of the mentioned

watershed areas but the people of Cebu, Philippines in general. In the same manner, this study would be

useful for legislative policies and strategies that may be implemented to address the issue.

NIPAS Zone

According to the NIPAS act, management planning shall be undertaken by among the others technical


2/7

specialists (Section 7). The General Management Planning Strategy (Section 8) mentions management

zones as one of the innovative management techniques. Section 10 defines the terms "sustainable" (no

degradation of biological and other natural resources), "traditional" (consistent with historical, customary

techniques), and "commercial"(sale in volumes in excess of basic subsistence). Section then defines nine

management zones and leaves an opening for a possible other type. The technical specialists found

grounds to limit the number of zones in the study area to ten:

1. Strict Protection Zone,

2. Sustainable Use Zone,

3. Restoration Zone,4. Multiple Use Zone,

5. Special Use Zone,

6. Habitat Management Zone,

7. Buffer Zone,

8. Cultural Zones,

9. Recreational Zones

10. Special Use Zones,

The rationale for his selection is the reconciliation of the actual conditions with the purpose of the protection,

which is to safeguard the source of potable water in the Kotkot, Lusaran, Mananga Valleys and the

restoration of the forest cove in CCNP. The establishment of the above mentioned four zones can help

management to achieve the give target together with the improvement of living standards.

Areas have been found that are practically inaccessible. If these areas are left alone ("closed to all human

activity except for scientific studies") nature will be able to maintain and restore the desired bio diversity.

Thus proposed Strict protection Zones are identified.

Many of these Strict Protection Zones are found in a string. Because they are rather small, they are very

vulnerable to human activities. Certain species, both in flora and fauna, thrive better larger areas. These are

two reasons why buffering is advantageous. The Sustainable Use Zone connects many of the Strict

Protection Use Zones for the 2 reasons. In the Sustainable Use Zone, the NIPAS Act allows (i) certain

groups to collect, (ii) research, (iii) visitors, but the Act excludes clearing, farming, settlement, and

commercial utilization. Given a population density of about one household per hectare, the declaration of a

Sustainable Use Zone without clearing, farming, settlement, and commercial utilization is only attainable ina rather small area of some 1500 has. Riparian Zones also enjoy a special legal status. Biodiversity

considerations strengthen this position by including them at least in the Sustainable Use Zone.

National policy has declared that permanent forests should cover slopes of more than 18%. The Province of

Cebu acquired an exception to this rule. Such exception means that the ruling has been accepted as sound

in its own right, but not enforceable in the exempted case. The nature of an exemption provides that an

exemption may be invoked, but that there is no obligation to apply it. Roughly three quarters of the study

falls in the category of "18% and over". The Restoration Zone of the NIPAS Act seems to be formulated for

this part of the Study Area. It requires the use of indigenous species and accepts human activities as

planting, maintenance and harvesting. The need of forest guards is clear. Fire control is mentioned.

Depending on the condition of the site (e.g. it being level) farming could be permitted longer than "initially"

only.

One or the other telecommunication installation is found inside the Protected Areas. The NIPAS act

explicitly accepts such installation, "subject to mutual agreements". The study recommends that proper

agreements be concluded to specifically define the Special Use Zones.

Finally the Multiple-Use Zone accepts the conditions as found on the ground, but leaves the regulation of

activities to the Management Plan. It should be noted that NIPAS Act explicitly mentions the granting of

land tenure to tilling tenants. This definitely should be a high priority activity of the Management.

The topology of the Study area contains many sharp rises. Understandably, most of these very steep

slopes and cliffs are contained in the Strict Protection or Restoration Zones. But even in the Multiple Use


3/7

Zone, one finds several of such "rough parts" of nature. These rough parts of nature are a challenge of sound

Management.

The permitted Land Use follows the Zoning. The Zoning Map of the study area recognizes essentially four

Zones: Strict Protection, Sustainable Use, Restoration and Multiple Use Zones. The Special Use Zones are

not considered here, because each one has its own specific description. (DENR, EMPAS, Vol. 1, June

2001 Edition)

NIPAS zoning

a. Strict Protection Zone - Areas with high bio-diversity values which shall be closed to all human

activity except for scientific studies and/or ceremonial or religious use by indigenous communities.

b. Sustainable Use Zone - Natural areas where the habitat and its associated biodiversity shall be

conserved but where consistent with the management plan and with Protected Area Management

Board (PAMB) approval; (i) indigenous community members and/or tenured migrants and/or buffer

zone residents may be allowed to collect and utilize natural resources using traditional sustainable

methods that are not in conflict with biodiversity conservation requirements; (ii) research, including

the reintroduction of indigenous species, may be undertaken; and (iii) park visitors may be allowed

limited use. Provided, no clearing, farming, settlement, commercial utilization or other activities

detrimental to biodiversity conservation shall be undertaken. The level of allowable activity can be

expected to vary from one situation to another.

c. Restoration Zone- Areas of degraded habitat where the long-term goal will be to restore naturalhabitat with its associated biodiversity and to rezone the area to a more strict protection level.

Initially, natural regeneration will be assisted through such human interventions as fire control, cogon

suppression and the planting pf native species including indigenous pioneer tree species as well as

climax species. Exotic species (not native to the site) shall not be used in the restoration process.

Existing houses and agricultural developments may be allowed to remain initially but would be

phased out eventually.

d. Habitat Management Zones - areas with significant habitat and species values where management

practices are required periodically to maintain specific non-climax habitat types or conditions

required by rare, threatened or endangered species. Examples would be forest openings for the

tamaraw or bushy forest for the Philippine tarsier. Human habitation and sustainable use may be

allowed if they play a habitat management role.

e. Multiple Use Zones - Areas with significant, traditional and/or sustainable land use, includingagriculture, agro forestry, extraction activities and other income generating or livelihood activities,

may be allowed to the extent prescribed in the management plan. Land tenure may be granted to

tenured residents, whether indigenous cultural community members

f. Buffer Zone - Areas outside the protected area but adjoining it that are established by law (Sect ion 8

of the Act) and under the control of the DENR through the Park Area Management Board. These are

effectively multiple-use zones that are to be managed to provide a social fence to prevent

encroachment into the protected area by outsiders. Land tenure may be granted to occupants who

qualify. Buffer zones should be treated as an integral part of the protected area in management

planning.

g. Cultural Zone- Areas with significant cultural, religious, spiritual or anthropological values where

traditional rights exist and ceremonies and/ or other practices take place.

h. Recreational Zones- Areas of high recreational, tourism, educational, or environmental awarenessvalues where sustainable eco-tourism, recreational, conservation education or public awareness

activities may be allowed as prescribed in the management plan.

i. Special Use Zones- Areas containing existing installations of national significance; such as

telecommunication facilities, irrigation canals or electric power lines. Such installations may be

retained subject to mutual agreements among the concerned parties, provided such installations will

not violate any of the prohibitions contained in Section 20 of the Act.

Topography, Physiography and Slope

The subproject site has rolling to rugged mountainous terrain. Elevation ranges between 80-800 meter, asl.

There are three major landforms in the subproject site: 1) alluvial; 2) hilly; 3) mountainous. Due to its

physiography, steep slopes and landforms, the soil is very susceptible to soil erosion. Flat lands are


4/7

insignificant in the watershed.

2. METHODOLOGY

Data Gathering and Decision-Tree Making

Data and maps of the three watersheds were gathered. Then the group came up with the five major factors

to be considered in the suitability of human settlement. The five major factors were then further grouped into

highly suitable, moderately suitable, lowly suitable and not suitable.

Data BaseThe database used in this study included the following:

NIPAS Zoning Map

A land use and land classification dataset

Topographic Map

Datasets on roads

A geologic map of the area

Query Combinations for suitability

The five major factors, after classifying them to highly suitable, moderately suitable, lowly suitable and not

suitable categories were combined to formulate suitability maps. The maps were then overlaid with the

existing land-use map to make the analysis of the suitability of the existing settlements.

3. DATA ANALYSIS

From the data shown, half of the settlement area is very safe and almost three-fourths belonged to the safe

ground with regards to slope, which is below 20 degrees as standards given by the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources. One could say an alarming percentage at 25% approximate belongs or

is situated in a slope not suitable for settlement. This may be is due to other factors that lead these settlers

to the said areas despite the high degree of slope.

SLOPE AREA (m2) PERCENTAGE

0-10 3007200 45.77%10-20 1895425 28.85%

20-30 1079150 16.43%

30-40 416075 6.33%

40-50 133750 2.04%

50-60 33450 0.51%

60-70 4275 0.07%

70-80 525 0.01%

There are only two zones that allow human settlement in the area, the multiple use zone and the restoration

zone. The result showed that most if not all of the settlers are located in the two zones with very minimal, if

not negligible, percentage of them located at the protected areas.

One factor for survival and why people choose where they settle is the presence of livelihood opportunities.

With majority of the population living in the area being engaged into farming, this is why they majority of

them situate themselves in the Alienable and Disposable lands. There are a number of those also living in

forestlands, which is not recommended since this would present problems with regards to deforestation.


5/7

Land Classification AREA (m2) PERCENTAGE

Alienable and Disposable 5046250 76.73%

Central National Park 216875 3.30%

Forest Land 1054375 16.03%

Sudlon National Park 165000 2.51%

Talisay-Minglanilla National Forest 93750 1.43%

Analyzing the built-up areas on multiple-use zones, here we noticed the increase of the percentage of the

Alienable and Disposable classification of land. This is because the multiple-use zone is generally

composed of these kinds of land, which is designed for human settlement.

Land Classification AREA (m2) PERCENTAGEAlienable and Disposable 2733750 93.18%

Forest Land 34375 1.17%


Talisay-Minglanilla Forest Reserve 18125 0.62%

When the built-up areas on restoration zones were analyzed in terms of the land classification they belong,

the alienable and disposable classification decreased in percentage with the forest land increased

recognizably, this is due to the presence of more forest lands in the restoration zone.

Land Classification AREA (m2) PERCENTAGE

Alienable and Disposable 2278750 63.41%

Forest Land 1018125 28.33%

Cebu Central National Park 200625 5.58%


Talisay-Minglanilla Forest Reserve 76875 2.14%

The settlements at multiple-use zones were found out to be safe for the slope factor. There is noticeably a

large percentage with regards to slope under 20degrees. This is again due to the design of the multiple-use

zone for human settlement.

Slope AREA (m2) PERCENTAGE

0-10 11638750 66.26%

10-20 4467500 25.60%


6/7

20-30 1073125 6.15%

30-40 268750 1.54%

40-50 80625 0.46%

50-60 36250 0.21%

There is a noticeable decline in the percentage of settlement area located at the restoration zone with

regards to slope. This is probably due to the presence of more forest land in the zone type thus having

larger degree of slopes.

Slope AREA (m2) PERCENTAGE

0-10 6084375 29.91%

10-20 6147500 30.22%

20-30 4945000 24.31%

30-40 2220625 10.92%

40-50 741875 3.65%

50-60 174375 0.86%

60-70 25625 0.13%

70-80 1250 0.01%

4. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Conclusion

It has been proven that indeed many of the settlements of the watershed areas already coincided with what

the NIPAS act provides since majority, if not almost all, are situated in either in the multiple-use and therestoration zone. However, the results were also very clear that despite these settlements passing the

requirements of the NIPAS act, a huge number of them are still situated in a not so suitable areas as found

in the results since almost one fourth of the population in the said watershed failed the slope requirements

needed to have a safe settlement, especially those situated in the restoration zone. As far as the other

factors are concerned, the results were satisfactory with minimal or negligible percentage found not suitable.

Recommendation

It is hereby recommended that there should be a review or rechecking of the settlements found in the build

up areas especially in the restoration zone since the failure of the slope requirement is a factor that should

not be taken for granted since this might causes damages to the settlers in an event of a natural calamity.

This research also showed that what is in the NIPAS act is not an assurance that one is safe when

considering its provisions. That is why it is recommended that constant field checking by the government bedone to ensure the safety of the people living in the said areas.

5. REFERENCES

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 705 (Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines) BUREAU OF

FOREST DEVELOPMENT (DENR)

(Geology and Mineral Resources of the Philippines; 1982 vol. 1) BUREAU OF MINES AND GEO-

SCIENCES MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DENR)

NATIONAL INTEGRATED PROTECTED AREAS SYSTEM (NIPAS) ACT R.A No. 7586

(Implementing Rules and Regulations) ADMISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 25, SERIES 1992 (DENR)

(APPRAISAL REPORT MANGA-KOTKOT-LUSARAN WATERSHED) DENR/WRC

a situational report on the human settlement suitability in cebu watersheds

Documents