LPPCHEA-Book PDF

SAVING THE LAST
COASTAL FRONTIER
Framework
Plan for the
Coastal Lagoons
of Las Piñas and
Parañaque
LPPCHEA
LAS PIÑAS-PARAÑAQUE CRITICAL HABITAT AND ECOTOURISM AREA
Republic of the Philippines
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
LPPCHEA FRAMEWORK PLAN
DENR-NCR
Philippine Reclamation Authority
Department of Tourism
The City Government of Las Piñas
The City Government of Parañaque
Wild Bird Club of the Philippines
M ESSAGE FROM THE SECRETARY
M ESSAGE FROM TH E SECRETARY
M ESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN
M ESSAGE FROM THE MAYOR
M ESSAGE FROM THE MAYOR
M ESSAGE FROM THE
CONTENTS
Executive Summary -------------------------------------------------------------------- X
Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2
The Planning Process ------------------------------------------------------------- 4
The Issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
Project Description ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
Critical Habitat and Ecotourism ------------------------------------------------- 8
Site Information -------------------------------------------------------------------- 20
Legal/Institutional Framework ---------------------------------------------------- 20
LPPCHEA Proclamation ---------------------------------------------------------- 22
Related Laws & Policies ---------------------------------------------------------- 23
Local Ordinances ----------------------------------------------------------------- 24
Local Agreements ----------------------------------------------------------------- 25
International and Regional Agreements -------------------------------------- 26
Supreme Court Mandamus ----------------------------------------------------- 26
Institutional Framework ---------------------------------------------------------- 27
Critical Issues --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30
Development Concept and Management Strategies ------------------------- 31
Vision & Mission ------------------------------------------------------------------- 31
Guiding Principles ----------------------------------------------------------------- 32
Management Strategies --------------------------------------------------------- 34
Institutional Mechanisms ------------------------------------------------------------ 34
Organizational Structure --------------------------------------------------------- 35
Duties & Functions ---------------------------------------------------------------- 37
LPPCHEA Physical Lay-out Plan ---------------------------------------------------- 39
Zoning Scheme -------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
Strict Zone -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
Habitat Restoration ------------------------------------------------------------- 40
Recreational Zone ---------------------------------------------------------------- 44
Sustainable Use Zone ------------------------------------------------------------

Annexes
Executive Summary
1 INTRODUCTION
T
he Philippines is blessed with
a variety of wetland areas, the
most extensive of which are the
coastal wetland type which includes
mangroves, estuaries, mudflats, and
other near-shore marine areas.1
The coastal lagoons of Las Piñas and Parañaque are an interesting

example of this type, quite more so because, despite its recent origins2
and diminutive size, it has nonetheless become an attraction of sorts
due to the number of local and migratory birds that frequent the area.
Every year, during the winter months in the Northern regions, the place
is transformed into a spectacle as thousands of birds—including rare
and endangered species—begin arriving in the area to rest and feed.
Set against the backdrop of the famed sunset of Manila Bay, the sight
of these magnificent birds, in graceful flight or simply idly feeding along
the stretch of shallow waters, is one that is truly worth beholding.
That the site is now home to a diverse array of wild birds made convincing
argument to conserve and protect it. Thankfully, the government did
just that by issuing Proclamation No. 1412 on April 22, 2007, an edict
formally establishing what is now known as the Las Piñas-Parañaque
Critical Habitat and Ecotourism Area (LPPCHEA).
1
A National Wetland Action Plan for the Republic of the Philippines. Downloaded
from: http://www.psdn.org.ph/wetlands/national_wetlands_action_plan.htm on
May 25, 2012.
2
According to the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA), the lagoons are a
result of the unfinishedreclamation project of then Construction and Development
Corporation of the Philippines (CDCP)/Philippine National Construction
Corporation (PNCC) and the Department of Public Works and Highway (DPWH) in
the early 70s. PRA Power Point Presentation dated June 2012.
1
Las Piñas-Parañaque Critical Habitat and Ecotourism Area
And more: a year later, on January 31, 2008 to be exact, the Manila Bay Critical Habitat
Management Council (henceforth, Management Council) was created through Proclamation
No. 1412-A. A multi-sectoral body, the Management Council is composed of the Department
of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) as Chair; the Philippine Reclamation Authority
(PRA) as Vice-Chair; and the local government units of Las Piñas and Parañaque as members;
along with representatives from the Department of Tourism (DOT); the Wild Bird Club of
thePhilippines (WBCP); and peoples’ organizations (POs).3
As per Section 4, paragraph 1 of Proc. 1412-A, the Management Council was tasked of preparing
and implementing the following: (1) a Master Plan that will provide the “criteria and guide
development in and around the area according to universally established and scientific
principles to ensure protection of critical bird habitats” and, (2) an Ecotourism Business
Plan that will “ensure sustainable tourism and management, and to promote environmental
awareness and education in the area”.
Since its creation then, the Management Council has been hard at work in coming up with
a plan that will address the twin issue of environmental protection and sustainable tourism.
THE PLANNING PROCESS

This Development Framework is a
summation of the attempts to forge a
‘Master Plan’ for LPPCHEA. Needless to say,
this plan is a product of collaboration of the
many people who voluntarily participated
and contributed in the process meant to
define the future of the area. It details the
grounds, among others, for government
intervention and how it intends, in general
terms, to go about developing the area
with less ecological impact but greater
involvement of the people and communities The first-ever meeting of the Manila Bay Critical Habitat
Management Council held at the Ninoy Aquino Parks
directly affected by it. and Wildlife Center in Quezon City
3
As of this writing, there is no PO representation yet in the Management Council. The same, however, will be selected
following the formulation of the process and criteria for PO representation by the existing members of the Council.
2
Saving the Last Coastal Frontier of Metro Manila
As it turns out, LPPCHEA plays an important role

not only in the lives of the many wild bird species
that flock the area during the winter seasons
but, perhaps more importantly, the many people
who feel connected to it somehow. These
people include, among others, the number of
small fisherfolks and shellfish gatherers from the
nearby cities of Las Piñas and Parañaque. Also
among the list are conservation advocates and
bird enthusiasts who regularly visit the area and,
finally, public and private land developers, all of
Presentation of the results of the Vulnerability
Assessment study for the Las Piñas-Parañaque
whom obviously have a stake on the development
Critical Habitat Area. prospects of LPPCHEA.
In coming out with a management plan for the LPPCHEA therefore, it became imperative for
the Management Council to involve and actively engage all of the identified stakeholders in a
consultation process, pursuant to previous agreements and commitments, if only to ensure that
the more important issues are raised and given the attention it rightly deserves.
The DENR-NCR started organizing meetings

for LPPCHEA as early as 2009. Likewise, it
commissioned the conduct of a Vulnerability
Assessment for the coastal lagoons of Las
Piñas and Parañaque. However, discussions
about the proposal to develop the area into
an ecotourism destination only began in
August of 2011, following the establishment
of the Interim Manila Bay Critical Habitat
Management Council.
The interim council then ordered the conduct Consultations were an integral part of the framework
planning process. Photo shows Hon. Florencio
of a Stakeholder’s Consultation Workshop in M. Bernabe, Jr., Parañaque City Mayor, actively
December of the same year. Said activity, participating in one of the meetings of the Management
Council.
apart from giving all stakeholders the
opportunity to present and advance their
position in relation to the project concept,
3
also served as the occasion for formally assembling

the members of the Management Council which
began meeting in earnest at the start of 2012.
The Management Council first met on February

2012 to deliberate on the draft management plan
being circulated at that time. This was followed
by two successive meetings held last March and
June of this year respectively. At this point, the
respective positions of the council members on
the issues were becoming fairly clear, but so are the points of agreement. Finally, in the
meeting held last September 13, 2012, the Management Council moved for the approval of
this document.
THE ISSUES
While the approval of the present plan appears
to have encountered only little opposition, that
is farthest from the truth. The debates, to be
sure, were much heated and at times personal.
But this was to be expected, for apart from
being an outright environmental issue, the
development of LPPCHEA is an economic
issue, and secondly a political and social one.
Because no matter how basic a proposal is for
LPPCHEA, costs—financial and otherwise—
are definitely in the offing. In which case, Much work remains in transforming LPPCHEA
looking at the issue simply from the vantage into a premier ecotourism destination in the metro.
point of environmental conservation will never

suffice as this ignores the project’s impact on all stakeholders. Likewise, it limits the range
of opportunities for the area other than as a bird and wildlife sanctuary. True, there will be
benefits derived from conserving and protecting the area, but the question begs if all concerned
will be better off with the project or only a particular segment of society will gain from it.
Then there is also the question of the sustainability of the project. Since even assuming that
the social benefits of the project greatly outweigh its social costs, the question whether the
4
proposed management plan will survive

the implementation stage is largely
dependent on the support it will receive
from all stakeholders, particularly the
government as lead agency.
Indeed, experience tells us that policy

formulation and implementation are two
different realms; one may succeed in
having a proposal approved but there is
no guarantee that it will be implemented.
The draft Framework Plan was presented and extensively
There are enough examples in the history discussed by the Management Council in its September
of policymaking in this country that will 13, 2012 meeting in Bagac, Bataan.
justify the coinage of the phrase “unfunded
mandates”.
Due caution was therefore a par for the course for the Management Council in preparing the
plan, cognizant as they were of the fact that, after all is said and done, the ensuing cost of
managing LPPCHEA will be borne by society at large.
Overall then, the Council faced the challenge of determining the optimum amount of government
intervention and considering all of the identifiable factors potentially affecting the project. For
this purpose, a number of studies were commissioned by the Management Council to guide
it in its decision making. Foremost of which is the Vulnerability Assessment conducted by Mr.
Manuel Sabater, et. al. in 2009, with Dr.Nathaniel C. Bantayan as consultant.4
Likewise, workshops and consultations meetings were held to carefully validate the results of
these studies, as well as identify problems that may have been missed out. The said workshops
and consultation meetings also provided a venue for stakeholders to advance their respective
development agenda.
That the plan took so long in writing only goes to show that the stakes were high and that the
council members themselves took their tasks seriously. Nevertheless, there is no presuming
4
Sabater, Manuel, et. al. (2009). Vulnerability Assessment of the Las Piñas and Parañaque Critical Habitat and
Ecotourism Area. Study commissioned by the DENR for LPPCHEA.
5
that the plan, as it appears here, is by all means complete and perfect. Although it provides
strategies for the establishment, development, and administration of LLPCHEA, members of the
Management Council and/or its future management board are far from being proscribed in
improving or revising the same. On the contrary, they are expected to constantly innovate and
be responsive to changing situations, and to be creative in finding solutions to problems they
would face as co-managers of the project.
Their duty, after all, does not end with the finalization of this plan; just the opposite, it has only
just begun....
6
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
CRITICAL HABITAT AND ECOTOURISM
The idea of government
imposing restraints on the
injurious use of a public resource
is not a new one. The fact is it is
probably as old as the concept
of the sovereign State itself,
“police powers”—or simply the
power to regulate property to
promote general welfare—being one of its fundamental powers.5 In
modern times, government usually does this by declaring an area as
protected. Critical habitats are areas set aside to sustain the existence
of a certain plant or animal species, common or otherwise. The use
of resources found therein is subjected either to strict prohibition or
regulation, with accompanying penalties and sanctions for violators.
In the Philippines, the legal framework for the establishment and

management of critical habitats is provided under Republic Act 9147 or
the Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act of 2001. This is
supported further by other executive issuances and related legislations.
Accordingly, LPPCHEA is the first critical habitat established in the
country and the first to be proclaimed by a President.
5
Cf. Tupaz, Antonio R. (2005). Constitutional Law Reviewer (Problems and Answers).
C & E Publishing, Inc.
7
Yet in spite of prevailing laws, enforcement is a perennial problem, even more so in a developing
country with limited financial resources. In the face of a relatively poor-performing economy
as against the competing, ever growing demands for service provision, as well as the political
commitments of policymakers, environment protection usually takes the backseat in the
priorities of the government. And this is where the ecotourism approach, seen as an alternative
source of funds for managing the area, comes in.
Ecotourism has been defined as ‘responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the
environment and improves the well-being of local people’.6 As such, it offers “market-linked
long-term solutions” to conservation efforts by charging fees to those who are willing to pay
for the protection and enhancement of the existing ecosystems in the coastal lagoons of Las
Piñas and Parañaque.
SITE INFORMATION
A. Geographic Location
LPPCHEA is nestled neatly on the
southern portion of the nation’s capital
and is part of the Manila Bay (see Fig.
1). It is bounded by Pasay City on the
northeast; by Bacoor, Cavite on the
southwest; and Manila Bay on the
west. Straddling along the Manila-
Cavite Coastal Road, LPPCHEA covers
approximately one hundred seventy five
hectares (175 has.) and encompasses
two (2) land masses: Long Island is at the
southwest portion of the LPPCHEA in Las
Piñas City, while Freedom Island is at the
northeast part and under the political
jurisdiction of Parañaque City.
Fig. 1 Aerial Photo of Manila Bay

(LPPCHEA in set) > > >
6
“What is Ecotourism?”. Downloaded from http://www.ecotourism.org/what-is-ecotourism on June 20, 2012
8
B. Political/Administrative Boundaries
As the name indicates, LPPCHEA is part

of Las Piñas and Parañaque City. Map 1
shows the area in relation to the political-
administrative boundaries of Las Piñas and
Parañaque. Although there are no actual
human occupants in LPPCHEA, there are
eight coastal barangays (only six are seen
in the map) immediately adjacent to the
project site. These are Brgys. Zapote,
Pulanglupa, Elias Aldana, Ilaya, Manuyo
Uno, and Daniel Fajardo in Las Piñas City
and Brgys. La Huerta and San Dionisio in
Parañaque City. Map 2 shows the location
of each barangay in relation to LPPCHEA.
Map 1 Boundary Map > > >
C. Population
Table 1 in the next page shows the

population in each barangay based on the
census conducted by the National Statistics
Office (NSO) in 2010.7 As can be seen
from the said table, Barangay Pulanglupa
in Las Piñas City has the most number of
residents at 31,922. Meanwhile, according
to the data posted in the official website of
Parañaque City, San Dionisio is the second
most populated barangay in the city at
66,642.8 This is up by 6,467 from the figure
listed in the Table 1.
Map 2 Barangays beside LPPCHEA > > >
7F
From http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/municipality.asp?muncode=137601000&regcode=13&provco
de=76. Downloaded on June 20, 2012
8
From http://www.paranaque.gov.ph. Downloaded on June 20, 2012
9
Table 1 Population Distribution
Area Population Population

Barangays
(Hectares) (as of May 1, 2010) Density
Paranaque City 4,657.00 552,660 119
San Dionisio 309.69 60,175 194
La Huerta 53.72 7,298 136
Las Pinas City 3,298.60 532,330 161
Zapote 69.68 17,944 258
Pulanglupa 338.96 31,922 94
D. Fajardo 30.77 14,690 477
Ilaya 13.2 6,196 465
E. Aldana 33.36 10,342 310
Manuyo Uno 74.85 12,057 161
Source: http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats
D. Socio-Economic Profile
Las Piñas City, based on the 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates released by the
National Statistical Coordinating Board (NSCB), is fifth among the poorest cities in the Fourth
District of the National Capital Region (NCR), with a poverty incident rating of 3.4.9
Parañaque City, on the other hand, is home to some 25,073 informal settler families. Of these,
not a few are assumed to call Barangay San Dionisio their home, judging from the number of
depressed areas it identified as within its jurisdiction. Worth noting here is that a number among
these depressed areas, namely J. de Leon Coastal and Ilog Palanyag, are within the vicinity of
LPPCHEA.
Majority of the residents of the coastal communities adjoining the LPPCHEA are engaged in
informal jobs, ranging from vending, fishing, shellfish cultivation, and the like.
Table 2 below shows the socio-economic characteristics of the residents in the coastal barangays
of LPPCHEA. Data is based on the survey-interview conducted by the team of Alba, et. al. with
620 respondents.10
9
2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates, NSCB. Downloaded from http://www.nscb.gov.ph/poverty/
sae/2003%20SAE%20of%20poverty%20(Full%20Report).pdf.
10
Alba, et. al.
10
Table 1 Population Distribution
VARIABLE CLASSIFICATION PERCENTAGE

Fisherman 18.87
Vendor 18.71
Driver 10.32
Store owner 5.00
Source of Income
Employee 15.16
Laborers 20.18
Others 10.65
No Job 0.48
Shanty 40.48
Duplex 0.97
1 storey 30.81
Type of housing
2 storey 21.77
3 storey 0.97
Room only 5.0
Owner 78.55
Renter 15.00
Tenurial status Boarder 00.16
Caretaker 1.61
Others 4.68
Electricity 75.00
Kerosene 20.16
Generator 1.45
Lighting facility
Combination:
electricity and kerosene 0.16
Candle 3.23
LPG 31.94
Firewood 23.55
Fuel used for cooking Charcoal 20.32
Kerosene 9.03
Combination/Others 15.16
Water sealed 65.97
Direct to the bay 20.97
Toilet Facility Public toilet 4.19
Open pit 0.97
No toilet 7.90
Government Collector 59.84
Burning 12.26
Direct to the bay 11.77
Garbage disposal
Throw anywhere 8.87
Nearby dumpsite 4.19
Just pile in a corner/area 3.06
Awareness of LPPCHEA
No 98.39
as a critical habitat and
Yes 1.61
ecotourism area
11
E. Biophysical Profile
1. Land Cover/Present Land Use

LPPCHEA is predominantly covered by mudflats, both in the north and south islands.
Map 3 below and Table 3 in the succeeding page show the current land use of the area
and its distribution.
Table 3 Land Use Map
12
2. Plant Species Table 3 Area Distribution
Mangroves are the predominant plant species

found in LPPCHEA. Now only consisting a mere Land Cover Area (ha.)
thirty (30) hectares or so, it is nonetheless still Mudflats/Lagoons 111.627
the most dense mangrove area within Manila Mangrove 36.123
Bay. Mixed Beach Forest 20.791
Fishpond 9.733
Mangroves are salt-tolerant trees adapted (including old)
to living in salt and brackish water conditions Informal Settlement 0.724
and are critical spawning, nursery, feeding and Fishport/Bulungan 0.858
temporary shelter areas not only to fishes but River Bank 0.509
other animals as well, wild birds as in the case Italian-Thai Corp. 5.187
of LPPCHEA. Property
PEA Office Site 1.269
The DENR-ERDB introduced three (3) Road 4.785
Rhizophora species of mangroves along the TOTAL 198.036
Cavite-Manila Coastal Road sometime between
1998 and 2001. Now, as per surveys conducted,
around eight (8) species of mangroves thrive in the area. Table 4 lists the type of mangrove
species, their number, and approximate location in the area.
13
Table 4 Inventory of Plant Species found in LPPCHEA
TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS

PLANT SPECIES (n) TOTAL
Freedom Island Long Island
A. Mangrove species
Bungalon (Avicennia marina) 516 1,589 2,105
Kulasi (Lumnitzera racemosa) 39 13 52
Pagatpat (Sonneratia alba) 98 76 174
Bakauan (Rhizophora spp.) - 681 681
Pototan (Bruguiera sexangula) - 1 1
Nipa (Nypa fruticans) 2
Tabigi (Xylocarpus granatum) 1
Saging-saging (Aegiceras corniculatumI) 1
B. Mangrove-associated species
Banalo (Thespesia populnea) 6 3 9
Bangkoro (Morinda citrifolia) 43 - 43
Buta-buta (Excoecarcia agallocha) - 7 7
C. Beach type species
Alagau (Premna odorata) 1 - 1
Aroma (Acacia farnesiana) 65 65 130
Talisai (Terminalia catappa) 12 2 14
D. Other plant species
American kapok (Ceiba pentandra) 1 - 1
Atis (Annona squamosa) 1 - 1
Aure (Acacia auricouliformis) 1 - 1
Castor oil (Ricinus communis) 3 - 3
Datiles (Muntingia calabura) 60 1 61
Guava (Psidium guajava) 6 - 6
Ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala) 262 49 311
Jathropa (Jathropa curcas) 4 - 4
Malungai (Moringa oleifera) 4 - 4
Kamachile (Pithecellobium dulce) - 2 2
Sampaloc (Tamarindus indica) - 1 1
14
The flourishing of mangroves in the area was a

major factor to its evolution as a bird sanctuary
Another factor is the fact that LPPCHEA lies within
the migration path of migrant birds escaping the
harsh Siberian winter. It was in year 2003 when
the Wild Bird Club of the Philippines first noticed
the presence of wild birds feeding and nesting
in LPPCHEA. From then onwards, the Club was
able to document the presence of more than 80
migrant and resident wildbird species in the area.
The area, however, is not confined to mangroves; as can be seen in the above table, there
exists other plant species as well—beach type, hardwood and fruit-bearing types. Among
these, the Ipil-Ipil (Leucaena leucocephala) is the most widespread, followed by Aroma
(Acacia farnesiana) and Datiles (Muntingia calabura). Accordingly, these were introduced
during reclamation works in the area in the late 1980s.
Though the area may not accurately be described as lush, laboratory analysis shows that,
for the most part, quality of soil is relatively good due to the significant presence of organic
materials.
3. Macro-invertebrate and Fish Species

Flanking the mangrove areas are mudflats of about one hundred and fourteen (114) hectares.
Foods for wild birds abound in these areas and the surrounding waters. These consist of
macro-invertebrates and fish.
Macro-invertebrates include polychaetes represented by mudworms (Nereis sp), crustaceans,

and molluscs. Molluscs, the most abundant macro-invertebrates in the area, include 23
species of bivalves and 14 species of gastropods. Table 5 shows the list of macrobenthos
found in LPPCHEA per the draft Macrobenthic Ecological Baseline for Manila Bay Report by
Dr. Benjamin Vallejo in February of 2012.
Eight (8) species of juvenile to sub-adult sized fish are also found in the vicinity of LPPCHEA
indicating the significance of its mangroves as fish nursery. These are milkfish (Chanos
chanos), dusky frillgoby (Bathygodius forma fuscus), striped poly fish (Leiognathus fasciatus),
long-arm mullet (Valamugil cunesius), silver sillage (Sillago sihana), fourlined terapon
(Pelates quadrilineatus), fringe scale sardinella (Sardinelle fimbria) and whipfin silverbiddy
(Gernes filamentousus).
15
Table 5 Macro-invertebrates in LPPCHEA11
MOLLUSCS
BIVALVES GASTROPODS
Scientific Name English Name Scientific Name English Name
Anadara antiquata Antique Ark Cantharus (Pollia) fumosus Smoky Goblet
Anadara granosa Blood Cockle Cerithium sp Cerith
Anadara maculosa Ark Shell Clypeomorus batillariaeformis Necklace Cerith
Arca navicularis Indo-Pacific ark Cronia margariticola Pearl-Shell-Inhabiting
Murex
Arca ventricosa Ventricose Ark Euchelus atratus Euchelus
Barbatia foliata Decussate Ark Monodonta labiata Monodont
Chama sp. Jewel Box Nassarius olivaceous Mud Snail
Crassostrea glomerata Auckland Oyster Nassarius pullus Nassa
Crassostrea iredalei Philippine Cupped Pyrene scripta Dotted Dove Shell
Oyster
Culcullea labiata Culcullea Strombus canarium Dog Conch
Gafrarium pectinatum Comb Venus Strombus urceus Little Pitcher Conch
Gafrarium tumidum Tumid Venus Tonna sulcosa Banded Tun
Gari elongata Elongate Sunset Clam Turritella terebralis Screw Turret
Gari togata Courtesan Sunset Umbonium moniliferum Costate Button Top
Clam
Gloriopallium pallium Royal Cloak Scallop
Katelysia hiantina Hiant Venus
Lioconcha castrensis Camp Pitar Venus
Perna viridis Asian Brown Mussel
Pinctada margaritifera Pacific Pearl-Oyster
Placamen calophylla Woodcarving Cake
Spondylus squamosus Ducal Thorny Oyster
Tellina staurella Cross Tellin
Vepricardium multispinosum Many-spined Heart
Cockle
CRUSTACEANS POLYCHAETES
Scientific Name English Name Scientific Name English Name
Amphibalanus amphitrite Striped Barnacle Nereiid polychaete Rag Worms
11
Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau, Macrobenthic Ecological Baseline for Manila Bay Report, February, 2012
16
4. Avian Species
Owing to the presence of relatively large,

undisturbed mudflats, as well as the relative
abundance of bird food in the area, LPPCHEA has
steadily attracted a variety of bird species from
both within and outside the country since the
1970s. The site, in fact, is transformed—between
the months of August to April of each year—
into a feeding and resting area for migratory
birds as they make their way south of the globe
to escape the harsh winter in China, Japan and
Siberia. When this happens, the number of birds
roosting and feeding in the area can reach as
high as 5,000 heads per day.
Surveys conducted from 2004 to 2008 by the

DENR-NCR, in cooperation with the Integrated
Environmental Monitoring Program (IEMP) of
Manila Bay, recorded a total of 44 bird species
roosting in LPPCHEA, 29 of which are migratory
bird species including Siberian Rubythroat (Luscinia calliope). On the other hand, there were
about 15 resident bird species spotted in the same survey, including the endemic Philippine
Duck (Anas luzonica), a globally vulnerable species.
Of great significance is the presence in LPPCHEA of high numbers of shorebirds, most notable
amongst which are the Black-winged Stilts (Himantopus himantopus) which has an estimated
population of 1,000 heads. This makes the area a candidate for the category of a wetland of
global ecological importance following the RAMSAR convention.
To date, the DENR has recorded 52 species of birds in the area while the Wild Bird Club of the
Philippines has recorded more than 80, of which 31 species are either uncommon or rare,
also in the same area. Both records show the presence of the vulnerable Philippine Duck
and the Chinese Egret (Egretta eulophotes), an endangered species. Table 6 summarizes the
findings of bird watchers in the area.
17
Table 6 List of bird species found in LPPCHEA
SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME

Phaethon rubricauda Red-tailed Tropicbird Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper
Ardea cinerea Grey Heron Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper
Ardea purpurea Purple Heron Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper
Ardea alba Great Egret Heteroscelus brevipes Grey-tailed Tattler
Egretta intermedia Intermediate Egret Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone
Egretta eulophotes Chinese Egret Calidris ruficollis Rufous-necked Stint
(Red-necked Stint )
Egretta garzetta Little Egret Calidris subminuta Long-toed Stint
Egretta sacra Pacific Reef-Egret Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
Butorides striata Little Heron (Striated Heron) Philomachus pugnax Ruff (Reeve)
Nycticorax nycticorax Black-crowned Night-Heron Glareola maldivarum Oriental Pratincole
Nycticorax caledonicus Rufous Night-Heron Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt
Ixobrychus Cinnamon Bittern Recurvirostra avosetta Pied Avocet
cinnamomeus
Ixobrychus sinensis Yellow Bittern Larus ridibundus Black-headed Gull (Common
Black-headed Gull)
Anas luzonica Philippine Duck Sterna hirundo Common Tern
Anas clypeata Northern Shoveler Chlidonias leucopterus White-winged Tern
(White-winged Black Tern)
Aythya fuligula Tufted Duck Chlidonias hybridus Whiskered Tern
Pandion haliaetus Osprey Streptopelia bitorquata Island Collared-Dove
Haliastur indus Brahminy Kite Streptopelia chinensis Spotted Dove
(Spotted-necked Dove)
Falco tinnunculus Eurasian Kestrel (Common Geopelia striata Zebra Dove
Kestrel)
Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon Ducula carola Spotted Imperial-Pigeon
Gallirallus torquatus Barred Rail Macropygia tenuirostris Philippine Cuckoo-Dove
Porzana cinerea White-browed Crake Loriculus philippensis Colasisi
Amaurornis phoenicurus White-breasted Waterhen Centropus bengalensis Lesser Coucal
(White-breasted Bush-hen)
Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen Caprimulgus affinis Savanna Nightjar
Pluvialis fulva Asian Golden-Plover Alcedo atthis Common Kingfisher
(Pacific Golden-Plover)
Charadrius dubius Little Ringed-Plover Halcyon smyrnensis White-throated Kingfisher
Charadrius alexandrinus Kentish Plover Todirhamphus chloris White-collared Kingfisher
(Collared Kingfisher)
Charadrius mongolus Lesser Sand-Plover Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow
(Mongolian Plover)
Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel Hirundo tahitica Pacific Swallow
...cont. next page >>>
18
...cont. of Table 6
SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME

Limosa lapponica Bar-tailed Godwit Pycnonotus goiavier Yellow-vented Bulbul
Tringa totanus Common Redshank Ixos philippinus Philippine Bulbul
Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank Oriolus chinensis Black-naped Oriole
Luscinia calliope Siberian Rubythroat Rhipidura javanica Pied Fantail
Gerygone sulphurea Golden-bellied Flyeater Motacilla cinerea Grey Wagtail
(Golden-bellied Gerygone)
Phylloscopus borealis Arctic Warbler Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail
Acrocephalus stentoreus Clamorous Reed-Warbler Lanius cristatus Brown Shrike
Acrocephalus orientalis Oriental Reed-Warbler Aplonis panayensis Asian Glossy Starling
Megalurus palustris Striated Grassbird Acridotheres cristatellus Crested Mynah
Locustella ochotensis Middendorff’s Passer montanus Eurasian Tree Sparrow
Grasshopper-Warbler
(Middendorff’s Warbler)
Cisticola exilis Bright-capped Cisticola Lonchura punctulata Scaly-breasted Munia
(Golden-headed Cisticola)
Cisticola juncidis Zitting Cisticola Lonchura malacca Chestnut Munia
(Fan-tailed Cisticola)
19
3 LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL
FRAMEWORK
While LPPCHEA is firmly founded on two directly related executive

issuances—i.e., Proclamations 1412 and 1412-A—there exists laws and
legal decisions which, on examination, appear to contain aspects that
tend to impose on or challenge the project’s legal basis. This section
provides a synopsis of each law and how it relates to the LPPCHEA
proclamations and its objectives:
LPPCHEA PROCLAMATIONS
• PROCLAMATION 1412
Issued on 22 April 2007, Presidential Proclamation No. 1412 formally
establishes the Las Piñas-Parañaque Critical Habitat and Ecotourism
Area (LPPCHEA). This document defines, among others, the legal
bases for its establishment and the specific geographic area under
the jurisdiction of LPPCHEA.
20
• PROCLAMATION 1412-A
On 31 January 2008, or barely a year after Presidential Proclamation
1412 was issued, out came Presidential Proclamation 1412-
A amending the former. This directs all relevant departments
and instrumentalities under the executive branch to ensure the
preservation of existing mangrove, mudflats and ecosystems in the
area defined under Proclamation 1412.
It also directs the DENR to convene and chair a Manila Bay Critical Habitat Management
Council composed of representatives from the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA);
Department of Tourism (DOT); the City Governments of Las Piñas and Parañaque; Non-
Government Organizations (NGOs) and People’s Organizations (POs) with a direct stake in
the area.
The Council was given the authority to:
a. Prepare and cause the implementation of a Critical Habitat Management Plan, approved
by the DENR Secretary, which will include a Master Plan to establish criteria and guide
development in and around the area according to universally established and scientific
principles to ensure protection of critical bird habitats and an Ecotourism Business Plan to
ensure sustainable tourism and management, and to promote environmental awareness
and education in the area;
b. Ensure integrated and sustainable management of the area for the protection of all
waterbirds wintering, foraging, breeding, roosting, and nesting, within the Las Piñas–
Parañaque Critical Habitat and Ecotourism Area and similar areas to be established
within Manila Bay;
c. Assess other areas for purpose of establishing additional important waterbird areas in
each province of the Bay in accordance with Manila Bay Action Plan and including the
relevant LGUs in the Council as they are established; and,
d. Ensure strict compliance with the Proclamation through the incorporation and
consideration of the requirements therein in the design of any future development
projects, and in the master and development plans of the local governments and other
concerned agencies.
21
RELATED LAWS AND POLICIES
• REPUBLIC ACT 9147 (WILDLIFE RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND PROTECTION ACT)

Section 25 of R.A. 9147 provides the legal basis for the
DENR Secretary in declaring a particular geographical
area—especially those outside the coverage of R.A. 7586
or the “National Integrated Protected Areas System Act
of 1992” like LPPCHEA—as a “critical habitat”.
The same law defines a critical habitat as areas where “threatened species are found” and
moves to protect it “from any form of exploitation or destruction which may be detrimental
to the survival of the threatened species dependent therein”.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 111

E.O. 111 establishes the guidelines for ecotourism development in the country to ensure the
sustainable use, development, management, protection and conservation of the country’s
environment and natural resources and cultural heritage for the enjoyment of the present
and future generations.
• PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 1085

Issued during the heydays of military rule in the country, P.D. 1085 formally conveys the
ownership and administration of reclaimed foreshore and offshore land in the Manila Bay,
more particularly the area where the Manila-Cavite Coastal Road now stands, to the Public
Estates Authority (PEA), now Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA).
Based on this issuance, LPPCHEA is owned by the PRA, hence a member of the Management
Council and involved in the preparation of the management plan.
• REPUBLIC ACT 7160 (THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES)

The law is meant to empower local government units (LGU) by granting them greater
autonomy from central agencies and offices. As such, it lays down the basis for greater
involvement of LGUs in the conceptualization, development and implementation of national
government projects or undertaking within their territorial jurisdiction.
Sections 2 and 26 of R.A. 7160 mandates the conduct of consultations with “the local
government units, nongovernmental organizations, and other sectors concerned” of any
government initiated projects or program that may “cause pollution, climatic change,
depletion of non-renewable resources, loss of crop land, rangeland, or forest cover, and
extinction of animal or plant species”.
22
The involvement of Las Piñas and Parañaque city government in the preparation of the
management plan is in keeping with the relevant provisions of the law.
• REPUBLIC ACT 8550 (THE PHILIPPINE FISHERIES CODE OF 1998)

R.A. 8550, or simply the “Fisheries Code of 1998”, provides the guidelines for, among
others, the “utilization, management, development, conservation and protection of fishery
resources”.
Of specific importance for LPPCHEA is Section 94 of the law which makes the conversion of
any mangrove area into fishponds or “any other purposes” unlawful.
• REPUBLIC ACT 9275 (PHILIPPINE CLEAN WATER ACT OF 2004)

As its title suggests, R.A. 9275 is intended to protect all water bodies in the country, including
the wetlands and mudflats of LPPCHEA, against pollution by providing water quality standards
and regulations, as well as penalties for violations of the same.
• PROCLAMATION 2152
Declares all mangrove swamps as forest reserves. As such, it makes conversion of mangroves
to fishponds illegal.
LOCAL ORDINANCES
A. Las Piñas City

• ORDINANCE NO. 754-07
This is an ordinance directing the registration of fishing vessels
weighing five (5) gross tonnage and below to register with
the city government. This is in keeping with Executive Order
No. 305 mandating the devolution of said function from the
Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and into the local government
unit concerned.
• ORDINANCE NO. 238-95, SERIES OF 1995 (AMENDED)

An Ordinance prohibiting the littering of garbage, refuse, waste materials, remnants human
or animal excrement, animal cadavers and the like on any public, road street, alley and
sidewalks; deputizing elementary and high school students to apprehend an issue citations,
tickets to any violation; granting a 255 share of the fine collected to the student fund
apprehended a violation and imposing a penalty for any violation thereof.
23
• ORDINANCE NO. 350-9, SERIES OF 1997

An ordinance prohibiting spitting in government offices and other public places and providing
penalties for violations thereof.

An ordinance providing for the efficient and environmentally-sound collection, transportation,
processing, storage and disposal of solid waste within the city of Las Piñas providing penalties
for violations thereof.
B. Parañaque City
An ordinance providing for the standard method
of mandatory waste segregation at source in the
city of Parañaque.
• ORDINANCE NO. 06-02 (104)

An ordinance that aims to protect the natural
resources and environment of the city against
pollution and deleterious fishing methods.
LOCAL AGREEMENTS
• MANILA BAY DECLARATION (2001), AS AMENDED

The Manila Bay Coastal Strategy, which is a product of a series of consultations with
stakeholders, embodies the visions and action programs for the restoration of Manila Bay.
It was adopted by various stakeholders, with former Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as

witness, in October 2001 in an event called the Manila Bay Declaration.
• BOULEVARD 2000 FRAMEWORK

Then Pres. Fidel V. Ramos issued on February 24, 1995 Administrative Order No. 176
creating the Presidential Task Force Boulevard 2000. The Task Force, Chaired and Co-chaired
by the Secretaries of the DPWH and the DENR respectively, with the General Manager of
the PEA as Vice-chair, is responsible for the preparation, integration and coordination of all
development plans, projects and programs in the Boulevard Reclamation Area. This project
shall be considered a priority infrastructure project of the government.
24
The Task Force came up with the Boulevard 2000

Integrated Framework Plan, or what was known as
the “Bay City”. It consists of a chain of reclamation
projects with land uses predominantly residential
and commercial areas as expansion to the Central
Business Districts (CBDs) of Pasay, Parañaque, Las
Piñas and Bacoor in Cavite. Two (2) main roads, the
Bay Boulevard and Central Boulevard (President
Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard) will integrate these
reclamation projects up to the three (3) islands.
INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL AGREEMENTS

AND INITIATIVES
In addition to the laws enumerated above, the implementers will want to look over the number
of international and national covenants on the protection of the environment to which the
country is a party of. These are comprised of the following:
• CONVENTION ON MIGRATORY SPECIES (CMS,1994)

Originally signed in 1979 at Bonn, Germany, CMS is an agreement that endeavours parties to
work together in the protection of migratory species among states within their migration routes.
• CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (CBD,1992)

CBD is a treaty aimed at conserving “biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components
and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic
resources.”
• CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND

FLORA (CITES)
Also known as the “Washington Convention”, CITES is a multilateral treaty that aims to
ensure that trade of wild animals and plants across signatory countries does not threaten
the survival of the species in the wild.
• INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF WETLANDS

(RAMSAR CONVENTION)
The RAMSAR Convention is an environmental treaty that provides framework for national
action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and
their resources in member countries.
25
SUPREME COURT MANDAMUS

The Supreme Court directed government agencies to cleanup and/or restore the Manila Bay,
and thereafter the preservation of the water quality of the bay after the rehabilitation process.
The agencies that were ordered by the Supreme Court in its Decision in G.R. Nos. 171947-48
in their different capacities were the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA),
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Department of Education
(DepEd), Department of Health (DOH), Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Public
Works and Highways (DPWH), Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Philippine
Coast Guard (PCG), the Philippine National Police Maritime Group, and the Department of the
Interior and Local Government (DILG).
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
LPPCHEA is, at present, structured in accordance with the relevant provisions of Proclamation
1412-A. In particular, the preparation of the plan is administered by the Manila Bay Critical
Habitat Management Council created under Section 3 of the same (see Fig. 2). The Council is
chaired by the DENR Secretary, through the Regional Executive Director (RED) of DENRNational
Capital Region. Vice Chair of the Council is the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) and
members are representatives from the local governments of Las Piñas and Parañaque, the
Wild Bird Club of the Philippines (WBCP), and the Department of Tourism (DOT)–NCR.
DENR
PRA
Las Piñas Parañaque PO

DOT WBCP
LGU LGU Representative
Fig. 2 Manila Bay Critical Habitat Management Council
26
4 CRITICAL ISSUES IN
LPPCHEA
While there is evident legal basis for the
establishment of LPPCHEA, the road
leading to the project’s realization is not
all smooth and easy. Among the issues
identified as critical are the following:
A. Institutional and attitude issues

At present, poor institutional coordination and collaboration among
stakeholders is quite noticeable. This is understandable given the
different service orientations and mandate of some of the government
agencies involved. The same may be said about the non-government
organizations (NGOs) and peoples’ organizations involved; differences
in their interests and attitudes, as well as levels of participation are
bound to result in conflicts.
It will be the role of the LPPCHEA management team to resolve these

conflicts and to create an environment that will inspire cooperation and
harmony.
B. Fishing related Issues

As pointed above, there are eight coastal barangays that are directly
and indirectly dependent on Manila Bay for their source of living. Most
of these barangays are into fishing. Therefore, regulating or outright
restriction of their access to the coastal lagoons and mudflats of LPPCHEA
might create problems in obtaining support of the local population in the
project. In which case, the management team is obligated to find the
right mix of policies that will deal with this issue without compromising
the conservation and environmental thrust of the project.
27
C. Land use issues

Deciding on the most efficient use of land
available is always an issue, owing to the
many possible uses of a particular area. In
the case of LPPCHEA, the matter is much
more complicated because of questions on
territorial jurisdiction. As has been described,
the project area straddles along the
coastlines of Las Piñas and Parañaque and,
as per Section 20 of the Local Government
Code; the two city governments have the
power to reclassify the lands in accordance
to their needs. The need to coordinate the individual zoning ordinances of the city, at least with
respect to LPPCHEA, is a major concern. So too is the fact that, by virtue of P.D. 1085, ownership
of the land belongs to the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA).
D. Pollution
Pollution is a perennial threat to LPPCHEA. Solid and
liquid wastes pose a major threat to the viability of
LPPCHEA as a recreational centre.
Given the location of LPPCHEA, the likelihood of the

area becoming a garbage sink of sorts is alarmingly high.
According to a report published in the Philippine Daily
Inquirer, Metro Manila residents generate an average of
.7 kg of waste per day.12 Given this fact, one can only imagine how much of this waste end up
at LPPCHEA since, as per the same report, only 9 of the 17 cities in Metro Manila have a solid
waste management plan in place.
Further compounding the issue are liquid wastes coming from municipal and industrial effluents,
as well as commercial ships that navigate the shores daily. Ballast waters and runoff fuel from
trading ships and small fishing boats contribute to the contamination of the waters.
This has the effect of increasing the nitrogen and phosphate compounds dissolved in the water
resulting to a depletion of oxygen in it. Low levels of dissolved oxygen (DO) in the water, in turn,
make it difficult for aquatic species to thrive in the area. Tables 7 & 8 show the level of nitrogen and
phosphates dissolved in the waters of LPPCHEA for the period 2010-2012. Acceptable levels for
nitrates-nitrogen and phosphate-phosphorous compounds are 0.2 mg/l and 0.4 mg/l respectively.
12
Alave, Kristine L. (2011). Metro Manila generates 25% of PH daily trash. Downloaded from http://newsinfo.inquirer.
net/42151/metro-manila-generates-25-of-ph-daily-trash on June 28, 2012
28
Table 7
Observed Phosphate-Phosphorus from 2010 - 2012 sampling at LPPCHEA
14
12
Phosphate-Phosphorus, mg/ml
Feb 2010
10
May 2011
8
Oct 2011
6 Apr 2012
4 Aug 2012
0
Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4
Table 8
Observed Nitrate-Nitrogen from 2010 - 2012 sampling at LPPCHEA
35
30
Feb 2010
25
May 2011
NO3-N, mg/ml
20
Oct 2011
15 Apr 2012
10 Aug 2012
0
Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4
29
E. Bird strikes
Quite recently, the issue of bird strikes gained public
attention because of reported incidents. In one of these
reports, Philippine Airlines (PAL) President Ramon S. Ang
was quoted as saying that the proximity of LPPCHEA to
the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) ‘endangers
the life of all passengers that go to Naia’.12 He even cited
the bird sanctuary as a reason preventing the airport
from attaining Category 1 status from the [Federal
Aviation Authority].”
Reacting on the reports, the NEDA Board-National Land Use Committee (NB-NLUC) conducted
an investigation. Said study revealed that the alleged link between the bird strikes and LPPCHEA
was inconclusive. Citing international scientists and bird strike experts, the NB-NLUC said that
airports and bird habitats can “coexist if properly managed”.
In view of which, the NEDA Board advised the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA)
to “expand their bird reduction measures and invest in instruments (e.g. Avian radar) to detect
bird-mass.”13
F. Soil Erosion
The rate of soil erosion occurring at the LPPCHEA is another cause for concern, due mainly to its
effect on the size of the land area. Two of the major factors seen as contributing to rapid soil
erosion in the sanctuary are garbage scouring and siltation.
Another factor is the rise in sea level as a result of Global Warming. Such a trend is evident in
the encroachment of mangrove species towards the center of the islands. As with garbage
scouring and siltation, the means to address this problem needs to be incorporated in the
Management Plan.
Paolo G. Montecillo, “PAL says bird strikes pose safety risk at NAIA”. Downloaded from http://business.inquirer.
12
net/79926/pal-says-bird-strikes-pose-safety-risk-at-naia on September 11, 2012

13
National Economic Development Authority-National Land Use Committee, NB-NLUC Technical Board Meeting
Issue Paper: Conflict between Las Piñas-Parañaque Critical Habitat and Ecotourism Area (LPPCHEA) and Ninoy Aquino
International Airport (NAIA) Operations, released on March 20, 2012
30
5 DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS &
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
This section discusses the development concept and strategies that the
Management Council and/or future investors will apply from this point
on and until a new one is crafted to address new issues and situations.
The same is in keeping with the provisions of Proclamation 1412-A
on the same which directs the Management Council to simply draft a
Master Plan that will serve as a guide to development efforts in and
around the area. That said, actual project and development planning
shall be based on the same:
31
VISION AND MISSION OF THE PROJECT
• Vision
LPPCHEA envisions the establishment of an internationally-recognized wetland and
educational park noted not only for its rich ecological biodiversity but also for the successful
implementation of a participatory and multi-stakeholder approach in managing natural
resources.
• Mission Statement
It is the mission of the Manila Bay Critical Habitat Management Council to ensure that the
coastal lagoons and mudflats of Las Piñas and Parañaque are transformed into a premier
learning and tourist destination providing excellent service and exemplifying responsible
management of critical habitats.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
In the formulation and implementation of development plans for LPPCHEA, the following
principles must be taken in consideration:
• Social Justice and Equity

Almost always, development takes place within a particular social context. Often too, society
is structured in a way that those who have less will have lesser opportunities and entitlements
in development undertakings. This should not be the case with LPPCHEA: in crafting thus a
development plan for LPPCHEA, measures must be in place to ensure reduction of economic
and political inequalities among stakeholders.
• Democracy
The development plan for LPPCHEA must be consistent with the principles of democracy.
Peoples’ participation is rendered ineffective if it is not anchored on transparency and
mutual respect for the freedom of each and every participant in expressing their needs and
concerns and to negotiate for these. Too, participation must not be limited in the sharing of
responsibilities but in the benefits of the project as well.
• Pluralism and Openness

The development plan for LPPCHEA must unite rather than divide the stakeholders into
either sides of an issue. Being open and the ability to harmonize the different and differing
interests of all stakeholders is an important management function.
32
• Progressiveness
The development plan for LPPCHEA must be dynamic and sensitive of changing situations.
Hence, as new conditions and problems arise, so too new strategies and solutions must be
formulated, negotiated in a democratic manner, and agreed upon by all concerned.
• Pro-people and pro-environment

Finally, the development plan for LPPCHEA must be pro-people and environment. Economic
growth plays a subordinate role as against the goal of attaining social development and
environment protection thru the project.
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
In developing the coastal lagoons of Las Piñas and Parañaque, the council will build on and
implement the following inter-related strategies of (1) environment protection; (2) research and
education; (3) livelihood generation; and (4) institutionalization.
• Environment protection and rehabilitation

At the core of LPPCHEA’s strategic efforts will be the conservation and protection of the
existing marine and avian ecosystems in the lagoons as well as rehabilitation of formerly
existing habitats and endemic species. This will be achieved thru the implementation of the
following programs on:
1. Restoration of wetland habitat and biodiversity enhancement;

2. Monitoring and abatement of pollution;
3. Sustainable utilization of resources in the area;
4. Eco-friendly infrastructure development.
• Research and education

The effective management of the park will need the knowledge, skills, resources and
comparative advantages of all its stakeholders. Hence, part of the development thrust of
LPPCHEA will be the application of a continuous education program for both the management
team and staff. Said programs will focus on:
1. Information dissemination and awareness raising;

2. Scientific research on ecosystems management;
3. Skills training and development;
33
4. Alternative livelihood development.
• Sustainable livelihood generation

As the project is envisioned to show that direct
benefits may be gained from environmental
protection, LPPCHEA will work and collaborate with
different organizations and individuals in finding
ways to provide alternative sources of income for
affected small fishermen and their families. This may
be possible thru programs that will provide:
1. Skills and product development training;

2. Cooperative management;
3. Direct employment opportunities.
• Institutionalization
Another aspect of the development thrust of LPPCHEA is the empowerment of all institutional
actors involved in the implementation of the project. As such, focus will be in the following
areas:
1. Organizational and human resource development;

2. Standardization of operational system;
3. Strengthening of legal basis of the project.
34
6 INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM
The development of the LPPCHEA shall be consistent with the
President’s Social contract with the Filipino People. This means that its
development and management shall be pursued using the PPP (Public-
Private Partnership) approach which recognizes the essential role of the
private sector as the main engine for national growth and development.
Following the September 13, 2012 meeting of the Management Council,
the PRA as the property owner, shall be responsible in the promotion,
development and implementation of PPP approach. However, in the
interim, the following organizational structure for the management of
the project is proposed:
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Council
en Banc
Technical
Working Group
Working DENR
Committees
PAWCZMS
LPPCHEA
PMO
Fig. 3 Proposed LLPCHEA Organizational Structure
35
DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS

• Council en banc
The Council, as provided in Presidential Proclamation No. 1412-A will remain to exercise
its power to policy formulation and project monitoring. It shall have the exclusive power to
approve submitted plans and proposals from the committees and other partner agencies and
organizations.
• Technical Working Group
The Council will be aided in its task by a Technical Working Group whose members shall come
from council member agencies and organizations. The Technical Working Group can form or
may create committees under its supervision to help it in the review and evaluation of proposed
programs and projects for the area. The committees that may be created are as follows:
1. Biodiversity Research & Education Committee
The Research & Education Committee will be tasked of providing both the Council en banc
relevant and verified information to better guide them in the execution of their duties.
The committee shall review and recommend proposals and plans submitted by the
other committees for the approval of the Council en banc. It shall also be responsible
for the preparation of a research and development plan for LPPCHEA, particularly on the
management and restoration of wetland habitats and enhancement of natural wetland
biodiversity in the area and abatement of pollution.
Likewise, it will be in charge of conducting studies and/or researches for purposes
identified by the council.
2. Ecotourism Committee
The committee shall be responsible for the development of an ecotourism business
plan that capitalizes on biodiversity assets and formulate guidelines in development
of tourism infrastructure, human resource training, promotion and marketing, and
sustainable tourism.
3. Plans & Programs
The committee shall be responsible for the preparation of the over-all infrastructure
development plan for LPPCHEA and the monitoring and updating of the management
plan. It shall have the power to regulate and/or restrict construction in the area, ensuring
that all construction activities therein are in accordance with the approved infrastructure
development plan for the park and ecologically-sound engineering techniques and
building materials.
36
4. Institutional
The institutional committee shall be in charge of ensuring that all approved plans and
programs of the LPPCHEA are coordinated with all the stakeholders of the project and
the maintenance of a well-coordinated, effective and efficient linkage with program
beneficiaries, people’s organizations existing in the area. It shall also have the
responsibility of drafting and lobbying for the legislation of a bill formally establishing
LPPCHEA.
5. Human Resources & Livelihood

The committee shall be responsible for the preparation of a comprehensive human
resources development plan for management and staffing purposes. It shall also be in
charge of with the preparation of alternative livelihood packages for local residents and
sourcing partners and funds for which.
6. Finance
The task of ensuring all council-approved plans and programs are funded and resources
needed by project stakeholders and Council en banc are available shall be delegated to
the committee on finance. Together with the Human Resources & Livelihood Committee,
it shall have the responsibility of crafting project proposals for revenue generation of the
project and social enterprise.
7. Information, Education and Communication

The chief responsibility of the IEC committee is the promotion and marketing of
LPPCHEA in all available mediums. For this purpose, it shall cause the preparation of a
communication plan for the project, as well as the development of dynamic and engaging
IEC materials.
• DENR/PAWCZMS/LPPCHEA Management Office

The DENR through its regional office shall be responsible for the implementation of the
council-approved interim plans and programs. It shall also act as the Secretariat of the
Council.
36 37
7 LPPCHEA PHYSICAL
LAY-OUT PLAN
Consistent with Section 4, par. 1 of Proclamation 1412-A, the

Management Council came up with a Physical Layout Plan that shall
serve as guide for all development undertakings, particularly land uses,
in the coming years. It provides the rationale for the proposed land use
plan, the proposed spatial structure for the area, and proposed policies
for land use management. With this, it is hoped that the problems
identified earlier will be addressed thru the careful implementation of
the proposed plan.
ZONING SCHEME
The area will be divided into three different sectors or zones. Zones are
defined in terms of their level of access to the general public and their
purpose. The concept of wise-use and management of natural resources
has been employed in the delineation of each zone. These are: (1) Strict Zone (SZ); (2) Recreational
Zone (RZ); and, (3) Sustainable Use Zone (SU). The following section is devoted to explaining
each zones.
Fig. 4 Zoning Scheme for LPPCHEA
MANILA BAY
STRICT ZONE
RECREATIONAL ZONE
SUSTAINABLE USE
ZONE
39
STRICT ZONES
Strict Zones are devoted to habitat restoration and biodiversity enhancement. Public access to
said areas, therefore, is strictly limited. The mangrove areas, salt marshes and mud flats (north
and south lagoons) are all part of the Strict Zones.
Fig. 5 Areas designated as Strict Zone
SALT
MARSHES
MANGROVE
AREA
NORTH
LAGOON
MANGROVE
AREA
SOUTH
LAGOON
STRICT ZONE
40
Habitat Restoration
Within the strict zones are salt marshes; these

low-lying, waterlogged areas play a key role in the
general food web, coastal protection, shoreline
stabilization (through sedimentation) and aquatic
nutrient exchange. To ensure the biological integrity
and sustainability of the area thus, a program for the
revival, rehabilitation, and maintainance of the salt
marshes needs to be developed.
In the preparation of such program, the following areas of concerns should be taken into
account: (a) removal of the heavily deposited solid wastes and accumulated silts and sediments
to revert it to its original elevation which was on intertidal range; (b) gradual eradication of non-
native/less salt tolerant species; and, (c) re-introduction of pioneer halophytes such as Spartina,
Salicornia, and other halophytic plant species.
LPPCHEA, as has been indicated, is significantly populated

with Ipil-ipil (Leucaenaleucocephala), an invasive tree species
that was introduced into the area through the reclamation
activity. These ipil-ipil trees compete with other vascular
plant species for sunlight and organic nutrients in the soil.
They are rapidly extending to other wetland habitats and
are a particular impediment in the growth of seedlings and
sapling planted in LPPCHEA. As a mitigating measure, gradual
removal of these invasive species should be undertaken.
RECREATIONAL ZONES
The stretch of the Long Island, except the mangrove areas
and lagoons, and certain portions of Freedom Island are
designated as Recreational Zones. Visitors are given free
access to this area. Figure 6 below shows the areas tagged
as Recreation Zones:
41
Fig. 6 Areas designated as Recreational Zone
RECREATIONAL
ZONE
42
The Recreational Zone is divided into two sections: The first section shall house the Visitor Center
and park’s Administration Office, as well as the Restaurant/Food Stalls, Eco-lodges and parking
area. It shall serve as the center for all activities inside the park.
Fig. 7 Basic Park Amenities
VISITORS’ CENTER /
ADMINISTRATION OFFICE
ECO-LODGE
RESTAURANT /
FOOD STALLS
PARKING AREAS
43
The other section shall be devoted to bird watching facilities and education and research. It
shall house an Education Center which will be equipped with a library and a natural museum.
Nature trails and boardwalks leading to bird observation hides is also part of this section.
Fig. 8 Bird Watching Facilities
44
Nature Trails and boardwalks provide access to visitors in the different

parts of the park. Bird hides, on the other hand, will offer visitors a
chance to observe the birds of LPPCHEA in their natural habitat.
The Education Center is intended to enhance the bird watching

experience of the visitors by providing scientific information about
each bird specie and their environment. The Library will be filled with
reading and audio-video materials about ecosystem, coastal resource
management, wildlife migration, field guides, etc., for those who will
want to further their knowledge about wild birds and the environment
in general.
The Education Center shall double as an activity center and will

be designed to accommodate special functions such as seminars,
workshops and meetings.
For visitors who will opt to stay longer, eco-lodges will be made available for them. They will
have an option to stay in rooms or to pitch tents in designated camping areas and sleep under
the stars.
Meanwhile, restaurants and food stalls offering special menu will ensure nourishment of the
park’s visitors during their stay.
45
SUSTAINABLE USE ZONE
Finally, the Sustainable Use Zone is reserved for use and access of local communities for livelihood
development purposes. Fishing, shellfish collection, and other lowimpact economic activities
will be allowed here.
Just the same, access to this zone shall be monitored and regulated to ensure its sustainability.
Fig. 9 Sustainable Use Zone
47
ANNEX
ANNEX
Management Council Meetings
Writeshop for LPPCHEA Management Plan, August 11-12, 2011
Day 1
Day 2
48
Stakeholders’ Consultation Workshop - December 11-13, 2011
49
08 February 2012 - PAWB, Quezon City
50
Special Council Meeting at Parañaque City Hall - 07 March 2012
51
20 June 2012 - Heritage Hotel
52
Writeshop for LPPCHEA Framework Plan - September 13, 2012
53

LPPCHEA-Book PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

LPPCHEA-Book PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

SAVING THE LAST

LPPCHEA FRAMEWORK PLAN

The coastal lagoons of Las Piñas and Parañaque are an interesting

THE PLANNING PROCESS

As it turns out, LPPCHEA plays an important role

The DENR-NCR started organizing meetings

also served as the occasion for formally assembling

The Management Council first met on February

point of environmental conservation will never

proposed management plan will survive

Indeed, experience tells us that policy

In the Philippines, the legal framework for the establishment and

Fig. 1 Aerial Photo of Manila Bay

As the name indicates, LPPCHEA is part

Map 1 Boundary Map > > >

Table 1 in the next page shows the

Map 2 Barangays beside LPPCHEA > > >

Table 1 Population Distribution

Area Population Population

Table 1 Population Distribution

VARIABLE CLASSIFICATION PERCENTAGE

1. Land Cover/Present Land Use

2. Plant Species Table 3 Area Distribution

Mangroves are the predominant plant species

Table 4 Inventory of Plant Species found in LPPCHEA

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS

The flourishing of mangroves in the area was a

3. Macro-invertebrate and Fish Species

Macro-invertebrates include polychaetes represented by mudworms (Nereis sp), crustaceans,

Table 5 Macro-invertebrates in LPPCHEA11

Owing to the presence of relatively large,

Surveys conducted from 2004 to 2008 by the

Table 6 List of bird species found in LPPCHEA

SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME

...cont. next page >>>

SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME ENGLISH NAME

While LPPCHEA is firmly founded on two directly related executive

The Council was given the authority to:

RELATED LAWS AND POLICIES

• REPUBLIC ACT 9147 (WILDLIFE RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND PROTECTION ACT)

• EXECUTIVE ORDER 111

• PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 1085

• REPUBLIC ACT 7160 (THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES)

• REPUBLIC ACT 8550 (THE PHILIPPINE FISHERIES CODE OF 1998)

• REPUBLIC ACT 9275 (PHILIPPINE CLEAN WATER ACT OF 2004)

A. Las Piñas City

• ORDINANCE NO. 238-95, SERIES OF 1995 (AMENDED)

• ORDINANCE NO. 350-9, SERIES OF 1997

• ORDINANCE NO. 578-02, SERIES OF 2002

• ORDINANCE NO. 06-02 (104)

• MANILA BAY DECLARATION (2001), AS AMENDED

It was adopted by various stakeholders, with former Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as

• BOULEVARD 2000 FRAMEWORK

The Task Force came up with the Boulevard 2000

INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL AGREEMENTS

• CONVENTION ON MIGRATORY SPECIES (CMS,1994)

• CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (CBD,1992)

• CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND

• INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF WETLANDS

SUPREME COURT MANDAMUS

Las Piñas Parañaque PO

Fig. 2 Manila Bay Critical Habitat Management Council

A. Institutional and attitude issues