Concerned netizens and environmental advocates were quick to flag something off-putting and suspicious bot-like commenters in a series of Facebook posts from the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) asserting its “legal mandate” over the protected Las Piñas Parañaque Wetland Park (LPPWP).
These posts, plus a video, came after various environmental groups condemned PRA’s statement about opening LPPWP for lease or joint venture on March 19.
The said video further drew the ire of many for suggesting so-called strategies to push through the proposed development in the LPPWP, including relocating mangroves.
PRA’s unsustainable solution
“You cannot simply just earth-ball or relocate mangroves,” said Mangroves Matter Philippines founder Matthew Vincent Tabilog.
In the video, PRA claims to plant more seedlings after relocating the mangrove forests of LPPWP.
LPPWP is declared a Ramsar Site (Wetlands of International Importance) and part of the ENIPAS (Expanded National Integrated Protected Area Systems) Act. From this alone, the wetland must be protected.
Tabilog argues that PRA failed to specify what techniques it intends to use for the so-called mangrove relocation or where exactly the mangroves would be transferred following considerations of environmental conditions.
He added that the root systems of mangroves are incredibly extensive, noting that relocating or uprooting mangroves cannot guarantee a 100% survival rate.
“In the Philippines, we experience more than 20 typhoons annually. So if you plant mangroves na very young pa, a lot of them will be wiped out because of heavy typhoons and it is something that we have to consider,” he added.
Last year, the Global Mangrove Alliance Philippines (GMAP) urged the Department of Environment and Natural Resources Biodiversity Management Bureau (DENR-BMB) to reconsider the applications of earth-balling of mangroves for infrastructure projects and related activities.
Earth-balling is a method of tree relocation where the tree is dug up with a large ball of earth and roots, leaving only most of the root systems intact.
Various studies also revealed that mangrove forests are unlikely to survive transplantation methods and earth-balling practices not only due to physiological stress but also because the process is economically unsound, especially by requiring high costs with no guarantee of mangrove seedling survival.
In the Philippines, mangrove forests used to be 500,000 hectares during the last century. By the 1990s, a declining trend was observed due to the drastic conversion of the wetland areas for aquaculture or fishponds, residential development, and industrial expansion.
“Consultations should be needed from experts and specialists, and monitoring of the planting sites is of paramount importance to determine if these seedlings are in optimal conditions to thrive in the ecosystem. Removing mature mangroves and replacing them with newly planted seedlings is unsustainable,” said Mangroves Matter Philippines in a joint statement.
Mangrove removal will worsen climate crisis
“Mangroves are carbon sinks. If you remove these, what’s the point of us knowing that we’re vulnerable to the effects of climate change when supposedly we should be conserving and protecting them instead of removing them or replacing them that we cannot even guarantee survival rate if relocated?” Tabilog lamented.
Climate scientists note that mangroves are highly effective carbon sinks that store significant amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2). When mangrove forests are removed, transplanted, or earth-balled, the stored CO2 will be released back into the atmosphere and contribute to the build-up of greenhouse gases that drive climate change.
Tabilog emphasized that mangroves also provide critical ecological and socio-economic services, especially when acting as natural barriers against storm surges, serving as buffer zones that support the livelihoods of fisherfolk, and helping sustain the food security of many coastal communities. Mangroves also serve as nesting and breeding grounds for migratory birds and various marine species.
“PRA should listen to the calls of the people, scientists, indigenous peoples, fisherfolks, and coastal communities who can be potentially affected by these developments. Consult with them and reconsider all of the plans as these can highly impact and are not aligned with our goals in terms of environmental protection,” said Tabilog.
Push for green alternatives
Instead of mangrove removal or earth-balling, GMAP advocates for the exploration and implementation of hybrid green-gray infrastructure solutions. This means integrating nature-based approaches to developmental measures while preserving ecological functions. These include mangrove restoration, community-driven conservation efforts, and sustainable land use among others.
GMAP further emphasized that coastal development should avoid designing coastal infrastructure in mangrove forests, especially like the LPPWP.
“LPPWP is Metro Manila’s last mangrove forest and a legally protected critical habitat[…] We call on the DENR to protect the LPPWP and the PRA to retract its invitation to investors and refrain from initiating activities that destroy our precious natural resources,” said GMAP in a statement.
