GISdevelopment.net --> Application --> Urban Planning
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 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:
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 in a 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 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
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 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 Base
The database used in this study included the following:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 the restoration 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 be done to ensure the safety of the people living in the said areas.
5. REFERENCES
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 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:
- Strict Protection Zone,
- Sustainable Use Zone,
- Restoration Zone,
- Multiple Use Zone,
- Special Use Zone,
- Habitat Management Zone,
- Buffer Zone,
- Cultural Zones,
- Recreational Zones
- Special Use Zones,
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 in a 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 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
- 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.
- 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.
- Restoration Zone- Areas of degraded habitat where the long-term goal will be to restore natural habitat 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.
- 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.
- Multiple Use Zones - Areas with significant, traditional and/or sustainable land use, including agriculture, 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
- Buffer Zone - Areas outside the protected area but adjoining it that are established by law (Section 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.
- Cultural Zone- Areas with significant cultural, religious, spiritual or anthropological values where traditional rights exist and ceremonies and/ or other practices take place.
- Recreational Zones- Areas of high recreational, tourism, educational, or environmental awareness values where sustainable eco-tourism, recreational, conservation education or public awareness activities may be allowed as prescribed in the management plan.
- 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.
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 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 Base
The 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
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.
| 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) | PERCENTAGE |
| Alienable and Disposable | 2733750 | 93.18% |
| Forest Land | 34375 | 1.17% |
| Sudlon National Park | 147500 | 5.03% |
| 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% |
| Sudlon National Park | 19375 | 0.54% |
| 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% |
| 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 the restoration 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 be done 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