Typhoon Ulysses bared the grim reality: The government has failed to stop the loggers and miners in killing our forest, as President Duterte himself said. The forest is our first line of defense against typhoons disgorging so much flood water.
However, another grim reality must be added: The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Climate Change Commission (CCC) and other government agencies have failed to institutionalize an integrated watershed management. The complaints of the local government officials from Cagayan and Isabela regarding the huge flow of flood water coming from nearby provinces such as Kalinga, Apayao, Nueva Viscaya and Mountain Province indicate the absence of an IWM for the area. Same story for Marikina City, San Mateo and Montalban/Rodriguez, which were all inundated by flood water coming from the upper Marikina Valley and the Sierra Madre range.
In 2010, the Climate Change Congress of the Philippines (CCCP) headed by Bishop Antonio Ledesma and Chairman Christian Monsod proposed to the then newly established CCC that the “integrated river basin management” strategy be replaced by the “integrated watershed management” approach. As generally defined, the IRBM refers to a coordinated approach in the conservation, management and development of water, land and other resources across a given river basin. The IWM does the same on a bigger geographic scale.
The rationale given by the CCCP for the proposed shift is simple: The river basin is part of a bigger watershed. The late Dr. Esteban Godilano, CCCP’s expert on geo-hazard mapping, explained that the whole country can, in fact, be divided into watersheds. He quipped: “We all live in a watershed!”
Dr. Godilano defined a watershed based on his geographic and environmental training at Cornell University. He said a watershed is the “geographical area” that covers the land, forests, rivers and streams in the said area. Water flows from the “ridge” (top of a hill or mountain), and gathers and merges with water draining from other areas of the land and forest. Water from the ridge and land eventually joins the river systems and various tributaries before flowing downward, as a body of water, all the way to the “reef” of the sea. Hence, the popular phrase “from ridge to reef.”
Based on the foregoing definition, all land within a designated watershed is considered part of the said watershed. This is the reason why the CCCP asked CCC then to adopt the IWM strategy and to help push government to use watershed as the “planning domain.” This implies a trans-regional and inter-provincial system of environmental planning. Dr. Godilano explained that the IWM does not respect administrative boundaries or local jurisdictions because water flows, flooding and landslides do not respect such boundaries or jurisdictions.
Typhoon Sendong in 2011 showed the importance of having an honest-to-goodness IWM. Dr. Godilano was able to predict in 2009 the possibility of massive flooding in Cagayan de Oro based on his analysis of the watershed map in the area. The map shows that rains in nearby Bukidnon province can rush downward to Cagayan de Oro even if the latter is having a sunny day. About 1,200 died when Sendong caused massive flooding in Cagayan de Oro and Iligan, with flood water coming from the hilly parts of Bukidnon and the Misamis provinces.
A watershed is disturbed by deforestation, population growth, pollution, road construction, mining, quarrying, swidden agriculture, and so on. And yes, by typhoons and earthquakes. Hence, a comprehensive system of watershed management is critical.
At the center of watershed management is water management. Either there is too much water, or too little of it, at the upper and lower parts of a watershed. Mapping the flow of water draining from various parts of the watershed is a major challenge. This mapping, in turn, becomes part of a holistic program of watershed management that seeks to develop a healthy balance in the interaction between the population and the environment.
The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) lists the following services and functions of a watershed:
- Provision of freshwater (particularly upland watersheds); Regulation of water flow;
- Maintenance of water quality;
- Provision and protection of natural resources for local livelihoods;
- Protection against natural hazards (e.g. local floods and landslides);
- Provision of energy (e.g. hydropower);
- Biodiversity conservation; and
- Recreation.
The FAO explains that the above watershed services and functions “…may be threatened by deforestation, uncontrolled timber harvesting, changes in farming systems, overgrazing, roads and road construction, pollution, and the invasion of alien plants. They may also be affected by natural disturbances such as wildfires, windstorms and disease. The deterioration of watershed functions has significant negative impacts, potentially leading to erosion and the depletion of soil productivity; the sedimentation of watercourses, reservoirs and coasts; increased runoff and flash flooding; reduced infiltration to groundwater; reduced water quality; and the loss of aquatic habitat and biodiversity.”
The above threats to the watershed requires a holistic and balanced program of protection and preservation of water, forest, land and other resources in the watershed. FAO asserts that watershed planning and watershed stewardship are a must. Watershed management also requires consultation with and getting the support of the communities living within the given watershed area on policies affecting the future of the watershed. These communities include those in the uplands (indigenous people, migrant settler families) and those in the low lands.
The question is: Have the DENR, CCC and other concerned government agencies ever sat down with the communities in various watersheds to discuss the future? And do the various watersheds, in their current state of care or neglect, have a sustainable future?