Kalikasan’s Brief Against the Manila Bay White Sand Project

POTENTIAL DAMAGE Dumping white sand on the shoreline of rehabilitated Manila Bay may have seemed like a fantastic idea to government officials until marine experts and academics screamed about the dangers it posed to the bay’s ecosystem. —RICHARD A. REYES

MANILA, Philippines – The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) states that the “white sand” that is poured to create a beach on a stretch of the rocky coastline of Manila Bay does not represent any harm to the ecosystem of the bay, but independent safety reports from foreign contractors Point out that dolomite, the rock pulverized to produce false white sand, can cause respiratory illness and is a potential carcinogen.

In an interview with the Inquirer on Sunday, maritime affairs expert and University of the Philippines law professor Jay Batongbacal said that reports from American contractors about potential damage from dolomite pouring into a 500-mile stretch meters from the coast of Manila Bay could be featured. a petition for an injunction from Kalikasan, a legal recourse to stop potentially environmentally damaging projects.

In its 2012 safety data report, Texas dealer and builder Lehigh Hanson Inc. warned that dolomite could cause skin and eye irritation, cancer, and lung damage through prolonged or repeated exposures. .

Another company, Lhoist North America, warned in its own safety data report submitted in 2018 that dolomite contains crystalline silica, classified as a potential carcinogen when inhaled by humans.

“Inhaling silica can also cause a chronic lung disorder, silicosis,” Lhoist said in his report.

If true, Batongbacal said, opponents of the DENR project may “obtain a kalikasan injunction and an injunction against the project from the courts, given the potential harm of dumping tons of potentially toxic particulates into a densely populated area.” .

“This is why any agency should have done a thorough evaluation of a project first,” Batongbacal said. “The DENR definitely violated several laws. Even something as basic as a consultation with the local government.[s] it was not done “.

Previously, the Mayor of Manila, Francisco “Isko Moreno” Domagoso, expressed his support for the project to beautify the beachless coastline of Manila Bay.

It is part of the P397.9 million Manila Bay rehabilitation program launched by Environment Secretary Roy Cimatu in January last year, and is expected to be completed by September 19.

Taken from Cebu, the dolomite reportedly came from Cebu, alarming local officials, who also complained that it was mined from their province without their knowledge, much less for the benefit of the locality where it was mined.

Loss of money

Fishermen and environmental groups oppose the project, saying it would only worsen the degradation of the bay’s environment.

Environmental watchdog Greenpeace Philippines said on Thursday the project was a waste of money because backwashing would bring the synthetic sand into the bay, while the Pamalakaya fishermen group denounced it as “whitewashing the government’s failure to rehabilitate the bay of Manila”.

Laws violated

Another environmental group, Oceana Philippines, said Sunday that DENR violated national laws governing ecological and heritage conservation.

Gloria Estenzo-Ramos, President of Oceana, said that DENR did not comply with the mandatory environmental impact assessment study required by Presidential Decree No. 1586 and the 1998 Philippine Fisheries Code.

Both laws require a thorough assessment of the potential effects of any project that is deemed to have an adverse impact on the environment and surrounding communities. These include the expansion or rehabilitation of specific areas.

DENR previously said it did not have to meet this requirement, claiming that a mere “beach food” does not need to undergo such an evaluation.

Incorrect

“That is not correct,” Batongbacal said on Sunday. “Whenever there is a potential negative effect, it is necessary. In fact, you can only find out if you have [adverse effects] if he really meets the [environmental impact assessment]. “

In the 2008 Supreme Court ruling that ordered 13 government agencies to clean up and rehabilitate Manila Bay, he said, no “beach nutrition plan” was mentioned.

“They had all these interventions aligned aimed at pollution, the application of marine laws on illegal fishing, basically [geared toward] better handling of the bay. The beach food plan was not even mentioned in the plan, especially when all activities have to be coordinated, ”said Batongbacal.

Oceana’s Ramos said that DENR also violated the Wildlife Conservation Law by extracting dolomite from Alcoy, Cebu, home to several endemic and protected species.

“Cebu is even one of the 10 provinces considered [landslide-prone areas], “she said.” That’s why [environmental impact assessment] it is necessary for both [Manila and Cebu]. ”

‘No rehabilitation’

Ramos said several environmental groups planned to draft a position paper on the matter before going to court.

“A legal recourse is a last resort because it takes a long time. For now, we hope that [will] listen to our concerns and respond to us with transparency, ”he said.

“This is not a rehabilitation but a destruction of the environment,” said Ramos. “This is a waste of [taxpayer] money when other agencies can’t find [funds] due to the pandemic. So imagine his nerve to claim that this project was already in the pipeline. So ruthless. “

The Inquirer Foundation supports our leaders in healthcare and still accepts cash donations to be deposited into the Banco de Oro (BDO) checking account # 007960018860 or donate through PayMaya using this link .

Read next

EDITOR’S SELECTION

MOST READ

Don’t miss the latest news and information.