A RECENT study conducted by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the Indonesian-based Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) has been quoted as saying that deforestation is not a cause of flooding. The study was conducted in Guatemala and China whose geological landscape, environmental condition and political system are very different from the Philippines. If FAO/CIFOR concluded that in those countries deforestation is not a cause of flooding, such findings do not hold true in the Philippines where forest degradation has gone from mild to severe from 70-percent forest cover in 1900 to barely18 percent in 1998 (ESSC, 1999. With the gravity of forest degradation in the Philippines, floodings have become more frequent and predictable in recent years. In 1990 it occurred in Western Mindanao (Zamboanga del Sur). In 1991 floods devastated Ormoc, Leyte, and also occurred in Central Luzon and Southern Mindanao. According to investigative journalist Marites Vitug (1993), “The Ormoc floods disaster was caused by deforestation—the result of decades-old government land use policies and the conversion of forest land to agriculture and logging.”
In 1994 nine incidents of flooding were recorded, a majority occurred in Northern, Southern and Central Mindanao. In 2004 the provinces of Quezon, Aurora, Bulacan and Nueva Ecija tragically suffered from flash floods and mudslides. In most of these areas where killer flash floods occurred, particularly in Samar, Leyte, Camiguin, Surigao, Isabela and Quezon, deforestation has been reported as severe due to various causes.
The FAO/CIFOR analysis that forests doesn’t act as “giant sponges” is highly contentious. According to Norman Myers, the author of the Primary Source, Tropical Forests & Our Future (1992), the forests exert a sponge effect, soaking up moisture before releasing it at regular rates . . . The multistoried structure of the forest, together with its vast amount of foliage, helps break the impact of a tropical downpour.” He added:
“The regions, where deforestation is most advanced, is Southern-Southeast Asia, and it suffers floods that increase in rage and intensity year by year.” When there are not enough forest cover, the absorptive and carrying capacity of the forest is diminished. Studies also indicate that if deforestation in the Philippines continues, soil resource depreciation would increase to PhP334 million in 1988, with a likely increase to P906 million in 1996 (Ganapin, 2001 as cited in Fernando, 2005).
Whatever FAO/CIFOR found out about Guatemalan and Chinese trees that made them conclude that such trees have roots that are too shallow to prevent major mudslides, this is not true for our native dipterocarps. Our trees, especially those found in the lowland forests, are large and buttressed.
Their roots are deeply planted in the ground. Thus, they remain sturdy windbreakers and barriers against heavy storms. However, in deforested areas due to land conversion for example, the remaining trees are no longer sufficient to help absorb water.
This was evident in the case of Panaon, Leyte, where the original dipterocap trees were replaced with coconut palms. The shallow roots of these palms could not have prevented mudslides and flash floods. Thus, the tragedy that occurred in 2003 was inevitable.
To generally conclude that deforestation in the Philippines is not a cause of flooding is misleading. The plunder and ravage done to the country’s forests are already enough to make Filipinos suffer not only from floods, but also from food shortage, water scarcity and health problems.