Mt. Kanlaon, Its Myths and Wildlife, Painting by Masaste

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(Note: This Management Plan was approved prior to the passage of RA 9154, declaring Mt. Kanlaon a Natural Park and authorizing PNOC-EDC to enter into 169 hectares of a so called "buffer zone" for the purpose for geothermal exploration and development. In this 2001 Management Plan, there is no room for PNOC-EDC's geothermal development. The plan is included in full in this website because it is closer to an ideal of how the plan should be. )

Mt. Kanlaon Natural Park

Management Plan: June 2001

Executive Summary

Mount Kanla-on in Negros Island was proclaimed as a protected area under the category of a Natural Park through Presidential Proclamation No. 1005 on May 8, 1997. It forms part of the Western Visayas Biogeographic Zone and is an important area for biodiversity conservation. The WVBZ represents 9% of the total area of the 15 biogeographic zones of the Philippines.

MKNP represents the only natural park in the greater-Negros-Panay faunal region where variety of endemic and endangered species can still be found. It has a high biodiversity value particularly on endemism and species richness and serves as an important life support system as a watershed for a large portion of Negros Island. It is home to some species of plants and animals not found elsewhere in the world and where natural landscape is at its best. MKNP is also host to a growing population within its boundaries majority of which belong to marginalized sectors.

There are numerous threats to the ecological integrity and biodiversity of MKNP. The presence of large settlements inside the PA composed of some 3000 households exert pressures on the resources of the park. Unsustainable and destructive livelihood activities have endangered several endemic fauna and flora and caused the extinction of others. Tracts of forestlands have been converted into agricultural use that adopts inappropriate technologies that are dependent on inorganic fertilizers and pesticides. Some LGUs within the park and other national agencies have implemented projects that are in conflict with the resource use policy of the park. Infrastructures in the area such as roads, school and market buildings, health centers and irrigation systems further attract in-migration. 

Other threats and issues that have impact on the PA are lack of ancestral domain and tenurial rights of IPs and tenured migrants, titled lands, absentee claimants and peace and order problems. Also included are natural and man made disasters, development of environmentally critical projects and sustainability of institutions and management programs for PA conservation.

The PAMB, Office of the PASu and the HNGO have formulated a management plan that seeks to address the requirements of biodiversity conservation and economic development. It provides the framework for sustainable development under cross cutting themes of biodiversity conservation, economic and social development, management structures, capacity and participation and disaster management. The plan adopts reinforcing strategies for the broad participation of different stakeholders in the various phases of implementation.

The strategies related to biodiversity conservation provides for the immediate zoning of the park, implementation of community-based protection measures designed to preserve its remaining resources, rehabilitation of highly disturbed and degraded habitats and ecosystems and the conduct of biodiversity monitoring and researches. The strategies on economic and social development focuses on alleviating poverty conditions in the PA while promoting the active participation of communities in the management. These require the adoption of more sustainable non-destructive alternative livelihood practices, sustainable agriculture technologies, community-based eco-tourism, provision of land tenure security and advocacy on ecological integrity.  

Similarly, the strategies on management structure, capacity and participation call for the institutionalization of different management structures and support mandated under the NIPAS Law. These include the PAMB and the PASu Office and their budgetary requirements for sustained operations. Priority is the passage of the law by the Philippine Congress proclaiming MKNP as a protected area that will complete the process of gazetting of the protected area. This theme also provides for improving the technical and managerial capacities of key players in PA management. Specific strategies under this theme focus on enhancing inter-agency coordination. LGU support, declaration of MKNP as a “peace zone”, resource mobilization and sustained IEC activities are other strategies of this plan.

The five-year implementation plan of MKNP proposes a total budget of P 119,204,903.00. Its first year implementation cost is estimated at about P 20,364,463.00  

2.0       INTRODUCTION

 The concept of the national park system was introduced in the Philippines by the American colonizers in 1932 through the passage of Legislative Act No. 3913. The system mandated that public domains with panoramic, historical, scientific and aesthetic values shall be withdrawn from settlement and should be dedicated as national parks for the benefit and enjoyment of the people. However, while most early parks were established to protect scenic and recreational resources, the idea of protecting the entire ecosystems to conserve biological diversity only came later in the form of “protected area” concept.    

Several legislative acts provided the legal framework for protected areas. The revised Forestry and Fishery Codes facilitated the establishment of national parks and marine sanctuaries in several parts of the country. There were also Executive and Administrative Orders declaring certain sites as protected areas such as watersheds, forest reserves, wildlife sanctuaries and others. In spite of these, however, national parks were not properly managed. With the logging boom in the 1960s, the Bureau of Forest Development (BFD) which was then charged of managing national parks, focused on the exploitation of forest resources.

The need for a more effective protected areas system was highlighted by a World Bank country report on the Philippines showing the deterioration of national parks in the country. Thus, in an effort to rationalize the management of the country’s natural resources, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) was created in 1987 by virtue of Executive Order No. 192. Consequently, the Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau (PAWB) was formed and tasked to protect, conserve and develop the country’s protected areas and biodiversity. The Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development (PSSD) was also formulated in 1989 and provided the country with a blueprint for the pursuit of economic development with conscious consideration of environmental protection.

The Philippines likewise became a party to several international agreements and conventions like the Basel Convention, Montreal Protocol, Convention on Biodiversity and United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). As one gesture of commitment to these international agreements, the country implemented the Integrated Protected Areas System (IPAS) Project to evaluate the status of different national parks and other protected areas and to design a management system that will enhance biodiversity conservation efforts. This project paved the way for the enactment of Republic Act 7586 or the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Law of 1992, which provides for the establishment and management of the protected areas system to promote biodiversity and sustainable development. Subsequently, the Conservation of Priority Protected Areas Project (CPPAP) was implemented, funded by the World Bank, and piloted the NIPAS Act in the first 10 priority sites identified in the 1992 IPAS Final Report that included Mount Kanla-on Natural Park (MKNP).

The formulation of this plan is a mandate accorded by the NIPAS to ensure and enhance the permanent protection and conservation of the natural condition of MKNP. The plan proposes innovative management strategies to respond to the different challenges of PA management, and to guide the PAMB in policy and program decisions, and the PASu in administering the protected area.

The simplified planning process shown in figure 1 gave working framework for the development of this document. The profile is the result of compilation of vast information from various sources and beefed up by the data generated while implementing the CPPAP.  Development plans by the different LGUs including their land-use plans were considered in the drafting. Resulting from data analysis, management issues and concerns were drawn out as basis in identifying management goals and objectives. Strategies were then spelled out including the introduction of zoning regime that shall be adopted in carrying out the different programs in addressing key issues in the PA.

The on-ground plan formulation aided by thematic maps was followed with a more detailed review, critiquing and consultation, providing stakeholders with the opportunity to participate in the various phases of plan development. The Office of the PASu with the Host NGO took the lead in the preparation of this plan through series of workshops and consultations with the PAMB and communities. The detailed planning process is presented in Annex D.

Figure 1. Simplified Planning Process

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20