Philippine Institute for Development Studies
Surian sa mga Pag-aaral Pangkaunlaran ng Pilipinas

National Greening Program Assessment
Project: Environmental Component Process Evaluation Phase
Tonie O. Balangue
DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES NO. 2016-11

The PIDS Discussion Paper Series
constitutes studies that are preliminary andsubject to further revisions. They are being circulated in a limited number of copies only for purposes of soliciting comments and suggestions for further refinements. The studies under the Series are
unedited and unreviewed.
The views and opinions expressed
are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute.
Not for quotation without permission
from the author(s) and the Institute.

April 2016
For comments, suggestions or further inquiries please contact:
The Research Information Staff, Philippine Institute for Development Studies
18th Floor, Three Cyberpod Centris - North Tower, EDSA corner Quezon Avenue, 1100 Quezon City, Philippines
Telephone Numbers: (63-2) 3721291 and 3721292; E-mail: publications@mail.pids.gov.ph
Or visit our website at http://www.pids.gov.ph

FINAL REPORTNATIONAL GREENING PROGAM ASSESSMENT PROJECT: ENVIRONMENTALCOMPONENT – PROCESS EVALUATION PHASE

DR. TONIE O. BALANGUE
Study Leader

SEPTEMBER 15, 2015
LOS BANOS, COLLEGE, LAGUNA

Contents
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1
I.

Background ................................................................................................................................... 2II.

Description of the Environmental Impact Component: Process Evaluation ...................... 3

1.

Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 3

2.

Significance of the project ......................................................................................................... 4

III.

Review of Literature ................................................................................................................... 6

1.

Forest Land Use Change ............................................................................................................ 6

2.

General characteristics of degraded forestland ........................................................................... 6

3.

Methods of Reforestation ........................................................................................................... 8
1.

Forest plantation approach .................................................................................................... 8

2.

Nitrogen-fixing forest restoration approach .......................................................................... 83.

Accelerated pioneer and climax species (APCS) planting approach ...................................... 9

4.

Natural forest succession ..................................................................................................... 10
Reforestation in other Countries ............................................................................................... 114.
1.

The Malay Experience .......................................................................................................... 112.

Thailand experience ............................................................................................................. 11

3.

Indonesia experience ........................................................................................................... 12

4.

Reforestation Techniques..................................................................................................... 13

5. Thinning in forest plantations in the Indonesian and Malaysian forest development
projects ......................................................................................................................................... 14
Applicability of the reforestation methods and experiences in other countries ........................ 14

5.
1.

Reforestation method .......................................................................................................... 14

2.

Implementation arrangement .............................................................................................. 15

6.

Contributory factors to high survival of forest plantation ........................................................ 16

7.

The Forestry Sector Project (FSP) ......................................................................................... 17

8.

Some successful reforestation projects ..................................................................................... 18

9.

Survival rates of some reforestation projects ........................................................................... 19

10.

Environmental Impacts of reforestation projects.................................................................. 20

1.

Carbon sequestration ........................................................................................................... 20

2.

Reduced air pollution ........................................................................................................... 22

3.

Reduced events of landslide and flooding ........................................................................... 23

4.

Reduced temperature .......................................................................................................... 23

5.

Soil temperature................................................................................................................... 24

6.

Soil organic carbon ............................................................................................................... 24

7.

Soil organic matter ............................................................................................................... 25

IV.

Research Gap and Potential Contribution of the Environmental Impact Study ....................... 25

1.

Research gaps ........................................................................................................................... 25

2.

Potential contribution of the study............................................................................................ 27
Conceptual Framework and Methodology ................................................................................... 28

V.
1.

Conceptual framework for assessment and evaluation ............................................................. 28

2.

Structure of the framework in matrix format............................................................................ 29

3.

Survey, mapping and planning (SMP) ..................................................................................... 29

4.

NGP beneficiary capability training ......................................................................................... 30

5.

NGP Forests quality assurance ................................................................................................. 30

6.

Seedling production .................................................................................................................. 30

7.

Site preparation......................................................................................................................... 31

8.

Planting..................................................................................................................................... 31

9.

Protection and maintenance ...................................................................................................... 32

10.

NGP impacts to environmental attributes............................................................................. 32

1.

Survival rate .......................................................................................................................... 33

2.

Soil erosion/soil accretion .................................................................................................... 33

3.

Temperature......................................................................................................................... 34

4.

Nitrogen, Potassium and Phosphorus (NPK) ........................................................................ 34

5.

Carbon sequestration ........................................................................................................... 35

6.

Soil moisture ......................................................................................................................... 35

7.

Wildlife ................................................................................................................................. 35

8.

Disaster risk reduction .......................................................................................................... 36

9.

Climate change adaptation and mitigation .......................................................................... 36

10.

Stumpage build-up ........................................................................................................... 36

11.

General impacts of NGP forests according to peoples’ perceptions in the communities ..... 37

VI.

Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 37

1.

Sampling NGP provinces, municipalities and NGP and Non-NGP sites ................................. 37

2.

Selected provinces, municipalities and NGP sites.................................................................... 38

3.

Data collection methodology .................................................................................................... 39
1.

Sampling KII/FGD participants .............................................................................................. 39

2.

Environmental impact measurement................................................................................... 41

2.1.

Survival rate ......................................................................................................................... 41

1.

Area for measurement ......................................................................................................... 41

2.

Allocation of the 190 hectares in NGP sites ......................................................................... 423.

100% inventory of seedlings/trees in the NGP site and Non-NGP site ................................ 42

2.2.

Indicators for measurements................................................................................................. 42

1.

Survival rate .......................................................................................................................... 42

2.

Potential stumpage buildup ................................................................................................. 43

2.3.

Measurements of environmental impact indicators .............................................................. 43

1.

Impact on Soil ....................................................................................................................... 43

2.

Impact on temperature ........................................................................................................ 44

3.

Impact on NPK, carbon and soil moisture ............................................................................ 443.

For DRR compliance of NGP site, non NGP site.................................................................... 46

4.

For Climate change adaptation and mitigation of NGP sites, non-NGP sites ...................... 47

5.

Wildlife impact of NGP plantations ...................................................................................... 49

4.

Data processing and analysis .................................................................................................... 50

VII.

Environmental Profile of the NGP Provinces, Municipalities and NGP Forest Plantations .... 50

1.

Province of Zambales ................................................................................................................... 51
1.

Geographic Location ................................................................................................................ 51

2.

Population and population density ........................................................................................... 51

3.

Land area .................................................................................................................................. 52

4.

Land use and vegetative cover ................................................................................................. 54

5.

Land use classification ............................................................................................................. 55

6.

Topography .............................................................................................................................. 56

7.

Climate ..................................................................................................................................... 56

8.

Soil............................................................................................................................................ 58

9.

Water Resources ....................................................................................................................... 59

10.

Volcano ................................................................................................................................ 60

11.

Environmental Profile of the Municipality of Sta. Cruz, Zambales ..................................... 60

1.

Location map of Sta Cruz, Zambales .................................................................................... 60

2.

Forest land uses .................................................................................................................... 60

3.

Environmental profile of the NGP sites ................................................................................ 62

Province of Dinagat Islands, Minadanao ...................................................................................... 64

2.
1.

Location of Dinagat Island ....................................................................................................... 64

2.

Population and population density ........................................................................................... 65

3.

Land area .................................................................................................................................. 66

4.

Land use and land cover ........................................................................................................... 67

5.

Climate ..................................................................................................................................... 67

6.

Flora and Fauna ........................................................................................................................ 68

7.

Topography .............................................................................................................................. 68

8.

Water resources ........................................................................................................................ 69

9.

Soils and geology ..................................................................................................................... 69

10.

Wildlife (Flora and Fauna) ................................................................................................... 70

11.

Environmental profile of the Municipality of Basilisa ......................................................... 71

1.

Location of Basilisa .................................................................................................................. 71

2.

Vegetative cover of Basilisa ..................................................................................................... 71

3.

Forest species ........................................................................................................................... 72

4.

Topography .............................................................................................................................. 72

5.

Soil and geology ....................................................................................................................... 73

6.

Water resources ........................................................................................................................ 73
Province of Negros Occidental ..................................................................................................... 73

3.
1.

Geographical Map of Negros Occidental ................................................................................. 74

2.

Population and population density ........................................................................................... 75

3.

Land classification .................................................................................................................... 76

4.

Forest cover .............................................................................................................................. 77

5.

Climate ..................................................................................................................................... 78

6.

Topography .............................................................................................................................. 78

7.

Water sources ........................................................................................................................... 78

8.

Environmental profile of the Municipality of Hinoba-an, Negros Occidental ......................... 78
1.

Topography of Hinobaan ...................................................................................................... 792.

Land cover ............................................................................................................................ 80

3.

Soil ........................................................................................................................................ 80

4.

Forest species ....................................................................................................................... 81

5.

Water sources....................................................................................................................... 81

VIII.

Results and Discussions ........................................................................................................... 81

1.

Zambales NGP sites ................................................................................................................. 81
1.1.

Survey, Mapping and Planning (SMP) .............................................................................. 81

1.2.

Feasibility Study ................................................................................................................ 831.3.

Planning ............................................................................................................................ 84

1.4.

Plantation quality assurance ............................................................................................ 89

1.5.

Capability building ............................................................................................................ 90

Reforestation Processes ............................................................................................................ 91

3.

1.1.

Seedling production.......................................................................................................... 91

1.2.

Site preparation ................................................................................................................ 94

1.3.

Planting ............................................................................................................................. 94

1.4.

Protection and maintenance ............................................................................................ 96

Survival Rates of the NGP Plantations ................................................................................... 101

2.

2.1.

Survival Rate Formulas ................................................................................................... 101

Forest species planted in NGP sites........................................................................................ 104

3.

3.1.

Sta. Cruz, Zambales......................................................................................................... 104

3.2.

Basic Profile of the NGP Sites ......................................................................................... 105

3.3.

Survival Rates ................................................................................................................. 107

1.

Guinabon NGP site: 99 hectares............................................................................................. 107

1.1.

Survival Rate Using DENR Formula ................................................................................. 107

1.2.

Survival Rate Using IST Formula ...................................................................................... 108

2.

Babuyan 150 Hectares ........................................................................................................ 109

2.1.

Survival rate using DENR formula .................................................................................... 109

2.2.

IST Survival Rate Formula ................................................................................................. 110

3.

Binonton NGP-BFI site - 130 hectares ................................................................................ 111

3.1.

Survival rate using DENR formula ................................................................................... 111

3.2.

Survival rate using IST formula ......................................................................................... 112

3.3.

Weighted average survival rate .......................................................................................... 112

3.4.

Species that suffered most .................................................................................................. 113

3.5.

Methods to increase survival rate ....................................................................................... 114

4. Stumpage Build-up of the NGP Plantations ............................................................................... 115

4.1.

99-ha timber plantation ................................................................................................. 115

4.2.

150-ha and the 131-ha NGP plantations ........................................................................ 119

4.3.

Measures to further improve the growth of the NGP plantations ................................ 120

5.

Environmental Impacts of NGP Plantations ........................................................................... 120

5.1.

Soil...................................................................................................................................... 120

1.

Soil baseline characteristics................................................................................................ 120

2.

Litter falls, NPK and OC yields of NGP sites ........................................................................ 124

3.

Comparison of the NPK of the NGP sites and the control sites (grasslands) ..................... 125
Impact to Soil Accretion ......................................................................................................... 126

4.
5.

Impact to Temperature ...................................................................................................... 126

6.

NGP compliance to disaster risk reduction ........................................................................ 127
Carbon sequestration .............................................................................................................. 129

7.
a.

Potential carbon sequestration of the 99-ha NGP plantation............................................ 129b.

Potential carbon sequestration of the co-dominant trees................................................. 131c.

Potential carbon sequestration of the 3rd layer ................................................................. 132

d.

Carbon sequestration of Babuyan and Binonton NGP sites ............................................... 133

5.

Impact to wildlife ................................................................................................................... 133

3.

Dinagat NGP Sites.................................................................................................................. 134
1.

Survey, Mapping and Planning ........................................................................................... 134
Capability building ................................................................................................................. 135

2.
3.

Plantation quality assurance .............................................................................................. 137

4.

Seedling production ........................................................................................................... 137

5.

Site preparation .................................................................................................................. 140

6.

Planting ............................................................................................................................... 140

7.

Protection and maintenance .............................................................................................. 142

a.

Threats to NGP plantations .................................................................................................... 143b.

Respondents’ estimates of survival rates in the NGP and Non-NGP sites ............................. 144

Suggestions of the respondents to maintain high survival rate............................................... 144

c.
8.

NGP and Non-NGP sites in Dinagat .................................................................................... 145

9.

Survival Rates of the NGP Forest Plantations ..................................................................... 151

9.1.

NGP Site-80 hectares ......................................................................................................... 151

1.

Survival rates using DENR formula ....................................................................................... 151

2.

Survival rates using the IST Formula ..................................................................................... 152

9.2.

NGP Site- 66 hectares ........................................................................................................ 153

1.

Survival rates using DENR formula ....................................................................................... 153

2.

Survival rate using the IST formula ....................................................................................... 154

9.3.

NGP Site- 44 hectares ........................................................................................................ 154

1.

Survival rates using the DENR formula ................................................................................. 154

2.

Survival rates using IST formula ............................................................................................ 155

3.

Weighted survival rates of NGP sites ..................................................................................... 156

9.4.

Non-NGP reforestation projects ......................................................................................... 156

1.

Survival rates using DENR formula ....................................................................................... 156

2.

Survival rates using IST formula ............................................................................................ 157

3.

Survival rates of other non-NGP sites .................................................................................... 157

4.

Weighted survival rate of non-NGP sites ............................................................................... 158

5.

Forest species that suffered most ............................................................................................ 159

6.

How to increase survival rate of indigenous forest species .................................................... 161

10.

NGP impact to the environment ............................................................................................. 161

1.

Soil baseline characteristics .................................................................................................... 161
2.

Litter fall impact to soil ....................................................................................................... 163

3.

NGP impact to soil accretion and temperature ....................................................................... 164

4.

NGP impact to DRR ............................................................................................................... 165
1.

80-ha NGP site .................................................................................................................... 165

2.

66-ha NGP site .................................................................................................................... 166

3.

44-ha. NGP site ................................................................................................................... 167
NGP compliance to climate change........................................................................................ 167

5.
1.

Carbon sequestration of the 3 NGP sites ........................................................................... 167

2.

Potential carbon sequestration of the 80-ha. NGP indigenous forest ............................... 168

3.

Potential carbon sequestration of the 66-ha. NGP indigenous forest ............................... 170

4.

Carbon sequestration of the 44-ha. NGP indigenous forest .............................................. 171

5.

Methods of increasing carbon sequestration capacity of the NGP forest? ....................... 172

11.

Impact to wildlife ............................................................................................................ 172

12.

Stakeholders’ observations regarding NGP implementation ......................................... 176

Hinobaan NGP Sites ............................................................................................................... 176

4.
1.

Survey, mapping and planning (SMP) ................................................................................ 176

2.

Capability building .............................................................................................................. 177

3.

Plantation quality assurance .............................................................................................. 177

4.

Site preparation .................................................................................................................. 177

6.

Planting ............................................................................................................................... 180

7.

Protection and maintenance .............................................................................................. 182

8.

Survival rates .......................................................................................................................... 183

1.

NGP Site – 119 ha coffee plantation ...................................................................................... 183

1.1.

Survival rates using the DENR formula ............................................................................. 183

1.2.

Survival rates using IST formula ........................................................................................ 183

2.

NGP site - 85-ha timber plantation ......................................................................................... 184

2.1.

Survival rates using the DENR formula ............................................................................. 184

2.2.

Survival rates using the IST formula .................................................................................. 185

2.3.

Weighted survival rate of NGP sites .................................................................................. 186

3.

Non-NGP Sites ....................................................................................................................... 186

3.1.

100 ha. watershed forest (Gmelina Timber Production) .................................................... 186

3.2.

109 ha. watershed forest (Agroforestry) ............................................................................. 187

3.3.

Weighted survival rate of non-NGP site............................................................................. 188

4.

Stumpage buildup ................................................................................................................... 188

4.1.

23 years old non-NGP reforestation project ....................................................................... 188

4.2.

20 years old 109 ha agroforestry project ............................................................................ 190

5.

Soil accretion and erosion and temperature ............................................................................ 194

6.

Reforestation impact to temperature....................................................................................... 195
Carbon sequestration .................................................................................................................. 196

7.

7.1.

NGP reforestation projects ................................................................................................. 196

7.2.

Non-NGP reforestation projects ......................................................................................... 197

7.3.

109 ha agroforestry plantation ............................................................................................ 198

7.4.

Total carbon sequestration of the non-NGP agroforestry plantation .................................. 204

7.5.

NGP Impacts to soil fertility, Organic Matter, Organic Carbon and Moisture Content. .... 205

7.6.

Litter fall contribution to NPK ........................................................................................... 206

7.7.

DRR compliance of NGP Sites .......................................................................................... 207

1.

100-ha Mangium plantation ................................................................................................... 207.................................................................................................................................................... 207

3.

Recommended DRR measures for both NGP sites ............................................................... 208

4.

Recommended climate change adaptation and mitigation measures in reforestation projects
209

5.

Impact to wildlife ................................................................................................................... 210

6.

Stakeholders’ observations on NGP implementation ............................................................. 211

IX.

Sites Evaluation ...................................................................................................................... 212

1.

Characteristics of NGP and non-NGP sites and control sites ................................................. 212

2.

Experts’ ratings on the NGP, non-NGP sites and control sites .............................................. 215

3.

Statistical evaluation among NGP site, Non-NGP site and Control site within the province.215

4. Statistical evaluation among NGP site, Non-NGP site and Control site in the 3
provinces/municipalities. ................................................................................................................ 215
1.

NGP vs. Non-NGP vs. Control ............................................................................................. 216

5.

Spearman’s correlations of indicators.................................................................................... 219
Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................................................ 226

X.
1.

Sustaining the NGP Plantations.............................................................................................. 226

2.

Indigenous forest species as replanting materials ................................................................ 227

3.

Proper execution of reforestation activities .......................................................................... 227

4.

Changing the survival rate formula to the IST formula ...................................................... 227

5.

Construction of a reforestation access road in all reforestation areas. ............................... 227

6.

Establishment of a CENRO-sub-office ................................................................................. 228

7.

Forest restorability assessment ............................................................................................. 228

8.

Climate change and DRR vulnerability assessment ............................................................. 228

9.

Enhancement of reforestation design ................................................................................... 228

10.

Monitoring impacts of reforestation projects ................................................................... 229

11.

Review of literature of forest species................................................................................. 229

12.

Methodology of environmental impact study.................................................................... 229

13.

Statistical differences of the NGP sites, non-NGP sites and control sites ....................... 229

14.

Reiteration of specific recommendations .......................................................................... 229

15.

Recommendations for the second phase ........................................................................... 230

References: ......................................................................................................................................... 231
Appendix Figure 1. Theory of Change for the National Greening Programming (N. Lasmarias, 2015)............................................................................................................................................................ 237
Appendix Table 1. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Survey, Mapping and Planning. ........... 238
Appendix Table 2. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Capacity Building of NGP Workers. ... 240
Appendix Table 3. Process Assessment and Evaluation for NGP Plantation Quality Assurance. ..... 241
Appendix Table 4. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Seedling Production. ............................ 242
Appendix Table 5. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Site Preparation. ................................... 243
Appendix Table 7. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Protection and Maintenance. ................ 246
Appendix Table 8. Environmental Impact Evaluation for NGP sites. ............................................... 247

Annex 1. KII/FGD Guide for Survey, Mapping and Planning........................................................... 250
Annex 2. KI/FGD Guide for Insuring the Quality of NGP Forest Plantations................................... 252
Annex 3. KII/FGD Guide for Capability Development of NGP Workers ......................................... 256
Annex 4. KII/FGD Guide for Seedling Growers................................................................................ 260
Annex 5. KII/FGD Guide for Workers Engaged in Site Preparation ................................................. 263
Annex 6. KII/FGD Guide for Workers Engaged in Planting Seedlings in NGP sites........................ 266
Annex 7. KII/FGD Guide for Workers Engaged in Protection and Maintenance of NGP Planted Sites............................................................................................................................................................ 271
Observation/comments: .................................................................................................................. 277

List of Figures
Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of NGP Processes and Impacts Assessment and Evaluation ................ 28
Figure 2. Locations of NGP Sites for Assessment and Evaluation. ..................................................... 39
Figure 3. Land Cover of Zambales. ...................................................................................................... 54
Figure 4. Other Vegetative Covr Types of Zambales. ........................................................................... 55
Figure 5. Land Classification Map of Zambales. ................................................................................. 56
Figure 6. Typhoon Path Passing Through Zambales. ........................................................................... 58
Figure 7. Location Map of Sta. Cruz, Zambales .................................................................................. 60
Figure 8. Forest Cover Map of Sta. Cruz, Zambales (Google Earth) ................................................... 62
Figure 9. Topography and Land Cover of NGP Site 1 (Google Earth). ............................................... 63
Figure 10. Topography and Land Cover of NGP Site 2 (Google Earth) .............................................. 63
Figure 11. Topography and Land Cover of NGP Site 3. ...................................................................... 64
Figure 12. Relative Location of Dinagat Islands (Google Earth, 2015) ............................................... 65
Figure 13. Land Cover of Dinagat. ....................................................................................................... 67
Figure 14. Topographic Map of Dinagat Islands in Relief Form. ........................................................ 69
Figure 15. Location Map of the Municipality of Basilisa, Dinagat ...................................................... 71
Figure 16. Land Cover of Basilisa. ....................................................................................................... 71
Figure 17. Topography of Basilisa, Dinagat (Google Earth) ............................................................... 72

Figure 18. Topography of Basilisa, Dinagat......................................................................................... 73
Figure 19. Geographical Map of Negros Occidental ............................................................................ 74
Figure 20. Land Cover of Negros Occidental....................................................................................... 77
Figure 21. Topography of Hinobaan, Negros Occidental (Google Earth) ........................................... 80
Figure 22. Eroded Areas in Hinobaan, Negros Occidental (Google Earth). ........................................ 80
Figure 23. Survival Rate Using DENR Formula in Matrix Format ................................................... 102
Figure 24. Survival Rate Accounting Matrix. .................................................................................... 104
Figure 25. Slope Map of Guinabon, Sta. Cruz, Zamables. .................................................................. 127
Figure 26. Slope Map of Babuyan, Sya. Cruz, Zambales. .................................................................... 128
Figure 27 . Map Showing the Highly Vulnerable Slopes, NGP Site. Dinagat ................................... 165
Figure 28. Slope Class Map of the 66-Ha. NGP Site, Dinagat........................................................... 166
Figure 29. Slope Class of the 44-Ha. NGP Site. 44-ha. NGP site ...................................................... 167
Figure 30. Slope Map of NGP Site, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental. .................................................. 207
Figure 31. Slope Map of NGP Site, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental. .................................................. 208

List of Tables
Table 1. Geographic Location of Zambales, Sta. Cruz and NGP Project Sites. ................................... 51
Table 2. Population and Population Density. ....................................................................................... 51
Table 3. Land Area and Forest Land Area of Zambales. ..................................................................... 52
Table 4. Land Use Classification of Zambales, 2010. .......................................................................... 55
Table 5. Soil Types in Zambales, 2010. ............................................................................................... 58
Table 6. Environmental Profile of Sta. Cruz, Zambales. ...................................................................... 61
Table 7. Geographic Coordinates of Dinagat Islands ..................................................................... 64
Table 8. Population and Population Density (2010-2015). .................................................................. 66
Table 9. Land Area of Municipalities and Cities.................................................................................. 66
Table 10. Population and Population Density of Negros Occidental. .................................................. 75
Table 11. Land Use and Land Cover Types, Hinoba-an. ..................................................................... 79
Table 12. Coverage and Specifications of the Survey and Mapping Requirements of the NGP. ........ 82

Table 13. Recommended Improvement for the Survey and Mapping Requirements for the NGP. ..... 82
Table 14. Site Development Planning Requirements of the NGP. ....................................................... 84
Table 15. Level of SM and SDP Compliance to SM and SDP Guidelines at the NGP Site. ............... 88
Table 16. Practices of the CENRO Masinloc Zambales in Ensuring Plantation Quality. .................... 90
Table 17. Training of the PO Members that Worked in the NGP Projects. ......................................... 91
Table 18. Responses of Respondents on Seedling Production, Sta. Cruz, Zambales. .......................... 92
Table 19. Summary of Planters' Responses in Sta. Cruz, Zambales. ................................................... 95
Table 20. Summary of Responses of Protection and Maintenance Partners. ....................................... 97
Table 21. Common Plantation Development Problems with Ranking. ................................................ 98
Table 22. NGP-Partners Actions to Prevent and Control Forest Fires. ................................................ 99
Table 23. Other Protection and Maintenance Activities Conducted by the NGP Partners. ................. 99
Table 24. Perceived Survival Rates of NGP Plantations in 2014 After Replanting According to the
Respondents........................................................................................................................................ 100
Table 25. Respondents Suggestions to Improve Survival Rates and Health Conditions of the NGP
Plantations. ......................................................................................................................................... 101
Table 26. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, 99-Ha NGP Site, Sta. Cruz, Zambales, 2015. ...... 107
Table 27. Survival Rates Using IST Formula,.................................................................................... 109
Table 28. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, ............................................................................... 110
Table 29. Survival Rates Using IST Formula,.................................................................................... 110
Table 30. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, NGP-BFI Site- 130 Hectares, 2015. ..................... 111
Table 31. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, NGP-BFI Site-130 Hectares...................................... 112
Table 32. Weighted Survival Rate (Using DENR Formula) of the NGP Sites in Sta. Cruz, Zambales.
............................................................................................................................................................ 112
Table 33. Weighted Average Survival Rate (Using IST Formula) of the NGP Sites in Sta. Cruz,
Zambales. ........................................................................................................................................... 113
Table 34. Percentage Mortality of Species Planted in the NGP Sites, Sta. Cruz, Zambales. ............. 114
Table 35. Stumpage Buildup of Dominant Trees in the 99-Ha NGP Plantation, Sta. Cruz, Zambales,
2015. ................................................................................................................................................... 116

Table 36. Potential Stumpage Buildup of the Second Layer Co Dominant 5,195 Trees of the 99-Ha
NGP Site ............................................................................................................................................. 117
Table 37. Potential Stumpage of the Third Layer of 42,512 Seedlings/Saplings in the 99-Ha .......... 118
Table 38. Soil Baseline Characteristics of NGP Sites and Comparison with Control (Grassland) Area.
............................................................................................................................................................ 122
Table 39. Litter Falls and NPK Yields of NGP Sites, Sta. Cruz, Zambales. ...................................... 124
Table 40. NPK of the Control Sites (Grassland), Sta. Cruz, Zambales, 2015. ................................... 125
Table 41. Impact to Soil Accretion of NGP Sites, Sta. Cruz, Zambales. ........................................... 126
Table 42. Impact of the NGP Forest Plantations to Temperature....................................................... 127
Table 43. Carbon Sequestration of NGP Sites at Assessment Period, Sta. Cruz, Zambales. ............. 129
Table 44. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the Dominant Trees in 99-Ha NGP Plantation. ........... 130
Table 45. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the Co-Dominant Trees in the 99-Ha, NGP Plantation.
............................................................................................................................................................ 131
Table 46. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the 3rd Canopy Layer of the 99-Ha NGP site. ............ 132
Table 47. Training Provided to the Planters in the NGP Site. ..................................................... 135
Table 48. Re-echo Training Conducted by PO Leaders. .................................................................... 136
Table 49. Self Evaluation Rating of Respondents’ Performance in the ............................................. 136
Table 50. Sources of Planting Materials in Dinagat. .......................................................................... 138
Table 51. Growing Periods of the Indigenous Species in the Nurseries before Outplanting. ............ 138
Table 52. Qualities of Seedlings Suitable for Planting. ...................................................................... 140
Table 53. Protection and Maintenance Activities Conducted by the Workers. .................................. 142
Table 54. Survival Rates of NGPO Plantations before Replanting. ................................................... 144
Table 55. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 80-Ha NGP Site. ............................................... 145
Table 56. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 66-Ha. NGP Site. .............................................. 146
Table 57. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 44-Ha. NGP Site. .............................................. 147
Table 58.Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 45 Ha. Non-NGP Site. ....................................... 148
Table 59. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the ........................................................................... 150
Table 60. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, 80-Ha. Basilisa, 2015. .......................................... 151

Table 61. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 80-Ha. Basilisa, 2015. ............................................... 152
Table 62. Survival Rates Using the DENR Formula, 66-Ha. Basilisa, 2015. .................................... 153
Table 63. Survival Rates Using the IST Formula, 66-Ha. Basilisa, 2015 .......................................... 154
Table 64. Survival Rates Using the DENR Formula, 44-Ha, Basilisa, 2015. .................................... 154
Table 65. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 44-Ha.Basilisa, Dinagat. ........................................... 155
Table 66. Weighted Survival Rates of NGP Sites Based on the DENR and IST. .............................. 156
Table 67. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula of the 54 Ha. Non-NGP Sites, Dinagat. ................ 156
Table 68. Survival Rates Calculated Using the IST Formula, ............................................................ 157
Table 69. Survival Rates of Sampled CMC Areas, Dinagat. ............................................................. 157
Table 70. Weighted Survival Rates of Non-NGP Sites. ..................................................................... 158
Table 71. Species that Suffered Most in the 80-Ha. NGP Site. .......................................................... 159
Table 72. Species that Suffered Most in the 66-Ha. NGP Site ........................................................... 160
Table 73. Species that suffered most in the 44-ha NGP Site. ............................................................. 160
Table 74. NPK Base Characteristics of NGP Sites, Basilisa, Dinagat Province. ............................... 162
Table 75. NPK Contribution of Species' Litter Fall in NGP Sites, Dinagat. ...................................... 164
Table 76. NGP Impact to Soil Accretion and Temperature, Dinagat, 2015. ...................................... 165
Table 77. Present Carbon Sequestration of the 3 NGP Sites in Dinagat. ........................................... 168
Table 78. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the 80-Ha. NGP Site, Using a Simulated Forest, Dinagat,
2015 .................................................................................................................................................... 169
Table 79. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the 66-Ha. NGP Site, Dinagat. .................................... 170
Table 80. Potential Carbon Seuqestration of the 44-ha NGP Site, Dinagat. ...................................... 171
Table 81. Fauna Spotted by Respondents in NGP Sites. .................................................................... 172
Table 82. Sources of Planting Materials, Duration of Propagation up to Outplanting, Hinobaan. .... 178
Table 83. Qualities of Seedlings Planted, Hinobaan. ......................................................................... 179
Table 84. Planting Practices of Workers in NGP and Non-NGP Sites. ............................................. 180
Table 85. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula for the 119-Ha. NGP Site ...................................... 183
Table 86. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 119-Ha. Coffee NGP Site in Hinobaan.2015. ........... 184
Table 87. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, 85-Ha. NGP, Hinobaan. ....................................... 184

Table 88. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 85-Ha. Hinobaan. ...................................................... 185
Table 89. Weighted Survival Rates of NGP Sites. ............................................................................. 186
Table 90. Survival Rate of the 100-Ha Non NGP Site, ...................................................................... 187
Table 91. Survival Rate of the 109 Ha. Non NGP Site, ..................................................................... 187
Table 92. Weighted Survival Rate Based on the DENR Formula of Non-NGP Site. ........................ 188
Table 93. Gmelina’s Stumpage Buildup of the 23 Years Old Non-NGP Forest Plantation, Hinobaan,
Negros Occidental, 2015. ................................................................................................................... 189
Table 94. Gmelina’s Stumpage of the 20 Years Old 109 Ha Agroforestry Project, .......................... 190
Table 95. Mahogany’s Stumpage Buildup in the Agroforestry Project. ............................................ 191
Table 96. Ipil-ipil’s Stumpage Buildup of the Agroforestry Project. ................................................. 193
Table 97. Soil Accretion and Temperature Impacts of NGP and Non-NGP ...................................... 194
Table 98. Carbon Sequestration of NGP Mangium Plantation, ......................................................... 196
Table 99. Carbon Sequestration of the 23-Year Old 100ha Non-NGP Gmelina Plantation, Hinobaan,
Negros Occidental. 2015. ................................................................................................................... 197
Table 100. Carbon Sequestration of the 20 Years Old 109 Ha Gmelina Plantation in the Non-NGP
Site, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015........................................................................................... 198
Table 101. Carbon Sequestration of the Fruit-Tree Plantation, Non-NGP Site, ................................ 199
Table 102. Carbon Sequestration of the Indigenous Forest Species, Non-NGP Agroforestry
Plantation, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015................................................................................. 201
Table 103. Mahogany’s Carbon Sequestration of the Agroforestry Plantation,................................. 202
Table 104. Carbon Sequestration of the Agroforestry (Ipil-ipil) Non-NGP Site,............................... 203
Table 105. Total Carbon Sequestration of the Non-NGP Agroforestry Project, ................................ 204
Table 106. NGP Impact to Soil Fertility, Organic Matter, Organic Carbon and Moisture Content. .. 205
Table 107. NPK Contribution of NGP and Non-NGP Plantations in Hinobaan, Negros Occidental. 207
Table 108. Fauna Species Observed by Residents in the NGP Site, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental,
2015. ................................................................................................................................................... 210

Executive Summary

The Philippine Institute of Development Studies (PIDS) of the National Economic Development
Authority (NEDA) commissioned the conduct of the Impact Assessment Study of the National
Greening Program (NGP) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)
to assess the NGP process as implemented in the field and the environmental impacts.
The municipalities of Sta. Cruz in Zambales, Basilisa in Dinagat Island, and Hinobaan in Negros
Occidental were randomly selected from all the NGP sites.
The methodology employed consisted of key informant interviews (KII) and focus group
discussions (FGD) for the survey, mapping, and planning (SMP), assessment of capability
building, plantation quality assurance, seedling production, planting, and protection andmaintenance, and actual impact measurements on the ground through sampling.
Results showed that the required NGP processes were not fully complied with. However, therequired survival rates of 85% were satisfied through replanting. The environmental impacts
were gaining positive momentum through reduced temperature, soil build up, soil fertility, soil
moisture, wildlife, stumpage build-up, and carbon sequestration. The NGP’s potential to produce
wood is envisaged subject to maintenance of the plantations. Impacts to disaster risk reduction
and climate change fell short due to lack of a suitable design
Recommendations to further improve NGP implementation include conduct of a ful-blown SMP
and FS, compliance to required processes and standards, inclusion of a reforestation access road,establishment of a CENRO-Suboffice right in the reforestation areas, linking reforestation to abusiness plan, capability building of reforestation partners, use the IST survival rate formula forfurther improving reforestation management, conduct forest restorability assessment prior to
selection of target areas for reforestation, integration of the DRR and CCA/M design in the
SMP, engage ERDB in species-site matching and other studies that support reforestation,and
include the environmental indicators in the M&E of the NGP plantations.
Key Words: Reforestation, NGP, Survival Rates, Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change
Adaptation/Mitigation.

1

I.

BackgroundIn 2011, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) launched the National
Greening Program (NGP). The NGP was created under Executive Order 26 in February 24, 2011
with a state policy of pursuing sustainable development for reducing poverty, ensuring foodsecurity, conserving biodiversity, and promoting climate change mitigation and adaptation in theforestry sector. To achieve these objectives, a multi-sector approach of reforestation is
implemented. This approach involves upland and coastal communities, people’s organizations(POs), civil society, local government units (LGUs), national government agencies (NGAs), statecolleges and universities (SCUs), and the private sector.
The target area for reforestation totals to 1.5 million hectares of grasslands and brush lands,
while other open areas will be planted with 1.5 billion trees of combined forest species and fruit
trees nationwide. This area will be reforested for over a period of six years with a total budget ofabout more than 5 billion pesos.
Now on its fifth year of implementation, NGP needs 1.5 years more to complete its target of 1.5
million hectares. According to the records, the program had planted 128,558 hectares in 2011,
221,763 hectares in 2012, and 333,160 hectares in 2013, with a total of 683,481 hectares planted
from this period.1 Last year, 2014, it planted a total area of 321,532 hectares. For 2015 and 2016,its target is 300,000 hectares each year, respectively.2
While the area planted as reported achieved the yearly target, no records were published yet by
the DENR on the actual survival rates of seedlings in the planted NGP sites. Moreover, while
there is supposedly a third party monitoring and evaluation (M&E) to be undertaken according to
the guidelines of the NGP, there has been no official M&E report yet on the survival rates andgrowth performance of the seedlings that were planted.
To implement the NGP on the ground, the Memorandum Circular (MC) 2011-01 (Guidelines of
NGP) was formulated and enforced to define the roles of the partner-agencies of the DENR.
Initially, the partner-agencies are the Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Agrarian
Reform (DAR), Department of Education (DepEd), Commission on Higher Education (CHED),
and Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD).3 The list was further increased toinclude the number of NGAs into the convergence initiative of the government in which the
Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Department of Interior and Local Government(DILG), Department of Health (DOH), Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH),
1

DENR NGP Website.

2

http://ngp.denr.gov.ph/index.php/basic-configuration/site-administrator/ngp-accomplishment-report

3

Paje RJP. 8 March 2011. DENR memorandum circular 2011-01: guidelines and procedures in the implementationof the national greening program. Quezon City, Philippines: Department of Environment and Natural Resources. A
PDF file. Retrieved 18 December 2014 from http://www.rainforestation.ph/news/pdfs/NGP%20PDFs/MCNo201101_Philippines_08Mar2011.pdf.
2

Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), Department of National Defense(DND), Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Science and Technology (DOST), National
Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), Technical Education and Skills Development
Authority (TESDA), Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR), governmentowned and controlled corporations (GOCCs), LGUs, and SCU are included.4
Considering the huge budget of the NGP and the absence of a physical audit of the NGP
plantations from a third-party evaluation, the Philippine Institute of Development Studies (PIDS)of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) recognizes the importance ofinvestigating the impacts of the NGP forests to provide some answers to the questions of the
public regarding the performance of the NGP and to find out ways that may further improvepolicies and implementation and management mechanism of reforestation program in the
country.
Hence, this project on the impact assessment of the NGP. This project is composed of four (4)components: a) environmental impact study that will assess and evaluate the processes andimpacts of the NGP to building up forests, conserving biodiversity, making disaster risk areas
resilient, and ensuring NGP compliance to climate change in order to achieve environmental
stability; b) social impact study that will assess and evaluate the NGP-related social processes
and impacts to food security and to find out ways how to ensure attainment of social
development objectives relative to the NGP; c) economic impact study that will assess andevaluate the NGP-related economic processes and impacts on income generation and livelihoodof the communities so as to reduce poverty and to find out ways on how to optimize theeconomic benefits from the NGP; and d) institutional impact study that will assess and evaluate
the NGP-related institutional processes and impacts to implementation arrangements among
partners and to find out ways on how to further improve linkages to attain an effective
institutional mechanism supportive of reforestation effort of the government.
The present component, the environmental impact study, will present how it will attain its
objectives of assessing and evaluating the processes and impacts of the NGP.
II.

Description of the Environmental Impact Component: Process Evaluation
1. Objectives

The overall objectives of the Environmental Component of the NGP assessment were to:4

Aquino BS III. 24 February 2011. Executive order 2011-26: declaring an interdepartmental convergence initiative
for a national greening program. Malacañang Palace, Manila, Philippines: Official Gazette of the Republic of thePhilippines 106 (23). Retrieved 18 December 2014 from http://www.gov.ph/2011/02/24/executive-order-no-26-2/.
3195p.

3

1. Validate the survival rates and growth performance of the NGP forest plantations under
different site conditions, and assess whether NGP could contribute to the forestation of thedegraded uplands of the country and provide sustainable wood supply for the energy,
furniture, housing, and other allied industries; and2.

Assess its impacts in improving on-site and off-site environmental conditions in terms of soilbuild up, water recharge, impact to disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation andmitigation (DRR-CCA/M) objectives; and biodiversity enrichment.

For Phase 1, the primary objective of the project was to conduct a scoping and processevaluation of the NGP in selected provinces.
The secondary objectives are to:
1. Assess and evaluate the relevant processes that were or are being used in the different
activity components of the national greening program of the DENR at different levels;
2. Assess and evaluate how the different forest establishment, protection and maintenance, andmanagement activities were conducted by the NGP contractors at the site level; and3. Determine the perception of non-NGP communities and NGP communities on the impacts of
the NGP-established forests to the environment.
2. Significance of the project
The project will establish whether the NGP environmental objective of primarily restoring
degraded/deforested forestland will achieve food security, minimize poverty, stabilize
environmental condition, reduce soil erosion, biodiversity conservation, and uphold climatechange adaptation/mitigation. Furthermore, the project will validate the survival rates and growth
performance of the NGP forest plantations under different site conditions, and assess whether
NGP could contribute sustainable wood supply for the energy, furniture, housing and other alliedindustries.
The Philippines will benefit from the environmental impact assessment and evaluation of the
NGP in terms of the following potential contributions:a. It will provide facts, information, and insights to policy makers on both the beneficial
impacts (that should be further enhanced and sustained), and negative impacts (to be
avoided) to the environment of similar reforestation5 efforts of the government in the
future. Such insights could be used for the formulation of new policies or further
improvement of existing ones governing forest restoration of degraded forest ecosystem.
Some of the potential policy contributions of the environmental component of the study
are:5

Reforestation is interchangeably used in this report with forest restoration. Both terms have the same meaning inforestry parlance.
41) Before embarking on a national forest restoration program, a full blown in depth
forest restorability assessment of all degraded forestland situated in every
barangay may provide direction to the design of a national forest restoration
program of the governments in the future. This will serve as a basis for the
allocation of degraded areas for restoration using an optimal mix of forest land
uses and for the allocation of funds. It will also be useful for the prioritization offorest restoration projects.
2) To fast tract reforestation with a realistic target, the barangays located inforestlands shall be trained in the establishment and sustainable management offorest and agroforest plantations under the guidance of the DENR. Assuming 50%
of all the barangays in the uplands and coastal areas will be allocated 300 hectares
to reforest in 6 years, that would mean 4.05 million hectares (45000 barangays *30% (in upland and coastal only) * 300 ha.), 300 hectares spread over 6 years isonly 50 hectares per year per barangay. This target is not difficult to plant in ayear with a 3-month rainy season window.
3) Any reforestation program should be tied to a business plan where productdevelopment and marketing is an important component. This is necessary to makeforest and agroforest plantation development and management sustainable. This
will also make the livelihood of the people in the barangays sustainable.
4) To address climate change concerns, the planting of fast growing indigenous
medium hardwood species suitable in degraded forestlands with the highest
carbon content should be given priority in reforestation projects for planting. This
may require nurse- crops during the first 3 years followed by indigenous medium
hardwoods on the 3rd year. The nurse-crops will provide partial shades and soil
nutrients to the newly planted species of medium hardwoods.
5) All areas above 50% slope must be planted with deep-rooted forest species forsoil protection purposes. Harvesting of trees in these areas should not be allowed.
Thus, addressing the concerns of DRR.
6) Existing forested areas must be protected and maintained. Such areas will provide
planting materials such as seeds and wildlings to be used in the restoration offorest in degraded forestland. In fact through natural forest succession process,grasslands and brush lands may be reforested through regenerants from the forest.
This is possible when birds, rats and other mammals and wind will eat the fruitsof the forest and disperse them in the grasslands and brush lands. What is neededis on a protection of the regenerants.
b. Lessons learned from the management and technical aspects of reforestation that resulted
in the best quality of forest plantations ensures the highest wood quantity and quality.

5Such lessons could be used for the further improvement of forest restoration or
reforestation techniques and management that will result in the most environmentallysound methods and practices of bringing back the forest cover of degraded forestlands.
c. Connecting the management and technical aspects of forest restoration to theenvironmental impact, economic impact, social impact and institutional impact of the
NGP would result to better allocation of future forest restoration funds to the plantablesites, to the best suitable species, to the best practices of forest restoration and practices,to productive partners in the barangays and to social and civic organizations and otherinstitutions that are supportive to attaining the objectives of forest restoration. Thus,
achieving the targets through the most economical approach.
d. Planting the suitable areas with the right species that command high value, high positiveenvironmental impact, high DRR impact and high CO2 sequestration capacity would
minimize the cost of forest restoration with the highest possible monetary benefit. This
will save a lot of government fund which could be used for other equally important
projects of the government.
III.

Review of Literature

1. Forest Land Use Change
The 2015 Revised Master Plan for Forestry Development6 revisited the land use change in forest
land. In 15757, the percent forest cover was 92% and in 2003, the forest cover was reduced to24%. In a span of 428 years, the forest cover declined at an annual average of 47,429.91 ha. This
reduction in forest cover has resulted in 20.3 million ha for several uses, two of which are forgrasslands and brush lands.
Considering the land classification of the country into A&D and Forestland, where A&D isallocated 14,194,675 ha. And forestland is 15,805,3258 ha., the area that needs to be reforested isless than 8,605,325 ha., taking into account non-plantable areas such as rivers, lakes and rocky
mountains. Assuming that the net area of forestland is 7 million ha after deducting the areas ofrivers, lakes and rocky mountains, and further subtracting the NGP-target areas of 1.5 millionha., the remaining area that would need reforestation in the future is 5.5 million ha. This estimate
is an optimistic one considering a high survival rate in the 1.5 million ha NGP-planted areas.
2. General characteristics of degraded forestland
Imagine what an alternating wet and dry season in 428 years can do to the ground surface ofsloping areas that have no permanent forest cover. The land cover types of such areas are grasses
6

FMB DENR, 2015. Revised Master Plan for Forestry Development.

7

ibid

8

FMB-DENR PFS 20106

and brushes and its top soils are already thin due to soil erosion. The grassland’s soil fertility isvery low, its pH is acidic and deficit of nitrogen-phosphorous-potassium (NPK) and otherimportant soil nutrients. Because the dominant land cover is grass, its organic matter is also low.
Thus, soil carbon is also low. As time passes, the soil becomes more acidic, shallower and thesoil depth where plants grow becomes thinner in soil layer and thinner in soil depth. With thesesoil characteristics, big trees can no long grow and survive. This is the reason why grasses suchas cogon, talahib, shrub, and few pioneer species are the ones that grow. When big trees areplanted, in most cases they die. This is one of the factors that contribute to difficulty inreforesting such areas resulting in low survival and poor growth performance of planted
seedlings (Balangue, 2014)9.
The other factor that had been hindering reforestation is the long dry season and short wet season
in northern Luzon particularly in Ilocos region (R1), Cagayan valley region (R2) and Central
Luzon region (R3)10. Long dry season means insufficient water for planted seedlings. Long dry
season has two characteristics. First, from December to March, temperature is low from a rangeof 8.1-15.8 degrees Celsius11, which further dries the moisture on the ground. Thus, depriving
the seedlings with soil moisture that they need to survive and grow faster.
From April to June, the temperature becomes hotter12 increasing to 30-37 degrees Celsius. This
causes heat stress to the seedlings due to accelerated soil moisture evaporation. Both weather
phenomena result in more mortalities of planted seedling. Reforestation is very much dependent
on rainfall. Unfortunately, because of the narrow rainfall window, actual planting is limited toutmost two months and thus, restricting the extent of area to be planted. Also, it resulted in thedeath of seedlings planted early and late of the rainy season.
The problem on temperature is further aggravated by global warming and climate change. The
regions’ dry season in the past is now drier. It further lowered the temperature during coldest
months and warmer during dry months with longer duration. In the dry regions, rainfall
frequency is less than the normal rainfall but once it rains, the rainfall volume is very high toextremely high. The amount of rainfall usually poured monthly under normal climatic conditionis poured in about 30 minutes to 12 hours during extreme rainfall events from 103.9 mm to454.9 mm rainfall13. The wet regions, such as in the Visayas and Mindanao regions, extreme

9

Balangue, T.O. 2014. Best Practices in Philippine Reforestation Using Indigenous Forest Species: Learning fromthe Field. Energy Development Corporation. Metro Manila.
10

Thelma A. Cinco, Flaviana D. Hilario, Rosalina G. de Guzman and Emma D. Ares. October 1-2, 2013. Climate
Trends and Projections In The Philippines. 12th National Convention on Statistics (NCS) at EDSA Shangrilla,
11
Source: PAG-ASA. January 27, 2014
12
13

Ibid
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon_Ketsana
7

rainfall events are more frequent with extremely high rainfall volume in about 30 minutes to 12hours.14
While rainfall is important in reforestation to supply much needed soil moisture of seedlings,
extreme rainfall events are mostly destructive causing moderate to heavy soil erosions tolandslides in sloping areas. During typhoon Milenyo, second growth forest with more medium
trees and few big trees were carried down by landslides during the typhoon in the western side of
Mt. Makiling. With this experience, established forests through reforestation in sloping areas arehighly vulnerable now to typhoons and extreme rainfall events.
The present ground characteristics of the grasslands, brush lands and other open areas that need
forest restoration must be inputted to reforestation planning so that the desired survival rate could
be achieved considering the very high investment in forest restoration.
3. Methods of Reforestation
1. Forest plantation approach
The common reforestation method used by government is the forest plantation approach. Thisrequires the planting of single tree species in rows by block following a plantation pattern
without any mixture of other tree species. Depending on the species and the objective ofreforestation, the seedlings are planted following a given spacing of 1m x 1m, 2m x 2m, 2m x
3m for immediate cover and to reduce soil erosion and for watershed rehabilitations and 4m x
4m, 5m x 5m for timber production and for agroforestry5m x 5m to 10m x 10m with somevariations15.
Most government reforestation projects concentrated on the planting of fast growing exotic
species in the past. The common species that were favorably planted were Mahogany, Gmelina,
Mangium, Auriculiformis, Falcataria, and Ipil-ipil. In Mindanao, Bagras was also planted by thethen PICOP. According to Baguinon (2013)16, Mahogany is an invasive alien species dominating
the species in areas where they were planted especially in Mt. Makiling although some foresters
contested that if Mahogany is invasive, it would have already invaded most open areas adjacentto Mahogany plantations, which is not the case.
2. Nitrogen-fixing forest restoration approach
14

Thelma A. Cinco, Flaviana D. Hilario, Rosalina G. de Guzman and Emma D. Ares. October 1-2, 2013. Climate
Trends and Projections In The Philippines. 12th National Convention on Statistics (NCS) at EDSA Shangrilla,
15

DENR Guidelines on reforestation in Loan 1 and some reforestation reports.
N.T. Baguinon, M.O. Quimado and G.J. Francisco Country report on forest invasive species in the Philippines:
The unwelcome guests. Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific forest invasive species ...
University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Forest Management Bureau, Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/ae944e/ae944e09.htm
168

Other approach to reforestation as reported by Balangue (2014)17 is Combalicer (2005)18 plantingof nitrogen-fixing species mixed with non-nitrogen fixing species. The nitrogen-fixing species
are native species of Erythrina variegata L., and Narra (Pterocarpus indicus Willd). The nonfixing species are Dao (Dracontomelon dao (Blanco) Merrille et Rolfe) and Dapdap (Bischofia
javanica Blume). The idea is to plant first nitrogen-fixing species to enrich the soil with nitrogenand to provide partial shade to non-fixing species. E. variegata and Narra grew faster and fixed
nitrogen better than the other non-fixing species. This means that E. variegata and Narra are
better species for forest restoration. In terms of growth and physiological characteristics, thoseplanted in the mountain area which has fertile and moist soil performed better than those in theplain area with dry soil. The same approach was experimented by Combalicer (2011) 19 byplanting other exotic nitrogen-fixing species (Acacia auriculiformis A.Cunn. ex Benth., Acacia
mangium Willd, and Pterocarpus indicus Willd.). The results showed that A. auriculiformis andA. mangium, are better than Narra in terms of surviving in adverse grassland condition and forserving as nurse crops. Further, a shade-demanding native species could be planted next to these
species when the nurse crops have already attained an age that could provide sufficient shade to
newly planted seedlings. From these experience, the forest restoration method that she
recommended for use by the DENR is the planting first of nurse crops using nitrogen fixing
species and then interplanting of shade-demanding native species after the nurse crops havealready attained a wider canopy to partially shade the native species (Combalicer, 2014).
A parallel experience, in which the method of planting nitrogen-fixing species in an integrated
fashion was used by the Mindanao Baptist Rural Life Center (MBRLC) (Palmer 1999). 20 The
species to fix nitrogen were Ipil-Ipil, Falcataria, Kakawate, Calliandra tetragona, Calliandra
calothyrsus, Leucaena diversifolia, Erythrina poeppigiana, Flemingia macrophylla, Desmodium
rensonii, and Indigofera ani. These species performed well in survival and growth in the planted
sites according Palmer (1999).
3. Accelerated pioneer and climax species (APCS) planting approach

17

Balangue, T.O. 2014. Best Practices in Philippine Reforestation Using Indigenous Forest Species: Learning fromthe Field. Energy Development Corporation. Metro Manila.
18 Marilyn S. Combalicer*1, Don Koo Lee2, Su Yong Woo3, Yong Kwon Lee4 and Yun Ho Jang5. September
2005. Early Growth andPhysiological Characteristics of Planted Seedlings in La Mesa Dam Watershed, Philippines. Early Growth andPhysiological Characteristics ofSeedlings. THE PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURAL SCIENTIST ISSN 0031-7454.Vol. 88 No. 3, 305 - 316
19 Dr. Marilyn S. Combalicer. Aug. 23, 2011. Planting exotic nitrogen-fixing species may improve forest restoration
and rehabilitation. http://www.searca.org/index.php/knowledge-management/seminar-series/641-planting-exoticnitrogen-fixing-species-may-improveforest-restoration-and-rehabilitation-study-says
20 Palmer, J. Jeff. (1999). Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT): Nitrogen Fixing Agroforestry for
Sustainable Soil and Water Conservation, A publication of the Mindanao Baptist Rural Life Center (MBRLC). ** p
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20585279/NitrogenFixing-Agroforestry-for-Sustainable-Upland-Farming.
9

This method has not been officially used by the DENR in its forest restoration method. Thismethod is based on the principle of forest succession stating that pioneer species will grow first
followed by intermediate species and then finally the climax species. This method was tested in
Vietnam (Nguyen Van So, nd)21 by planting pioneer species, intermediate species and climax
species in an integrated manner in a planting area. The pioneer species are: Indigofera teysmanii,
Trema orientalis, Anthocephalus chinensis, Wrightia tomentosa etc.; the intermediate species:
Dalbergia cochinchinesis, Xylia dolabriformis, Cassia siamea and Lagerstroemia angustifolia;
the climax species: Dipterocarpus alatus, D. dyerii, Hopea odorata, Anisoptera cochinchinensis.
Initial results were shortening of natural succession and enhancement of biodiversity. This has
been tried in Vietnam and proved successful. Elliott, et. al (2002)22 modified the APCS andnamed at the Species Framework Approach where the framework species are the pioneer andintermediate species and interplanted with climax species. This method was tested in degradedlands in Thailand where 37 native forest tree species acting as framework tree species planted in
the degraded upper watershed in Doi Suthep-Pui National Park in northern Thailand. The tree
density of 3125 per ha was used in 1998 and 1999. In this density all the best pioneer species,
intermediate species and climax species are planted together.
4. Natural forest succession
Degraded forestlands undergo forest succession when forest gaps occur. Forest gaps encourage
certain pioneer species to form a pioneer forest through the aid of seed dispersal agents such as
birds, mammals and winds. Such pioneer species are short-lived and will be changed later byother species adapted to the changing conditions. The species that will take over the short-lived
species are the seral species or intermediate species23. Long-lived species will eventually replace
the short-lived ones forming a stable forest composition – the climax forest24. With forest
21

Nguyen Van So, nd The Potential of Local Tree Species to Accelerate Natural Forest Succession on Marginal
Grasslands in Southern Vietnam.
22

Stephen Elliott, Puttipong Navakitbumrung, Cherdsak Kuarak, Sudarat Zangkum, Vilaiwan Anusarnsunthorn,
David Blakesley. Selecting framework tree species for restoring seasonally dry tropical forests in northern Thailand
based on ﬁeld performance. Forest Ecology and Management 184 (2003) 177–191. ELSEVIER
23

Seral species are vegetations between the pioneer species and climax species.

24

Forest maintenance and succession. http://www.rainforestconservation.org/rainforest-primer/rainforest-primertable-ofcontents/f-forest-maintenance-and-succession/10

succession, open lands, grasslands and brush lands can be restored through this approach as longas there are no further disturbances. What is needed therefore is to protect the areas that had been
occupied by pioneer species until it is fully covered with climax species. The only problem withthis approach is that it will take a long time to fully cover open lands, grasslands and brush lands.
For forest succession to work in forest restoration, the following factors must be considered: a)
Extent of the disturbed forest area (how large is the disturbed area?) this should be large enoughfor sunlight to reach the soil of the disturbed area; b) Degree of forest disturbances (partial
clearing by tree or groups of trees, total clearing of trees and other vegetation to the ground?); c)
Existence of coppicing species; d) Existence of residual species in the disturbed area; e) Species
surrounding the disturbed area (How many seeding trees and how far they are located relative tothe disturbed area?); and presence of seed dispersal agents available in adjacent undisturbed
forest (birds, bats, animals, wind)?
4.

Reforestation in other Countries
1. The Malay Experience

In Malaysia, agriculture and commercial logging are major forces in deforestation. However,unlike in other countries such as the Philippines (which started during colonization), it only
started at the end of the 19th century wherein logged timber were entirely used for the country’s
development. In the 1970’s, timber harvesting intended for conversion on other land uses such as
plantation of oil palm were the main cause of large destructions reported in many studies.
Shifting cultivation accounted for 50% deforestation while commercial logging and small-holder
cultivation played the lesser roles (Brookfield, et.al. 1990; Collins, et.al. 1991; Repetto 1988)25.
The reforestation process in Malaysia started in the 1980s where the Compensatory Forestry
Project was implemented through the ADB loan. Unlike the other countries’ experience in forest
transition from net deforestation to net reforestation, Malaysia has a rather fluctuating forest
areas thereby having a low deforestation rate with an annual change rate of -0.42% from 20052010 (Meridian Institute, 2009)26.
2. Thailand experience
In 1998, Thailand’s forest area decreased from 53.33% of its total land area to 25.13%(Charuppat, 1998; Lakanavichian, 2001)27; while in 1995, this was reduced to only 22.8 % of the25

As cited by Wan Razali W.M and Mohd Shawadi H.O in “Transitions in Sustainable Forest Management andRehabilitation in Malaysia. University Putra Malaysia.
26

Ibid. Wan Razali W.M & Mohd Shawadi H.O. n.d.
As cited by Lakanavichian S. 2006. “Trends in Forest Ownership, Forest Resource Tenure and Institutional
Arrangements: Are they contributing to better Forest Management and Poverty Reduction? A Case Study fromThailand.” Case Studies in South and East Asia
27

11

country’s total land area. Jantakad and Gilmour (1999) (as cited by Lakanavichian, 2006)28
reported an annual deforestation rate of 3.85 percent between 1976 and 1982, which was among
the highest rates and the most rapid among tropical countries.
Reforestation started in 1906 where a teak plantation was established by the Royal Forest
Department. However, the total land area reforested from 1906-2004 which is 1.07 million
hectares were completely insignificant compared to the total deforested area of 10.76 million
hectares from 1961-2004 (RFD, 2004)29. Even though reforestation was taking place,
deforestation also continued at rates of about 2 to 2.6% every year (FAO, 1999)30.
3. Indonesia experience
In a recent study by Margono and Potapov et.al (2014)31, the annual primary forest loss inIndonesia was estimated to be higher than in Brazil in 2012. Indonesia had lost 840,000 hectares
compared to 460,000 hectares in Brazil. This is alarming because Indonesia is now the major
greenhouse gas producer, with 85% of its emission coming from forest destruction anddegradation (Vidal, 2014)32.
Numerous efforts have been done to reforest Indonesia which includes government efforts andprivate partnerships. In 2007, a $100 million project called the Kalimantan Forest and Climate
Partnership was inaugurated by the foreign minister Alexander Downer of the Australian
government; believing that the project would make a “very real and very practical contribution to
improving our environment” yielding “immediate and tangible results.” The plan was to plant
100 million trees and to rehabilitate 200 hectares of peatland and forests in Kalimantan until June
2012, but later was extended for a year. However, at the end of July 2012, there were only 2.5
million seedling raised in nurseries, which only constituted the 2.5% of the target. It was stillthen unclear how many of these seedlings were planted. With this, the Australian government aid
agency, AusAID, decided to end the project, (Hamann, K., 2013)33 making it a total failure.
Still, recently, it was reported that Indonesia’s newly elected President Joko Widodo committed
to reforest 2 million hectares of Indonesia’s degraded land annually. The focus would be more on
the country’s highly degraded areas as suggested by a recent study led by Budiharta. Some28

Ibid. Lakanavichian S. 2006.
Ibid. Lakanavichian S. 2006.
30
Ibid. Lakanavichian S. 2006.
31
Margono, B.A., Potapov P.V. et. al. 2014. Primary forest cover loss in Indonesia over 2000–2012. Nature Climate
Change.
32
Vidal, J. 2014. “Rate of deforestation in Indonesia overtakes Brazil, says study”. The Guardian.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/29/rate-of-deforestation-in-indonesia-overtakes-brazil-saysstudy. Retrieved May 8, 2015.
29

Hamann, K. 2013. “Government ends AusAID reforestation program in Indonesia” Posted July 2, 2013 in ABC
News. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-02/government-ends-ausaid-reforestation-program-inindonesia/4794554 retrieved May 11, 2015.
33

12

reforestation options include the Community-Based Programs and Ecosystem Restoration
Concessions which are to be funded by private investments (Meijaard, 2014)34.
4. Reforestation Techniques
In 1967 in Thailand, the Forest Industry Organization began to establish Forest villages to hasten
reforestation efforts; with the “taungya” system being used as the primary reforestation method.
In this method, tree saplings and agricultural crops are simultaneously planted until only the trees
are left to complete reforestation (Combre, 1982 and Evans, 1982)35. Various combinations havealready been tried since the establishment of the programme, which varies depending on the
different climatic conditions in the country. Some examples include: teak combined with upland
rice in the North, fast-growing trees with cassava in the Northeast, fast-growing trees with maizein the West and para-rubber or fast-growing trees with fruit trees in the South (Watanabe, H.,
Sahunalu, P., Khemnark, C., 1988)36.
A study of Sardjono (1996)37 showed that a traditional agroforestry system can be used tomitigate forest degradation. This type of agroforestry system is called the lembo system. The
lembo system which was being practiced by the indigenous people of Barongtongkok Sub
district of East Kalimantan involves traditional forest and domestic gardens. Most lembos are
small, covering only 0.1 to 2.0 hectares depending on the number of families or group members
using them. A plot of 0.25 hectares can already contain 40 different species, thus creating
diversity. Ninety percent of these are trees while the other 10% are made up of palms, bamboos
or lianas. The trees and woody plants dominating in this system belongs to families
Anacardiaceae, Bombacaceae, Dipterocarpaceae, Euparbiaceae, Meliaceae, Moraceae,
Sapindaceae, Palmae and Rubiaceae, with which most are indigenous species. Aside fromensuring ecological sustainability, there are also a lot of products which can be utilized out of thedifferent species planted in the system, thus, also able to meet the people’s needs.
A recent study in 2014 was conducted by Wasli, et.al38 which was a preliminary assessment on
the growth performance of Dryobalanops beccarii using the line planting technique.
Meijaard, E. (2014). Indonesia’s ambitious plan to reforest 2M ha annually. The Borneo Iniatives.
http://news.mongabay.com/2014/1205-meijaard-rps-indonesia-reforestation.html. retrieved May 8, 2015.
34

As cited by Watanabe, H., Sahunalu, P., Khemnark, C., 1988. “Combinations of trees and crops in the taungya
method as applied in Thailand”. Agroforestry Systems. Vol. 6, Iss. 1. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Doldrecht:
Netherlands.
36
Ibid. Watanabe, H., Sahunalu, P., Khemnark, C., 1988.
37
Sardjono, M.A. 1996. “The Lembo System: A model for agroforestry in dipterocarp forest ecosystems of East
Kalimantan.” Schulte, A. and Schone,D.H. 1996. Dipterocarp Forest Ecosystems: Towards sustainable forest
management. World Scientific Publishing Co.: Singapore. Retrieved from http://books.google.com May 11, 2015
35

Wasli, M.E, Sani, H. Ho, S.Y, et. al. 2014. “Preliminary Assessment on the Growth Performance ofDryobalanops beccarii Dyer Planted under Enrichment Planting Technique at Gunung Apeng Forest Reserve,
Sarawak, Malaysia.” Kuroshio Science, Vol. 8, Iss. 1. retrieved from https://ir.kochiu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10126/5418/2/8-1.45.pdf May 11, 2015.
38

13

Dryobalanops beccarii is a dipterocarp species and is one of the most commonly used species forreforestation purposes in Sarawak, Malaysia. It was also listed “endangered” in the Red List of
Threatened Species under the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). This
study focused on the current state of the growth performance and survival rate of D. beccarii
planted in the reforestation areas in Gunung Apeng Forest Reserve in Sarawak Malaysia. Studysites were established in the areas where D. beccarii was planted in the year 2005; DB05 and2008; DB08. The assessment on the growth performance of planted D. beccarii at different age
stand was evaluated by measuring the stem diameter, height and survival rate from October 2010
to December 2012. Results then showed that the survival rate of planted trees in DB05 and D208
were at 88% and 86%, respectively; which indicates high survival rate. Thus, it was concluded
that D. beccarii is suitable for forest rehabilitation purpose in the study site and positive outcome
could be achieved from this reforestation effort on a long run.
5. Thinning in forest plantations in the Indonesian and Malaysian forest development
projects
In terms of reforestation design and implementation at the field level, there is a big difference inthe practices of the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia. The 3 countries used similar spacing
ranging from 2m x 2m to 4m x 4m in forest plantations for timber production. Closer spacing of
2m x 2m was used in Malaysia and Indonesia. However, thinning operation is included in thedesign and practiced on the ground where after 1 to 2 years, the original density was reduced to
50% and another thinning to further reduce the final density to 50% on the 4th to 5th year of theforest plantations. Doing this increased the volume at final harvest 39. This practice is in thesilvicultural design of most forest plantations in the Philippines but due to political reason thishas not been implemented on the ground thinking that this is a timber cutting technique that will
circumvent harvesting
5. Applicability of the reforestation methods and experiences in other countries
1. Reforestation method
All the reforestation methods discussed above are applicable in the reforestation of degradedlands in the Philippines. The forest plantation approach is a very popular method for those whose
primary objective is timber production using fast growing species. In fact the private woodindustry that ventured in industrial plantations used this approach with high survival rates. The
nitrogen-fixing series planting approach has been tried in Mindanao with good result. Thisapproach was based on the studies of forest scientist in UPLB1. It is only waiting to be adopted
by the government in its reforestation program. Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand are using the39

Balangue, T.O. 1989. Post-Evaluation Report of the Indonesian Forestry Development Project. ADB Postevaluation mission.
14

same forest plantation method being used by the DENR here in the Philippines. Except for
Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia in their ADB-funded forest development projects planted
Mangium and Eucalyptus in monoculture. The forest plantations had high survival rates. In
Thailand, Teak was planted also in monoculture.
The Accelerated Pioneer and Climax Species has not been tried yet in the Philippines but it has
been tried in Vietnam (Nguyen Van So, nd)1 and in Thailand (Elliot, 2002) by planting pioneer
species, intermediate species and climax species in an integrated arrangement following how
such species grow on the ground. This method has been successful in Vietnam and in Thailand
according to the authors. What is necessary is to first identify on the ground the pioneer species(these are the species that grow first when a forest canopy is open. These species are also
nitrogen-fixer and are good shades for intermediate species and climax species. When there aresufficient numbers of pioneer species on the ground, intermediate species may be planted in
between until both species have already survived after which the climax species are planted
under the canopy of the pioneer and intermediate species. There are plenty of pioneer,intermediate and climax species in the Philippines which can be combined and it is only matterof trying this approach even in an experimental stage.
The last approach is natural forest succession. The first company in the Philippines that hasplanned or is already using natural forest succession in its areas is the Energy Development
Corporation. This is applicable in reforesting forest gaps that are not too wide and where humanintervention on site is zero. This approach will only take time because it is dependent on
birds/rats/wind-aided seed dispersal.
What is needed is to identify the forest gaps and mother trees. The next step is to provide avegetative fence to prevent and protect the regenerants40 from destruction. Regenerants comefrom fruits/seeds of climax species eaten by birds and mammals, and also dispersed throughwinds. Then the regenerants are protected from forest fires, hunters, and shifting cultivators.
This method is applicable in brushland areas and in adequately stocked residual forest in thePhilippines where there are small to medium trees that are already growing on site. These trees
will serve as shades to regenerants of climax species. This approach can also be modified byinterplanting the climax species near the pioneer species that are already growing on the ground.
This approach does not follow a specific density resulting in a random spacing.
2. Implementation arrangement
The reforestation implementation arrangement in the Philippines before 1996 implemented 3
modalities: a) Individual contracting; b) family contracting and c) PO corporate contracting. Of
40

Regenerants are wildlings.
15

the 3, PO corporate contracting was successful in terms of survival rates. This was the basis of
the community-based forest management agreement (CBFMA) where good performing
communities are given 50 years-tenure to plant, protect and manage their areas. Some of the
CBFMA holders were given contracts to reforest their areas but majority was not provided suchcontract because of the limited funding. Funding still remains a problem in the 5.3 million
hectares under CBFMA.
Almost at the same time, Thailand launched its community forestry program in 1970, now under
the Office of Community Forest Management41, of which its concept has been adopted by othercountries under different people-oriented forest development programs.
In Indonesia, community forestry42has established a co-management approach allowing
communities as cooperatives to gain 25 year leaseholds on unencumbered State forest lands.
In Malaysia, social forestry is applied with 3 distinct approaches: a) In Sabah, social forestry
programmes are designed for community development. In Sarawak, the programme is agrobased and in Peninsular Malaysia for amenity and the creation of awareness among the people.
In the whole of Malaysia, social forestry is only second to primary wood production forindustrial uses because there is already a thriving export trade primarily for wood products aswell as for the strong domestic demand for timber products43.
6.

Contributory factors to high survival of forest plantation

High survival rates and good forest growth performance depend on the existence of the right area
to be planted, good weather timing, healthy seedlings, proper site preparation and planting,proper applications of methods and techniques, proactive protection and maintenance, dedicatedproject implementers at all levels, longer contract following a three-year contract from planting
to protection and maintenance, ensure stakeholders benefits to the plantations, and timely
releases of sufficient resources.44 Added to these are climate change adaptation measures forforest plantations to survive such as the use of supplemental water system where rain harvesting
may be used to collect water, tapping live springs and streams, and installation of water
impounding ponds. Also, important are access roads and foot paths to the reforestation to41

Patrict Durst, 2009. Working Paper No. APFSOS II/WP/2009/22. Thailand Forestry Outlook Study.
http://www.fao.org/3/a-am617e.pdf
42
Marcus Colchester, nd Bridging The Gap: Challenges To Community Forestry Networking In Indonesia
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marcus_Colchester/publication/237607645_SNAPSHOTS_OF_INTERNATIO
NAL_COMMU
43

T.Y. Chee Agro, Community or Social Forestry In Malaysia - Time To Act
HTTP://WWW.FAO.ORG/DOCREP/ARTICLE/WFC/XII/0438-C1.HTM
44

Balangue, T.O. 2014. Best Practices in Philippine Reforestation Using Indigenous Forest Species: Learning fromthe Field. Energy Development Corporation. Metro Manila.

16

facilitate the transport of manpower, seedlings and supplies and to carry out emergency activities
like putting out forest fires.

7. The Forestry Sector Project (FSP)The FSP was implemented by the DENR in 1993 to 1999 as commissioned by the AsianDevelopment Bank (ADB)45, and in 1996 to 2003 by the Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund
(OECF)/ Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC)46. The FSP aimed to: a) reverse theprocess of upland and mangrove forest degradation; b) ensure the long-term sustainability of
sector investments through broadly based community participation; c) enhance environmental
rehabilitation through forest protection and law enforcement, and d) reduce poverty and augment
income-earning opportunities among rural communities in the project areas. At the national
level, the FSP is coordinated by the National Forestation Development Office (NFDO), while theregional subprojects were implemented by the 15 DENR regional offices.
While both components were originally designed for a six-year implementation covering the
preparatory activities and completion of targets, the ADB component was extended for one (1)year while the OECF/JBIC was extended for three (3) years. The FSP-ADB commenced
implementation in May 1993 and concluded in December 1999 while the FSP-OECF/JBIC ran
from 1996 to 2003.
The FSP under ADB financing targeted the reforestation of 170,000 ha through communitybased approach where 93,000 ha are for management of residual upland and mangrove forest,
55,000 ha for reforestation of degraded sites, and 22,000 ha of critical watersheds forrehabilitation. Conversely, the FSP under OECF/JBIC component targeted 80,000 ha ofwatersheds and mangrove areas. The ADB component reduced and accomplished its target of
35,000 ha in 1998 while the OECF/JBIC component reduced and accomplished its target of
69,571 ha in 2003. These target reductions demonstrated that the DENR has been more effective
on small scale than nationwide scale projects47.
The FSP was implemented in six (6) phases: 1) site identification and selection; 2) survey,
mapping, and planning; 3) feasibility studies or appraisal of the sites; 4) community organizing;5) comprehensive site development; and 6) monitoring and evaluation. In implementing eachphase, the DENR has worked with various organizations as it initiated the first phase of site
identification and selection: non-government organizations (NGOs) were tapped for the SMP,
45

ADB. November 2003. Forestry Sector Project Completion Report. Loan 119(SF)/1192-PH. PCR PHI 24266.

46

Masashi Takano. Sept-Nov. 2005. OECF/JBIC. Forestry Sector Project.

47

ADB Project Completion Report.
17

community organizing (CO), and monitoring and evaluation (M&E); technical consultants forthe feasibility studies and/or appraisal reports; and people’s organizations (POs) for thecomprehensive site development.
The ADB component had numerous small scale subproject sites each with an area of more than
50 ha, while OECF/JBIC had few but bigger subproject areas each with area no less than 2000
ha. The FSP sites nationwide under the ADB funding were located in remote and hardly
accessible areas, while in the OECF/JBIC component the sites were accessible because accessroad upgrading was integrated into the design.
Additional support livelihood projects to People’s Organizations consisted of seven (7) smallscale forest industries with good domestic and/or export market potential: handicrafts,
management of logged-over forests, coconut husk processing, handmade pulp making,handmade paper making, cut flower production, and sericulture. However, there were no reports
received by ADB whether such livelihood projects flourished into community-based forest
industries as a result of the project. Livelihood projects in CFMAs, such as poultry, piggery, andcarabao dispersal and charcoal briquette production were also implemented to augment incomeof members of the People’s Organizations (ADB, 2003).
Sustainability of the projects was ensured by providing various support for the POs such as
issuance of tenure, capability building assistance, maintenance of audited book of accounts, andimplementation of viable livelihood enterprises (ADB, 2003). The 50-year tenure issued to POs
under the Community Forest Management Agreement (CFMAs) provided adequate security andstability to its members, resulting in the reduction of poverty and improved environmental
protection (ADB, 2003).
Further benefits from the FSP included income for PO members, topsoil stabilization, erosion
control and siltation reduction, increased water in streams, and improvement of microclimate(Takano, 2005).
In terms of survival rate of the FSP plantation, the OECF/JBIC audit mission recorded an 84%
survival rate more than the minimum of 80% (Takano, 2005). There was no report on thesurvival rate of the FSP component under the ADB.
8. Some successful reforestation projects
Several reforestation projects were implemented in different parts of the country in different
periods. The seedlings that were planted grew and mature into forests. Some of these are theOsmeña Reforestation Project (ORP) in Minglanilla, Cebu province in 1919. It was declared as18

an experimental forest station under DENR Administrative Order 2004-51.48 The ORP generates
cool and fresh air from its tall trees, provides life support system, and offers aesthetic andeducational benefits. With the declaration, the biodiversity and the benefits remain. However,human exploitation threatens the area.49 In April 2014, eight men, including government
officials, were filed administrative and criminal charges for cutting trees in a protected area in
Barangay Manipis, Talisay City.50 They were charged of cutting mahogany trees in the ORP in
Sitio Campinsa.51
In 1919, the Magsaysay Reforestation Project was established in Arayat, Ilocos, and Zambales.
This was followed by the establishment of the Cinchona plantation in Bukidnon (Mindanao)52 in
1927.
The other one was the Makiling Reforestation Project which was planted in 1916, and in 19371941 by the forestry and agriculture students. The resulting forest was declared as the Makiling
Forest Reserve, which is now under the administrative jurisdiction of the University of thePhilippines at Los Banos. The existing mature forest cover in these reforestation projects
indicates the high survival rate of species planted in the grassland and barren areas.
9. Survival rates of some reforestation projects
A review of some of the reforestation projects in terms of their survival rates was conducted. The
survival rates of these reforestation projects by sector are presented below:
a. Forestry Sector Project, Phase I - 42 percent and below (UNAC 1992), (CIFOR, 2006).
DENR records show a range of 29-86 percent. The factors that contributed to low
survival rates of this project were attributed to activity contracting where planters such asindividuals and families were contracted to perform planting only. After planting theseedlings, the contractors were paid without any responsibility of protecting andmaintaining what they have planted. Also, replanting dead seedlings was not part of theircontract. The project design did not consider the planters as important partners or

48

Gozun EA, Acosta RT and Diaz CP. 31 August 2004. DENR administrative order no. 2004-51. Quezon City,
Philippines: Department of Environment and Natural Resources. A PDF file. Retrieved 13 January 2015 fromhttp://www.denr.gov.ph/policy/dao2004/dao2004-51.pdf.
49

Lanuza RL. 2013 June 7. From Osmeña reforestation project to experimental forest station: potentials andimplications. Philstar. Retrieved 13 January 2015 from http://www.philstar.com/cebunews/2013/06/07/951173/osmena-reforestion-project-experimental-forest-station-potentials-and.
50

Vestil JK. 7 April 2014. 8 face raps for cutting trees. Cebu, Philippines: Sun.Star Publishing, Inc. Retrieved 13
January 2015 from http://50.28.66.108/cebu/local-news/2014/04/07/8-face-raps-cutting-trees-337122.
51

Vestil JK. 27 March 2014. City sent chainsaw to cut trees. : Sun.Star Publishing, Inc. Retrieved 13 January 2015
from http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2014/03/27/city-sent-chainsaw-cut-trees-335377.
52

Ibid
19

stakeholders necessary to sustain the established forests. Also, the project was managed
by the CENROs or PENROs that remotely managed the project sites.
b. Forestry Sector Project, Phase II (OECF/JBIC) - weighted survival rates – 80% (FSP
Completion Report, 2003). The deficiencies of FSP1 were addressed in FSP II. POs were
contracts were extended to 3 years where the first year was for seedling production andplanting, second year for protection and maintenance and replanting, and the third year
for continuation of protection and maintenance and replanting ensuring that theestablished forests will be able to cross the 3rd year up to the 10th year. Another feature of
FSP II that made it attractive to upland and coastal communities was the issuance of
CBFMA which gave them the tenure of 50 years to the areas that they have planted andat the same time giving them the right to harvest and market whatever products they havein the plantations. This is similar to owning the fruits or harvests from the land. And inorder to ensure sustainability of the project and whatever investments introduced in thearea were co-managed by the DENR Subproject Site Management Office and the
CBFMA holder.
c. Reforestation by Administration (DENR) – no published records on survival rates.
d. Tree farms reforestation project of the National Power Corporation in Lake Lanao-Agus
River watershed reservation in 1992, Lanao del Sur, Philippines with technical assistancefrom PICOP53
e. EDC BINHI, Negros Island forest restoration program planted local indigenous speciesof trees primarily to attract biodiverse species - 60-80% survival rates54.
10. Environmental Impacts of reforestation projects
Not all reforestation projects were monitored and evaluated in terms of their quantitativeenvironmental impacts. Environmental impacts were generally qualitative.
1. Carbon sequestration
Campbell (2012) cited the environmental effects of forest restoration. Among these are air
quality, water quality, tree health, soils and the understory, and wildlife habitats and populations.
Non-market benefits and costs, such as watershed and habitat protection, biodiversity, and53

Danilo C. Mero. 1992.. Financing Community Based Watershed Reforestation In The Philippines. Department ofForestry, College of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Mindanao State University, Marawi City, Philippines;
Tel.: +63-633-520982; Cell phone No.: +63-919-4383905; E-mail:danmero@eudoramail.comftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ad496e/ad496e04.pdf
54

EDC-Negros. Reforestation Project Announced For Negros Island, Philippines. Http://Thinkgeoenergy.Com/Archives/19672

20

carbon mitigation are included (Viers, 2005, as reported by Campbell, 2012)55. Furthermore,reforestation increases the density of trees that will crack the soil to increase water percolation
into the soil. This also results to increased stream flow in watersheds.
The impact of reforestation to the amount of carbon captured is proportional to the annual
biomass increment and dependent on the annual diameter and height growth.
The reforestation project in the Philippines that was evaluated according to its impacts is the
CBRM project implemented by the Department of Finance. REECS (2005) in its impact
assessment of CBRM concluded that the reforestation of degraded watersheds and deforested
mangrove lands exhibited positive effects when reforested. The positive impacts were on making
the environment cooler, recharging water to creeks, minimizing soil erosion, recharging soil
fertility, and in bringing back wildlife to the reforested areas56.
Lasco and Pulhin (2006)57 observed in CBFM projects where the planting of trees in farms andlandscapes by the people has led to soil and water conservation, carbon sequestration andbiomass production. It is very obvious that reforestation projects promote CO2 capture from theatmosphere, thereby decreasing the greenhouse effect through the photosynthesis where carbon
is stored in vegetation biomass and forest soils.
The total amount of CO2 accumulated in trees were approximated based from Huy et al. (2008)
who reported the following relationship: Total CO2 accumulation in trees: = 62 % in stem = 26
% in branches = 10 % in bark = 2 % in leaf58. According to Tagupa et al (2010) in Tampisilan
campus by area of species, the species CO2 densities (kT) are: a) Mohogany (Swietenia
macrophylla) is 1.87kt; b) Gmelina (Gmelina arboreaI) 0.47kt; c) Mangium (Acacia mangium)
1.51kt; d) Rubber (Hevea brasillensis) 56.41kt; and e) Natural Forest Trees 27.91kt.
According to Lasco and Pulhin (2009), Carbon (C) density in aboveground biomass (AGB)
declines by about 50% after logging, grasslands and annual crops have C density less than 15
MgC/ha, conversion of natural forests to tree plantations and perennial crops reduce C density by
about 50%, and in reforestation activities in degraded areas C density is increased with a mean

55

Marti Campbell, May 2012. Benefits Of Forest Restoration: Literature Review
Coalition for the Upper South Platte.
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/fujitsu/My%20Documents/Downloads/Review%20of%20literature%20en
vi%
56

REECS (2005), Impact Assessment of the Community-Based Resource Management Project. Department of
Finance.
57

Rodel D. Lasco and Juan M. Pulhin. Environmental impacts of community-based forest management in thePhilippines. Int. J. Environment and Sustainable Development, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2006.
http://www.worldagroforestrycentre.org/downloads/publications/PDFs/bc06025lasco.pdf
58

C. Tagupa , A. Lopez And F. Caperida , G. Pamunag , A. Luzada. Carbon Dioxide (Co2) Sequestration Capacity
Of Tampilisan Forest -International Scientific Research Journal Issn: 2094-1749 volume: 2 issue: 3, 2010 182
21

annual accumulation of up to about 10 MgC/ha/yr for fast growing species and 3 MgC/ha/yr forslow growing species, and silvicultural treatments such as mycorrhizal inoculation can increase
C accumulation.59
Furthermore, Lasco and Pulhin (2009) reported from the 1997 Buante’s data that Acacia
mangium has 25.61 Mg/ha, Gmelina arborea 31.59 Mg/ha, and A. auriculiformis 28.58 Mg/ha.60
According to Palma and Carandang (2014) an agroforestry system planting Bagras and cornalong the boundary of the agroforestry area has a biomass production based on site indexes of 52
trees per hectare was 24.44, 73.07 and 78.67 Mg ha-1. The mean annual aboveground biomass
accumulation was 24.44, 7.31 and 3.93 Mg ha-1 y-1 at ages 1, 10 and 20 years.
Inside the agroforestry area, establishing bagras at a distance of 2 m, site index equal to 19 m,
age set at 10 years was predicted to yield 0.1974 m3 per tree in 2020 and increased to 3.1182 m3
per tree in 2050. Yield and biomass production in boundary plantings can be highly variable –dependent on environmental and soil characteristics and tree spacing61.
Benguet pine (Pinus kesiya) plantations in Bukidnon, Philippines sequester carbon ranging fromabout 22 to 607 Mg per ha. The second-growth forest patches have total carbon density of 450 to529 MgC per ha. P. kesiya tree plantations have carbon stocks that are 4.8 to 77.4% lower than
the second-growth forests. However, P. kesiya’s sequestration rate of 12.7 MgC per ha whilesecond-growth forests which take so much time to develop have an average sequestration rate of
only 4.8 MgC per ha62.
2. Reduced air pollution
Air pollution is one of the problems that cause multiple damages to human and environment.
Thus, there is a need to reduce air pollutants. According to Yang et. al (2004)63, trees play two59

Rodel D. Lasco and Florencia B. Pulhin. Carbon Budgets of Forest Ecosystems in the Philippines. Journal ofEnvironmental Science and Management 12(1):1-13 (June 2009) ISSN 0119-1144
60

Ibid

61

Richmund A. Palma and Wilfredo M. Carandang. Carbon Sequestration and Climate Change Impact on the Yieldof Bagras (Eucalyptus deglupta Blume) in Bagras-Corn Boundary Planting Agroforestry System in Misamis
Oriental and Bukidnon, Philippines Journal of Environmental Science and Management 17(2): 29-37 (December2014) ISSN 0119-1144
62

Jose Hermis P. Patricio and Adrian M. Tulod (2010). Carbon Sequestration Potential of BenguetPine (Pinus
Kesiya) Plantation in Bukidnon. Philippines Jour
-3179

63

Yang, J., ET. Al (2004). The Urban Forest In Beijing And Its Role In Air Pollution Reduction. Department ofEnvironmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-3110,
USA. Institute of Forestry Science, Chinese Academy of Forestry Science, Beijing 100091, China.

22

important roles in reducing air pollutants, first is by direct reduction by absorbing gaseous
pollutants (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone) from air and by indirect reduction of air
temperature through direct shading and evapotranspiration for cooling purposes. Also by
lowering air temperature, the activity of chemical reactions can be decreased (Taha, 1996)64.
One of the studies in Beijing, China (Yang, et. al, 2004) shows that 2.4 million of trees canremove 1261.4 tons of pollutants from the air. The air pollutant that was most reduced was
PM10 (particulate matters with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than 10 mm) and the reduction
amounted to 772 tons. The carbon dioxide (CO2) stored in biomass form by the urban forest
amounted to about 0.2 million tons.
3. Reduced events of landslide and flooding
Land cover could be a good indicator of the watershed’s rating for landslide susceptibility
because the forest covers contribute to the integrity of the soil. It could also lessen thepossibilities and risks of having landslides and erosion (Begueria, 2006)65. Characteristics of land
cover affect susceptibility to landslide with the amount of number of trees and density of tree.
Vegetation is influenced by removing soil moisture through evapotranspiration and by providing
root cohesion to the soil mantle (Gray and Megahan, 1981)66. The presence of vegetation can
mitigate the occurrence of landslide since trees and other plants will make the soil morecompacted making it resistant to any pressure applied.
According to Rickli and Graf (2009)67, forest can stabilize steep slopes. Their study showed thatlandslide densities were lower in forested terrain than in open land. Furthermore, landslides
mapped in forests occurred on steeper slopes than slides mapped in open land.
4. Reduced temperature
According to its situation, species, size and condition, the shade from trees can reduce spendingon air conditioning for residential and commercial buildings from a percentage of 15% to 50%.
The shade from trees helps in cooling the streets and parking lots. Temperatures in cities tend toregister between 5.09 degrees more than in regions where there are plenty of trees.
64

Taha, H., 1996. Modeling Impacts of Increased Urban Vegetation on Ozone Air Quality in the South Coast Air
Basin. Atmospheric Environment 30, 3423–3430.
65

Begueria, S., 2006. Changes in Land Cover and Shallow Landslide Activity: A Case Study in the Spanish
Pyrenees. Geomorphology 74: 196–206
66

Gray, D.H., and Megahan, W.F., 1981. Forest Vegetation Removal and Slope Stability in the Idaho Batholith.
USDA Forest Service. Paper INT-127: 23.
Rickli, C. and Graf, F. (2009). Effects of Forests on Shallow Landslides – Case Studies in Switzerland. WSL
Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research, CH-8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland.
67

23

The reason for the reduction in temperature by plants is due to photosynthesis where water will
split to hydrogen and oxygen when there is light energy. The formula for photosynthesis isshown as,68

According to Northwest Territories Forest Management as reported by Helmenstine, 6000
pounds of oxygen are easily produced by a 100-ft tall tree with a base diameter of 18"69. Also,
she quoted the figure of Environment Canada that on the average, one tree produces nearly 260
pounds of oxygen each year. Two mature trees can provide enough oxygen for a family of four."In a joint publication of the U.S. Forest Service and International Society of Arboriculture, thearticle reported the "Mean net annual oxygen production (after accounting for decomposition)
per hectare of trees (100% tree canopy) offsets oxygen consumption of 19 people per year (eightpeople per acre of tree cover), but ranges from nine people per hectare of canopy cover (fourpeople/ac cover) in Minneapolis, Minnesota, to 28 people/ha cover (12 people/ac cover) in
Calgary,
Alberta."

5. Soil temperature
Reforestation can also impact the soil temperature as attested in the study conducted by Correa
and Scull (2005)70, Hamilton, NY (Madison County). According to them, the soil temperature infields are warmer than those of forested lands. The field’s mean temperature during the month ofNovember 12-May 31 was 4.09ᵒC while 3.57ᵒC in the forest. The field soils had greater variation
than the forested soils with standard deviations of 3.31 and 2.43. Of the three seasons examinedin this study the forested soils were warmer in both the fall and the winter, but not significantly.
The mean soil temperature in the fields during the fall was 4.67ᵒC and the forest was 5.10ᵒC. The
wintertime mean soil temperature for the fields was 1.30ᵒ C while the forest was 1.37ᵒC. The
spring marked the greatest difference in mean soil temperature between the forest and the fieldwith mean field temperature at 8.13ᵒC whereas the forest has a temperature of 5.89ᵒC.
6. Soil organic carbon
68

http://www.ext.colostate.edu/mg/gardennotes/141.html

69

Anne Helmenstine (nd) How Much Oxygen Does One Tree Produce? http://chemistry.about.com/bio/Anne-MarieHelmenstine-Ph-D-7815.htm
70

Correa, S. M. and Scull, P. (2005). The Impact of Reforestation on Soil Temperature. Department of Geography
Colgate University, Hamilton, NY, 13346.

24

Soil organic carbon (SOC) storage and CO2 flux into the atmosphere can be influenced by land
use change, especially reforestation. Coniferous forest land uses have the highest SOC storage(SF1=255.00 and SF2=237.90 Mg C ha−1). Then followed by deciduous forest (PF1=216.74 andPF2=159.12 Mg C ha−1) and abandoned rangeland (AR1=185.31 and AR2=151.60 Mg C ha−1).
According to Moghiseh, et, al (2013), changes in the use of lands had a significant impacts on
soil CO2 efflux. The highest recorded soil CO2 efflux in a wide range of land uses were obtainedin August to October due to more suitable temperature and rainfall distribution. Based on lower
CO2 emission in abandoned rangelands, lesser soil organic carbon is related to lower input tosoil. The higher C: N ratios in litter and some of mineral horizons (SF2) and lower CO2
emissions by the higher lignin and polyphenol concentrations (SF1) in coniferous forests
compared to deciduous forests have probably caused increasing SOC storage.
7. Soil organic matterOn the other hand, reforestation can also affect the soil organic matter and its other properties.
Reforestation increases soil organic matter by 49%-72% which was more significant comparedto the cultivated control soils. Reforestation with olive increased mean weight diameter by 81%
and reforestation with Cupressus increased MWD by 83.6%. Therefore forest clearing followedby cultivation of the hilly slopes resulted in the decline of the soil quality attributes, whilereforestation improved them in the study area.
IV.

Research Gap and Potential Contribution of the Environmental Impact Study
1. Research gaps

A review of the studies of the Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau published in
Sylvatrop and other published materials showed that most studies conducted were on the seeding
duration and schedules of exotic and indigenous forest species, seed germination technology,
cloning or vegetative propagation techniques of planting materials, and effects of fertilizer andmycorrhiza applications. Almost all studies were conducted at experimental nurseries and sometrial plantings of cloned seedlings in selected field conditions.
Studies designed to provide scientific information to reforestation projects before, during andafter establishment of forest conducted in reforestation sites are seldom read in literatures. This
indicates that reforestation projects and research studies are somehow disconnected particularly
at the field level. To gain fruitful result in any greening program of the government, researchshould always be supportive to the needs of such greening program on site.
Some of the research gaps are:For further improving the usefulness of Survey, Mapping and Planning (SMP)25

1. Incomplete site capacity assessment as reflected in the reviewed SMP reports 71. Soilcharacterization was not given much importance. What are the site factors that should be
addressed in the SMP that are better predictors of survival rate?
2. There are no trial plantings of forest species (preferably indigenous ones) in different
barangays that cut across elevations and slopes. The growth performance of such species
will provide guidance to species-site matching in reforestation projects.
For planning and actual planting activities
3. When is the right time to start and stop planting? Wrong timing in planting results to low
survival rate because soil moisture might be insufficient. Is the regular rainy season a
sufficient indicator of when to start and stop planting on a per site basis? Is the soil
moisture content on the ground a better indicator than rainfall season? A study that will
establish the soil moisture level per rainfall intensity in an area is important to establish
the best indicator that will define the reforestation window72 in a particular place.
Similarly, during dry season, what temperature is critical to the survival of forest
plantations during the early stage of development?
For maximizing the use of planted species
4. Which forest species would better build up soil accretion, NPK, carbon and soil moisture,
result in cool temperature, attract wildlife, sequester carbon, and build-up stumpage onsite considering the planted species?
For species adaptation to high temperature condition
5. Which forest species would survive in high temperature, drought, El Niño? What are thespecial features of species that could survive in high temperature?
6. Innovations in reforestation areas to reduce the effect of dryness, high temperature,
drought and El Niño to newly planted seedlings and forest plantations in their early stageof development?
For species diversification with high survival rate
7. Growth performance at different time frames of planted species in monoculture and mix
planting pattern given prescribed density.

71

Based on initial review of SMP documents for NGP sites in CENRO Masinloc, Zambales.
http://news.mongabay.com/2014/1205-meijaard-rps-indonesia-reforestation.html
72

Reforestation window is the best time of the rainy season where soil moisture is sufficient to support the growthof newly planted seedlings and forest plantations in their early stages of development.
26

8. To move forward from the usual reforestation of planting fast growing exotic species,
what are the indigenous pioneer, intermediate and climax species that would grow well inan area? What ecological habitat do they require?
For systematic assessment and evaluation
9. A systematic environmental impact assessment of reforestation project focusing on
processes, effects and outcomes
For reforestation project implementation arrangement and management
10. Optimal configuration of reforestation project implementation arrangement andmanagement considering, restorability of degraded forestlands, capable warm bodies atthe barangay level, weather condition, funding, local government machinery and CENRO
project management capacity.
For creating planting materials that can withstand strong wind.
11. Effectiveness of root trainer in assisting seedling roots to grow deeper into the soil and beable to hold itself even under strong wind. What is the best size of the root trainer for
every species?
2. Potential contribution of the study
The environmental impact study is expected to contribute in terms of the following possible
observations:
1. Provide a systematic assessment and evaluation methodology focusing on how theprocesses were implemented, estimating their effects and outcomes and pointing out
critical processes for further improvement and how improvement can be attained. Current
monitoring and evaluation system being implemented focuses solely on survival rates offorest plantations rather than on a holistic approach as what is being proposed in thisstudy.
2. Recommendations for upgrading measures to reforestation processes that werehaphazardly implemented in the field.
3. Recommendation on research and reforestation tandem to focus on research opportunities
that will further improve implementation of reforestation projects.
4. Recommendation on the optimal CENRO-BLGU management configuration that will
implement and manage any reforestation project with the primary objective of further
improving survival rate and producing a quality forest.
5. Recommendation on specific forest species that will have the highest contribution towood supply, soil accretion, cool temperature, carbon sequestration, wildlife, soil
nutrients and soil moisture, DRR and CCA/M.
27

V.

Conceptual Framework and Methodology

The conceptual framework and the methodology of the environmental component of the Impact
Project of the NGP were based on the Theory of Change of the Social Component of the Impact
Project by Noela Lasmarias (2015). The Theory of Change diagram is in Appendix Figure 1. For
details please refer to the Social Component Report. The activities in Appendix Figure 1 are the
NGP activities and considered in Figure 1 below as the processes that were assessed andevaluated in the environmental impact study. These were compared to the specifications of theactivities defined in the NGP guidelines and best practices benchmark.
1. Conceptual framework for assessment and evaluation
The framework of analysis of the environmental component in schematic diagram is shown in
Figure 1.
FRAMEWORK OF NGP PROCESS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATIONPROCESSES & IMPACTS
EVALUATIONNGP PROCESSES AND IMPACTS ASSESSMENTREQUIREMENTS (NGPGUIDELINESDRR FARMEWORKCCAM FRAMEWORKBEST PRACTICESREQUIREMENTS (NGPGUIDELINESDRR FARMEWORKCCAM FRAMEWORKBEST PRACTICESNGPOBJECTIVESDRROBJECTIVESCCA/M
OBJECTIVESA.

NGP PROCESSES:SURVEY, MAPPINGAND PLANNING
B.
FOREST
PLANTATIONQUALITY
ASSURANCEC.
CAPACITYBUILDING

PROCESSES IN NGP FORESTESTABLISHMENT
A. SEEDLING PRODUCTION
B. SITE PREPARATION
C. PLANTING
D. PROTECTION &MAINTENACENONNGP
SITES

NGP
SITES

Best
Practic
es
Bench
mark

NGP
Sites

NonNGP
Sites

Contr
ol
Sites

CHANGE (+,-) IN
PROCESSES & BESTPRACTICESNET CHANGE (+,-)
NGP
BENEFICIARIESENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT S OF NGP
A. SURVIVAL RATE OF PLANTED TREES
B. SOIL ACCRETION/EROSION
C. SOIL NPK, OM, CARBONSOIL
MOISTURE
D. LITTER FALL NPK, OM, CARBON
E. TEMPERATURE
F. WIDLIFE
G. DRR COMPLIANCE
H. CCA/M COMPLIANCE
I. IMPACT PERCEPTIONS OFCOMMUNITIESNONNGPBENEFICI
ARIES

Best
Practic
es
Bench
mark

CHANGE (+,-) IN
PROCESSES & BESTPRACTICES IN FORESTESTABLISHMENTNET CHANGE (+, -)

NGP
SITES

NONNGP
SITES

CONT
ROLSI
TES

INDICATORSMEASUREMENTS

CHANGE (+,-) IN
IMPACTS (NGP SITESTO NON-NGP SITES &NGP SITES TO
CONTROL SITES)NET CHANGE (+,-)

Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of NGP Processes and Impacts Assessment and Evaluation
There are two major components of Figure 1. One is the NGP processes and impacts assessment,
and the other one is the processes and impacts evaluation.
The NGP Process Assessment component determines the actual performance of the specific NGP
sites in terms of putting on the ground the forests while the NGP Process Evaluation component
compares the performance of the NGP sites to the Non-NGP sites and to the Best Practices
Benchmark in forest restoration. The expanded form of the framework considering the important
technical processes in forest restoration is presented in Appendix Table 1 to Appendix Table 7.
Apendix Table 1 is for the assessment and evaluation of SMP, Appendix Table 2 is for thecapability building of the NGP workers, Appendix Table 3 is for the NGP forest quality
28

plantation assurance, Appendix Table 4 is for seedling production, Appendix Table 5 is for site
preparation, Appendix Table 6 is for planting, and Appendix Table 7 is for protection andmaintenance. The specific activity process assessment and evaluation formats are presented in
the following sections:
2. Structure of the framework in matrix format
The
structurecontains
5
majorcolumns.
These
columnsare“Basis”,“Process/Criteria/Indicator”, “Finding”, “Positive Rating”, and “Negative Rating”. The column
title “Basis” contains the NGP DENR guidelines defining the activities that are relevant to theactivity. It also includes DRR and CCA/M framework. The column “Process/Criteria/Indicator”
contains the criteria or indicators to be used in describing how the activities where conducted in
the NGP sites and Non-NGP sites. The column “Finding” contains the observations in the NGP
site and Non-NGP Site according to the KII/FGD results. The columns “Positive Rating” and“Negative Rating” contain the evaluation of the process according to the indicators. Comparing
the findings in the NGP site with the Non-NGP site and Best Practices Benchmark gives the
positive or negative qualitative or quantitative observations which may be rated through a rating
scheme involving experts in forest restoration. The most common rating scheme that may be
used is through the allocation of a scale from 1 to 5 where a scale of 1 means low importance and5 means very high importance.
The study assessed and evaluated the following NGP processes:
3. Survey, mapping and planning (SMP)
SMP is the first major activity of any reforestation project. SMP includes surveys, mapping andplanning. SMP in general is designed to determine the areas that are suitable for planting (Article
2, DAO 31, series of 1991 Revised Guidelines for Contract Reforestation; NGP Implementation
Manual, 2012). It involves surveying the boundaries of the potential areas for reforestation andestablishing the areas to be free from other claims and assuring that they are under the domain or
jurisdiction of the DENR. To determine whether the species to be planted will thrive or not,activities such as soil assessment survey and identification of growing species on sites areundertaken. These also serve as inputs to species-site matching. If the selected species matchedwith the sites, then the survival and the growth performance of the species planted are expected
to be high.
Since the NGP has expanded its objectives to include DRR and CCA/M compliance, the SMP
should also address these concerns.
Detailed enumeration of the sub-activities under SMP are indicated in Appendix Table 1.
The format of the process assessment and evaluation of the SMP activity is described in same
Appendix Table 1. Only critical sub-activities of SMP are included for assessment andevaluation. The entries are defined at the Note section of the table. SMP is divided into: a)Survey and its indicators: boundary, soil survey, vegetation survey, DRR areas, and CCA/M
29

areas, plantable and non-plantable sites as indicators; b) mapping those that were surveyed in
Item a; and d) planning with its indicators: feasibility design and forest restoration plan.
4. NGP beneficiary capability training
Proper training on the processes and standards of establishing NGP forests are necessary for thecontractors before commencing to the NGP sites to ensure that their outputs would meet theobjectives and standards of the NGP. This training shall involve providing knowledge on proper
handling and management of contract funds to avoid potential conflicts between and among theworkers and managers of the contractors, as well as knowledge on the right billing processes
based on actual acceptable activity outputs for transparency purposes.
Training forest restoration workers on the different activities of the NGP will improve thecapability of the workers to properly conduct such activities resulting in the right quality ofoutput. Appendix Table 2 presents the indicators to be assessed and evaluated.
The basic training topics that should have been given by DENR to the NGP beneficiaries before
starting their assigned tasks.
5. NGP Forests quality assurance
NGP Forests quality assurance involves activity and output inspection to ensure that minimum
standards required by DENR were met, quality grading of the outputs of each of the above
activities which are usually the basis of payments to the contractors, back job instructions to redo
substandard qualities before recommendation for payment is prepared until the required
minimum standard is satisfied, and instructions for conditional payments.
There are best practices in ensuring the success of establishing forest plantations that have beendeveloped in similar reforestation projects in the past. One of the best practices relevant toensuring the quality of forest plantation is the conduct of activity inspection to check whether
such activity is properly implemented. Activities that are not properly implemented result to poor
quality of output. Example in reforestation is when the sites are prepared haphazardly where
weeds can recover within weeks. When the site is planted, the seedlings will not be able to growwell because the weeds will grow faster than the seedlings. This will end up in high mortality ofthe seedlings. Before planting, therefore, strip brushing should be able to clean well the area
where the seedlings will be planted. Appendix Table 3 presents the assessment and evaluation of
the NGP forest plantation quality assurance. The same weighing or rating scheme applies.
6. Seedling production
Seedling production starts from seed collection, wildling collection, cloning (to some extent) andother modes of acquiring seedlings. There is no guideline limiting seedling production to theproject beneficiaries. Seedlings can be produced by members of the communities or People’s
Organizations. In other situation, the seedlings are produced and provided by the DENR at cost.
It is also possible that the contracted members of the communities or POs are allowed to procure
30

the seedlings from outside suppliers. The quality of the seedlings disposed of from the nursery to
NGP sites should satisfy the standard set by the DENR for seedlings ready for planting. This will
include seedling transport from the nursery to the sites to be planted (Article 2, DAO 31, seriesof 1991 Revised Guidelines for Contract Reforestation NGP Implementing Guideline, 2012).
Seedling production is one of the critical aspects of any reforestation projects. The quality offorest plantations depends on the sources of seeds, wildlings and other planting materials and on
how these are grown in the nursery. Thus, the indicators that should be assessed and evaluated
are the sources of planting materials, the growth period spent, and the growth rate of theseedlings are important in evaluating whether the project will be a success or failure. Appendix
Table 4 presents the process assessment and evaluation for seedling production. The samedescriptions of the table columns apply, except for the “Process/Criteria/Indicators.” This
column contains the indicators for seedling production. The same process and rating scheme
applies for the evaluation of the Findings and the Negative and Positive Ratings.
7. Site preparation
Site preparation processes include strip or ring clearing of the areas to be planted, removal onsite of the cut grasses and weeds, staking of planting sites along the strips or rings according toprescribed spacing, hole digging according to prescribed hole dimension, full cleaning of thehole and its immediate vicinity (within 0.5m radius from the hole) removing all grass roots,
preparation of satellite nurseries73 in the planting sites where seedlings are temporarily stocked,
construction of firelines/firebreaks, construction of composting area (optional for those who used
fertilizers) (Article 2, DAO 31, series of 1991 Revised Guidelines for Contract Reforestation;
and NGP Implementation Guideline 2012).
Construction of water system (optional), and construction of feeder roads or foot paths in theplanting site are considered as important innovations.
Appendix Table 5 shows the process assessment and evaluation for site preparation. The“Process/ Criteria/ Indicator” Column contains the activities conducted in the preparation of thesite where the seedlings are to be planted. Again, same process applies for the evaluation of theFindings and the Negative and Positive Ratings. The most common rating scheme which may be
used is through the allocation of a scale from 1 to 5 where a scale of 1 means low importance and5 means very high importance.
8. Planting
Planting processes include seedling distribution to the planting sites from the satellite nurseries
or temporary seedling depots, use of seedling carriers to minimize damage to seedlings duringtransport, proper removal of seedling plastic bags without bursting the balled soil, erection of the73

Satellite nurseries are temporary in nature provided with shades and watering system where seedlings for planting
are temporarily stocked.
31

seedlings on the hole with proper depth of root collar, filling up the hole with fertile soil,pressing the filled up soil around the planted seedling, staking back to mark the hole has beenplanted, and placement of a mulch on every planted seedlings in preparation for the incoming dry
season. The proper timing of planting, such as considering the start and end of the actual rainyseason is part of the processes of planting (Article 2, DAO 31, series of 1991 Revised Guidelines
for Contract Reforestation; ERDB, 201074 and NGP Implementation Manual, 2012)
Appendix Table 6 shows the process assessment and evaluation for Planting NGP sites. The“Criteria/Indicator” column contains the activities necessary in planting at the site. Again,
observations will be discussed in the Findings section, and the processes will be assessed andevaluated according to the indicators through the scale of 1-5.
9. Protection and maintenance
Under protection and maintenance, NGP forests are periodically inspected to assess their growthand health condition. Other activities such as replanting of trees to meet required survival rate,
ring weeding and remulching, applying fertilizer, brushing and cleaning fire breaks and fire lines,
patrolling, mobilizing fire fighters during dry season and information campaigning are also
conducted under this NGP process (Article 2, DAO 31, series of 1991 Revised Guidelines forContract Reforestation; ERDB Guidebook on Reforestation of 2010; and NGP Implementation
Manual, 2012).
Appendix Table 7 contains the process assessment and evaluation for the protection andmaintenance of the NGP established forest plantation. The Criteria and Indicator column
includes several activities necessary to protect the planted seedlings and maintain the goodcondition of the seedlings and the site. Observations will be discussed in the Findings section,and the processes will be assessed and evaluated according to the indicators through the scale of
1-5.
10. NGP impacts to environmental attributes
The effects or outcomes of the processes that will be assessed and evaluated in Appendix Table 1
to Appendix Table 7 are believed to result in the level of survival rates of the NGP forest
plantations that were established. Thus, survival rate is very important because all the otherimpacts of the NGP biodiversity, social, economic, and institutional will hinge from it. The
environmental indicators that will be measured in the sampled NGP and Non-NGP sites andcontrol sites indicated in the approved proposal and Terms of Reference are presented in theprocess and impact assessment and evaluation matrix (Table 8).
74

Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau. 2010. Development and management of forest plantations: aguidebook. College, Laguna: Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau, Department of Environment andNatural Resources. 80p; 185p; 195p; 223p 183p; 188p; 191p; 226p

32

1. Survival rate
Survival rate is the number of seedlings or trees that are still alive during assessment time given
the total number of seedlings that were planted and paid. It is determined by the formula
indicated in Figure 22 and Figure 23.
A minimum survival rate of 85% prescribed by NGP will be followed (NGP Implementation
Guideline, 2012).
Criteria for judging seedling condition
A seedling is evaluated as living if it has any of the following health conditions:a. All parts (stem, branch, leaves) are alive.
b. A seedling is declared alive even if any of its parts is damaged under the following
conditions: Leaves, majority of the seedling crown is damaged
 Branches and twigs, majority of its branches and twigs is not damaged.
c. A seedling is declared dead under the following conditions: Leaves, all leaves are dried or totally damaged except for deciduous and coppicing
species Almost all of its branches and twigs are dried except for deciduous75and coppicing
76
species
2. Soil erosion/soil accretion
Soil is a very important component of the natural resources. Without soil there are no forest andfood crops to talk of. Thus, it is a very important concerns. Because of this, any reforestation
projects implemented by government, should always have an objective of reducing soil erosion
because trees perform such function77. Thus, it is one of the environmental indicators that shouldbe measured in this study.
The project will also find out the impact of the NGP forests to soil erosion or accretion.
Physically, the root system will hold the soil thus minimizing the movements of soil particles andthrough the root system soil particles are trapped and through time build up the soil. Also, the75

Deciduous species that shed off all their leaves by nature specially during summer time.

76

Coppicing species have the capability to bear shoots and develop into full stem and become a tree even if thewhole tree is cut as long as the stump and the root are still in the ground.
77

Forestry Sector Project (1996 to 2003). A Community-Based Reforestation Project Implemented By DENR.
33

litter falls from the canopy of the NGP forests are expected to become humus and eventually mix
up with the soil, thus, resulting to its accretion. Both soil erosion and soil accretion will bemeasured through NGP forests.
3. Temperature
Trees, through the process of photosynthesis, provide fresh and cool oxygen to theatmosphere78.It also capture carbon in the atmosphere. Carbon is one of the atmosphericelements that contributes to global warming. The impact of reforestation to the amount of carbon
captured is proportional to the annual biomass increment and dependent on the annual diameterand height growth. Lasco and Pulhin (2006)79 observed in CBFM projects where the planting oftrees in farms and landscapes by the people has led to soil and water conservation, carbon
sequestration and biomass production. It is very obvious that reforestation projects promote CO2
capture from the atmosphere, thereby decreasing the greenhouse effect through thephotosynthesis where carbon is stored in vegetation biomass and forest soils.
Thus, temperature is considered as one of the environmental indicators to be measured.
4. Nitrogen, Potassium and Phosphorus (NPK)Vegetation by nature is a source of NPK from their dead parts. NPK are nutrients to trees andcrops. Farmers are dependent of commercial fertilizers for their farms to produce more yields.
According to Nazir and Netajini (2014)80 three forest types i.e., sal (Shorea robusta), teak(Tectona grandis) and shisham (Dalbergia sissoo) average available potassium was maximum(147ppm) in Shorea robusta forest followed by teak and shisham with 102ppm and 32ppm
respectively. Similarly, available phosphorus was highest in teak (19.33ppm) followed by sal andshisham 18.17ppm and 2.75ppm, respectively. Organic carbon and total nitrogen were maximum
under teak plantation. These findings showed that trees provides NPK.
In reforestation projects in the Philippines, planted seedlings or trees shed off their leaves, twigs
and other dead parts that fall on the ground and become parts of the humus which later wouldmix with the soil. When decayed, the plants parts are rich in nutrients needed by other plants to
grow. The primary soil nutrients are NPK. As the NGP forests grow, their litter falls will also
increase and automatically resulting to an increase in the NPK available to plants on the ground.

78

Taha, H., 1996. Modeling Impacts of Increased Urban Vegetation on Ozone Air Quality in the South Coast Air
Basin. Atmospheric Environment 30, 3423–3430.
79

Rodel D. Lasco and Juan M. Pulhin. Environmental impacts of community-based forest management in thePhilippines. Int. J. Environment and Sustainable Development, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2006.
http://www.worldagroforestrycentre.org/downloads/publications/PDFs/bc06025lasco.pdf
80Tahir Nazir and Ningthoujam Netajini, 2014. Economic Valuation of NPK and Soil Vegetation Interrelationshipin Three Forest Types of Dehradun. Nature and Science 2014;12(9). http://www.sciencepub.net/nature/34

This NPK will also be transported downhill during rains contributing to the fertility of the lands
in lower slope areas.
Because of this, NPK is considered as one of the environmental indicators that will be measured
in the NGP sites to determine whether the plantations are contributing to enriching nutrients tothe soil.
5. Carbon sequestration
Increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide can be addressed through forestry and forest
management81. Reforestation is one of the forestry activities that captures carbon from theatmosphere. Carbon is stored in the wood biomass and in the soil from the residues of the litter
falls that fell to the ground. This becomes part of the carbon trapped in the soil. The more carbon
trapped the better to the environment because high temperature will be further reduced. Initially,
the effect of cooling the temperature would be felt at the micro-ecosystem level and later on as
the forests become mature, the cooling effect would be felt at the macro-ecosystem level.
6. Soil moisture
According to Tyagi, et al, nd82 soil moisture under dense forest cover is higher than in degraded
forest during all seasons. The values during monsoon, winter and summer seasons were obtained
as 40.33, 29.29 and 25.95% respectively under dense forest; and 39.34, 25.50 and 22.58%
respectively under degraded forest. The figures indicate that there are more soil moistures inforested areas than in adequately forested areas. Following the trend, it is possible that reforested
areas have more soil moisture than the grasslands. It is for this reason that soil moisture isselected as one of the environmental impact indicators that will be measured in the NGP sites todetermine whether there NGP forest plantations can recharge moisture into the ground as initial
impact of reforestation to water recharging.
7. Wildlife
The revegetation of grasslands attracts fauna and flora species. Fauna uses the forest as habitat
area and in return they will bring in fruits and seeds of tree species that will be grown naturally
to the NGP-planted area. So if there are wildlife browsing in the area, this will be due to theestablished forest. If other tree species are growing together with the species that were planted in
81

Roger Sedjo (2001). Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investment. RFF.
http://www.rff.org/Documents/RFF-DP-01-34.pdf
82

J.V. Tyagi, NIH Roorkee Nuzhat Qazi, FRI Dehradun S.P. Rai, NIH Roorkee M.P. Singh, FRI, Dehradun. Effect
Of Forest Cover Structures On Soil Moisture Variation A Case Study In Oak Forested Watersheds
http://www.apafri.org/activities/Forest%20Hydrology%20Workshop%20Dehradun/PPTs/24-092013/Theme%203/6._jb%20
35

the NGP project sites, these are attributed as impact of the planted species. Fauna and flora
observed on site will also be identified and counted.
According to Ochterski, et. al., 2009.83Wildlife benefits from reforestation projects. berryproducing shrubs attracts songbirds, trees that bear nuts attract turkey and small mammals,
evergreens and dense shrubs for cover for wildlife habitat and for foraging wildlife.
8. Disaster risk reduction
The DRR law and its IRR relevant to the NGP will be considered in the environmental impact
assessment and evaluation84. Translating the NGP areas into vulnerable and high risk areas due
to extreme rainfall events, typhoons, droughts such as high slopes, water lagged, stream banks,
gullies, landslide areas will be considered as among the environmental impact indicators under
NGP compliance to DRR.
9. Climate change adaptation and mitigation
The environmental impact indicators to measure NGP compliance to climate change will bebased on the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change (2010-2022). The whole NGPestablished forests are also ways to adaptation/mitigation to climate change. This is due to thecarbon being sequestered by plants in general. The bigger the tree species, the higher carbon is
captured. Also, the faster the growth rate of the tree, the more carbon is sequestered. If NGP
planted such tree species, then it has addressed these concerns in climate change.
10. Stumpage build-up
The NGP- established forests are also meant to produce wood in designated production forest for
the wood industry. This is intended to supply lumber, veneer, plywood, paper and other woodbased products. A high survival rate would mean high stumpage at economic or biologicalrotation. Therefore, there would be sufficient supply of wood for the wood industry.
In the protected area sector, the buildup of stumpage is important for the production ofenvironmental services.

83

Jim Ochterski, Cornell University Cooperative Extension of Ontario County Peter Smallidge, Cornell University
Cooperative Extension, Department of Natural Resources Jeff Ward, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment
Station, Department of Forestry and Horticulture. Dec 2009. Northeastern Tree Planting & Reforestation.
http://www.cce.cornell.edu/Environment/Documents/PDFs/TreePlantingBulletin12-09.pdf
84

Republic Act No. 101211. An Act Strengthening The Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction And Management
System, Providing For The National Disaster Risk Reduction And Management Framework And Institutionalizing
The National Disaster Risk Reduction And Management Plan, Appropriating Funds Therefor And For Other
Purposes. http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/45/Republic_Act_10121.pdf
36

11. General impacts of NGP forests according to peoples’ perceptions in thecommunities
According to the findings of the social study group, some of the respondents interviewed inZambales informed them that after a year of planting in the NGP, a dead spring was recharged
with water during the summer season. Some of the questions to be asked are those that pertain towhether NGP has already reduced siltation of streams, flooding during wet season, increased
stream flow of rivers, increased volume of ground water through recharging of wells, cooling oftemperature in the barangay, increased number of wildlife, and other observed impacts based on
the perceptions of the people in the communities.
Environmental impact evaluation for NGP sites is presented here in Appendix Table 8. “Criteria
and Indicator” includes impacts to Soil Indicators, soil NPK, Carbon, Organic Matter and soil
moisture, litter fall NPK, and Carbon, DRR, CCA, and Biodiversity Conservation. The threedifferent sites will be compared to one another using the indicators.

VI.

Methodology
1. Sampling NGP provinces, municipalities and NGP and Non-NGP sites

The sampling methodology for selecting the NGP sites for assessment and evaluation followed amulti-stage sampling with proportional allocation to the provinces that implemented the NGP.
The steps in the sampling process were:
1. Stratifying the sampling population – the provinces by major islands: Luzon, Visayas andMindanao. The stratum are Luzon Stratum, Visayas Stratum, and Mindanao Stratum.
2. The total number of provinces by stratum was determined. This resulted to:a. Luzon stratum – 39 provincesb. Visayas stratum – 17 provincesc. Mindanao stratum – 24 provinces
3. The maximum number of provinces was significantly dictated by available resources andtime constraint for the environmental impact study. Budget calculation and fundallocation to the different activities and time constraint indicated that it was only
sufficient for 6 provinces.
4. The 6 provinces were allocated to the major islands using proportional allocation, thepercentage was calculated for each stratum. The results are:a. Luzon stratum: 39/80 = 48%
b. Visayas stratum: 17/80 = 21%37

c. Mindanao stratum: 24/80 = 30%
5. The number of provinces that were selected for sampling are:a. Luzon stratum: 48% of 6 is 2.88 rounded up to 3 provinces.
b. Visayas stratum: 21% of 6 is 1.26 rounded up to 1 province.
c. Mindanao stratum: 30% of 6 is 1.86 rounded up to 2 provinces.
6. Random selection of the 6 provinces
To avoid bias in the selection process, the provinces in Luzon stratum, Visayas stratumand Mindanao stratum, were selected by random draw lots by the NGP Assistant
Coordinator and staff together with the presence of the PIDS consultants and PIDS
representative. For phase 1, 3 provinces were selected. Another 3 provinces will beselected in Phase 2.
The randomly selected provinces for Phase 1 were Zambales, Dinagat and Negros
Occidental.
7. The municipalities that were sampled were determined through cluster sampling where
all the municipalities in each of the selected provinces having 196 hectares or more
planted under the NGP and another 196 hectares or more under non-NGP sites (planted
under different funding mechanism) were clustered.
8. The municipality that was randomly selected corresponds to where the NGP sites andnon-NGP sites are located.
9. Purposive selection of the NGP site and Non-NGP site in the randomly selectedmunicipality by selecting the NGP sites and non-NGP sites that are contiguous or at most
within 1 to 3 hours travel time from site to site.
10. At the NGP site or Non-NGP site level, 100% inventory and measurements of theseedlings/trees planted were conducted.
11. Sampling plots for the environmental indicator measurements were conducted using a
30% sampling intensity of the inventoried seedlings/trees. The seedlings/trees where
measurements of environmental indicators were randomly selected on the ground.
2. Selected provinces, municipalities and NGP sites
The sampling resulted to the selection of the following provinces and municipalities (Figure 2).
The random selection of the provinces and municipalities were conducted with the DENR NGPNational Coordinator and staff, FMB Director’s Office Representative, consultants and NEDAPIDS Representative.

38

LOCATIION MAP OF NGPPROVINCES AND
MUNICIPALITIESPhilippines

Basilisi NGP
and NonNGP sites

Figure 2. Locations of NGP Sites for Assessment and Evaluation.
In Zambales, the municipality of Sta. Cruz was randomly selected. In Dinagat Islands, themunicipality of Basilisa was selected. In the province of Negros Occidental, the municipality ofHinobaan was selected.
3. Data collection methodology
The general methodology used is KII/FGD for the process assessment and evaluation. For theenvironmental indicators, actual measurements were used.
The reasons for selecting the KII/FGD as the methodology for the process assessment andevaluation are: a) this activity was budgeted; b) implementation procedures in reforestation
activities were the same for all workers and that payments were based on physical outpust
according to standards. Thus, this did not require a higher number of respondents.
1. Sampling KII/FGD participants
The respondents to the KII/FGD were randomly selected from the list of workers in the NGP and
Non-NGP sites provided by the CENRO. From the list, random selection was conducted bydrawing the names of the workers. The respondents came from those who worked in seedling
production, site preparation, planting, and protection and maintenance in the NGP and Non-NGP
sites.
1.1.

FGD instrument

39

The FGD invited the officers of the CENROs, PENROs, Regions and People’s Organizations
involved in executing Survey, Mapping and Planning (SMP), Capability building, and NGP
forest quality assurance.
The FGD instruments for these activities were:a. Annex 1 is for the assesment and evaluation of the process of Survey, Mapping and
Planning (SMP) implemented by the PENRO and/or the CENRO or sometimes
contracted to technical service providers. The target respondents were enumerated in the
KII/FGD guides.
b. Annex 2 is for the assessment and evaluation of the processes in NGP forests quality
assurance. The respondents were those engaged in periodic inspection of the quality ofprocesses and their outputs to ensure that the minimum standards prescribed by the
DENR are satisfied.
c. Annex 3 is for the assessment and evaluation of the processes performed by the CENRO
and/or PENRO or his/her staff to train/orient or leveling of the PO and/or communitymember contractors who were assigned in specific reforestation activities. The
respondents were the officers and members of the PO who attended the training ororientation, the CENRO and PENRO technical staff who acted as resource persons.
1.2.

KII instrument

The KII instruments used for assessing seedling production, site preparation, planting, andprotection and maintenance were:a. Annex 4 is for the assessment and evaluation of the processes of how seedlings were
produced whether from seeds collected, wildling collected and cloned seedlings, or
procured from accredited nurseries or from other sources. The target respondents shouldbe those engaged in the actual preparation and taking care of the seedlings at the nursery.
These were the PO or community members who worked in the seedling production
process.
b. Annex 5 is for assessment and evaluation of the processes of how the reforestation sites
were prepared for planting by the contracted PO or community members. The target
respondents were those that participated in actual site preparation activities.
c. Annex 6 is for the assessment and evaluation of the processes of how planting was
conducted by the PO or community members in the reforestation sites that were preparedfor planting. The respondents to the KII/FGD should be those that participated in theplanting activities.

40

d. Annex 7 is for the assessment and evaluation of the processes of how protection andmaintenance activities were implemented by the PO or community members. The
respondents were those who conducted the actual protection and maintenance activities.
2. Environmental impact measurement
The second part of the process assessment and evaluation is the validation or measurement ofenvironmental impact indicators to see whether NGP will be able to result on quality forests
expected to be established and managed, achieve the NGP objectives, and whether such forests
will attain positive impacts.
The following environmental impact indicators measured and/or validated on the ground were:
2.1.

Survival rate

The survival rate is important because the NGP’s impacts to the environmental, social, economic
and institutional will hinge from it. Impacts included both positive and negative effects to theenvironment, social, economic, and institutions.
1. Area for measurement
The total area sampled per province was 569 ha. This area was divided into 3 parts, 190 ha for
NGP sites, 190 ha for non-NGP sites85, and 190 ha for control sites. Some province have no
Non-NGP sites so the 190 ha was added and sampled in NGP sites, making a total area of 380 hain NGP sites. The 190 ha control site was sampled in adjacent grassland, bare soil or not-plantedareas near NGP sites.
The purpose of the non-NGP site, also planted with forest species, is to have a comparison interms of survival rates and processes used with the planted NGP site. The control site, which ismostly grassland, is for comparison of the other environmental impact indicators with the NGP
site planted with forest species. The difference between the NGP site and non-NGP site in termsof survival rates and processes implemented provides insights on whether NGP implementation
is better than the non-NGP site or vice versa. On the other hand, the difference between the NGP
site and the control site in terms of the environmental impact indicators, provides insights onwhether the NGP site is beneficial or not to the environment. The original condition of theenvironment of the NGP site befor it was planted is similar to the control site.

85

Non-NGP sites by definition are area reforested or planted using non-NGP funds. This may include EDC
reforestation projects, NAPOCOR Watershed reforestation projects, FSP CBFMA reforestation projects, miningreforestation projects and other projects not funded under NGP. Private sector reforestation projects are also
included in the definition of non-NGP sites.
41

2. Allocation of the 190 hectares in NGP sites
Some NGP sites were more than 190 hectares exceeding the area to be sampled. In this case,proportionate allocation of the area to be sampled was conducted. If the area is equal to 190 ha,
proportionate allocation was not necessary. The sampling plot was a strip plot with a dimensionof 20 meters x 50 meters across the slope of the NGP site. There were several 20m x 50m plots
from boundary to boundary of the selected NGP site that was sampled.
3. 100% inventory of seedlings/trees in the NGP site and Non-NGP site
All seedlings inside all the plots within an NGP site were counted and graded whether living ordead including a description of the health of the living seedlings.
The same procedure was conducted in non-NGP sites.
In the control sites, which were generally bare soil or grassland, the procedures mentioned in the
NGP and non-NGP sites were not performed.
2.2.

Indicators for measurements
1. Survival rate

For survival rate, the following information were measured:a. Species plantedb. Year plantedc. Area planted
d. Year replanted
e. Area replantedf. Spacing (based on SMP)
g. Actual spacing to be randomly sampled on the groundh. Number of living planted seedlings
i. Number of dead planted seedlings
j. Potential/probable cause of seedlings mortality
k. Health condition of living seedlings42

l. Height of planted seedlings
m. Diameter of planted seedlings
n. Number of leaves of living seedlingso. Recommendations on how to improve growth and survival of planted seedlings
2. Potential stumpage buildup
The build-up of wood volume of the NGP sites made use of projected survival rates of theplanted species through time. The projected survival rates were based on natural thinning process
as a function of the overlapping crowns of individual trees as the trees grow. Existing growth andyield models for the planted species were used to project their potential stumpage. For species
without growth and yield models, a simple linear projection was used to estimate their potential
stumpage by computing their total wood volume divided by their age.
2.3.

Measurements of environmental impact indicators

The following environmental impact indicators were measured in the NGP site, non-NGP siteand control sites
1. Impact on Soil
The NGP forests will contribute to erosion or accretion of the soil. Physically, the root system
will hold the soil thus minimizing the movements of soil particles and through the root system,
soil particles are trapped and build up the soil. Also, the litter falls from the canopy of the NGP
forests are expected to become humus and eventually will mix up with the soil. Thus, resulting in
the accretion of the soil.
Soil erosion/accretion impact was measured through following steps:
a. Randomly select 10 seedlings along the center within the sampling plot (20m x 50mplot), measure the soil build up at the base (upper hill base) and soil scouring (lower hillbase) of each of the randomly selected seedlings. Use a calibrated erosion bar formeasuring the heights of soil buildup and depths of eroded soil.
b. The algebraic sum of the upper hill base and lower hill base gives the NGP contribution
to soil accretion or soil erosion per living seedling. Do the same process for all sampledplanted seedlings.
c. Calculate the average soil erosion/accretion per plot by multiplying the average soil
erosion/accretion per seedling by the number of live seedlings in the sample plot.
d. Repeat items a to c for the other sampling plots.

43

e. Repeat the process in the non-NGP sites.
f. Repeat the process in the control sites by randomly selecting 10 grass spots for soil
erosion and accretion measurements.
2. Impact on temperature
For temperature measurement, the following were the steps undertaken:
a. Using the same 10 seedlings randomly selected in the soil erosion and accretionmeasurements per plot, take temperature readings below the crown or branches of eachseedling within the sampling plot.
b. Repeat the process in every sampling plot.
c. Repeat the process in every sampling plot in the non-NGP sites.
d. Repeat the process by selecting 10 grass spots in the control sites for temperature
measurements.
3. Impact on NPK, carbon and soil moisture
1. NPK, carbon and moisture in the soil
The NPK, carbon and moisture serve as baseline information on the quantity of NPK,
carbon and moisture already stocked in the soil. When forest species are planted in the
NGP sites, NPK, carbon and moisture in the soil are expected to increase. The increase isdue to the contribution of the forest species to the soil.
Sampling method
The sampling method used was the stratified randomized sampling method. The
procedures in implementing this method were:a. Stratify the NGP area to be sampled into slope classes. Different slope classes havedifferent NPK, carbon and soil moisture. This means that for a single slope class, forinstance, 0-18% slope, all ground points have the same (with insignificant variation)
NPK, carbon and soil moisture contents because they share the same species(grasses), the same effect of soil erosion, and the same effect on the deposition of
NPK, carbon and moisture. Thus, all ground points within the slope class have moreor less similar NPK, Carbon and soil moisture contents.
Under this situation, there is no need to sample several soil sampling plots and thatone plot will suffice. This is so because the accuracy of information that can begenerated from a single sampling plot is similar to those taken from several plots. The
other consideration is that the cost of sampling and laboratory analysis of a single
44

sample versus several samples counts with very little value added information thatcan be generated from several sampling plots in the same ground condition. What is
important is how the sampling point will be selected whether randomly or
purposively selected.
Comparing the soil sampling method for the NGP sites with that of the DA Region2in 2014 in updating its map, it conducted a soil survey for NPK soil survey andanalysis covering 114,000 hectares establishing on 4,430 soil samples. This had aratio of 25.73 hectares of agricultural land represented by 1 sample86. It appears thatthe soil sampling in the NGP site has more samples per NGP site area than in the
agricultural sector.
The point of interest is the contribution of the NGP site to NPK, carbon and soil
moisture in enriching the soil over different ground slopes planted with different
species. Thus, the sampler will randomly select on the ground within the slope class
where to establish one sampling point. As a result of this process, there will be one
soil sampling plot for each of the following slope classes: a) 0-18% slope class; b) 1936% slope class; c) 37-55% slope class; and >55% slope class.
b. Weigh all the plastic bag with zip lock and label properly indicating the following:a. Weight of the plastic bag
b. NGP sitec. Slope classd. Weight of the soil sample in the plastic bag
e. Forest species planted
f. Date and time sampled
g. Sampled byc. Take each of the soil samples at a soil depth of 0-30cm.
d. Place each collected soil samples in a plastic bag with zip lock.
e. Weigh each of the soil samples with the plastic bags.
f. Complete the label in the plastic bag upon filling it in soil sample and weighing it.

86

Rudy A. Fernandez, August 14, 2011 R-2 updates soil fertility map.
http://www.philstar.com/agriculture/716089/da-r-2-updates-soil-fertility-map

45

g. Bring all the soil samples that were already properly weighed and labeled to the soillaboratory for the analysis of NPK, carbon and soil moisture.
h. Repeat the process from items a to g for the non-NGP sites and control sites.
2. NPK and carbon from litter falls of NGP planted seedlings
The sampling method used here was a stratified random sampling of living seedlings
within each of the plots. The stratification was based on forest species planted and year
planted.
The procedures followed consisted of the following steps:
a. Locate on the ground in the NGP site, the forest species and the year where suchforest species were planted.
b. For a given forest species in a block, randomly select 10 seedlings along the centerline of the 20m x 50m sampling plot.
a. Weight of the plastic bag
b. NGP sitec. Slope classd. Weight of the litter fall sample in the plastic bag
e. Forest species planted
f. Date and time sampled
g. Sampled byc. Under the crown or branches of each seedling, collect the litter fall or fallen leaves.
d. Place collected litter falls in a plastic bag with zip lock.
e. Weigh the plastic bag filled with litter falls
f. Complete the label in the filled plastic bag by indicating the weight of the plastic bagwith the litter fall.
g. Repeat the process in the non-NGP sites.
h. Since the control site is mostly grassland, no litter fall sample will be collected.
Grassland species have negligible NPK and carbon contribution to the soil compared
to forest species.
3. For DRR compliance of NGP site, non NGP site

46

There was no sampling method used here. Instead, mapping of the following risky areas wereconducted. Existing topographic maps of the NGP sites were classified according to slope classes
considered as high risk areas.
The risky areas were:a. High slopes and above planted.
The necessary information are:
Slope range(%)

Area (hectares)

Percent Area
over Total
NGP Area

DRR Design87

Forest Species
PlantedDRR Design88

Forest Species
Planted36 – 55%>55%

b. River banks, gullies and land slide areas
Ground Natural
FeatureArea (hectares)

Percent Area
over Total
NGP Area

Vulnerable
river/stream
banks
Existing gullies
Existing
slidesland

4. For Climate change adaptation and mitigation of NGP sites, non-NGP sites
Climate change adaptation89
87

DRR designs refer to any features that will reduce the impact of rainwater and surface runoff to areas that may
collect rainwater and eventually result in flooding, landslides, gullies etc.
88

Ibid

89

Climate change adaptation refers to the activities necessary to reduce the vulnerability of the NGP reforested areas
to climate change effects such as El Nino, drought, floods due to extreme rainfall events, rainfall of typhoons, La
Nina, landslides, excessive soil erosion that will reduce the viability of establishing forests under the NGP.
47

Climate
Factorchange Climate
EffectChange Adaptation Measures NGP compliance toto NGP sites
ClimateChangeAdaptation

Extremerainfall Floods
events, heavy typhoon
rainfall, La Nina

Constructionof See if the adaptationintercepting ditches to measures
weredivert surface water conductedfrom passing throughplanted areas

Landslides

Planting of deep- Same above
rooted forest species
in close spacing

Extreme soil erosion

Planting of hedge Same aboverows of kakawate anddeep rooted forest
species in between
hedgerows.

Gully formation

Constructionof Same above
diversion canals todeviate surface runoff
from gully directions
and planting of gullies
with deep –rooted
forest species to holdback the soil.

Dry season, drought, Soil
moistureel Niño
depletion in NGP
areas
that
were
already planted andabout to be planted.

Provisionof Same above
improvisedwatersystem such as rainwater harvesting, drip
method of watering
seedlings, tapping ofspring water, stream
water for the NGP
plantations. Plantingof water loving plants
or drought resistantspecies before desired
forest species are48

plantedHigh mortality of Same above
planted seedlings in
NGP sites resulting in
low survival rates

Same above

Reduce target of NGP Same above
plantable areas

Same above

For climate change mitigation90

Climate Change Problem
Increase in temperature

Mitigation Measures

NGP compliance to climatechange mitigation

Establishment of NGP forests
to provide more carbon sinkthus capturing substantial
amount of carbon from theatmosphereThis project calculated thecarbon sequestration of eachof the NGP planted forest
species, determined their
growth rates and observed
whether the NGP sites werecorrect in selecting andplanting such forest species.
Increase in soil carbon fromthe litter falls of the NGP
planted forest species.

5. Wildlife impact of NGP plantations
This was composed of two wildlife classes. These are: a) fauna; b) flora. The impact of NGP to
the influx of fauna into the planted areas was estimated through the following steps:
Fauna
a. Showing pictures of fauna that returned to the NGP sites. The respondents identified thespecies of fauna giving them local names, and they were asked on what time of the day
90

Climate change mitigation refers to activities that will reduce carbon emission and capture more carbon from theatmosphere.
49

such species of fauna were spotted. They were asked also how many times they havespotted the species of fauna that they have identified.
b. The responses were recorded.

Floraa. While doing the inventory of planted NGP forest species, pioneer forest species growing
in the area were counted per spot.
b. Their diameter and height was measured.
c. Flowering pioneer forest species growing in the area were recorded to indicate that theseare potentials for providing wildlings to regenerate the area.
4. Data processing and analysis
Going back to Appendix Table 1 to Appendix Table 8 indicators, the data and information taken
during the KII and FGD and the actual measurements of the environmental impacts, were
processed using the following statistical tests. The analysis followed the results of the ANOVA
or F-test of the following:
1. In comparing the provinces in terms of the environmental indicators, Analysis of varianceor F-test was used. A one-Way ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) was used to test whether
3 or more means of the NGP sites are equal. It tests if the value of a single variable
differs significantly among three or more factors.
The correlations of the indicators or variables were tested using Pearson’s correlation coefficientfor quantitative variables and Spearman’s rank order correlation for qualitative variables.
VII.

Environmental Profile of the NGP Provinces, Municipalities and NGP Forest
Plantations

The environmental profile information was generated from the internet. These information
include geographic location of the province, municipality and the NGP sites, population anddensity, land area, topography, climate (rainfall and temperature), soil and geology, land cover,forest species, and water sources. Some useful environmental profile maps available from theinternet were downloaded and were used in describing the environmental profile of the provinces
and municipalities. In some cases, the provincial and municipal environmental profile with thedesired features visible were downloaded from Google Earth. Environmental maps that are notavailable in the internet were not presented in the environmental profiles of the provinces andmunicipalities.
On the other hand, some available environmental profile maps of the NGP sites were requested
from the CENRO or PENRO.
50

1. Province of Zambales
1. Geographic Location
The coordinates of the province and the municipality sampled including the sampled NGP sites
where environmental impact evaluation was conducted are described in Table 1
Table 1. Geographic Location of Zambales, Sta. Cruz and NGP Project Sites.

NE

15° 20′ 0″120° 10′ 0″15° 46′ 0″119° 55′ 0″Corner 1
NE
15° 51′ 29″
120° 2′ 46″
15° 51′ 29″
120° 2′ 46″
15° 51′ 29″
120° 2′ 46″

ZambalesSta. CruzNGP Site
Babuyan
GuinabonCorner 2
N
15° 51′ 29″
15° 51′ 29″
15° 51′ 29″

Corner 3

E
120° 2′ 46″
120° 2′ 46″
120° 2′ 46″

N
15° 51′ 21″
15° 51′ 29″
15° 51′ 29″

Corner 4

E
120° 2′ 48″
120° 2′ 46″
120° 2′ 46″

N
15° 51′ 15″
15° 51′ 29″
15° 51′ 29″

E
120° 2′ 44″
120° 2′ 46″
120° 2′ 46″

2. Population and population density
Zambales is located in the Central Luzon region (Region III) which is bounded by the West
Philippine Sea to the west, Pangsinan to the north, Tarlac and Pampanga to the east, then Bataan
to the south. It has a total land area of 3,830.83 km2 and is considered as the second largest
province among all the provinces of Central Luzon (Region III).91Table 2 shows the populationand population density by municipality and city of Zambales.
Table 2. Population and Population Density.
Municipalities
and Cities
Botolan
Cabangan
Candelaria
Castillejos
Iba
Masinloc
Olongapo
Palaguig
San Antonio

Population92
2010
54,43423,08225,02048,84546,761
44,342
221,178
33,28634,217

2015
60,17725,517
27,66053,99851,69449,020244,512
36,79837,82791

Department of Tourism, 2015; National Statistics Office,2015.

92

Source: NSO, 2015, www. NSO.gov.ph51

Pop
Density(2010)
0.74
1.32
0.75
5.25
3.05
1.34
11.96
1.07
1.82

Pop
Density(2015)
0.82
1.46
0.83
5.81
3.37
1.48
13.22
1.19
2.01

San Felipe
22,02024,343
1.97
San Marcelino
31,87935,242
0.76
San Narciso
26,96629,811
3.77
Santa Cruz
53,86759,5501.23
Subic89,72499,190
3.12
Data source: Source: NSO, 2015, www. Nso.gov.ph

2.18
0.85
4.16
1.36
3.45

The least populated municipalities are Botolan and San Marcelino. The highest populated
municipalities are Olongapo, Castillejos, San Narciso and Subic. The population density of thestudy site, the Municipality of Sta. Cruz, is 1.36. This means that a little more than one person isliving in a hectare of land in Sta.Cruz this 2015.
3. Land area
The total land area of Zambales is 383,083 hectares and its total forest land is 36,806 hectares(Table 3)

Table 3. Land Area and Forest Land Area of Zambales.

Municipalities and Cities

Land
Area93(ha)

Forest Lands94 % Forested
Land

Botolan

73,5280

0.0

Cabangan

17,52911,75067.0

Candelaria

33,3590

0.0

Castillejos

9,299

0

0.0

Iba

15,3380

0.0

Masinloc

33,150

1,487

4.5

Olongapo

18,50012,291

66.4

Palaguig

31,000

1,014

3.3

93

Ibid

94

Source: DA BAR Maps
52

San Antonio

18,8120

0.0

San Felipe

11,1600

0.0

San Marcelino

41,6860

0.0

San Narciso

7,160

0

0.0

Santa Cruz

43,846

10,264

23.4

Subic

28,7160

0.0

Total Land Area

383,083

36,806Out of the 14 municipalities, Cabangan (67%), Olongapo (66.4%) and Sta Cruz (23.4%) arethose still with forests. The total forest land is only 9.6% of the total land area of the province.
This percent forest land cover is much way below the national forest land cover figure of about
24% of the total land area of the country. It can be deduced that 9 of these have minimal
potentials to recharge water, minimize soil erosion, capture carbon, and other environmental
services, which means that Zambales is one of the provinces where its forest land has been
degraded significantly.
Increasing the area of degraded forest lands for forest restoration must be pursued by theprovince in order to restore back the productivity of the forest ecosystems for forest goods andenvironmental services and environmental development of the province.

53

4. Land use and vegetative cover

Figure 3. Land Cover of Zambales.
As shown in the Land Cover Map (Figure 3), forested areas are relatively negligible in area
compared to agriculture lands. The forested lands are situated in Santa Cruz, Candelaria,
Masinloc, Palauig and Olongapo. Open canopy areas composed of Mango and other fruit trees,
small trees and shrubs, cover about 35% of total area of Zambales.
Forests play a very important role in providing wood for the lumber industry,
in recharging water to the watersheds, in sequestering carbon, in producing fresh and clean
oxygen, in serving as wildlife sanctuary and in many other environmental services. Based on thedensity and distribution of the forest in the province, it can be deduced that the supply of woodand environmental services is already at an alarming level.
The common types of forest species that can be observed in Zambales are Agoho (Casuarina
equisetifolia), Acacia (Samanea saman), Bagras (Eucalyptus deglupta), Benguet pine (Pinus
kesiya), Banuyo (Wallaceodendron celebicum) and Mangium (Acacia mangium). Bagras,
Benguet pine and Mangium are exotic to the place and introduced in reforestation areas.
However, they are adapted to the place and are thriving well. These forest species are growing
throughout the whole area of Zambales. These species have different characteristics. Acacia,
Benguet pine and Banuyo, for example, grow up to 30 meters with a diameter of 120 cm or
higher often with a straight trunk. Mangium is a popular species for forest plantation and usedalso for agroforestry projects. It can reach a height of 15 meters and a diameter of 70 cm.
54

The other vegetative cover that is widespread in the province is grassland mostly covered withcogon
grass.
Grassland is very
common to grazing.
Roughly, 75 % of thetotal area of theprovince is grassland
includingtheunproductive
agriculturalland(Figure 4). Burningof grasses is common
in grazing to improveyoung shoots that are
palatable to cattle.
Grass burning ispracticed at least
Figure 4. Other Vegetative Covr Types of Zambales.
twice a year. This
explains the high soil erosion of the mountains in the province.
5. Land use classification
In 2010, 68 percent of the area was forested but unfortunately it decreased by 18 percent since 50
percent of the area was already denuded. The remaining 31.33 percent of the total land area ofthe province is considered part of alienable and disposable lands, including agricultural land,
uncultivated, built-up areas and creeks/rivers (Table 4). Figure 5 shows the land classification
map of Zambales.
Table 4. Land Use Classification of Zambales, 2010.
Area(Hectares)

Land Classification% AreaAlienable and Disposable Land
Agricultural

52,370

14.10

Uncultivated28,335

7.63

Built-up Areas

28,468

7.66

Creeks/Rivers

7,205

1.94

116,378

31.33

TOTAL

55

Classified Forest/Timberland
Remaining Forest Area

140,284.10

37.77

Denuded Area

114,777.90

30.90

TOTAL

255,062.00

68.67

GRAND TOTAL

371,440.00

100

Data source: Department of Agriculture

LAND CLASSIFICATION OF
ZAMBALESWest
Philippine Sea

Figure 5. Land Classification Map of Zambales.
6. Topography
Zambales is generally mountainous to the east. Terrain ranges from a stretch of narrow plain to
the west from high to very high slopes to the east. It has a small area that is swampy to the northbordering with Pangasinan (Google Earth, 2015).
7. Climate
The climate of Central Luzon where Zambales is located is generally influenced by three
predominant air streams, namely: the northeast monsoon (Amihan) common from November to
February, which is relatively cool and less humid; the tradewinds common during late March andearly May, which is very warm and humid; and the southwest monsoon (Habagat) common from
June to October. The climate of the Philippines is generally described in terms of the distributionof rainfall received in a locality during the different months. Based on the Corona classification56

of climate types, most of Central Luzon is described as Type I, with two pronounced seasons:typically dry from December to May and wet during the rest of the year.
a.

Rainfall
For the period observed (1969-1995), the average annual precipitation ranges
from a low 1036.7 mm to a high 3857 millimeters. The maximum rainfall wasobserved at Cabangan (Zambales) station during the month of August at 2712.1
mm. Rainfall is relatively heavier along the peripheries of the province in the
coastal areas than its inner mountainous areas. This is attributable to thecondensation of clouds formed through evaporation of sea water from the ocean 95.

b.

Temperature
The average normal maximum and minimum temperatures are 32°C and 22°C,
respectively. The coldest period is from December to February. The hotter months
are from April to June.

c.

Typhoons and Storm Surge
Typhoons frequency in Zambales area coming from the east is low due to its
mountain ranges blocking the north-easterly winds. While it is free from the northeasterly winds, it is vulnerable to the southeast monsoon and cyclonic typhoons96.
During the past 40 years (1946-1985), the region was visited by typhoons averaging
22 surges annually.97 The typhoons that passed through Zambales from 1947-2002
causing peripheral impacts were Trining which occurred from October 16-31, 1991
(wind speed of 204kph, no rainfall data), Yoling in November 17-20, 1970 (windspeed of 200kph, no rainfall data) and Didang in May 12-17, 1976 (wind speed of
150kph, no rainfall data). These typhoons caused deaths and damages to properties
worth billions of pesos. Didang killed 374 persons in Iba, Zambales and Yoling
resulted in 611 dead persons. The other typhoons that landed in Zambales are Juan(wind speed of 30-60kph, rainfall of 50-65mm), Basyang (wind speed of 65145kph, rainfall of 150mm), and Caloy (wind speed of 130-150kph, rainfall of 8090mm). These typhoons damaged mostly the agricultural crops of Zambales
through flooding and wind throws.98

95

Final Report for the Tourism Master Plan for Region III (Central Luzon). Engineering and Development
Corporation of the Philippines (EDCOP)
96

Ibid

97

Final Report for the Tourism Master Plan for Region III (Central Luzon). Engineering and Development
Corporation of the Philippines (EDCOP)
98

Typhoon2000 official website. Retrieved from: http://www.typhoon2000 .ph/stormstats/ Worst
LuzonTyphoons.htm
57

The last typhoon that hit Zambales in 2014 was Glenda (wind speed of 110-140kph,
rainfall of 7.5-25mm). Figure 6 shows the typhoon path passing through Zambales.

Figure 6. Typhoon Path Passing Through Zambales.
8. Soil
There are 7 types of soil found in the province of Zambales. These are mountain soil,
undifferentiated soil, Antipolo Clay, Angeles Sand, Quingua Silt Loam, Cabangan Sandy Loam,and Hydrosol. More than 60 percent of the total land area of the province exhibit mountain soil
type since it is traversed by the Zambales Mountain Ranges (Table 5).

Table 5. Soil Types in Zambales, 2010.
Soil TypeArea % Area
Mountain Soil
242,284 64.96
Undifferentiated60,13016.19
Antipolo Clay
33,292
8.96
Angeles Sand
16,983
4.57
Quingua Silt Loam
11,308
3.05
Cabangan Sandy Loam 6,723
1.81
Hydrosol
1,720
0.46
TOTAL
37,440100
Data source: Department of Agriculture58

According to Carating99 (2014), mountain soil was formed from weathered quartz, diorite, andsandstone. It occurs at elevation even higher than Natubleng series, at around 2,262 m above
mean sea level. The relief is moderately steep to very steep. The external drainage is good toexcessive while the internal drainage is poor. This means that surface runoff is high and water
recharge is low probably due to impermeable hard rock underneath the soil. Another is the
antipolo clay which belongs to the Antipolo series formed from basalt, igneous, and othervolcanic rocks. The relief is rolling basaltic hills and ridges to mountainous. Some portions areslightly rolling to almost flat, especially the localized valleys. Next is the Angeles sand. It is ariver–terrace soil basically used for agricultural production. Then the Cabangan series was firstdescribed in the municipality of Cabangan, Zambales, and it was the secondary soil developed
from older alluvial materials deposited on fans or terraces and classified as Aquic Eutrudepts.
The external drainage is fair to good while internal drainage is poor. The relief is level to gently
sloping. It has a topsoil of about 25cm, pale brown in color and slightly compact. A total of
129,965 ha of Cabangan sandy loam, clay loam, and clay were mapped in Agusan, Zambales andDavao provinces (Fernandez and Jesus 1980). And lastly, the Hydrosols, a soil classified as
saturated with water for longer period of time and have poor drainage. The soils were influenced
by the seasonal wet conditions of the year for at least 2-3 months (McBartney and Minasny,2007)100.
9. Water Resources
Heavy precipitation occurs generally from June to October, the period of southwest monsoons.
More than 90% of the annual rainfall concentrates in this period with August experiencing theheaviest downpour. The annual amounts range from 1,036 mm in the central portion of Central
Luzon to 3,856 mm along the western coasts101.
Generally, the central plain is good for shallow wells, and the mountain areas in the east and thewest are difficult areas for groundwater utilization as indicated in the report of National Water
Resources Council (NWRC) in 1992 popularly known as the "Rapid Assessment of Water
Supply". Deep wells that can be found in Zambales are at the northern part of Tarlac102.
Irrigation water for agricultural land of Sta. Cruz, Zambales was described by people in thecommunity to appear red due to nickel mining in the area. This indeed became a threat to the99

Carating,R.B., Galanta, R. G. and Bacotio, C.D (2014). The Soils of the Philippines. World soil book series.

100

Minasny, B., A.E. Hartemink, A.B. McBratney & H.J. Jang 2013. Citations and the Index of Soil Researchers And Journals In The Web Of
Science, Scopus, And Google Scholar PeerJ 1:e183; DOI 10.7717/peerj.183

Final Report for the Tourism Master Plan for Region III (Central Luzon). Engineering and Development
Corporation of the Philippines (EDCOP)
101

102

Ibid as reported by EDCOP

59

livelihood of the people as well as to their lives. The need to rehabilitate the denuded area ofZambales is deemed important.103
10. Volcano
There are two volcanoes found in Zambales. These are Mt. Cuadrado, an inactive volcano. The
other one is Mt. Pinatubo in Botolan, Zambales104.
11. Environmental Profile of the Municipality of Sta. Cruz, Zambales
1. Location map of Sta Cruz, Zambales
The location of Sta. Cruz is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Location Map of Sta. Cruz, Zambales
The environmental profile of Sta. Cruz is similar to that of the province of Zambales. They only
differ in land uses and land cover types and in area allocations.
2. Forest land uses

103

Ibid as reported by EDCOP

104

Final Report for the Tourism Master Plan for Region III (Central Luzon). Engineering and Development
Corporation of the Philippines (EDCOP)60

In the case of Sta. Cruz, the forest land uses and land cover types are summarized in Table 6.
The land uses are dominated by arable lands, crop lands with coconut plantation, and cultivatedarea mixed with brushland and grassland. All these account for 49.8%. Grassland accounts for
26.8% and forested lands account for 22.3%. This implies that the current forested lands may not
be sufficient to provide on a sustainable basis the important goods and environmental services ofthe existing forest ecosystems. Thus, the need for expanding the forest cover possibly in all thegrasslands, and brushlands in the municipality is necessary to strike a balance on the sustainableproduction of land-based goods and environmental services.
Figure 8 shows the forest cover of Sta Cruz, Zambales. The forested areas are colored green
while the bare lands or crop lands are colored gray.

Table 6. Environmental Profile of Sta. Cruz, Zambales.

Land Uses
Arable land, crops mainly cereals and sugar
Built-up Area
Closed canopy, mature trees covering > 50
percent
Coconut plantations
Coral Reef
Crop land mixed with coconut plantation
Cultivated Area mixed withbrushland/grassland
Fishponds derived from mangrove
Grassland, grass covering > 70 percent
Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50
percent
QuarryTotal land area
Data source: DA-BAR.

61

Area
(Ha)
9940.07
58.52

%
Area
26.5
0.2

3863.52
217.377.81
4324.05

10.3
0.6
0.0
11.5

4164.08
338.7910037.55

11.1
0.9
26.8

4498.317.1737467.23

12.0
0.0
100.0

Figure 8. Forest Cover Map of Sta. Cruz, Zambales (Google Earth)

3. Environmental profile of the NGP sites
The environmental profile of the NGP sites is similar with that of the province of Zambales aswell as with the municipality of Sta. Cruz in terms of rainfall, temperature, soil and geology.
They differ only in terms of slopes, elevation, land cover and stream network. Selecting the sites
for the NGP is right in the sense that the areas are generally barren and eroded (Figures 9-11)
requiring immediate forest cover to reduce soil erosion particularly in sloping areas. The
formation of gullies as a result of excessive surface runoff aside from soil erosion is evident in
the pictures.

62

Figure 9. Topography and Land Cover of NGP Site 1 (Google Earth).

Figure 10. Topography and Land Cover of NGP Site 2 (Google Earth)63

Figure 11. Topography and Land Cover of NGP Site 3.
Due to the absence of adequate vegetation in the mountains of Sta. Cruz, the stream yieldis reduced during summer and its condition is already silted indicating that substantial
quantity of soil has already been deposited. Leaving the areas without vegetation would
further reduce the capacity of the streams to store rainwater. Thus, making it difficult forthe municipality to sustain its water supply for domestic use and for irrigation.
Due to the barren condition of the mountains of Sta. Cruz and the need to generate
sustainable stream flow supply, provide wood supply, and supply of other environmental
services, the restoration of degraded lands into forested condition is very important andmust be pursued to reduce the present rate of land degradation.
2. Province of Dinagat Islands, Minadanao
1. Location of Dinagat Island
The coordinates of Dinagat Islands in latitudes and longitudes are shown in Table 7. The relative
location of the province with respect to other provinces is shown in Figure 12 based on Google
Earth (2015).
Table 7. Geographic Coordinates of Dinagat Islands105
Selected Outermost
Points

LatitudeLongitude

Remarks

Northernmost Point

10°28'15.6173"

125°42'23.5890"

Desolation Point

Province of Dinagat Islands. 2015. General profile. PDI: Dinagat Islands Provincial Website. Retrieved 21
January 2015 from http://dev.dinagatislands.gov.ph/executive/ppdo-main/socio-economic-profile-2/general-profile/105

64

Easternmost Point

9°53'37.1657"

125°42'20.3417"

Along Dinagat
Sound

Southernmost Point

9°51'12.0722"

125°39'51.1642"

Along Gaboc
ChannelWesternmost Point

10°08'14.3014"

125°28'16.6544"

Tungo Point

Dinagat Province

Figure 12. Relative Location of Dinagat Islands (Google Earth, 2015)
Dinagat Islands is one of the five provinces in Region XIII or Caraga Region. 106 North and Westof Dinagat Islands is the Surigao Strait, while the Philippine Sea bounded Dinagat Island on theEast. On the South East is the Dinagat sound, on the South is the Gaboc Channel and Nonoc
Island, South West is the Awasan Bay, Hanigad Island and Hikdop Island.107
2. Population and population density
The population of Dinagat province for 2015 is estimated at 137,708 based on the average
population growth rate of 1.72% (2000-2010) from the 2010 population. There are more people
in Basilisa and San Jose and less people in Loreto and Tubajon (Table 8).

Regalado FGB. September 2014. Philippine standard geographic codes. Makati, Philippines: National Statistical
Coordination Board, Philippine Statistics Authority. A PDF file. Retrieved 21 January 2015 fromhttp://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/PSA-MAKATI-PSGC_SUM-SEPT2014.pdf.
106

107

Arroyo GM. 2 October 2006. Republic act no. 9355: an act creating the province of Dinagat Islands. Metro
Manila, Philippines: Thirteenth Congress, Third Regular Session. A PDF file. Retrived 21 January 2015 fromhttp://www.congress.gov.ph/download/ra_13/RA09355.pdf.
65

Table 8. Population and Population Density (2010-2015).

Municipalities
and Cities
BasilisaCagdianao
Dinagat
Libjo
LoretoSan Jose
Tubajon
Total

Population
2010
2015
33,880 36,794
15,047
12,786
17,567
8,920

Pop
Pop
Density Density(2010) (2015)
3.7
4.0

16,341
13,886
19,078
9,687

0.6
0.9
1.0
0.3

0.7
1.0
1.1
0.4

31,035 33,704
7,568
8,219
126,803 137,708

11.2
0.8

12.1
0.9

3. Land area
The land area of the municipalities in Dinagat Islands is shown in Table 9. The municipalities of
Loreto and Cagdianao have 24% each in land area while San Jose and Basilisa have the lowest
land area.

Table 9. Land Area of Municipalities and Cities

Municipalities and Cities
BasilisaCagdianao
Dinagat
Libjo
LoretoSan Jose
TubajonTotal

Land Area (ha)9,268
24,94813,99418,05725,5872,780
9,000
103,634

source: NSO

66

Percent
Land Area
8.9
24.1
13.5
17.4
24.7
2.7
8.7
100.0

4. Land use and land cover
The land uses and land cover types of Dinagat Islands are shown in Figure 13. The remaining
close canopy forests are located in the eastern side of the main island and it is estimated to beabout 20% of the total land area of Dinagat. The open canopy forests are adjacent to the close
canopy forests and approximately 15% of the total land area. The rests are agricultural lands,
grasslands, cultivated lands and mangroves.

Dinagat Island is divided into two general classifications such as alienable and disposable land,
and timberland. Its alienable and disposable land is 15,836 hectares which is found in flat lands
or areas with zero to 3% slopes. The timberlands with 62,660.36 hectares are found in
mountainous slopes of the province.

Figure 13. Land Cover of Dinagat.
5. Climate
Dinagat Islands has no dry season. Rainfall is very prominent from November to January. This
classification is the Climate Type II. Moreover, the Northeast Monsoon and trade winds or67

cyclonic storms directly affect the area.108 The total annual rainfall for 204 days is 2,830.60 m.
Temperature in January is 23.9°C to September with 33.06°. In 2004, the average annual
minimum temperature is 25°C while the maximum is 31.06°C.109 The average temperature in theisland for the year 2014 is 27.25°C while the total precipitation is 3438 mm averaging to 286.5
mm per month.110 “The average annual humidity is 81% and the average velocity is one meter
per second.111
6. Flora and Fauna
Dinagat Islands is part of the Eastern Mindanao Biodiversity Corridor (EMBC). It is a corridor
approach to biodiversity conservation to help in the sustainable growth and development offauna and flora. The island is one of the Key Biodiversity Areas. The threats to the biodiversity
in the island are mining and quarrying, timber extraction, illegal and over fishing, industrial
development, land conversion, and population pressure.112 The chain of 1,000-m. high, forested
mountains runs north to south through the interior, in which the interior forest has fruit trees,
palm and bamboo.113
7. Topography
The highest points of the island are both found in the Municipality of Loreto namely, Mt.
Kambinliw and Mt. Redondo (famous for its natural bonsai forest). The topographic map
showing the mountainous areas in Dinagat Islands is shown in Figure 14.

Province of Dinagat Islands. 2015. General profile. PDI: Dinagat Islands Provincial Website. Retrieved 21
January 2015 from http://dev.dinagatislands.gov.ph/executive/ppdo-main/socio-economic-profile-2/general-profile/.
108

109

denfermace8538. 20 January 2010. Dinagat Islands socio economic fact book. Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/25455336/Dinagat-Islands-Socio-Economic-Fact-Book#scribd.
110

AccuWeather, Inc. 2015. Dinagat, PH local weather. Retrieved 21 January 2015 fromhttp://www.accuweather.com/en/ph/dinagat/262993/january-weather/262993?monyr=1/1/2014&view=table,.
111

denfermace8538. 20 January 2010. Dinagat Islands socio economic fact book. Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/25455336/Dinagat-Islands-Socio-Economic-Fact-Book#scribd.
112

Philippine Eagle Foundation. 2008. 1. Introduction [Eastern Mindanao Biodiversity Corridor]. A PDF file.
Retrieved 21 January 2015 fromhttp://s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/www.geo.umass.edu/ContentPages/430367241.pdf.
113_______. n. d. Towns and cities: general information (Dinagat Islands). Biyahero Philippine Travel Portal.
Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.biyahero.net/index.php?option=com_sobi2&sobi2Task=sobi2Details&catid=86&sobi2Id=2027&Itemid=56.
68

Figure 14. Topographic Map of Dinagat Islands in Relief Form.
The terrain in the province is oriented from flat to rugged to mountainous whereas elevation of
the eastern part of the province reaches 900 meters from sea level. While the lands adjacent to
the ocean were considered as having a broken relief or low elevation, Mt. Kambinliw and Mt.
Redondo are the mountains where the highest peak is located.
8. Water resources
There is also a cold and hot spring in the said municipality. There is a waterfall in Bankaw
Mountain Resort and a lagoon known as the Tambongon Lagoon. These are situated in the
Municipality of Tubajon. These are also the so-called Ouano Lagoon and Blue Lagoon in the
Municipality of Libjo.114
9. Soils and geology
The island has three rock formations: (a) pato or duck, (b) bao or turtle, (c) Punta Kalabera or
Skull Point. The rock islands lack fine sandy beaches.115 The soil is primarily Dinagat clay loam
114

Denfermace8538. 20 January 2010. Dinagat Islands socio economic fact book. Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/25455336/Dinagat-Islands-Socio-Economic-Fact-Book#scribd.
115

Philippine Eagle Foundation. 2008. 1. Introduction [Eastern Mindanao Biodiversity Corridor]. A PDF file.
Retrieved 21 January 2015 fromhttp://s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/www.geo.umass.edu/ContentPages/430367241.pdf.
69─ 70% kabatohan, 20% loam and 10% of Bolinao clay steep; friable and slightly granular innature.116 It is rich in metallic and non-metallic resource which includes chromite, aluminous
laterite ore and nickeliferous laterite. There is also a small amount of rock phosphate, limestone,
siliceous and gold deposits.117 The one fourth of the land areas of Municipality of Dinagat only
had cogon in the vegetation because of the presence of ore. For the Municipality of Cagdianao,
the study of Mines and Geo-science Bureau (MGB) showed that the area is “absolutely hazard
for large infrastructure projects” because of the “strike-slip fault extending from Poblacion to
Barangay Mataas”.118
10. Wildlife (Flora and Fauna)
Dinagat Islands has two endemic mammal species119 ― Batomys russatus and the endangered
Crateromys australis, both from Family Muridae120. Some bird species in Loreto that are
threatened by hunting are the Mindanao bleeding-heart Gallicolumba crinigera (vulnerable),
Mindanao Writhed Hornbill Aceros leucocephalus (near threatened) and the Philippine Cockatoo
Cacatua haematuropgyia. Other bird species in the island are the Kalaw Rufous hornbill (nearthreatened), Malaysian Plover Charadrius peronii (near threatened), Balud Ducula poliocephala(near threatened), Mindanao Broadbill Eurylaimus steeri (vulnerable), Tabon Megapodius
cumingii (least concern), and little slaty flycatcher Ficedula basilanica (vulnerable), and Pipit
Hypothymis coelestis (vulnerable).121 Some fish species have high exploitation rate or fishingmortalities in the Dinagat waters as reported in the Convention on Biological Diversity.122

116

Denfermace8538. 20 January 2010. Dinagat Islands socio economic fact book. Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/25455336/Dinagat-Islands-Socio-Economic-Fact-Book#scribd.
117

Denfermace8538. 20 January 2010. Dinagat Islands socio economic fact book. Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/25455336/Dinagat-Islands-Socio-Economic-Fact-Book#scribd.
118

Pangga Dinagat. 2012. Geography of Dinagat. Official Website of the Municipality of Dinagat, Dinagat Islands,
Philippines. Designed and developed by karlspace.web.solutions. Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.dinagat.gov.ph/index.php/about-dinagat/geography-of-dinagat.
Kapoor S. 2007. Eastern Mindanao biodiversity corridor – Philippines. A PDF file. Retrieved 26 January 2015
fromhttps://library.conservation.org/Published%20Documents/2009/Eastern%20Mindanao%20Biodiversity%20Corridor-Philippines-2007.pdf.
119

120

World Wildlife Fund. 2015. Southeastern Asia: Philippines. Retrieved 27 Janauary 2015 fromhttp://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/im0129.
121

Panopio JK and Pajaro M. July 2014. State of the Philippine Birds. Haribon Foundation for the Conservation of
Natural Resources, Incoporated. A PDF file. Retrieved 21 January 2015 from http://www.haribon.org.ph/mediamanager/files/State-of-the-Philippine-Birds-July-2014.pdf.
122

Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau- Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2009. 4th Philippine
national report to the convention on biological diversity. A PDF file. Retrieved 26 January 2015 fromhttp://www.ph.undp.org/content/dam/philippines/docs/environment/4th%20Philippine%20National%20Report%20t
o%20the%20Convention%20on%20Biological%20Diversity.pdf. 10p
70

The forest species common in Dinagat are Bakauan Babae and Bakauan Lalake in mangrove
areas. In terrestrial, dipterocarps, milliaceae, rosaceae are common. Specific tree species found in
the area are Malabitanghol, Marang, Ulayan Agoho, Banay-banay, Bitanghol, Molave, Nato,Narra, Sagimsim, Tiga and Wakatan, Camagong, Kalumpit, Talisai and Manga-manga.
11. Environmental profile of the Municipality of Basilisa
The environmental profile of the Dinagat study site is similar to the environmental profile of the
Dinagat province presented in the previous sections. Rainfall, temperature, soil and geology are
the same with that of the province.
1. Location of Basilisa
The location map of Basilisa relative to Dinagat province is shown in Figure 15. Basilisa issituated at the west side bellow mid-section (red color) of Dinagat. It is facing the sea to thewest, the municipality of Cadianao to the east, and the municipality of Libjo to the north.

Figure 15. Location Map of the Municipality of Basilisa, Dinagat
2. Vegetative cover of Basilisa
There are only two main land cover types in
Basilisa. These are cultivated crop land mixed withgrassland and brushland, and cropland mixed withcoconut plantation. Cultivated crop land is about
95% of the total land area of Basilisa while croplandwith coconut is only about 5% of the area of Basilisa(Figure 16 and Figure 17).
Figure 16. Land Cover of Basilisa.
Due to the sparse forest stands, the production of environmental services is minimal requiring
forest restoration as a priority activity for Basilisa.

71

Thus, making the NGP appropriate in the area.
3. Forest species
The forest land of Basilisa based on Figure 9 is of the brushland type wherein patches of small
trees mixed with grasses (cogon and talahib) are very common. The species found in thebrushland area are mostly tibig, anabiong, sili-sili, takip asin, and katmon. These tree species are
considered pioneer species that grow whenever a forest canopy is cleared.

Figure 17. Topography of Basilisa, Dinagat (Google Earth)
4. Topography
Interpreting Figure 18 showed the terrain of Basilisa. The terrain is composed of hills to small
mountains and its slope ranges from about 18% to 50% from the seaside going up to themountains. Among the municipalities of Dinagat, Basilisa has more flatter to rolling terrain thanthe other municipalities which generally are mountainous.

72

Figure 18. Topography of Basilisa, Dinagat.
5. Soil and geology
The soil is type of Basilisa is clay to clay loam. The soil is reddish in color. It is fine to granular,a characteristic of clay123. The geological foundation of Basilisa is not known as of this writing.
6. Water resources
The major source of water for irrigation and drinking water of Basilisa is a small river thattraverses the watersheds of Basilisa. However, due to the inadequate vegetation in Basilisa,
stream yield is intermittent throughout the year. During dry season, the supply of stream yield is
reduced124.

3. Province of Negros Occidental

Negros Occidental is located in the North western portion of Negros Island. It is bounded on thenorth by the Visayan Sea, and on the south by the Sulu Sea. In the southeast, it is bounded by
Panay Island. On the east, it is bounded by Tanon Strait and Negros Oriental.
The province is composed of 13 cities and 19 municipalities.

123

According to the PENRO of Dinagat Province.

124

According to an interview with the PENRO of Dinagat during the assessment survey.
73

1. Geographical Map of Negros OccidentalThe

location

mapofNegrosOccidental

is

shown

Figure 19. Geographical Map of Negros Occidental

74

in

Figure19.

2. Population and population density
The top 3 municipalities/cities in terms of population are highlighted with yellow color while
those topping the top 3 population densities are highlighted with green color (Table 10). The
municipalities/cities with the lowest population are highlighted gray while those with the lowest
population densities are highlighted with blue color.
Table 10. Population and Population Density of Negros Occidental.

Municipality/City
1. Bacolod city
(capital)
2. Bago city
3. Binalbagan
4. Cadiz city
5. Calatrava
6. Candoni
7. Cauayan
8. Enrique b.
Magalona (saravia)
9. City of escalante
10. City ofhimamaylan
11. Hinigaran
12. Hinoba-an(asia)
13. Ilog
14. Isabela
15. City ofkabankalan
16. La carlota city
17. La castellana
18. Manapla

Population Populationin 2010125
in 2015

Land Area(as of2007, inhectares)

Population
Density in2010

Population
Density in
2015

511,820
163,045
65,431
151,500
79,00921,33696,921

548,671
174,784
70,142
162,408
84,69822,872
103,899

16,267
40,12018,99652,45750,45019,17052,000

31.5
4.1
3.4
2.9
1.6
1.1
1.9

33.7
4.4
3.7
3.1
1.7
1.2
2.0

59,43493,00563,71399,701

11,325
19,276

5.2
4.8

5.6
5.2

103,006
81,925

110,42287,82436,704
15,492

2.8
5.3

3.0
5.7

54,62454,42359,52358,55758,34163,80941,45028,17017,876

1.3
1.9
3.3

1.4
2.1
3.6

167,666
63,852
71,013
52,687

179,738
68,44976,12656,48069,735
13,72918,522
11,286

2.4
4.7
3.8
4.7

2.6
5.0
4.1
5.0

125

http://www.census.gov.ph/content/2010-census-population-and-housing-reveals-philippine-population-9234million

7519. Moises padilla(magallon)
20. Murcia
21. Pontevedra
22. Pulupandan
23. Sagay city
24. San carlos city
25. San enrique
26. Silay city
27. City of sipalay
28. City of talisay
29. Toboso
30. Valladolid

39,25775,20747,94525,350140,740
129,981
23,189120,999
67,40397,571
41,65836,41642,08480,622
51,397
27,175150,873
139,340
24,859129,71172,256
104,596
44,65739,03814,41027,914
11,2502,300
33,03445,1502,884
21,48037,978
20,118
11,733
4,803

2.7
2.7
4.3
11.0
4.3
2.9
8.0
5.6
1.8
4.8
3.6
7.6

2.9
2.9
4.6
11.8
4.6
3.1
8.6
6.0
1.9
5.2
3.8
8.1

88,29994,657

13,392

6.6

7.1

23,62425,325

17,0501.4

1.5

31. City of victorias
32. Salvador
benedicto
Pgr = 1.44%126

3. Land classification
The Province of Negros Occidental has a total land area of 792,607 hectares of which 68% or
540,385.62 hectares are classified as A & D, while 32% or 252,221.38 hectares are classified as
Forestland. Its forested area is 68,857.87 hectares127. The areas for protection and production
forest are 104,877.06 and 147,344.00 hectares, respectively128.
Negros Occidental has three (3) watersheds namely: Bago River Watershed Forest Reserve, IlogHilabangan Watershed Forest Reserve, and Kabankalan Watershed Forest Reserve covering a
total area of 72,569 hectares and located in the Cities of Bago and San Carlos, Kabankalan and
Himamaylan129
It has a total area of 32,000.00 hectares natural park, the Mt. Kanla-on Natural Park establishedunder Republic Act No. 9154 dated August 11, 2001. The park is situated in the cities of Bago,
La Carlota, and San Carlos and in the Municipalities of La Castellana and Murcia and in the City

126

Ibid

127

http://r6.denr.gov.ph/index.php/about-us/regional-profile

128

Ibid

129

Ibid
76

of Canlaon and Municipality of
24,557.60 hectares130.

Vallehermoso, Province of Negros Oriental with an area of

4. Forest cover
The land use and land cover map of Negros Occidental is shown in Figure 20. The remaining
close canopy forest in Negros Occidental is very small (dark geen areas) located in Cadiz cityand in the municipality of Murcia. Open canopy forest is quite larger than the close canopy
forests (light green areas) and adjacent to the close canopy forest. Most of the areas of theprovince are agricultural lands, crop lands and grasslands.

Figure 20. Land Cover of Negros Occidental.

130

Ibid
77

5. Climate
Months from June to November are the rainy months December to May are the dry season. The
province’s annual rainfall ranges from 1,967mm to 2,500 mm. The hottest months are fromMarch to June with April having the highest temperature.
6. Topography
Negros Occidental’s terrain is moderately sloping to rolling lands. Slope range from 0-18%
comprises about 71% of the total provincial area of 563,100 hectares. The northern and westernparts of the province have flat lands to gently rolling slopes. Steep slopes from 18 to over 30
percent constitute 20.1% or 229,510 hectares.
The Negros Occidental’s mountains along the coastline are irregular in terrain than its neighborprovince of Negros Oriental. The northern and western parts are largely flat lands andmoderately sloping. Mt. Kanla-on, with an elevation of about 2,700 meters, is the highest in theCentral Philippines. The other mountains that are also high in elevations are Mt. Manadalagan
and Mt. Silay,with elevations at about 2,055 meters to 1,677 meters, respectively. There are othervolcanoes of the province. These are Mt. Solitario in the north and Mt. Malapantao in thesouthern end.
7. Water sources
There are six river basins in the province. These are the Danao river basin, Himoga-an river
basin, Malogo river basin, Bago river basin, Binalbagan river basin and Ilog river basin. Himogaan river basin stretches from the eastern slope of a chain of volcanic mountain ranges in thenorthern part of Negros Island. Danao river basin cuts from the northeast cordillera and drains
into Tanon Strait at Escalante. Malogo or Silay river basin originates at the western slope of Mt.
Silay and drains into Guimaras Strait. Bago river basin upstream slope is located in the northeastof Mt. Kanla-on. Also, it drains into Guimaras Strait. Ilog river basin is the largest among the six
basins in the province. It starts from the southeastern portion of Mt. Kanla-on and drains into
Panay Gulf.
The areas that are vulnerable to flooding during heavy rainfall are those near the river banks andplain areas where the stream overflow over flat lands at the downstream watersheds of thesebasins. Thus, damaging agricultural crops and other properties of affected communities.
There are no watershed maps showing the water sources in Negros Occidental in the internet.
8. Environmental profile of the Municipality of Hinoba-an, Negros Occidental
The environmental profile is similar with that of the province in terms rainfall, temperature, soil
and geology and types of vegetation. They differ in land cover types. Hinoba-an has only 2.1%of its land area under forest cover and 87% croplands mixed with grassland and brushland (Table
11). Insights from its very small fraction of remaining forest cover and the large portions ofcultivated mixed with grassland and brushland, showed that Considering that any reforestation78

projects are mostly focused on grasslands and brushlands, such areas are available in Hinoba-an
will define the extent of grasslands or brushlands that would be targeted for reforestation.
Hinoba-an is an agricultural municipality having most of its area planted with food crops. The
forested land in Hinoba-an is only 2.1% of the total land area of the municipality and it is an
open canopy forest. This implies that the open canopy forest has an inadequate number of tree
density that makes it short of producing the expected goods and environmental services for the
population and other economic activity requirements.

Eighty-six percent accounted for cultivated area mixed with grasslands and brushlands. This is ahigh number of potential areas that should be given priority attention for reforestation (Table 11).
Table 11. Land Use and Land Cover Types, Hinoba-an.

Land Use and Land Cover Types
Arable land, crops mainly cereals and sugar
Coconut plantations
Coral Reef
Crop land mixed with coconut plantation
Cultivated Area mixed withbrushland/grassland
Fishponds derived from mangrove
Grassland, grass covering > 70 percent
Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50
percent
Total area
Basic data source used in the GIS analysis:
DA-BAR

Area (Ha)435.44628.5
6.42
3471.85

%
Area
0.9
1.4
0.0
7.5

40051.88
0.02
687.02

86.6
0.0
1.5

980.9846262.11

2.1
100.0

1. Topography of Hinobaan
Interpretation of the aerial photograph of Hinobaan taken by Google Earth showed that the
topography is relatively plain to moderately sloping in the western side near the sea to its midportion and mountainous on the east, north and south. On the east, the mountain gradually
peaked and then it sloped down reaching the foot of another mountain. On the south-western side
is a small mountain near the sea (Figure 21).

79

Figure 21. Topography of Hinobaan, Negros Occidental (Google Earth)
2. Land cover
The land cover of Hinobaan as interpreted in Figure 20 indicates that its forest cover is a small
component of the municipality and that majority of its areas is cropland or cultivated areas.
Patches of forest cover are located in the mountainous areas on the east and on the south. These
are the areas that are colored dark green. The rests are croplands or cultivated areas.
3. Soil
The areas that are heavily eroded in Hinobaan are shown in Figure 22. These are the white togray colored areas in between cultivated areas. The extent of eroded areas is large compared to
the forested portion. There are no erosion maps in the internet that can be attached here showing
other information on the soil characteristics. Likewise, there is also no map on the internet
indicating the type of geology in Hinobaan.

Figure 22. Eroded Areas in Hinobaan, Negros Occidental (Google Earth).

80

4. Forest species
Some of the indigenous forest species that grow in Hinobaan are Toog, Nato, Bakan, Bakawan,
Bayog, Balete, Guisok, Kalingag, Lauan, Malatambis, Makaasim, Sambulawan, Taguilomboy,
Takpan, and Tuai. The pioneer species growing in the area are Tibig, Kulispakatan, Tambalau,
Binunga, Banato and Himamao131. These species will be validated during the assessment survey.
5. Water sources
There is no existing watershed map showing the water sources of Hinobaan. It is suspected that
Hinobaan draws its water needs from existing live creeks, in deep wells near the seashore anddirectly from rains. Maps of water sources will be collected during the environmental assessment
survey.

VIII.

Results and Discussions
1. Zambales NGP sites
1.1.

Survey, Mapping and Planning (SMP)

Before any project starts, there should be preparatory activities to be conducted so that the
maximum potential of the project will be obtained, especially those projects having a large
amount of budget. Such activities include the survey and mapping of the site and planning for thedesign and activities which are deemed appropriate as evaluated through the survey.
a. Coverage of Survey and Mapping
The requirements of the Survey and Mapping based on the National Greening Program
Implementation Manual (2012) are summarized in Table 12.

131

According to interview with the foresters in the CENRO/PENRO.
81

Table 12. Coverage and Specifications of the Survey and Mapping Requirements of the
NGP.
Indicator

Description

Boundary

GPS survey and GIS mapping

Physical

Topographic, drainage system, Infrastructure(roads and trails)

BiologicalNo specifications on what types of biologicalindicators

Soil

No specifications on what types of parameters
to survey

Vegetation
Watershed

Soil erosion reduction, landslides, floods,
rockfall, streambank erosion

To further improve the survey and mapping requirements defined in the NGP Manual, thefollowing are recommended for consideration to address new goals or objectives of the NGP(Table 13).
Table 13. Recommended Improvement for the Survey and Mapping Requirements for the
NGP.
Indicator

Recommended Inclusion for Further
Improvement

Boundary
PhysicalSurvey and map only the suitable areas fromplanting. Exclude rocky/stony areas, shallow
soil depth areas, water-lagged, very steep
slope areas where seedlings will not survive.

Biological

Identify, survey and map areas of indigenous
plants species already growing and map
wildlife habitat.

Soil

Include in the survey soil pH, soil fertility
and soil depth82

Vegetation

Include stands of indigenous and exotic trees
from pioneer, intermediate, and climax
species including their regenerants.

Watershed

Same indicators as defined in the watershedrehabilitation guidelines

New Goals/Objectives ofReforestation
Program(based on NGP)
Disaster risks
ClimateareaschangeSocial, economic

1.2.

Survey and map areas which are vulnerable
to natural disasters.
vulnerable Survey and map of the areas that arevulnerable to climate-related impacts (raininduced, high temperature, drought, and El
Niño and La Niña and extreme rainfall
events).
All forms of threat to the project site

Feasibility Study

From SM, the process jumped to site development planning without passing through thefeasibility study aspect. One of the important of the feasibility study is to evaluate whichreforestation design is best for a given site. It is also a venue for evaluating which of thealternative species is best or which species should be combined according to their compatibility
on actual ground condition.
Feasibility study is not a compulsory requirement of the NGP reforestation projects. Nowhere in
the NGP guidelines that this should be undertaken. In foreign-funded reforestation projects,
feasibility studies or site appraisal reports are important basis for evaluating whether such projectwill be feasible and viable considering all possible relevant factors. It is also the basis forevaluating alternative designs and selecting the best one that will be translated into site
development plan.
The CENRO accepted that FS is a necessary component of the planning process. However, they
were overtaken by instructions coming from central and regional top management to focus onreforestation activities in the field.

83

1.3.

Planning

The coverage of the NGP in terms of its planning requirements is indicated in Table 14. It
requires a site development plan with the following contents:
Table 14. Site Development Planning Requirements of the NGP.

Content
I. Introduction
A. Project scopeand rationale

Description of the Content

Recommended Inclusion for
Further Improvement of theProcess*Indicate reason and purpose forthe project and what it
seeks to accomplish.
B. Project
development
objectives
For production forest, include a
community-based entrepreneurial
development objectives that willprocess the wood into finishedproducts that will be marketed.
Income generated shall be shared to
the workers and the DENR tofinance on continuing basis theforest restoration and wood*indicate specific purpose of forest processing and marketing.
plantation to be established (if for For environmental protection,
production or protection)
include DRR and CCA/M.
II. Project Sitedescription
A. PhysicalCharacteristics
Location*Indicate province, municipality,barangay, sitio where
project is situated including area;*Indicate also manner of access toarea
84

Climate*indicate climatic type, rainfall
volume, and otherrelevant meteorological data
Topography and drainage*describe in general terms the
topography(e.g. Moderate, flat, rugged
terrain)* indicate slope categories(e.g. i: 0-15%; ii: over 15-30%; iii:
over 30-50%; iv: over 50%)
*indicate existence of bodies ofwater(e.g. Rivers, streams, creeks, etc.)
Geology, soils and erosion*describe the geologicalcharacteristics of the area, soil
type, and extent/ location oferosion
Vegetation/ Land use
describe existing vegetation(species distribution), andland use (e.g. Grassland,brushland, kaingin, forest, etc)
B. Socio-economic
Characteristics
Local Population*Indicate number/ profile ofpeople residing in the area
Income profile/ Source of
livelihood*Indicate their income bracket andsource of livelihood
Land tenure status*Indicate nature/basis ofoccupancy
III. Sitedevelopment
85

Include legal land use status withrequired certification from the
DENR field officeactivities
A. Construction ofnursery facilities*indicate number/type ofnurseries, sheds, bunk houses,
and other facilities to beconstructed
B.Nursery
Operations
Choice species*identify species of trees and otherperennials to be planted, including
cover crops in case of protection
forests to be developed
Procurement of seeds/ planting
materials*Indicate mode of procuring/ seed
source and otherplanting materials
Seedling production*Indicate total number of
seedlings to be raised, species,
nurseries, techniques, schedule ofactivities

To address DRR, use root trainer
pots for vertical growing and deep
penetration of the root system tomake them sturdy and strong whenplanting in the forestation sites.

C. Plantation
establishment
Plant design
Different design depends on end
use: for timber production,
protection forest, watershedrehabilitation, soil conservation,
DRR and CCA/M vulnerable areas.

*Prepare an appropriate plantdesign showing the detailed
distribution, spacing, and numberof species of trees and otherperennials to be planted taking into Design of species mix and spacing
account slope categories
per unit area per design.
Site Preparation*Discuss site preparation
techniques/ methods to be
employed in relation to project86

development objectives*Indicate schedule
Planting/ Replanting*Discuss planting techniques/
methods to be used,*Indicate planting/ replanting
schedule
Intercropping*Indicate species of food crops tobe planted, if any, and method ifintercropping
D. Plantation
maintenance andprotection
Weeding and cultivation*Discuss method/ frequency of
weeding/ cultivation
to be employed
Fertilizer Application*Indicate kind of fertilizer to be
used, techniques, andfrequency of application
Fire prevention and control*Describe the strategies for fire
prevention and control*Indicate specifications for
fireline/ firebreak to beestablished
Pest and Disease Control*Indicate strategies for pests anddisease control,
including contingency measures incase of pests/disease
outbreak in established plantations
Include a reforestation access roadand foot path, water system (rainwater harvesting, impounding
ponds, etc).

E. Infrastructure
Support87Compliance to Survey and Mapping (SM)Due to the immediate implementation of the NGP reforestation projects in Zambales, Dinagat
and Negros Occidental and the need to catch up with the rainy season to start planting, there was
not much time and resources allocated for SM and SDP. The activities that were conducted andthose that were not are indicated in Table 15.
Table 15. Level of SM and SDP Compliance to SM and SDP Guidelines at the NGP Site.
Activity
Boundary survey

Method Conducted?
RemarkGPS
Yes
Well defined coordinates making
the boundary accurately established
Boundary mapping
GIS
Yes
on the map and on the ground.
Soil survey (Important Indicators)
a. Soil typeYesb. Soil fertility
No
Determines the right levels of NPK
fertilizers to be recommended for
application.
c. Soil depth
No
Determines the right species thatcan grow based on the depth of soil
layers suitable to grow plants.
d. Soil pH
No
Determines where the soil is acidic
or basic. It is an indicator of aciditytolerant or basic-loving plant
species. Also determines liming ofacidic soil to make it plantable.
Survey of DRR vulnerable
areas
No
Determines DRR design and
Mapping of DRR vulnerable
specific deep-rooted species
areasNo
recommended for planting on site.
No
Existing species in the area serves
Vegetation survey/species site
as basis for identifying the plantmatching
species to be planted.
Delimit the area where a plant
Mapping of species-site
species or groups of plant species
matchingNo
are suitable.
Survey of non-plantable areas
To be avoided or not to be planted88

in the surveyed polygon
Nosuch as rocky/stony areas, acidic
soil, shallow soil layer, waterlagged, very steep slopes, etc.

The requirements of the site development plan are presented in Table 15. However, during thesurveys and scoping, the CENRO of Masinloc, Zambales and Hinobaan, Negros Occiedental and
the PENRO in Dinagat mentioned that their efforts were concentrated on the supervision andmonitoring of the site preparation activities to make the reforestation areas ready for the fast
approaching rainy season which was the start of the planting season. This was also necessary tomeet the target of the CENRO for that year as defined in the road map prepared by the central
office. As replacement to the site development plan, the CENRO prepared a brief but concise
SMP, work and financial plan and contracts where the activities to be undertaken, targets andbudgets are indicated. These were considered as replacement to the site development plan. On
the spatial and temporal requirements of the activities that should be indicated on the SDP, the
CENROs and the PENRO reiterated that it is part of the SMP and that in terms of the temporal
requirements of the reforestation activities, it is a common knowledge that seedling production
maybe conducted at any time of the year provided that there are water system. Site preparation
timing is always conducted few months before the onset of the rainy season. Planting during therainy season and protection and maintenance were mostly concentrated during the dry season.
Compliance to DRR and CCA/M, although indicated in the goals/objectives of the NGP, were
not given emphasis on the NGP guidelines in terms of the necessary indicators to be addressed in
the field. These were acknowledged by the DENR field offices as important which should be
addressed in future similar projects provided that the central office will give them the instruction
on what specific indicators to focus on in the field. The lack of specific instructions on DRR and
CCA/M from the central office resulted on some deficiencies in the specific designs and plansfor integration into the SMP or the SDP.
Also, in the site development planning, areas that are considered non-plantable that wereoverlooked during the SM should be marked on the ground and on the map. Such areas should
not be planted to avoid wastage of seedlings and manpower, and low survival. In cases wheresuch areas are included in the polygon of the surveyed sites, replacement may be considered inadjacent areas along or near the boundary of the NGP site.

1.4.

Plantation quality assuranceThis process is intended to ensure that all reforestation activities are properly conducted and thatthe quality of outputs is necessary resulting in the development of a quality forest in the future.
This process had been used in successful private reforestation companies in the Philippines. This89

process is being considered as one of the best practices benchmark where NGP field-based
operations can be compared with.
The NGP reforestation projects in Sta. Cruz Zambales do not have a system but some of theactivities that may lead to assuring a quality plantation are being performed. Table 16 describes
the practices of the CENRO relative to plantation quality assurance.
Table 16. Practices of the CENRO Masinloc Zambales in Ensuring Plantation Quality.
Presence of a regularinspection system to ensure thatplanted seedlings are growing
well.

Activitya. Activity implementation
inspectionb. Activity output inspectionc. Proper sequential
implementation of forest
restoration activities
d. Payment deduction due topoor quality of seedlings
e. Payment deduction due tolow survival rate

1.5.

Practice
No regularinspection.
Inspection is done
only during billingand payment of theservices of the PO
members.
No record showing
inspection of output
of every activity.
No record ofsequential
implementation ofactivities withinspection of qualityof every activity andits output
Practiced
Practiced

Capability building

The PO members who worked in the NGP did not have any training regarding the reforestation
activities of the NGP. Accordingly, they have been trained in similar reforestation projects in thepast and they are knowledgeable on the different reforestation activities. Table 17 describes thecapability of the PO members.
90

Table 17. Training of the PO Members that Worked in the NGP Projects.
Training of the workers on
important technical aspectsof the NGP

Topic

1 Seedling production

2. Site preparation

3. Planting
4. Protection andmaintenance5.. Replanting
2. Orientation on monitoringand evaluation of thecondition of theestablished forest
plantation
3. Orientation on billing
procedure
4. Orientation on prescribedbookkeeping andaccounting procedure

NGP Site
No formal
training only
demonstration onsite during theactivity
Demonstration
on site during theactivity
Demonstration
on site during theactivity
Demonstration
on site during theactivity
Demonstration onsite during theactivity

No orientation
No orientation

No orientation

3. Reforestation Processes
1.1.

Seedling production

In the NGP site of 99 hectares in Guinabon, the seeds came from wildlings and seeds collectedby the respondents which are the members of the clusters. The seeds are germinated in nurseries
91while the wildling are cultured and conditioned in the nursery. The nurseries are located on thehousehold’ backyard. When the seedlings are matured enough for planting, they are reported to
the DENR CENRO office for inspection to see whether the seedlings are ready for outplanting in
the NGP sites (Table 18).
Seed growers are also the planters and all of them are residing in the community close to NGP
sites. The main nursery are located usually near at the Chairman's house and nursery satellites arelocated 50 meters from the NGP site the water source.
On the other hand, the NGP site in Babuyan with an area of 150 hectares and the NGP-BFI site
in Binonton with 131 hectares had their seeds requirements collected by the respondents andgrown in the nursery.
The NGP-BFI used a detailed process of seed collection usually once a month or every 2 months.
There is no problem on collection because the species to be collected are said to be abundantaround.

After 2- 5 months, the respondents from NGP site in Guinabon said that they outplanted theirseedlings. While those in the Binonton NGP-BFI site and the Babuyan site stick on the scheduleof 5 months before planting to make sure that the standard height and diameter of the seedlings
are met. The standard height to plant is said to be 22 - 30 cm and diameter of 3 to 5 are based on
the requirements of the DENR.
Site 99 and site 150 do not really have the standard number of leaves, they consider 3-10 leaves
as good. While BFI on the other hand stick on the standard number of leaves per species. They
assigned a Quality Control Officer to inspect the seedlings before the release for planting.
Table 18. Responses of Respondents on Seedling Production, Sta. Cruz, Zambales.
NGP
Site 99

Question

NGP
Site
150

NGPBFI Site
Bfi

Sources of Seedlings
From Seeds Collected by Respondent

100% 100%

Both from Wildlings And Seed Collected by
Respondents
How many months did you take care of the seedlingsin the nursery up to outplanting in the NGP planting

92

100%

sites?
Mahogany

2-5months

-

-

Auri

2-5
months

5-6
mont
hs

-

Eucalyptus

2-5months-5 months

Acacia mangium

2-5months

5-6
mont
hs

5 months

Callicarpa--

5 months

Banaba--5 months

Agoho

-

-

5 months

Banguet pine--

5 months

Narra

-

-

5 months

Tanguile/Oyong--

5 months

Ipil-ipil--

5 months

What were the qualities of seedlings that were
hauled to planting sites?
Ht of Seedlings (cm)22 - 30100%%

25 - 30100%

26 - 30

100%

Diameter of Seedlings (mm)3 to 5

100%

100% 100%

3 to 10-

Number of Leaves of Seedlings
Mahogany

93

-

Auri

3 to 10

5 to
10

-

Eucalyptus

3 to 10-15 to 20

Acacia mangium

3 to 105 to
10

10 to 15

Callicarpa--

5 to 10

Banaba--5 to 10

Agoho

-

-

n/a

Banguet pine--

5 to 10

Narra

-

-

5 to 10

Tanguile/Oyong--

5 to 10Ipil-ipil--

5 to 101.2.

Site preparation

On the site preparation, the clusters had 1 month before rainy season to do all the cleaning of theground. Brushing on the plantable sites were based the best practices benchmark in brushingbased on previous reforestation projects implemented before NGP. The size of strip and ringbrushed areas is not less than 1m strip and 0.5 meter radius ring. Stakes are erected in every
planting hole for marking of the commodity to be planted. The size of the planting hole in NGP
site in Guinabon of 99 hectares and Babuyan NGP site of 150 hectares ranges from 4 inches to 5
inches square a depth of 4 to 5 inches, while in the NGP-BFI site of 131 hectares maintained abigger hole size of 6 inches square with a depth of no less than 6 inches.
As to replacement of the original soil taken from each hole, they said that they did not make useof this because they are provided with fertilizers.

1.3.

Planting

Based on the KII/FGD in Zambales, Planting of seedlings starts during rainy season and majority
said that they stop planting by first week of dry season. They extended planting to meet theirtargets. Most of them, transport their seedlings from the nursery to the planting site through94

manual hauling using rattan basket. In the process, damage to seedlings cannot be avoided. Strip
brushing, ring weeding, hole digging and planting were conducted simultaneously to save ontime and take advantage of their presence in the field. In planting they removed the plastic bag
by cutting it as much as possible without disturbing the balled soil. However, there were times
that it cannot be avoided to disturb the soil during plastic removal. About 30 to 50% of planted
seedlings had more or less affected their balled soil due to the need to plant all the seedlings
brought to the site during the day. This happened during the establishment of the NGP
plantations in the Guinabon and Babuyan sites (Table 19).
Soils used in filling the hole were mostly coming from what had been taken out during holedigging. Fertilizer application is done by putting in about 5-10 grams of complete fertilizer per
hole. The respondents were not aware whether the seedlings’ root collar had the right level withthe ground surface.
Based on the answers of the respondents, the team came up with an observation that they did nothave the standard way of planting because they were receiving instructions only from the PO
Chairman. This affected the survival rates of the plantings.

Table 19. Summary of Planters' Responses in Sta. Cruz, Zambales.

SITE 99

SITE 150

SITE
BFI

100%

100%

100%

Start of Planting
During Rainy Season
Stop of Planting
One week before the end of Rainy Season

7%

First week of Dry Season

93%

40%
100%

60%

Soil Fertility Additives
Forest Top Soil/Humus

40%
5-10
grams perholedependingonbudgeted

Fertilizer

95

5-10 grams
per holedependingonbudgeted
fertilizers

60%
about 50
to 100grams
per holemixedfertilizers

withhumus.

Removal of Soil from the plastic bag
Cut and removed with minimal breakage ofthe balled soil

50%

50%

40%

Cut and removed disturbing the balled soil

50%

50%

60%

How deep did you plant the seedlings?
Root collar same level with the ground surface
Root collar 3-4 inches below the groundsurface
Root collar 2 inches above the ground surface

40%
7%

43%

93%

57%

60%

Did you firmly plant the seedlings on the ground?
Yes

80-85%

80-85%

85-90%

100%

100%

100%

No
Did you erect a stake in every planted hole?
Yes
No
After planting the seedlings did you provide some forms of mulch to collect andsave soil moisture?

1.4.

Yes

20%

No

80%

40%
100%

60%

Protection and maintenance

The protection and maintenance of NGP Site 99 and NGP 150 are not really a must for
POs/Clusters because they only have the chance to visit the site if it’s along the way going totheir own farms. The inner portions of the plantation are seldom inspected. The NGP-BFI site,
however, has its own fire fighters to prevent forest fire. Their site inspection is almost every day.
They even have their own equipment on fire prevention. The responses of the respondents on
specific questions are summarized in Table 20.
96Inspection of the plantation to assess the health condition of the individual seedlings is necessary
to improve the survival rate. Knowing the right problems on site enables the NGP partners andthe extension officers to identify and implement the right corrective measures. The frequency ofinspection or visit to the plantations are indicated in Table 20.
Table 20. Summary of Responses of Protection and Maintenance Partners.
Frequency of Plantation of Inspection After
Planting

Number of Times/Week

Site 99

Twice to 5 times week along the way

Site 150

2 to 7 times per Week along the way

NGP- BFI

7 times per Week in almost all
portions

Inspection of the forest plantations is hindered by the absence of reforestation road network andreadily passable footpath. All the 3 sites are not readily accessible. This infrastructure is not only
useful in the regular inspection of the established reforestation sites but also necessary during theplantation establishment phase. Seedling transport will be facilitated if there are existingreforestation road network in the area. Likewise, the transport of manpower, supplies andmaterials will be easier. Thus, delivering such inputs to forest plantation protection andmaintenance activities on time. In times of forest fire, fast mobility of forest fire protection
patrols will be facilitated it there are reforestation road network.
Low survival of the planted seedlings during the initial planting periods was attributed by the
respondents to lack of reforestation roads because they resorted to manual seedling transport
from the central nursery to the planting area. In the process, damages to seedlings due toimproper handling was not be avoided.
b. Common problems that cause survival rate reduction
The ranking of the common plantation problems that relate to the reduction of survival rate areshown in Table 21. The respondents ranked forest fire due to grazing is the most common
problem in all the 3 sites. The next common problem is drought in NGP Site 99 and NGP-BFISite while in NGP Site 150, second is improper planting. Third most common problem isimproper planting in NGP Site 99, transport of seedlings in NGP Site 150 which resulted in
substantial damage to seedlings, and rat and “anay infestation in NGP-BFI site (Table 21).
Combining all these problems contributes to low survival rates.

97

Table 21. Common Plantation Development Problems with Ranking.
What were the common problems thatcaused the reduction of survival rates in
the NGP planted areas? (Ranking)Site 99

Site 150

BFI

Drought2

62

Grass fires due to grazing

1

1

1

Kaingin-making

7

5

4

Wildlife hunting

6

4

5

Treasure hunting

5

7

6

Improper planting

3

2

7

Inferior Seedlings Planted

4

8

8

Others: Trucking/Handling of seeds(Transportation)

-

3

-

Others: Daga/Anay

-

-

3

Forest and grass fires are common threats to all the 3 sites which prompted the CENRO and the
PO/Clusters to come with their own fire prevention and control system. Based on FGD
conducted, grass fire is a pasture cultural practice by most households with cattle in thebarangays to renew young shoots for forage every year.
Because the vegetative cover in the uplands is mostly cogon, which is highly flammable, it iseasier for the grass fire to spread over the planted areas during dry season. The respondents
added that several grass fire sightings that affected reforestation sites in the upland areas of Sta.
Cruz in previous years.
The respondents believe that to minimize grass fire there is a need for Foot Patrol Teams andBantay Gubat to be budgeted as part of the protection and maintenance cost of the plantations.
Furthermore, the introduction of site-based water system to serve the watering requirement of theplantations during dry season is a must. Also, firelines or firebreaks using plants with multiple
benefits, should be integrated into the site development plan and most importantly budgeted.
When asked on what the NGP-partners did to control the spread of grass fires based on theirexperiences, their answers are summarized in Table 22.

98

Table 22. NGP-Partners Actions to Prevent and Control Forest Fires.
Respondent

Action of NGP-Partners

NGP Site

Measures conductedto prevent forest or
grass fires

Measures conductedto control forest or
grass fires

Guinabon Site 99 Hectares

Foot patrol/Bantay
Gubat

Water application

Babuyan Site 150 Hectares

None

Water application

NGP-BFI 130 Hectares

Fire Fighting Crew
and Fireline
establishment

Firelines Beater,
Using power
sprayerc. Other protection and maintenance activities
The other activities that were performed by the NGP partners are summarized in Table 23.
Table 23. Other Protection and Maintenance Activities Conducted by the NGP Partners.
What were theprotection andmaintenanceactivities did you
perform?

Activity

Site 99

Ring-weeding, Fertilizer application, Fire break or fire-line
construction, Replanting, Watering, Forest/grass fire protection,
Foot Patrol

Site 150

Ring-weeding, Fertilizer application, Firebreak or fire line
construction, Forest/grass fire protection

NGP- BFI

Ring-weeding, Mulching, Fertilizer application, Fire break or
fire-line construction, Replanting, Watering, Forest/grass fire
protection, Foot Patrol99

d. Estimated survival rates from the respondents’ point of views
According to the Cluster leaders and POs as far as they can remember, survival rates from Site
99 ranges from 50 - 90% but most likely skewed to the 50%. On the other hand, Site 150 has
50% survival rate while the NGP- BFI have 90 - 95% but mostly likely skewed to 90 %( Table
24).

Table 24. Perceived Survival Rates of NGP Plantations in 2014 After Replanting According
to the Respondents.
During the last inspection that you
conducted, what was the survival rateof the planted NGP site before
replanting?

SIte 99

Mahogany

Site 150

NGP-BFI

-

-

-

Auri

90%

50%

-

Batino80%--

Eucalyptus

50%-90-95%

Acacia mangium

80%

50%

90-95%

Callicarpa--

90-95%

Banaba--90-95%

Agoho

-

-

90-95%

Banguet pine--

90-95%

Narra

-

-

90-95%

Tanguile/Oyong--

90-95%

Ipil-ipil--

90-95%

e. NGP-partners suggestions on how to further improve survival rate100

According to priority ranking (1 is high priority), the respondents by NGP site prioritized theirselections on what should be done to improve survival rates and health conditions of theplantations (Table 25).
Table 25. Respondents Suggestions to Improve Survival Rates and Health Conditions of the
NGP Plantations.
Based on your observations, what should be done toimprove the conditions (survival rate and healthconditions) of the NGP plantations in order to have agood quality NGP forests in the future? Prioritize
your answers.

NGP Site
99

Straight 3 years contract to PO withresponsibility to protect and maintain what they haveplanted.

4

Allocate additional budget for water system tobe used in watering the plantations during drought.

3

2

5

Since most of the grassland and brushlandareas in the site are already deteriorated apply soil
fertility enhancing organic materials to support plant
growth.

2

3

4Prioritize reforestation along the periphery offorest lines and along creeks expanding uphill.

1

4

2

Others: Fund for Lookout / Bantay gubat-

5

Others: Additional equipment like power
sprayer and two way radio.

-

1

NGP Site
150

NGP-BFI130

3

1

2. Survival Rates of the NGP Plantations
There are two formulas used in the estimation of survival rates of the NGP plantations using datacollected during the inventory of the 3 NGP sites in Sta. Cruz, Zambales. These are discussed in
the following sections.

2.1.

Survival Rate Formulas

101

There are two formulas used in the estimation of survival rates of the NGP plantations. These are
the DENR survival rate formula and the IST formula.

1. The DENR formula presented in a matrix format.
Accounting
Entry Tile
2011

Reforestation Management Period (Year)
2012
2013
2014

2015

Seedling
Opening
Stock (SOS)SOSSCS (2011)
SCS (2012)
SCS (2013)
SCS (2014)
Mortality(Reduction)
(M)
M
M
M
M
M
Net Surviving
Seedling
NSS= SOS(NSS)
M
SOS-M
SOS-M
SOS-M
SOS-M
Additional
Seedling(AS) orReplanting(R)
R (2011)R (2012)R (2013)
R (2014)
R (2015)
Seedling
Closing Stock(SCS)SCS= NSS+R SCS= NSS+R SCS= NSS+R SCS= NSS+R SCS= NSS+R
SCS/SOS*10
SCS/SOS*10 SCS/SOS*10 SCS/SOS*10
Survival Rate0
SCS/SOS*100000Figure 23. Survival Rate Using DENR Formula in Matrix Format

Dead seedlings are replaced through replanting. Usually, replanting is designed tocomplete the original number of seedlings planted or just to maintain the minimum
survival rate requirement of 85%. Since the DENR is not certain on the level of deadseedlings on the following year, DENR requires a replanting level to complete theoriginal seedling density that was planted and paid. In some cases, the total original
number of seedling planted is exceeded with an allowance to make sure that the final
living seedling is above or equal the required minimum.

102

The cost of seedlings for replanting including labor is budgeted but the cost of labor for
replanting is allocated a minimal budget. In some cases, the labor cost is a counterpart ofthose that did the planting or some sort of a back job.
After a year’s replanting, the survival rate is remeasured and replanting again is
conducted. This process is repeated 3 times from the 1st year to the 3rd year of theplantation.
After the 3rd year, the activities to be undertaken are forest management activities
including forest protection and maintenance of the plantation. Thinning may be done toremove trees that are suppressed and cannot grow any longer. This will provide growth indiameter and height and higher wood volume of the trees that are left to grow. Leaving
the forest plantation as is to undergo natural elimination process is another option until itreaches maturity. In this case forest protection should come in to protect the plantations.
Otherwise, it will cut by illegal loggers.
Replanting is limited to some extent and work only under the following conditions:a. Replanting the same species will not survive if replanted under the canopy of theoriginally planted seedlings especially when sunlight cannot reach them.
b. Replanting the same species may survive if planted along the edge of theplantations for them to receive sunlight.
c. Replanting indigenous forest species such as premium and dipterocarp species
that survive under partial shade or partial sunlight is a better option rather thanplanting the same fast growing species.

2. The Impact Study Team Formula (IST) in matrix format
Account
ing
Entry
Title
Seedling
Opening
Stock(SOS)
Mortality(Reduction) (M)
Net
Surviving
Seedling(NSS)
Additional

Reforestation Management Period (Year)
2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

SOS

SCS (2011)

SCS (2012)

SCS (2013)

SCS (2014)

M

M

M

M

M

NSS=SOS-M

NSS=SCS-M

NSS=SCS-M

NSS= SCS-M

NSS=SCS-M

R (2011)R (2012)R (2013)

R (2014)

R (2015)103

Seedling(AS) orReplanti
ng (R)
Seedling
Closing
Stock
(SCS)

SCS(2011)=N
SS+R
SR=
NSS/(SOS+R
1) *100

Survival
Rate

SCS(2012)=NSS+R

SCS (2013)=NSS+R

SCS(2014)=NSS+R

SCS(2015)=NSS+R

SR=NSS/(SOS+R1+
R2)*100

SR=NSS/(SOS+R1+R2+R3)*100

SR=NSS/(SOS+R1+R2+R
3+R4)*100

SR=NSS/(SOS+R1+R2+R3+
R4+R5)*100

Figure 24. Survival Rate Accounting Matrix.
The features of the formula are:

It integrates efficiency of reforestation activities as a function of the summation of theannual replanting and the original density of seedlings planted and paid in a reforestation
project area.

Efficiency is given by zero mortality or replanting.

Efficiency levels may play between 0 to 15% (DENR Prescribed maximum mortality) of
the original total seedling density. Conversely, inefficiency levels may play between 15%
and above mortality of the original total density.

It eliminates additional cost in replanting and seedling production when the mortality or
replanting value is zero. Thus, the unspent budget becomes a saving which will accrue tothose who work in the protection and maintenance.

3. Forest species planted in NGP sites
3.1.

Sta. Cruz, Zambales

There are 3 fast growing species planted in Guinabon, Babuyan and Binonton NGP reforestationsites. These are Auriculiformis (Acacia auriculiformis), Mangium (Acacia mangium) and
Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus europhylla). Auriculiformis and Mangium are nitrogen-fixing species,
while Eucalyptus europhylla132 is an exotic species and not a nitrogen fixer. However, it had
132

Stanley C. Malab. Current Status of Eucalyptus Plantations in the Northwestern Philippines. FAO. Reports
submitted to the regional expert consultation on eucalyptus. Volume II. Eucalyptus urophylla. This is one of thespecies recommended by the Panel of the Advisory Committee on Technology Innovation as a fuelwood species forhumid regions, especially in areas where rainfall is more than 1,000 mm per year. It grows best on deep, welldrained, medium to heavy non calcareous soils at altitudes of 300 m to 3,000 m. The wood is less dense than thoseof other species, but is also used as building poles and fence posts. It gives a high pulp yield of 20 to 30 m 3/ha/yrunder favorable conditions (NAS, 1983). The species that has proven better growth is Eucalyptus camaldulensis
based on the PFDPIN project in implemented in Ilocos Norte. This species is the most widely planted Eucalyptus in104

shown an average growth performance in PFDPIN reforestation project in Pasuquin, Ilocos
Norte at 297 cm in height and 25.93 mm in diameter 5 years after planting with a survival rate of
47%.133 On the other hand, E. camaldulensis had a survival rate of 52-75% on the same site.
Observations in the ASEAN-NEW ZEALAND project in Mayantoc, Tarlac planted in early
1990s, showed E. camaldulensis has a diameter range of 50-60 cm and total height range of 2530 meters today134. The other characteristics of E. camaldulensis is its ability to coppice andsuitable for a long dry season and resistance to drought and fire. A forest fire control experimentin PFDPIN showed that E. camaldulensis is fire resistant. Observations showed a 100% survivalwith 5 to 10 new shoots grown one month after the fire. The coppices were about 260 cm inheight and 24 mm in diameter five months after the plantation was burned (PFDPIN, 1992). In
different sites in Binga-Ambuklao watershed, burned plantations of E. camaldulensis had
survival rate of 48% to 53% 5 to 6 months after it was burned. In another observation in
Pantabangan, Nueva Ecija showed 48% after 8 months the plantation was burned (Agpaoa ,1980) as reported by Malab.
Another species integrated with the fast growing species is Agoho, which is consideredindigenous in the Philippines. Agoho naturally grows in sandy soil and in beach areas. According
to CENRO Masinloc, there are areas in the mountains where Agoho trees can be found.

3.2.

Basic Profile of the NGP Sites

There are 3 NGP sites in Sta. Cruz, Zambales. These are:Description of the Area: The area is a grassland area. The types of grasses growing on site arecogon, talahib and other shrubs. Its terrain is rolling to steep slope. Soil is compacted, orange to
red in color. The area is rocky and prone to erosion. In some plots, grasses taller than the planted
seedlings.

the world. It is resistant to fire and has a broad range of adaptability from tropical to subtropical climates. It also has
the ability to grow on relatively poor soils. The wood is sometimes used for paper pulp. When fully dry, it is an
outstanding fuel. Highly valued in Australia, it is also useful for general construction. In the Philippines, this species
was found as a good wood substrate for the culture of 'shiitake' mushroom, the most important mushroom in Japan(Zamora, 1986). Annual wood yield ranges from 17 to 30m 3/ha in good sites. It can be regenerated by coppicing
even up to six or more rotations (NAS, 1980). This species is very dominant around the Mediterranean (Spain has
114,000 ha while Morocco has 87,000 ha). Plantations are also found in Pakistan, Uruguay, Argentina and Kenya(NAS, 1983), and recently in the Philippines, (PFDPIN, 1992).http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/ac772e/ac772e0k.htm
133

Measured in PFDPIN (1992) as reported by Malab.S.

134

Region 3 Forester. Asean New Zealand Afforestation/Reforestation Project in Mayantoc, Tarlac.
105

This NGP site is exposed to extreme temperature and intense sunlight and because of this plus
the thick cogon, it is very prone to forest fire.
Natural forest species considered as pioneer and intermediate species naturally growing in thearea areBinayoyo, Balinghasai and Batino.
The NGP site is close to a river situated at the lower elevation at the western side of the site.
Area Planted : 99 hectares
Date of Planting: 2011
Date of Replanting: 2013 and 2014
Location: Guinabon, Sta. Cruz, Zambales
Description of the Area: The area is a grassland area. The grasses growing are cogon, talahib
and other shrubs. The site has a rolling to steep terrain. Soil is compacted, orange to red in color,characteristics of a clay soil. The area is rocky and prone to erosion. In some plots, grasses areeven taller than the planted seedlings. This NGP site is exposed to high to very high temperatureand sunlight. The area is prone to grass and forest fire.
Binayuyu, Balinghasai and Batino are some of the species naturally growing in the area. There isa river at the bottom of the area.
Area Planted: 150 hectares
Date of Planting: 2013
Date of Replanting: 2014
Location: Babuyan, Sta. Cruz, Zambales
Description of the area: Grassland; cogon, talahib and other grasses are present in the area.
Agoho, Benguet and Mindoro Pine are naturally occuring in the area. If observed in a panoramicview the spacing of the planted seedlings is very noticeable. Rugged terrain, with varying slopes.
The area is rocky and very rich in minerals such as marble, nickel and chromite since it is near
the mining area in the province. The soil is relatively compacted and dry since it is exposed to
extreme sunlight and temperature, however, there are also patches of forest observable in thearea. Exposed to extreme sunlight and temperature. Fire Breaks was also established in the area.
Area Planted: 131 hectares
Date of Planting: 2013
Date of Replanting: 2014
Location: Binonton, Sta. Cruz, Zambales

106

3.3.

Survival Rates

1. Guinabon NGP site: 99 hectares
1.1.

Survival Rate Using DENR FormulaThis NGP site was planted during the rainy season of 2011. Planters were contracted from
Barangay Guinabon on a yearly basis.
Using the usual method of calculating survival rate based on annual number of live seedlings
over the original number of seedlings planted is shown in Table 26.
Seedling mortality occurred the following year’s dry season. This was the first time the planted
seedlings were exposed to real field condition which resulted to seedling shock. On the same
year, came the rainy season, the dead seedlings were replaced through replanting. This process
was repeated on an annual basis.
Following top management instruction, the DENR field offices successfully brought back theoriginal density of seedlings planted in the area through replanting increasing the survival ratefrom a low of 29% in 2013 to a high of 88% in 2015 without replanting the mortality. The
DENR field offices did a tremendous effort in increasing the survival rate above the acceptable
minimum level of 85% by replanting every year.
At 88% survival rate, the Guinabon NGP site has passed the minimum survival rate prescribedby DENR assuming that no further mortalities resulted after the assessment period consideringthat there are still about 3 dry months to follow where the seedlings will still be exposed to hightemperature.
From the point of view of efficiency, summing all the replanted seedlings from 2012 to 2014
yielded 73,111 seedlings replanted. This already has exceeded the original seedling density of
49,500 by 48%. Assuming that the mortality in 2015 will be replanted this rainy season, the total
seedling replanted will now be 78,961 seedlings, exceeding the original seedling density by
160%. This may be translated into another 99 hectares plus 59.4 hectares planted assuming eachhas perfect survival rate. Also, the cost of establishing the forest plantations would be increased
by 160%.

Table 26. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, 99-Ha NGP Site, Sta. Cruz, Zambales,
2015.
Account Entry Title

Reforestation Management Period
2011 2012 2013 2014
2015

107

Seedling Opening Stock (SOS)
135
136

Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing StockSurvival Rate

1.2.

49500 49500 49500 49500 49500
09900 35318 27893 5850137
039600 14182 21607 43650
00100

9900 35318 27893
49500 49500 49500
80 28.65 43.65

0
43650
88.18

Survival Rate Using IST Formula

The IST formula is not meant to make the DENR formula inferior. It is meant to offer anothersystem that has in it an efficiency consideration. It is upon the discretion of the DENR to use it
for assessing reforestation efficiency.
The calculations of the SRs using the formula are intended to demonstrate the site to site
implications on reforestation and not intended to downgrade the efforts of the DENR field
offices as well as the community stakeholders who participated in the NGP in trying their best to
really put growing seedlings on the ground. In fact, this study speak well of their dedications of
performing their task of reforesting their area no matter how hard it is. The results of the IST
formula should not be taken against them but rather serving as an inspiration to work harder sothat in the future we see a quality forest standing.
The survival rates calculated using the IST formula are shown in Table 27. Using the same
figures used in Table 26, the survival rates are lower than the estimates calculated using the
DENR formula. The reduction is substantial and its implication points to further erosion of theefficiency of reforestation activities in establishing plantations. It is also making reforestation
process too costly.
The ideal situation is to maintain the original density as a constant denominator with zero annual
replanting. Doing this means that the original seedling density is perfectly growing without
mortality and need for replanting.

135

The figures are based on interview with the CENRO and Extension Officers, CENRO Masinloc, Zambales.
Replanting targets were set on the planted seedling density of 500 seedlings/hectare instead of maintaining theminimum survival rate of 85%. This is necessary to give an allowance that will surely exceed the minimum survival
rate of 85%.
136

Based on the NGP records of CENRO Masinloc

137

Based on actual count of dead seedlings and those seedlings with health problems
108This approach of deriving the survival rates is logical because it integrates efficiency andeffectiveness into the reforestation process. The lower the survival rates, the less efficient andeffective the reforestation processes are in establishing living seedlings according to the required
density. Having more dead seedlings that will require replacement is an indication that somethings were missed in the planning and in the implementation of the reforestation activities.

Table 27. Survival Rates Using IST Formula,
NGP Site of 99 Hectares, 2015.

Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanted
Seedling closing stock
Survival Rate

Reforestation Management Period
20112012 2013 2014 2015
49500
49500 49500 49500 49500
9900 35318 27893 5850
39600 14182 21607 43650

100.009900 35318 27893
049500 49500 49500 43650
66.67 14.97 17.62 35.60

The survival rates calculated using the IST formula are 17%, 48%, 60% and 60% lower than thesurvival rates derived using the DENR formula, for 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively.
The reason for the low survival rates is due to the accumulated annual replanting which
increased the denominator of the formula. Unlike in the DENR formula where the denominator
is fixed to the seedling closing stock, the survival rate is higher for not accounting the total
number seedlings already planted on the ground.
2. Babuyan 150 Hectares
2.1.

Survival rate using DENR formula

The 150 hectares planted in 2013 has a total density of 75,000 seedlings. Notice that themortality (reduction) in 2014 according to the records of the CENRO was 15,500 seedlings. This
yielded a survival rate of 79% for 2014. Due to the relatively lower mortality in 2015, counted at
9,617 dead seedlings, the survival rate is increased to 87% in 2015. If the dead seedlings in 2015
will be replaced on the ground, it will increase the survival rate to another level subject to theprevailing condition after the replanting (Table 28).

109

Table 28. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula,
NGP Site of 150 Hectares, 2015.
Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling or Replanted
Seedling Closing StockSurvival Rate

2.2.

Reforestation Management Period
2011 2012 2013
2014
2015
0
0 75000
75000
75000
138
0
0
15500
9617139
0
0
59500
65383
0
0
15500
0
0
0
75000
65383
0
0
79.33
87.18

IST Survival Rate Formula

Using this method reduces the survival rates of the 150 hectares NGP reforestation area. The
2014 survival rate is reduced to 66% and the 87% survival rate in 2015 to 72%. Comparing the
99 hectares with the 150 hectares shows that the reforestation activities were probably better
implemented in the 150 hectares than in the 99 hectares where the DENR field offices learned alot from it. Another reason is perhaps the issuance of the NGP Manual of Implementation in2012 which guided the conduct of reforestation activities (Table 29).

Table 29. Survival Rates Using IST Formula,
NGP Site of 150 Hectares, 2015.

Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling or Replanted
Seedling Closing StockSurvival Rate

Reforestation Management Period
2011 2012
2013
2014
2015
0
0 75000 75000 75000
0
15500
9617
0
59500 65383
0
15500
0
0
75000 65383
065.75 72.25

138

Based on the records of CENRO Masinloc.

139

Based on the study’s assessment of the survival rate in the 150 hectares.
110The estimates of the survival rates of the IST formula are 17.11% lower in 2014 and 17.12%
lower in 2015 compared to the DENR formula estimates. The same reason why the estimates arelower to that of the Guinabon survival rates.
3. Binonton NGP-BFI site - 130 hectares
This site is a joint undertaking of the NGP through the CENRO and the Bukidnon Forest, Inc.
under the USEC for Field Operations according to the CENRO. The difference of this projectwith the first 2 NGP sites are: a) The NGP-BFI site has personnel in planting and protection andmaintenance that are budgeted for a longer period giving longer work security to the workers
with assured income for not less than 3 years .
The same species were planted in the 99 hectares in Guinabon and 150 hectares in Babuyan NGP
site.
3.1.

Survival rate using DENR formula

Among the 3 sites, this project has the highest survival rate using the DENR formula (Table 30).
The second year is always critical to the plantation because it is the first time the seedlings are
exposed to real field condition. This happened in all NGP sites in Sta. Cruz, Zambales. The
calculated survival rate for 2014 is 86% and in 2015 the survival rate has further increased to90%. This site passed the minimum survival rate requirement of 85%.
The high survival rates are attributed to the NGP-partners who are in the plantilla of the BFI for
at least 3 years and are technically equipped to handle reforestation activities anytime. It is theirprimary responsibility to take care of the forest plantations unlike those in the 2 sites where the
NGP-partners are the members of the People’s Organizations who are contracted on annual basis
due to fund limitation.
Table 30. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, NGP-BFI Site- 130 Hectares, 2015.
Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening Stock
Mortality (Reduction)140
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling Replanted
Seedling Closing StockSurvival Rate

Reforestation Management Period
2011 2012
2013
2014
2015
0
0 65500 65500 65500
0
9055
6455
0
56445 59045
0
9055
0
0
65500 59045
086.18 90.15

140

Based on the heights of seedlings measured during the inventory where 0.3m to 0.5m are believed to be 2 years
old and <0.3m seedlings are 1 year old.
111

3.2.

Survival rate using IST formula

The survival rates are shown in Table 31. Comparing with the survival rates with those derived
using the DENR formula indicates that the IST estimates are lower by 12.14% in 2014 and11.24% in 2015. The survival rate in 2015 is below the 85% prescribed minimum survival rateby DENR. The Binonton NGP-BFI site is more efficient compared to the Guinabon and Babuyan
NGP sites as indicated by its survival rate at 80%.
Table 31. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, NGP-BFI Site-130 Hectares.

Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening Stock
Reduction (Mortality)
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing StockSurvival Rate

3.3.

Reforestation Management Period
2011 2012
2013
2014
2015
0
0 65500 65500 65500
0
9055
6455
0
56445 59045
0
0
0

9055
65500
75.71

0
59045
80

Weighted average survival rate

Using the DENR formula and the IST formula for deriving the weighted average survival rate forthe 3 NGP sites in Sta. Cruz, Zambales, and the results are shown in Table 32 (DENR Formula)and Table 33 (IST Formula).
On the average, the 3 NGP sites have a weighted average survival rate of 88.29% determinedthrough the DENR Formula indicating a passing mark compared to the 85% minimum survival
rate prescribed by DENR.
Table 32. Weighted Survival Rate (Using DENR Formula) of the NGP Sites in Sta. Cruz,
Zambales.

NGP Site
Guinabon NGP Site 99 Hectares
Babuyan NGP Site 150 Hectares
Binonton NGP-BFI Site 130
Hectares

Survival
Rate (%)(2015)
88
87
90

Weighted Average
Survival Rate (%)
Weighted Sum
8,712.00
13,050.00
11,700.00
33,462.00
88.29

112

On the other hand, if the weighted average survival rate is computed using the IST Formula, theweighted average survival rate is reduced to 65.33%. This means that the 3 NGP sites were notefficient in the implementation of the reforestation activities and that there are more rooms forfurther improvement. Instead of opting to do replanting most of the time, the DENR field offices
must implement the best practices in reforestation activities that minimize high seedlingmortalities (Table 33).

Table 33. Weighted Average Survival Rate (Using IST Formula) of the NGP Sites in Sta.
Cruz, Zambales.

NGP Site
Guinabon NGP Site 99 Hectares
Babuyan NGP Site 150 Hectares
Binonton NGP-BFI Site 130 Hectares

Survival
Rate (%)(2015)
35.6
72.25
80

Weighted Average
Survival Rate (%)
Weighted Sum
3,524.40
10,837.50
10,400.00
24,761.90
65.33

3.4.

Species that suffered mostThe percent species mortality of the NGP plantations is shown in Table 34. The information
given in the table is useful in deciding whether a given species is going to be used for planting or
replanting in the same sites or in totally new areas. Species with high percentage mortality
should be avoided or as much as possible discover why such species did not survive. Among thespecies that showed small percentage of mortality is Agoho, the only indigenous species in thegroup. Eucalyptus europhyla is an exotic species from Australia. According to the review ofliterature, it has a low survival rate in the Philippines. Based on the table below, it is second inpercentage mortality in all the 3 NGP sites. It is surprising to note that Auriculformis, a species
that can grow in any field condition has the highest percentage mortality among the species
planted. Some of the probable reasons for this are: a) the seedlings were not hardened enough inthe nursery and therefore not ready for planting; b) transport and handling from the nursery to thesite causing damage to the seedlings; c) improper site preparation and planting. The exact
reasons why this happened should be an interesting problem area for research.

113

Table 34. Percentage Mortality of Species Planted in the NGP Sites, Sta. Cruz, Zambales.
Species
Auriculiformis
Eucalyptus
Agoho
Mangium
Others(Batino)
Total

3.5.

99 Hectares
Number
%
2479
42
1926
33
886
15
559
10

150 Hectares
Number
%
1859
19
4818
50
1347
14
1534
16

5850

59
9617

100

1
100

130 Hectares
Number
%
1864
891
3700

29
14
57

6455

0
100

Methods to increase survival rate

Since most of the species planted in the NGP sites are fast growing species, the following mayhelp the DENR field offices and the community stakeholders in increasing the survival rates:a) Do not plant unhardened and low quality seedlings (succulent stems and branches, few
leaves, undersize stem and height).
b) In replanting especially under the canopy of the plantations, use indigenous forest species
that are partial shade-loving and suitable in the area. If replanting is done outside thecanopy, use the same fast growing species but selecting the species with the highest
survival rate.
c) Prepare well the site, especially the size of the hole and depth. The hole size should be
sufficient to capture rainwater, store it in the soil particles and make it available toseedlings during the dry season. Mix with the soil cleaned/sterilized worn out cloth toincrease water absorptive capacity of the soil. Surrounding the hole about 20cm awayfrom the edge, dig a circular canal to catch surface runoff. Cover it with a mulch toprevent soil moisture evaporation. This will provide the water requirements of the plants.
d) If intense sunlight is anticipated during the dry season, provide seedling shades using any
available materials on site such as leaves of shrubs, palm, native bananas, cogon, andtalahib. This is part of the protection and maintenance activities that are budgeted.
d) Rocky soil underneath the soil surface which was not seen during the SMP due to lack ofa soil survey should be replaced in adjacent areas with thick soil layer;d) During dry season assign members of the People’s Organization or community toestablish an entrance-exit guard house along the boundary where access paths are located.
Man this 24/7 to monitor and to prevent the entry of hunters and shifting cultivators,
forest products gatherers. Conduct regular IEC to the barangays. Secure an authority to114

the barangay leaders for the enforcement of barangay ordinances protecting the NGP
plantations.
e)Inculcate to the minds of the members of the communities through regular education
campaign the importance of the reforested areas in providing them sustainable supply ofwater and other environmental services and benefits. Thus, the need to take care of theplantations without pay is important.

f) Conduct a study to understand very well the site characteristics and the species, and comeup with options that would result to better growth performance. The expertise of the
ERDB and ERDS should come in to assist the DENR field offices along this matter.

4. Stumpage Build-up of the NGP Plantations

4.1.

99-ha timber plantation

Due to the mixed heights and diameters of the species in the 99-ha NGP sites resulting from thereplanting activities, the trees were stratified according to heights. This was done to derive amore realistic estimate of the volume of the trees rather than averaging all the trees. The
remnants of the first planting in 2011 are the dominant trees in the area. Their heights range from
5-9 meters. The dominant trees are the first layer of the canopy. There are only 413 dominant
trees in the area.
The other stratum is the co-dominant trees. Their heights are from 2-4.9 meters. This stratum isthe second layer and they are below the dominant trees. There are only 5,195 co-dominant trees
in the area.
The third layer is composed of the seedlings/saplings equal to and below 2 meters in heights. The
seedlings/saplings are under the canopy of the second layer. There are plenty of theseseedlings/saplings in the 99-ha area numbering 42,512 seedlings or samplings.
a. Dominant trees (413 trees)
There are 413 trees that belong to the first planting in 2011. These are the dominant trees in the
99-ha plantation measured in 2015 during the assessment period. Using the diameter and height
growth rates of the trees in 5 years, a linear projection of the diameters and heights of the trees
each year from year 1 to year 30 was conducted. Based on these parameters, the volumes of thetrees were computed. The results are shown in Table 35. The projection assumes that none of thetrees will die within the 30 year period.

115

Table 35. Stumpage Buildup of Dominant Trees in the 99-Ha NGP Plantation, Sta. Cruz,
Zambales, 2015.

Age
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

Bole HT
0.91
1.82
2.73
3.64
4.55
5.46
6.37
7.28
8.19
9.10
10.01
10.92
11.83
12.74
13.65
14.56
15.47
16.38
17.29
18.20
19.11
20.02
20.93
21.84
22.75
23.66
24.57
25.48
26.39
27.30

Average
Dia
1.66
3.31
4.97
6.63
8.28
9.94
11.60
13.25
14.91
16.57
18.23
19.88
21.54
23.20
24.85
26.51
28.17
29.82
31.48
33.14
34.79
36.45
38.11
39.76
41.42
43.08
44.73
46.39
48.05
49.71

Vol/Tree
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.07
0.10
0.14
0.20
0.26
0.34
0.43
0.54
0.66
0.80
0.96
1.14
1.35
1.57
1.82
2.09
2.39
2.71
3.07
3.45
3.86
4.31
4.78
5.30

Total Trees
413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00Total Wood
Volume
0.08
0.65
2.19
5.19
10.13
17.50
27.79
41.48
59.07
81.02
107.84140.01178.01222.33273.45331.87398.07472.53555.74648.18750.36862.73985.811120.06
1265.991424.06
1594.78
1778.62
1976.072187.62b. Second layer co-dominant trees (5,195 trees)
The co-dominant trees are those with heights ranging from 2 – 4.9 meters in theplantations. They are the next layer below the dominant trees which have heights equal to116

or greater than 5 meters. The projected diameters and heights are fitted to small woods
only that can be used for fuelwood and pulpwood unless fertilizer applications using theright amount as required to pump the trees to their normal growth rates. Also,
silvicultural treatments designed to open more spaces for sunlight for faster foodproduction that can be used by the plants.
The potential stumpage buildup of the co-dominant trees in the plantation is shown in
Table 36. Assuming that the survival rate of the co-dominant trees will be maintained in
30 years, it will have a total volume of 564 cum suitable for pulpwood, fuelwood, anddecorative materials.

Table 36. Potential Stumpage Buildup of the Second Layer Co Dominant 5,195 Trees of the
99-Ha NGP Site

AGE
(Yr)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Bole HT
(m)
0.35
0.70
1.05
1.41
1.76
2.11
2.46
2.81
3.16
3.51
3.87
4.22
4.57
4.92
5.27
5.62
5.98
6.33
6.68
7.03
7.38
7.73

Average
DIA
(cm)
0.38
0.76
1.15
1.53
1.91
2.29
2.67
3.06
3.44
3.82
4.20
4.58
4.96
5.35
5.73
6.11
6.49
6.87
7.26
7.64
8.02
8.40

Vol/Tree
(Cum)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04

117

Total Trees
(No.)
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195

Total Vol
(Cum)
0.02
0.17
0.56
1.34
2.61
4.52
7.17
10.71
15.25
20.92
27.84
36.14
45.95
57.40
70.59
85.68
102.76121.99143.47167.33193.71222.72

23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

8.08
8.44
8.79
9.14
9.49
9.84
10.19
10.54

8.78
9.17
9.55
9.93
10.31
10.69
11.08
11.46

0.05
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.11

5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195
5195

254.49289.15326.82367.63411.70459.16510.14564.75c. Third layer of trees layer (42,512 seedlings/saplings)
Majority of plants in the 99-ha NGP sites totaling 42,512 seedlings or saplings will havestumpage buildup within 30 years as projected in Table 37. The projected wood volume in 30
years is only 14.7 cum per hectare at 440 trees per hectare (500 trees original density *88%
survival rate). This is significantly lower than the 9-year old A. auriculiformis yielding 45 cum
per hectare in Nueva Ecija (Lasco and Pulhin, 1999).
Table 37. Potential Stumpage of the Third Layer of 42,512 Seedlings/Saplings in the 99-Ha

Age
(Yr)

Bole
HeightAverage
Dia

1

0.36

0.21

2

0.71

0.41

3

1.07

0.62

4

1.43

0.83

5

1.78

1.03

6

2.14

1.24

7

2.50

1.45

8

2.85

1.65

9

3.21

1.86

10

3.56

2.07

Vol/Tree
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.001

118

Total
Trees

Total Wood
Volume

42512

0.05

42512

0.41

42512

1.37

42512

3.26

42512

6.36

42512

10.99

42512

17.46

42512

26.06

42512

37.10

42512

50.90

4.2.

11

3.92

2.27

12

4.28

2.48

13

4.63

2.69

14

4.99

2.90

15

5.35

3.10

16

5.70

3.31

17

6.06

3.52

18

6.42

3.72

19

6.77

3.93

20

7.13

4.14

21

7.49

4.34

22

7.84

4.55

23

8.20

4.76

24

8.56

4.96

25

8.91

5.17

26

9.27

5.38

27

9.62

5.58

28

9.98

5.79

29

10.34

6.00

30

10.69

6.20

0.002
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0.010
0.011
0.013
0.015
0.017
0.019
0.021
0.024
0.026
0.029
0.032

42512

67.74

42512

87.95

42512

111.8242512

139.6642512

171.7742512

208.4742512

250.0542512

296.8342512

349.1042512

407.1742512

471.3542512

541.9442512

619.2642512

703.5942512

795.2542512

894.5542512

1001.7942512

1117.2842512

1241.3142512

1374.20150-ha and the 131-ha NGP plantations

The Babuyan and the Binonton NGP sites are still young (2 years and 1 year old). At least eachof the plantations should have no less than 3 years to be able to derive the growth rates of theplanted trees in terms of diameter and height. From these growth rates, a linear extrapolation
may be used to estimate the volume of trees in the future.

119

As a reference, the stumpage of the 99-ha may be used as a basis for estimating the stumpage ofthe 150- ha Babuyan NGP site and the 131- ha NGP-BFI site. If the survival rates of the 2 NGP
sites will be maintained, the stumpage buildup for Babuyan will be 1% lower than that of the
Guinabon NGP site. However, if the Binonton NGP site is considered, the stumpage buildup will
be 2% higher than the Guinabon estimate on stumpage. These estimates were based on the
difference of the survival rates of 3 NGP sites. These estimates will happen only if the survival
rates will be maintained within the 30-year period.
4.3.

Measures to further improve the growth of the NGP plantations

a. Conduct intensive fertilizer application to all the plants by putting the right type andquantity of fertilizers. To avoid leaching and erosion of applied fertilizer to plants,
conduct the application during the dry season and water each plant when the soil is nearlydry. Do not over water because this will leach out the fertilizer.
b. Watch for insects that feed on the leaves of the plants. Get rid of the insects using manualor biological approaches. Chemical application should be ruled out because it isdetrimental to health and to the environment.
c. Regularly conduct inspection of the individual plants to determine their health conditions
and apply the right methods to be used to solve whatever problems that affect theirhealth.
d. During dry season, guarding the plantation from forest fire is a must. Establish fire
protection sectors that should be manned 24/7. If possible, establish a site-based fire
protection quarter/office inside the NGP site purposely to have focus and to be able toimplement immediate action in putting off forest fires.
e. Take advantage of the shades of the canopies of the NGP trees by interplanting shadeloving intermediate and climax indigenous forest species that are growing in the area.
Because there is already sufficient shades, dipterocarp species together with otherindigenous species may be interplanted.
f. No thinning should be conducted until the time when the intermediate and climax species
have totally acclimatized and adapted on the site condition. When they reached thesapling stage, they may be released to more sunlight by pruning some of the branches ofthe fast growing species. In crowded trees, thinning may be done.
5. Environmental Impacts of NGP Plantations
5.1.

Soil

1. Soil baseline characteristics

120

To be able to determine the contribution of plant species to soil moisture, soil carbon, soil
fertility (NPK), and to reduction of soil acidity, the initial contents of the soil where the forest
species are planted must be measured first. The soil baseline characteristics for the NGP sites areshown in Table 38. The averages of the soil moisture contents of the NGP sites at ages 1,2, and 3
years old yielded an average of 21.6% for the 3-year old NGP forest plantation, 19.17% in the 2year old NGP plantation and 19.48% for the 1-year old NGP plantation. The difference between
the 2-year old and the 1-year old forest plantation is the higher survival rate of the 1-year old
than the 2-year old plantation where more plants store water into the soil. Considering the otherindicators such as organic matter (OM), soil acidity (pH), Nitrogen (N), Organic Carbon (OC),
Phosphorus (P) and Potassium (K) indicate that the NGP plantations have already started
building humus through the positive OM, recharged the soil with OC thus helping in carbon
sequestration and further enriched soil fertility through the positive NPK results. In terms of soil
pH, the NGP plantations have not reversed yet the acidic soil.
Comparing the NGP sites’ baseline soil characteristics with that of the control sites (grasslands),
the moisture contents in the 3 NGP sites exhibited higher values compared to the soil moisture
contents of the control sites taken at the same soil depths. This means that the control sites whichhave cogon as soil cover have negligible soil moisture content compared with those planted with
forest species. In terms of pH, the control sites are more acidic than the NGP sites.
In terms of the other soil indicators, the differences between the average of the control sites andthe averages of the soil indicators in various slope classes within each of the NGP plantations
show whether the NGP sites have already exceeded the control site. If the difference is negative,
the NGP plantation has not yet contributed much to the soil in terms of the soil indicator.
However, if the difference is positive, it has already given more to the soil than that of thegrassland. Negative N, OC, P and K happened when the grasses were cut and removed on siteand did not decay on site. Whereas, in the control sites, the dead leaves of the grasses are left torot on site having more of the N, OC, P, and K. This condition is temporary because the NGP
plantations are still young. Within 5-10 years, the situation will turn around where the NGP sites
will be producing more N, OC, P, and K than the control sites (grassland).

121

Table 38. Soil Baseline Characteristics of NGP Sites and Comparison with Control(Grassland) Area.

Site

Area

Plot
No.

Slope Class1

19-36%

Weightof Soil
Samples(grams)

%MC

%OM

pH

%N

%OC

P(ppm)

K(me/100g)

13.8

1.857
7

4.7

0.09
29

1.080
1

1.57982.7986

350

30.5

3.118
3

5.4

0.15
59

1.812
9

1.44812.3256

300

26.79

2.653
8

5.2

0.13
27

1.542
9

1.84450.8146

350

25.57

0.995
2

5.2

0.04
98

0.578
8

1.7561

0.854

380

18.45

1.326
9

5.2

0.06
63

0.771
5

1.53591.2088

300

14.78

3.051
9

4.6

0.15
26

1.774
4

1.84451.0643

285

Total

129.8
9

13.00
38

0.65
02

7.560
6

10.00899.0659Average

21.64
83

2.167
3

30.
3
5.0
50
0

0.10
84

1.260
1

1.6682

1.5110

327.5

25.54

2.653
8

4.4

0.13
27

1.542
9

1.9331

1.1168

350

21.99

2.521
2

4.3

0.12
61

1.465
8

1.44810.5913

300

1.002
9

1.5359

1.8

300

12

Guinabon,Sta. Cruz
Zambales

14

>55%

99Ha
17
19
5

1
2
Babuyan,
Sta. Cruz
Zambales

>55%

150H
A

3
4
6

0-18%
19-36%
37-55%

0-18%
19-36%

14.68

1.725

5

0.08
63

12.44

2.388
5

4.7

0.11
94

1.388
6

2.5583

1.2088

310

21.23

1.061
5

4.5

0.05
31

0.617
2

1.88880.7358300

37-55%
19-36%
0-18%
122

10.35

22.
9

0.51
76

6.017
4

9.36425.4527

4.5
8

0.10
352

1.203
48

1.87284

1.09054

312

4.6

0.15
59

1.812
9

1.66791.3008

250

1.234
3

1.8003

1.1825

320

Total

95.88

Average

19.17
6

2.07

21.07

3.118
3

22.59

2.123
1

5.4

0.10
62

20.85

3.317
3

4.2

0.16
59

1.928
7

2.02191.4847

300

17.68

2.388
5

5.3

0.11
94

1.388
6

2.11081.7212

285

4.3

0.33
5

3.895
9

2.4236

1.0511

250

0.13
27

1.542
9

2.0663

1.3665

300

11.80
33

12.09088.10681.967
217

2.015133

1.3511333
3

P(ppm
)

K(me/100g)

1
10Binonton,
Sta. Cruz
Zambales337-55%
0-18%
37-55%

131Ha
6
819-36%
37-55%
25.99

6.701

8.71

2.653
8

5.3

Total

116.8
9

20.30
2

29.
1

Average

19.48
167

3.383
667

4.8
5

1.01
51
0.16
918
3

%M
C

%O
M

pH

%N

%OC

4.7

0.26
87

3.124
4

2.19990.3679

4.7

0.19
24

2.237
3

1.57980.8803

0.05
31

0.617
2

1.66791.6161

0.17
14

1.993
0

1.81590.95489Site

Control
Sites forall NGP
Sites

Area

>55%

Plot
No.

Randomly
Selected
Sampling Points

Plot
1

Grassland Site 1

Plot
2

Grassland
Site 2Plot
3Grassland Site 3

Average

0

5.374

0

3.848
4

0

1.061
5

0.000
0

3.428
0

123

4.6
4.6
66
7

284.17

Guinabonvs.Control
Babuyanvs.
Control
Binotonvs.
Control

Difference

21.64
83

Difference

19.17
60

Difference

19.48
17

1.260
7
1.358
0
0.044
3

0.3
83
3
0.0
86
7
0.1
83
3

0.06
30

0.732
9

0.06
79
0.00
22

0.789
5
0.025
7

-0.1477

0.55620.05700.13580.19930.3964

2. Litter falls, NPK and OC yields of NGP sites
Evidences that the NGP plantations are giving off N, P, K, and OC to the soil are indicated inTable 39. In the 3-year old NGP plantations, Auriculiformis and Mangium as nitrogen-fixer givehigher N than Agoho (native species) and Eucalyptus (exotic species). Mangium has higher
Phosphorus and Potassium than Agoho, Auriculiformis, and Eucalyptus. OC is just 0.2% of theweight of the litter fall by species. For Agoho, the OC is 0.2gram. In the 2-year old and 1-year
old NGP plantations, the trend is similar to that of the 3-year old NGP plantation. To reiterate,
the litter fall NPK levels are additions to the NPK in the soil. Similarly the OC from the litter fallis an addition to the existing OC in the soil. As the NGP plantations mature, there will be more
NPK and OC added into the soil.

Table 39. Litter Falls and NPK Yields of NGP Sites, Sta. Cruz, Zambales.
NGP Sites

Guinabon, Sta.
Cruz, Zambales

Year
Planted
2011

%N
0.77

%P
0.02

%K
0.04

WeightofSample
(g)
100

Agoho

2011
2011
2011
Total
Average
2013

1
1.16
0.69
3.62
0.905
0.77

0.01
0.1
0.01
0.14
0.035
0.01

0.25
0.31
0.2
0.8
0.2
0.09

300
380
300
1080
270
85

A.
auricauliformis

2013

0.69

0.01

0.07

300

Leaf Litter
SamplesAgohoA.
auricauliformis
A. mangium
Eucalyptus

124Babuyan, Sta.
Cruz, Zambales

Binonton, Sta.
Cruz, Zambales

A. mangium
Eucalyptus
Total
AverageAgohoA.
auricauliformis
A. mangium
Eucalyptus
Total

2013
2013

2014
2014
2014
2014

Average

1
0.39
2.85
0.7125
0.77

0.04
0.01
0.07
0.0175
0.01

0.13
0.17
0.46
0.115
0.1

300
300
985
246.25
150

0.65
0.84
0.35
2.61

0.01
0.06
0.01
0.09

0.07
0.14
0.17
0.48

350
320
310
1130

0.65250.0225

0.12

282.5

3. Comparison of the NPK of the NGP sites and the control sites (grasslands)
Comparing the NPK of the NGP sites to that of the control site, %N is a lot higher in Guinabonsite than the control sites. However, when it comes to P and K, the control site surpasses the
Guinabon Site. Same observation goes with Babuyan and Binonton sites. The high %N content
present in all NGP sites were caused by the N-rich trees planted there.

Table 40. NPK of the Control Sites (Grassland), Sta. Cruz, Zambales, 2015.

Site

Control Sites for all
NGP Sites

Species

Grasses(Cogon &Talahib)

Randomly
Selected
Sampling
PointsGrassland
Site 1
Grassland
Site 2
Grassland
Site 3
Average

125%N

P(ppm) K(me/100g)

0.26872.19990.36790.1924

1.57980.88030.05310.1714

1.66791.81591.6161
0.9548

4. Impact to Soil Accretion
Soil accretion is the build up of soil due to the capacity of the base of plant to trap soil particles
that are carried away through surface runoff. It is also contributed by the build up of humus as it
mixes with the soil. Forest during the process of growth increases soil accretion as more litter
falls are formed into humus and mixed with the soil. The averages per tree soil accretion impactof each of the 3 NGP sites are presented in Table 41.
Comparing the NGP sites with the control sites (grassland) in terms of soil accretion or erosion
indicates that the grassland control site have a net soil erosion.

Table 41. Impact to Soil Accretion of NGP Sites, Sta. Cruz, Zambales.
NGP Site

Area (Hectares)

Year Planted

Soil Accretion(Cm/plant)

Control Site
Soil Erosion

Guinabon

99

2011

0.27

-2.188Babuyan

150

2013

0.16

-2.195Binonton

131

2013

0.35

-0.655

5. Impact to Temperature
The impact of the NGP reforestation sites to temperature in the uplands of Sta. Cruz, Zambales
are shown in Table 42.
Among the three NGP reforestation sites, Guinabon site has the highest reduction in temperature
at 3.1 degrees Celsius. This is due to the relatively higher heights of the older age planted forest
species which have more leaf area which is responsible in producing more oxygen through theprocess of photosynthesis. The other site with the next higher temperature reduction is that of the
Binonton site. It also reduced temperature at 3.1 degrees Celsius. This is attributed to the higher
survival rate of the NGP plantation in Binonton compared to Guinabon. The higher number oflive trees in Binonton at 2 years old compensates for more plants performing photosynthetic
activity resulting in cooler temperature. The Babuyan site has the least temperature reduction
because it has the lowest number of surviving trees compared to the 2 sites. The other reason isthat it is relatively younger in age dominated by very young stands of forest plantation where
photosynthetic activities are limited by the young trees.

126

In general, all the NGP sites showed positive reduction in temperature when compared to thegrassland proving that forest produces cooler temperature. This will contribute to reducing
warming initially at the site level and may scale up to a provincial level if all the degraded lands
will be reforested.
Table 42. Impact of the NGP Forest Plantations to Temperature.
NGP
Sites
GuinabonBabuyanBinonton

Area
(Has)
99
150
131

Year
Planted
2011
2013
2013

Average
Age
Temperature Control Temperature(Years)(C0)
Site
Difference
3
31.9
35
3.1
2
33.4
35.9
2.5
1
33.7
36.8
3.1

6. NGP compliance to disaster risk reduction
One of the NGP’s objectives is to address DRR concerns in the uplands through its NGP
reforestation sites. Although
NGP did not specify the DRR
indicators in the planning stage
and in the monitoring; whether
its DRR objective will beachieved, this study points tosome readily measurable DRR
indicators that may be includedin the future in the monitoringand evaluation of the NGP
sites. These indicators areshown in the methodology.

Figure 25. Slope Map of Guinabon, Sta. Cruz, Zamables.

a. Vulnerable areas to disaster in the Guinabon NGP site

127

The highest slope in the site belongs to the slope range of 19-36% (color yellow green) with anarea of 23 hectares. The biggest portion of the site (color green) has a slope range of 0-18%. This
has an area of 73 hectares. Given
the DRR risky slopes, there are no
DRR concerns in the 99 hectares
Guinabon NGP site. Thus, there isno need to have a specific designfor DRR to address a rain-induced
disaster to reduce the occurrenceof landslides (Figure 24).

b. Vulnerable areas todisaster in Babuyan NGP site
The areas which are DR-sensitive
under a rain-induced disaster are
Figure 26. Slope Map of Babuyan, Sya. Cruz, Zambales.
in the slope ranges of 37-55%
with 43 hectares (orange) and >55% with 7 hectares (red) in Figure 25. A total of 50 hectares
considered sensitive to rain-induced disaster which needs to be addressed in the design and in theimplementation.
c. Vulnerable areas to disaster in Binonton NGP-BFI site
The slope map of the Binonton site was not provided by the management. Anyway, slopes thatare 37-55% and >55% are DRR-sensitive areas, which need different species from those planted
ones and special site planning because vulnerable areas will have to be addressed.
d. Specific recommendations to make NGP compliant to DRR.
For the 3 NGP sites, to make them DRR compliant, there is a need to integrate the following:a. Conduct a more detailed topographic profiling survey of the areas under 37-55% slope
and those equal to and greater than >55% areas. The detailed topographic profilingsurvey is intended for designing a specific DRR measures that are suitable to the DRRsensitive sites.
b. The DRR measure may vary from vegetative to structural methods or combination of themethods whichever is the most suitable method to be applied.

128

c. Species to be planted in close spacing are those that are deep-rooted or root -trained
species.
d. Gullies, landslides and eroded areas may be installed with closely planted deep- rooted orroot-trained trees.
7. Carbon sequestration
The carbon sequestration capacities of the NGP plantations in Sta. Cruz, Zambales are shown in
the following sections. Table 43 shows the present carbon sequestration capacities of the threesites.
Table 43. Carbon Sequestration of NGP Sites at Assessment Period, Sta. Cruz, Zambales.

Indicator
Diameter( cm)
Total Height (m)Bole Height (m)Volume/Tree(Cum/tree)
Crown Volume(Cum/tree)
Root Volume(Cum/tree)
Total Biomass(Cum/tree)
Wood Density(Ton/tree)
Carbon Sequestration(Tons/tree)
Carbon Sequestration(Tons/ha)Total Sequestration(Ton/Total Site Area)

99-ha NGP Site,
GuinabonDensity
Quantity
1.00671.31290.9847150-ha NGP Site,
BabuyanDensity
Quantity
1.17471.4746
1.1059131-ha NGP-BFISite in Bononton
Density
Quantity
0.89241.29090.96820.00080.00140.00260.00010.00020.00040.00010.00020.00030.00100.00180.00330.00070.00120.00230.00020.00040.0007440.900.0925435.880.1613450.7

0.315343650.00

9.158565383.00

24.198259045.0

41.3062

a. Potential carbon sequestration of the 99-ha NGP plantation
The potential carbon sequestration capacity of the 99-ha NGP plantation is shown in Table 44.
The potential stumpage of the area is used. The crown volume is estimated at 15% of the total
volume and the root volume is 13% of the total volume. These three factors are added to derive
129the total biomass in volume. To get the wood density, a factor of .7 ton per cum of wood is used
to convert the volume from cum to ton. To derive the carbon sequestered, a factor of 0.35 carbon
per ton of wood is used. This factor is for softwood species. The last two columns of the table
present the carbon sequestration (total and per hectare) for a given year. The carbon values arevery low due to the many small trees resulting from the series of replanting.
Table 44. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the Dominant Trees in 99-Ha NGP Plantation.

Age
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Bole
Average
HT
DIA
0.91
1.66
1.82
3.31
2.73
4.97
3.64
6.63
4.55
8.28
5.46
9.94
6.37
11.60
7.28
13.25
8.19
14.91
9.10
16.57
10.01
18.23
10.92
19.88
11.83
21.54
12.74
23.20
13.65
24.85
14.56
26.51
15.47
28.17
16.38
29.82
17.29
31.48
18.20
33.14
19.11
34.79
20.02
36.45
20.93
38.11
21.84
39.76
22.75
41.42
23.66
43.08
24.57
44.73
25.48
46.39

Total
Trees
413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00413.00

Total
Vol
0.08
0.65
2.19
5.19
10.13
17.50
27.79
41.48
59.07
81.02
107.84140.01178.01222.33273.45331.87398.07472.53555.74648.18750.36862.73985.811120.06
1265.991424.06
1594.78
1778.62130

AnnualTotal
Carbon Carbon
Total
Biomass Seques
Seq
Biomass Density tration
Rate
0.10
0.07
0.03
0.83
0.58
0.20
0.18
2.80
1.96
0.69
0.48
6.64
4.65
1.63
0.94
12.96
9.07
3.18
1.55
22.40
15.68
5.49
2.31
35.57
24.90
8.72
3.23
53.10
37.17
13.01
4.29
75.60
52.92
18.52
5.51
103.71
72.60
25.41
6.89
138.04
96.63
33.82
8.41
179.21125.4543.91
10.09
227.85159.4955.82
11.92
284.58199.2169.72
13.90
350.02245.0185.75
16.03
424.79297.36 104.07
18.32
509.53356.67 124.83
20.76
604.83423.38 148.18
23.35
711.34497.94 174.28
26.09
829.68580.77 203.27
28.99
960.45672.32 235.31
32.04
1104.30
773.01 270.55
35.24
1261.83
883.28 309.15
38.60
1433.68 1003.58 351.25
42.10
1620.46 1134.32 397.01
45.76
1822.80 1275.96 446.59
49.57
2041.32 1428.92 500.12
53.54
2276.63 1593.64 557.78
57.65

29
30

26.39
27.30

48.05
49.71

413.00413.001976.072187.622529.372800.161770.56
1960.11619.70686.04

61.92
66.34

b. Potential carbon sequestration of the co-dominant trees
There are 5,195 co-dominant trees in the 99-ha NGP plantation. Using the same assumptions as in Table
44, their potential carbon sequestration at any given time is presented in Table 45.

Table 45. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the Co-Dominant Trees in the 99-Ha, NGP
Plantation.

Age
(Yr)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Bole
Average
Tot alHT
DIA
Trees
Volume
0.35
0.38
5195
0.02
0.70
0.76
5195
0.17
1.05
1.15
5195
0.56
1.41
1.53
5195
1.34
1.76
1.91
5195
2.61
2.11
2.29
5195
4.52
2.46
2.67
5195
7.17
2.81
3.06
5195
10.71
3.16
3.44
5195
15.25
3.51
3.82
5195
20.92
3.87
4.20
5195
27.84
4.22
4.58
5195
36.14
4.57
4.96
5195
45.95
4.92
5.35
5195
57.40
5.27
5.73
5195
70.59
5.62
6.11
5195
85.68
5.98
6.49
5195 102.76
6.33
6.87
5195 121.99
6.68
7.26
5195 143.47
7.03
7.64
5195 167.33
7.38
8.02
5195 193.71
7.73
8.40
5195 222.72
8.08
8.78
5195 254.49
8.44
9.17
5195 289.15
8.79
9.55
5195 326.82
131

Total
Total
Biomass Biomass
Volume Density
0.02
0.02
0.20
0.14
0.66
0.46
1.57
1.10
3.06
2.14
5.28
3.70
8.39
5.87
12.52
8.77
17.83
12.48
24.46
17.12
32.56
22.79
42.27
29.59
53.74
37.62
67.12
46.99
82.56
57.79
100.2070.14
120.1884.13
142.6699.86
167.79117.45
195.70136.99226.54158.58260.47182.33297.63208.34338.16236.72382.22267.55

AnnualCarbonCarbon Seq
Seq
Rate
0.01
0.05
0.04
0.16
0.11
0.38
0.22
0.75
0.37
1.29
0.55
2.06
0.76
3.07
1.01
4.37
1.30
5.99
1.62
7.98
1.98
10.36
2.38
13.17
2.81
16.45
3.28
20.23
3.78
24.55
4.32
29.44
4.90
34.95
5.51
41.11
6.16
47.95
6.84
55.50
7.56
63.82
8.31
72.92
9.10
82.85
9.93
93.64
10.79

26
27
28
29
30

9.14
9.49
9.84
10.19
10.54

9.93
10.31
10.69
11.08
11.46

5195
5195
5195
5195
5195

367.63411.70459.16510.14564.75429.95481.49536.99596.61660.48300.96337.04375.90417.63462.33105.34117.96131.56146.17161.82

11.69
12.63
13.60
14.61
15.65

c. Potential carbon sequestration of the 3rd layer
Grasses sequester carbon so with small trees and seedlings. In the 99-ha NGP plantations there
are 42,512 small seedlings and saplings. While growing, they also sequester carbon probably
similar to those in the first and second layer assuming that survival rate will be maintained within
the growing period. The projected carbon sequestration of the 42,512 seedlings or saplings will
increase as they grow from year 1 to year 30 (Table 46).
Comparing the carbon sequestration on a per hectare basis with forest plantations in Luzonshows that the estimate in year 30 is only 3.82 tons per hectare (369.38 tons/42,512 plants * (500plants per hectare * 88% survival rate) whereas a similar 9-year old A. auriculiformis
reforestation projects had 19.1 to 20.7 tons per hectare in Nueva Ecija (Lasco and Pulhin, 1999).
Table 46. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the 3rd Canopy Layer of the 99-Ha NGP site.

Age
(Yr)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Bole
Average
Height
Dia
0.36
0.21
0.71
0.41
1.07
0.62
1.43
0.83
1.78
1.03
2.14
1.24
2.50
1.45
2.85
1.65
3.21
1.86
3.56
2.07
3.92
2.27
4.28
2.48
4.63
2.69
4.99
2.90
5.35
3.10

Total
Total
Trees Volume
42512
0.05
42512
0.41
42512
1.37
42512
3.26
42512
6.36
42512
10.99
42512
17.46
42512
26.06
42512
37.10
42512
50.90
42512
67.74
42512
87.95
42512 111.82
42512 139.66
42512 171.77
132

Total
Total
Biomass Biomass
Volume Density
0.07
0.05
0.52
0.36
1.76
1.23
4.17
2.92
8.14
5.70
14.07
9.85
22.35
15.64
33.36
23.35
47.49
33.24
65.15
45.60
86.71
60.70
112.5778.80
143.13100.19178.76125.13219.87153.91

AnnualCarbonCarbon
Seq.
Seq.
Rate
0.01
0.11
0.10
0.37
0.26
0.88
0.51
1.71
0.83
2.96
1.24
4.69
1.74
7.00
2.31
9.97
2.97
13.68
3.71
18.21
4.53
23.64
5.43
30.06
6.42
37.54
7.48
46.17
8.63

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

5.70
6.06
6.42
6.77
7.13
7.49
7.84
8.20
8.56
8.91
9.27
9.62
9.98
10.34
10.69

3.31
3.52
3.72
3.93
4.14
4.34
4.55
4.76
4.96
5.17
5.38
5.58
5.79
6.00
6.20

42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512
42512

208.47250.05296.83349.10407.17471.35541.94619.26703.59795.25894.551001.79
1117.28
1241.311374.20266.84320.07379.94446.84521.18603.33693.69792.65900.601017.931145.03
1282.291430.111588.881758.98

186.79224.05265.96312.79364.82422.33
485.58554.85630.42712.55801.52897.611001.081112.211231.28

56.04
67.21
79.79
93.84
109.45126.70145.67166.46189.13213.76240.46269.28300.32333.66369.38

9.86
11.18
12.57
14.05
15.61
17.25
18.98
20.78
22.67
24.64
26.69
28.83
31.04
33.34
35.72

d. Carbon sequestration of Babuyan and Binonton NGP sites
The Babuyan and the Binonton NGP sites are still young (2 years and 1 year old) to estimate
their potential carbon capture capacities. If their survival rates will be maintained up to the 15year, their carbon sequestration rates would be quite higher than the 99-ha NGP plantations due
to higher survival rates. This is so because, they have the same species, same site quality andsame management system under the CENRO.
5. Impact to wildlife
Listed below are fauna spotted or observed by local residents in the area. Most of fauna species
are birds. According to the respondents there are more birds, followed by reptiles and thenmammals. Philippine Eagle has been spotted in the mountains close to the NGP sites. The morefauna in the NGP sites the faster would be the dispersal of seeds of indigenous forest species.
Thus, increasing the biodiversity of the area.
CLASS
Avifauna
Avifauna
Avifauna
Avifauna
Avifauna
Avifauna
Avifauna

FAMILYAccipitridae
AnatidaeBucerotidae
Bucerotidae
Columbidae
Columbidae
Estrildidae

SCIENTIFIC NAME
Pithecophaga jefferyi
Turnix ocellatus
Buceros hydrocorax
Penelopides manillae
Chalcophaps indica
Treron axillaris
Lonchura oryzivora
133

COMMON NAME
Philippine Eagle
Spotted Button Quail
Rufous Hornbill
Tarictic Hornbill
Emerald DoveGreen Pigeon
Java Sparrow

LOCAL NAME
kali
pugo
kalaw
kanaway
alimukingpagaobilit tsina

AvifaunaHalcyonidae

Alcedo cyanopectus

Avifauna
Avifauna

Hirundinidae
Monarchidae

Hirundo rustica
Hypothymis azurea

Avifauna

Picidae

Picoides maculatus

Avifauna
Avifauna
Avifauna
Avifauna
Mammals
Mammals
Mammals
Mammals

Psittaculidae
Rhipiduridae
Tytonidae
Upupidae
Hipposideridae
Muridae
Muridae
MuridaeTanygnathus lucionensis
Rhipidura nigritorquis
Tyto sp.
Upupa epops
Hipposideros diadema
Rattus house rat
Rattus exulans
Rattus tanesumi

Mammals

Pteropodidae

Cynopterus brachyotis

ReptilesColubridae

Ahaetulla prasina

ReptilesReptilesReptilesReptilesReptilesReptilesReptilesReptilesReptilesReptilesColubridae
Colubridae
Crotalidae
Dicroglossidae
Gekkonidae
Microhylidae
Rhacophoridae
Rhacophoridae
Scincidae
Varanidae

Boiga dendrophila
Dendrelaphis pictus
Tropidolaemus wagleri
Occidozyga laevis
Gecko monarchus
Kaoula baleata
Polypedates macrotis
Nyctixalus pictus
Dasia grisea
Varanussalvator

Indigo-Banded
Kingfisher
Barn Swallow
Black Naped MonarchPhilippine Pygmy
Woodpecker
Blue Naped Parrot
Pied Fantail
Grass Owl
HoopoeRoundleaf Bat
Asian House Rat
Polynesian Rat
Asian House Rat
Common Shortnosed
Fruit Bat
Asian Vine Snake,
Oriental Whipsnake
Mangrove Snake
Painted Bronzeback
Wagler's Pit Viper
Puddle Frog
Spotted House Gecko
Smooth Fingered
Brown-Striped Tree FrogPeter's Tree Frog
Brown Tree Skink
Monitor Lizard

salaksaksalsalapingaw
bilit-tulingsawsawit/anluage
bulilisinglawlawigan
sagangbalog
kurarapnit
bao
utot
utot/marabutit
panikibartinkarasaen
ulig/manukak
barten
tukak
tika
pilat
pilat
tukak saba
banyasalebot/alibot

3. Dinagat NGP Sites
1. Survey, Mapping and Planning
Although the conduct of SMP is one of the requirements of NGP implementation, it was notconsidered due to lack of time and budget to cover a detailed survey. It focused on GPS
boundary survey and GIS mapping. It did not conduct soil survey and analysis, vegetation
survey, DRR survey and species-site matching. Forest species recommended for planting werebased on existing forest cover in the area and through the recommendation of the Ecosystems

134

Research and Development Bureau. There were no indication that alternative species evaluation
was conducted to find out those that best survived in the area.
2. Capability building
According to the respondents, they were trained on planting and protection and maintenanceactivities for 1 day each topic by technical staffs of the DENR in 2011, 2012 and 2014. Details of
the training are shown in Table 47.

Table 47. Training Provided to the Planters in the NGP Site.
.
1.
Before the start of implementing the NGP activities in thereforestation area, were there trainings conducted to re-orient thecontractors or workers on the establishment, protection, maintenance andother reforestation activities?

Title ofTrainings

Year

Number ofdays ofAttendeetraining withdemonstration

On-thegroundtraining
Planting

Resource Persons

DENR Personnel
2012

Maintenance 20112014
andProtection

30-64
pax

1

30 pax1

Foresters/Agroforestry
Specialist
Foresters/Agroforestry
Specialist

The respondents commented that due to the many attendees, a 1 day training for planting is not
sufficient if all the steps in how to properly plant seedlings were discussed and demonstrated.
Similarly the training on protection and maintenance which covers several activities wasinadequate. To benefit those that were not involved in the first training, a 4-day re-echo training
was conducted by the leaders that were trained by the DENR. The details of the training aredescribed in Table 48.

135

Table 48. Re-echo Training Conducted by PO Leaders.

2.
Were the workers trained by their officers on the same
subject matters taught to them during their trainings?

Title oftraining

Approach oftraining

Attendee andtheir functionsin the NGP

orientation anddemonstration

60 paxplanters

Site
Preparation

orientation anddemonstration

60 paxwprkers
assigned insite
preparation

Seedling
production

orientation anddemonstration

60 pax nursery
operationorientation anddemonstration

60 paxworkers
assigned inprotection andmaintenance

Planting

Maintenanceand Protection

Remark
The training
wasconducted
in one day
only,
The training
wasconducted
in one day
only
The training
wasconducted
in one day
only
The training
wasconducted
in one day
only

To validate the skills learned by the workers in planting and protection and maintenance, they
were asked to rate how they performed in actual implementation of the reforestation activities.
Their answers are summarized in Table 49.
Table 49. Self Evaluation Rating of Respondents’ Performance in the
Conduct of Reforestation Activities.
How did the trained workers demonstrate their learning in the
training?
(whether skills gained were applied in the actual conduct of NGP
136

activities)
Respondents’ Assessment
Not all activities, only about 80100% were conductedaccording to what were taught
in the training.
Poorly undertaken, lower than
50% of the skills gained were
implemented due to difficultyof work environment in thereforestation site.
More than 80%, but notexceeding 90%, of the planting
activities were thoroughly
carried out. There wereactivities conducted without
following required procedures.
Compliance to required
activities is between 80-90%
due lack of supervision.

Reforestation Activity

Nursery operations or seedlings
production

Site preparation

Planting

Protection and maintenance

3. Plantation quality assurance
According to the KII respondents, the Extension Officers of the PENRO conducted evaluation of
the quality of the seedlings produced by the workers and the acceptance ratings range from 80 to
90% of the seedlings conformed to the prescribed minimum standards. Some workers were givenhigh quality ratings of their seedlings produced from 95-100%.
Likewise, they also inspected the qualities of the other reforestation activity outputs whether
these are consistent with the prescribed standards of the NGP.
However, there is no system implemented by the DENR that will ensure the quality of the NGP
plantations except those regular validation activities of survival for billing purposes.
4. Seedling production
All seedling requirements for planting in the NGP sites are being grown in the PENRO nursery.
According to the PENRO this is necessary to maintain the quality of the seedlings because they
have the technical background and experience in seedling production. All seedlings for
replanting were grown by the NGP-partners or contractors. The sources of planting materials are137

from seeds and wildlings. The seeds and wildlings collected were from the following indigenous
species: Nato (Palaqium luzoniense), Saguimsim (Syzgium brevistylum), Mountain Agoho(Casuarina equisetifolia) , Kalumpit (Terminalia microcarpa), Tiga, Mangkono (Xanthostemon
verdugonianus), Narra (Pterocarpus indicus), Molave (Vitex parviflora), Agoho (Casuarina
equisetifolia), Yakal, Red Lauan (Shorea negrosensis), Wakatan, Mangium (Acacia mangium),
White Bitanghol (Callophyllum blancoi), Siguimsim sibat, Talisay (Terminalia catappa),
Marang (Artocarpus odoratissimus), Kulipapa (Vitex quinata). Table 50 shows the assignmentsof the NGP-partners and the PENRO in raising the required seedlings for the NGP reforestationsites.
Table 50. Sources of Planting Materials in Dinagat.
NGP

NON-NGP

Sources of Seedlings
From seeds collected by respondents for replanting

About
50%

From wildlings collected by respondents for replanting

About
50%

From wildings collected by respondents for planting

About
100%

Procurement from private nurseries (wildlings, seeds
collected by private nurseries) for planting in NGP sites

About50100%PENRO nurseries for species to be planted in NGP sites

About
100%

The growing periods of the indigenous species raised in the nurseries according to the
respondents are shown in Table 51. Wildlings collected are conditioned in the nurseries to have
new roots before planting. The minimum numbers of months to condition the wildlings areprovided in the table. Plant materials from seeds of indigenous species require relatively longer
periods to prepare the seedlings to attain the desired qualities for planting in the reforestationsites.
Table 51. Growing Periods of the Indigenous Species in the Nurseries before Outplanting.
How many months did you take care of the seedlings in the nursery up to138Outplanting in the NGP reforestation sites?
Indigenous Species

NGP Site

Non-NGP
Site

Covered Activity

Nato

3 months-

Conditioning wildlings

Saguimsim

6 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Mountain Agoho

2 months-

Conditioning wildlings

Kulitapa

12 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Kalumpit

7 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Tiga

6 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Mangkono

12-24 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Narra

3 months-

Molave7 -12 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Agoho

5 to 12 months

3 months

Seed germination to hardening

Yakal

9 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Red Lauan

12 months-

Seed germination to hardening

Wakatan-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Mangium-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

White Bitanghol-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Mangkono-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Saguimsim-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Saguimsim sibat-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Talisay-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Marang-3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Kulipapa-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

Bitanghol-

3 months

Conditioning of wildlings

139

Dinagat also contributed to the Treevolution actvity of DENR in Mindanao part. They aimed toplant within one hour at least more than a million, to beat the record of India in planting morethan 1 millon in one day. However, while many participated, the quality of the plantings resulted
to survival rates close to the minimum requirement of 85%.
5. Site preparation
In clearing the area to be planted, the most common method is strip or contour brushing. Thiswas conducted by the PENRO workers and technical staff following the common size of strip
with a width of 1 m and in every spot, cleaned around a 0.5 m radius.
Strip brushing starts during the dry season or during the rainy season simultaneously withplanting. The holes are prepared with a size similar to that of the plastic bag or sometimes
bigger. This is also true in the Non-NGP sites.
6. Planting
Planting is done by volunteers as part of the social mobilization of NGP in Dinagat during therainy season. Instructions in the proper planting of the seedlings were given to the volunteers
before planting using the best practices learned from DENR’s past reforestation projects. To
maintain good growth of the planted seedlings, vermicast fertilizer was applied.
In the case of the Non-NGP sites, the application of vermicast, compost and urea is practiced.
However, this did not result to significantly higher survival rates as most of the non-ngp
plantations have lower survival rates compared to the 85%.
After planting the seedlings, stakes produced from Ipil-ipil and bugang poles (1 m. Height) wereplaced beside the seedlings.
Seedlings that were planted in the NGP sites possess the prescribed qualities shown in Table 52.

Table 52. Qualities of Seedlings Suitable for Planting.

What were the qualities of the seedlings that were
hauled to planting sites?
Ht of
Seedlings

140

Diameter ofSeedlings

Number of
Leaves ofSpecies(inches)(cm)

Seedlings

NGP
Site

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

Nato

8 to 9-0.3-

5 to 7 -Saguimsim

3 to 5

-

0.3

-

8 to
10

MountainAgoho

5 to 6-0.6-

2 to 3 -Kulitapa

5 to 7

-

0.3

-

10 to
12

-

Kalumpit

5 to 7

-

0.3

-

15 to
20

-

Tiga

5 to 7

-

0.3

-

8 to
10

-

Mangkono

3 to 5

-

0.3

-

8 to
10

-

Narra

5 to 7

10 to
12

0.55

0.8

15 to
17

15 to 20

Molave6 to 7-

0.8-

6 to 7 -Agoho

5 to 64 to 50.6

any

5 to 6 no idea

Yakal

3 to 5-0.3-

5 to 7 -Red Lauan

5 to 7-0.8-

5 to 8 -Wakatan

-

5 to
10

-

0.3

-

7 to 15

Mangium-

4 to 5-0.3-

4 to 10

White
Bitanghol

-

10 to
12

-

0.3

-

10 to 15

Mangkono

-

8 to
10

-

0.3

-

12 to 15141

NonNGP
Site-

Saguimsim

-

8 to
10

-

0.8

-

7 to 15

Saguimsim
sibat

-

10 to
12

-

0.5

-

10 to 15

Talisay

-

8 to
10

-

0.5

-

Kulipapa

-

10 to
15

-

0.8

-

8 to 10

Bitanghol

-

8 to
12

-

0.4

-

10 to 15

7. Protection and maintenanceMembers of religious organization operating in the area were hired to conduct protection andmaintenance activities including replanting. When asked on the protection and maintenanceactivities that they performed, they enumerated the activities with the descriptions of how they
conducted such activities in the field (Table 53). They have no way of determining whether theactivities were effective or not because there were no monitoring done. They can only validate
the effectiveness of the activities if these are provided with fundings.

Table 53. Protection and Maintenance Activities Conducted by the Workers.

Activity
Ring weeding

NGP and Non-NGP Respondents
Workers' Description
Cutting of grasses and weeds around the planted seedlings.
Grass roots were not extracted on site.
Frequency of ring weeding depends on the budgeted scheduleregardless of the thickness of weeds/grasses.

Fertilizer
application
Fireline/firebreakApplied one teaspoon full of complete fertilizer to seedlings
with signs of nutrients deficiency.
Removal of a strip of grasses to reduce the volume of dried142construction

matter that may serve as fuel during forest fires.

Replanting

It is also designed to cut the flow of fire by removing thegrasses.
Planting seedlings on the spots of dead seedlings.

Watering

Done during dry season to provide moisture to seedlings inorder to survive.
Difficult to implement because water source is located below
the planated area and one has to hike a longer distance.

IEC

House to house campaign informing households theimportance of the forest and the need to protect it from forest
fires.

Patrolling
Making the workers visible in the planted area to inspect thecondition of and to know what is going on in the plantation.

a. Threats to NGP plantations
According to the respondents, there are some threats to the NGP plantations that they have toprepare for. These are only two most critical threats:
1. Grass fire or forest fire
2. Fuelwood cutting and gathering
3. Shifting cultivation
4. Drought, high temperature, prolonged dry season, and El Nino.
When asked on how they responded to these, they used information and education campaign incommunities requesting the households not to throw lighted materials or conduct slash and burnnear the NGP sites to prevent forest fire; and conduct of regular foot patrol to spot, deter and put
off forest fires. These activities are being implemented by the workers under the guidance of theextension officers of the PENRO.
In the case of fuelwood cutting and gathering and shifting cultivation, the workers claimed thatthey have no other alternative livelihood and they are forced to do it because they have to earn aliving. If DENR will provide them sustainable work in reforestation, they will voluntarily stopthese illegal practices.

143

To lessen the impact of drought, high temperature, El Nino, the workers used the ferns bybending their leaves as live mulch. They said that cutting the ferns’ leaves add to dry matter that
may add fuel to forest fires.
b. Respondents’ estimates of survival rates in the NGP and Non-NGP sites
According to the respondents, they did a good job in maintaining the NGP sites assigned to themfor protection and maintenance. Thus, on a per species basis, the survival rates that they canremember are summarized in Table 54.
Table 54. Survival Rates of NGPO Plantations before Replanting.

During the last inspection that you conducted, what NGP SITE
was the survival rate of the planted NGP site before
replanting?

NONNGP
SITE

Narra

80%

100%

Nato

80%

-

Saguimsim

80%

100%

Bagutambis

80%-

Mangkono

80%

97.50
%

Mangga-97.50%

Sudiang

-

100%

Agoho

-

80%

Acacia-80%

Bitanghol-

80%

Dayuk-dayuk

-

100%

c. Suggestions of the respondents to maintain high survival rate
The respondents suggested to increase the budget for planting, protection and maintenance toinclude forest officers and bantay gubat that will assist them in protecting the NGP plantations
from forest or grass fires and to continue monitoring the condition of the reforested areas.
Accordingly, indigenous forest species that were planted are too sensitive to sunlight and theyshould be provided with shades while still seedlings because they easily get stressed. Thus, to144

improve their survival rates, intensive care of every seedling should be practiced during the dry
season up to the time that they have already survived and acclimatized in the reforestation area.
This is usually 3 to 4 years old depending on the species.
8. NGP and Non-NGP sites in Dinagat
The NGP reforestation projects that were assessed and evaluated are:
1. NGP site in Brgy. Diegas, Basilisa with 80 hectares area planted with indigenous forest
species
Description of the Area: Area is dominated by Agsam (ferns), ferns are usually used as
mulch to the seedlings. Seedlings are usually small. Soil is Ultramafic: brown to reddish
in color, granulated to fine texture. Strips of forest area can be found inside the area
(dominated of Mangkono (X. verdugonianus), Sili-sili, and Sagimsim (S.brevistylum),).
Seedlings are planted along the contour. The area was planted with the following species:
Sagimsim (S.brevistylum), Nato (P. luzoniense), and Mangkono (X. verdugonianus). The
slope is generally rolling to sloping.
Area Planted: 80 hectares
Date of Planting: 2013
Date of Replanting: No record
The species planted in this NGP site are shown in Table 55:
Table 55. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 80-Ha NGP Site.
Common Name

Scientific Name

Bahai

Ormosia calavensis

Mangkono

Xantosthemon verdugonianus

Nato

Palaqium luzoniense

Sagimsim

Syzgium brevistylum

Sili-sili*

2. NGP site in Brgy Diegas and Geotina, Basilisa with 66 hectares area planted withindigenous forest species
Description of the Area: Area is dominated by Agsam (ferns), ferns are usually used as
mulch to the seedlings. Seedlings are usually small. Soil is Ultramafic: brown to reddish145

in color, granulated soil texture. Seedlings are planted along the countour. Area isrelatively steep and very prone to erosion.
Area Planted: 66 hectares
Date of Planting: 2014
Progeny record: None
The species planted in this NGP site are shown in Table 56:

Table 56. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 66-Ha. NGP Site.
CommonName
Agoho

Scientific Name
Casuarina
equisetifolia
Albizia acle
Colona serratifolia
Melia dubia
Melia dubia
Parashorea
malaanonan
Diplodiscus
paniculatus
Calophyllum blancoi
Calophyllum
inophyllum

Akle
AnilauBagalunga
Bagon
Bagtikan
BaloboBitanghol
Bitaog
BilayanDalingdingan
Guijo
Hauili
Iga
Kalantas
Malatapai
Narra
Nato
Panau

Hope foxworthyi
Shorea guiso
Ficus septica
Toona calantas
Alangium longiflorum
Pterocarpus indicus
Palaqium luzoniense
Dipterocarpus
gracilisSyzgium brevistylum
Hopea plagata

Sagimsim
Saplungan146

Subiang
TalutoBridelia insulana
Pterocymbium
tinctorium
Sterculia crassiramea
Bischofia javanica
Shorea astylosa

Tapinag
Tuai
Yakal

3. NGP site in Brgy. Diegas with 44 hectares area planted with indigenous forest species.
Description of the Area: The area is part of the "TREEVOLUTION PROGRAM" ofthe PENRO, plants are not properly spaced on the strip, but the dsitance between strips isrelatively uniform. According to the guide that we have the area is a site for small scale
mining of chromite particularlly on the top of the mountain, and it is obvously eroded.
Generally the area is rolling to steep slope. Grasses like cogon and talahib are alsopresent in the area.
Area planted: 44 hectares
Date of Planting: 2014
Progeny Record: None
The species planted in this NGP site are shown in Table 57.
Table 57. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 44-Ha. NGP Site.
Common Name

Scientific Name

Agoho

Casuarina equisetifolia

Akle

Albizia acle

Bagalunga

Melia dubia

Bagtikan

Parashorea malaanonan

Bahai

Ormosia calavensis

BaloboDiplodiscus paniculatus

Banai-banai

Rodermachera pinnata

Bitanghol

Calophyllum blancoi

BitaogCalophyllum blancoi

Dalingdingan

Hopea foxworthyi147

GuijoShorea guiso

HauiliFicus septica

Iga
Kalantas

Toona calantas

Malatapai

Alangium longiflorum

ManggaMangifera indica

Mangkono

Xanthostemon verdugonianus

Panau

Dipterocarpus gracilis

Sagimsim

Syzgium brevistylum

Sili-sili*
Subiang

Bridelia insulana

TalutoPterocymbium tinctorium

TapinagSterculia crassiramea

Tuai

Bischofia javanica

Yakal

Shorea astylosa

The Non-NGP sites are reforestation projects of the mining companies in Dinagat province
1. Mining reforestation areas in Brgy. Bayanihan, Libjo, Dinagat – 54 hectares planted withindigenous forest species. The species planted are shown in Table 58:
Table 58.Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the 45 Ha. Non-NGP Site.
Common Name

Scientific Name

Agoho

Casuarina equisetifolia

Akle

Albizia acle

Bagalunga

Melia dubia

Bagon
Bagtikan

Parashorea malaanonan

148

Bahai

Ormosia calavensis

BaloboDiplodiscus paniculatus

Banai-banai

Rodermachera pinnata

Bitanghol

Calophyllum blancoi

BitaogCalophyllum blancoi

BilayanDalingdingan

Hopea foxworthyi

Guijo

Shorea guiso

HauiliFicus septica

Iga
Kalantas

Toona calantas

Malatapai

Alangium longiflorum

ManggaMangifera indica

Mangkono

Xanthostemon
verdugonianus

Panau

Dipterocarpus gracilis

Sagimsim

Syzgium brevistylum

Sili-sili*
Subiang

Bridelia insulana

TalutoPterocymbium tinctorium

TapinagSterculia crassiramea

Tuai

Bischofia javanica

Yakal

Shorea astylosa

2. CMC Reforestation area – several sites with an aggregate area of 142.36 hectares plantedwith indigenous species shown in Table 59.

149

Table 59. Indigenous Forest Species Planted in the
Non-NGP CMC Reforestation Projects.
Common Name

Scientific Name

Agoho

Casuarina equisetifolia

Akle

Albizia acle

Bagalunga

Melia dubia

Bagtikan

Parashorea malaanonan

Bahai

Ormosia calavensis

BaloboDiplodiscus paniculatus

Banai-banai

Rodermachera pinnata

Bitanghol

Calophyllum blancoi

BitaogCalophyllum blancoi

BilayanDalingdingan

Hopea foxworthyi

Guijo

Shorea guiso

HauiliFicus septica

Iga
Kalantas

Toona calantas

Malatapai

Alangium longiflorum

ManggaMangifera indica

Mangkono

Xanthostemon verdugonianus

Panau

Dipterocarpus gracilis

Sagimsim

Syzgium brevistylum

Sili-sili*
Subiang

Bridelia insulana

TalutoPterocymbium tinctorium

150

TapinagSterculia crassiramea

Tuai

Bischofia javanica

Yakal

Shorea astylosa

9. Survival Rates of the NGP Forest Plantations
9.1.

NGP Site-80 hectares

1. Survival rates using DENR formula
The PENRO did a bold step in using indigenous forest species in the NGP reforestation areas inDinagat province even without an adequate knowledge on the specific cultural requirements of
the individual species. Their experience will pave the way for the use of indigenous forest
species andimplementation of the reforestation practices degraded forestlands whereindigenous forest species are preferred in biodiversity areas in the country. Their performance
will be watched by those engage in similar projects.
For the 80 hectares, the survival rates (SR) using the DENR formula are shown in the Table 60.
Table 60. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, 80-Ha. Basilisa, 2015.
Accounting Entry
Title
Seedling Opening
Stock

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0

0

40000

40000

Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock

0

10313

21877

0

29687

18123

0

10313

21877

0

40000

40000

Survival Rate

0

74.22

45.31

40000
5702
34298
0
34298
85.75

Note: Since there were no records on mortality in 2013 and 2014, this study used thenumber of seedlings with a height range of 0.31 to 0.6cm as the total mortality andreplanted in 2014.

151

2. Survival rates using the IST Formula
Using the same data in Table 60 but using the IST formula in computing for the survival rates,
the results are shown in Table 61. The survival rates are way below the survival rates calculatedusing the DENR formula. This means that from the point of view of efficiency, there is sufficientroom for the project to attain efficiency by trying its best to identify what went wrong in thereforestation process and correct this. It is best to work on the original seedling density by
maximizing survival rather through proper site assessment and evaluation, feasibility study ofdesign options, planning, care and protection and maintenance rather than continuing replanting.
Table 61. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 80-Ha. Basilisa, 2015.
Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening
Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0

Survival Rate

0
0

40000
10313

40000
21877

0

29687

18123

0

10313

21877

0

40000

40000

0

59.00

25.10

40000
5702
34298
0
34298
55.43

Comparing the survival rate standard prescribed by DENR for indigenous forest species, thedinagat survival rates are higher than the survival rates of dipterocarp species in Kalimantan,
Indonesia. This could be due to the continuous replanting in NGP sites. Huss and Sutisna (2003)
studied the survival rates of diptetocarp seedlings. The species studied were Hopea mengarawan
with a survival rate of 19%, Shorea leprosula (14%), Shorea ovalis (15%), Shorea johorenis(5%), Shorea smithiana (12%), and Dipterocarpus conutus (25%) from germinated seedlings141.
Widiyanto, et al (2014) studied the survival of early performance of 23
dipterocarp species planted in logged-over rainforest. Out of the 23 species, seven species
141

Jurgen Huss and Maman Sutisna. Conversion of Exploited Natural Dipterocarps into Semi-Natural Production
Forest. Restoration of Tropical Forest Ecosystems: Proceedings of ... Helmut Lieth, M. Lohmann - 2013 Technology & Engineering Support of natural Dipterocarp regeneration by soil
preparationhttps://books.google.com.ph/books?isbn=9401728968.

152

showed high survival rates (71 to 85%), nine species moderate (50 to 70%) and seven species
low (38 to 48%).142 Based on these literatures, it is necessary to rethink the minimum survival
rates for indigenous forest species.

9.2.

NGP Site- 66 hectares

1. Survival rates using DENR formula
The survival rates are shown in Table 62. For 2014 the survival rate is 46% and 88% in 2015. To
save on replanting, the DENR field offices may assess and evaluate where they missed some
important activities that should have been carried out to minimize mortality. Knowing this would
lead to the identification and implementation of corrective measures. Instead of spending somuch on replacement of mortality, the amount to be spent is better used to maintain the original
seedling density by knowing and implementing what are necessary to be done.
Table 62. Survival Rates Using the DENR Formula, 66-Ha. Basilisa, 2015.
Accounting Entry
Title
2011
Seedling Opening
Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock
Survival Rate

Reforestation Management Period
2012
2013
2014
2015

0

0
0

0
0

33000
17810

33000
3905

0

0

15190

29095

0

0

17810

0

0
0

0

33000
46.03

29095
88.17

Note: Since there were no records on mortality in 2013 and 2014, this study used thenumber of seedlings with a height range of 0.31 to 0.6cm as replanted in 2014 .

142

Widiyatno et al. 2014. Early Performance Of 23 Dipterocarp Species Planted In Logged-Over Rainforest Journalof Tropical Forest Science 26(2): 259–266 (2014)153

2. Survival rate using the IST formula
Using the same data in Table 63, the calculated survival rates using the IST formula are shown in
Table 63. To improve the SR, it is necessary to reduce the levels of the annual replanting by
being effective in maintaining the original number of seedlings planted by doing the right things
at the very start. This means that real data on the site characteristics should be known, use this to
identify the indigenous forest species that can be combined and grown, select only the species
where cultural technologies are already existing and proven to work effectively and efficiently,
evaluate the combinations to see whether these are technically and economically feasible, train
the NGP-partners so that they execute the right ways of doing reforestation activities, supervise
their work and check whether these are within standards or best practices benchmark, andregularly inspect the plantations 24/7 to protect by all means the investments.
Table 63. Survival Rates Using the IST Formula, 66-Ha. Basilisa, 2015
Accounting Entry
Title
Seedling Opening
Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock
Survival Rate

9.3.

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0

0
0

0
0

33000
17810

33000
3905

0

0

15190

29095

0

0

17810

0

0
0

0
0

33000
25.09

29095
57.26

NGP Site- 44 hectares

1. Survival rates using the DENR formula
The SRs are shown in Table 64. This NGP site meets the minimum required survival rate. The
same observation with the other sites holds through in this NGP site. Also, the same suggestions
for improving survival rate are reiterated.
Table 64. Survival Rates Using the DENR Formula, 44-Ha, Basilisa, 2015.
Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
27000
0
0
0
27000
154

StockMortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock

0

0

13644

0

0

13356

0

0

13644

0

0

27000

Survival Rate

0

0

49.47

3901
23099
0
23099
85.55

Note: Since there was no record on mortality in 2014, this study used the number of
seedlings with a height range of 0.1 to 0.3 cm as the mortality and replanting in 2014.

2. Survival rates using IST formula
Using the IST formula results to the SRs in Table 65. The results are lower than that of the
DENR formula. This reduction in SR compared to the DENR formula is due to the annual
replanting to replace the mortality that is added to the original seedling density planted in the
NGP area. The annual replanting measures the inefficiency of reforestation management in thissite. Instead of making the original planted seedlings alive, reforestation management opted toreplant without any assurance of success in the following year since the site factors will still be
the same.
Table 65. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 44-Ha.Basilisa, Dinagat.

Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening
Stock

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0

0

0

27000

Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock Planted

0

0

13644

0

0

13356

0

0

13644

0

0

27000

Survival Rate

0

0

32.86

155

27000
3901
23099
0
23099
56.83

3. Weighted survival rates of NGP sites
The weighted averages of the 3 NGP sites using the DENR formula and IST formula wecomputed. The results are 86.54 using the DENR formula and 63.20 with the IST formula (Table
66).
Table 66. Weighted Survival Rates of NGP Sites Based on the DENR and IST.

NGP Site
80-ha
Basilisa
66-ha
Basilisa
44-ha
Basilisa
Sum

9.4.

Area

Simple Average
DENR
IST

Weighted Sum
DENR
IST

80

85.75

55.43

6860.00

4434.4

66

88.17

57.26

5819.223779.16

44
190

85.55

56.83

3764.2016443.42

2500.52
10714.08

Weighted
Average
DENR
IST

86.54

63.20

Non-NGP reforestation projects

1. Survival rates using DENR formula
The calculated survival rates of the Non-NGP sites mostly reforested by mining companies are
59% in 2013, 50% in 2014, and 70% in 2015 (Table 67). The total number of seedlings planted
and replanted is 51775. This is 191% of the original seedling density planted.
Table 67. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula of the 54 Ha. Non-NGP Sites, Dinagat.
Accounting Entry
Title
Seedling Opening
Stock

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0

0

Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting

0
0
0
156

27000

27000

27000

11171

13604

8027

15829

13396

18973

11171

13604

0

Seedling Closing stock0

Survival Rate

0

27000

27000

18973

58.63

49.61

70.27

Note: Since there were no records on mortality in 2013 and 2014, this study used thenumber of seedlings with a height range of 0.31 to 0.6cm as replanted in 2013 andthose with a height range of 0.1 to 0.3 cm as the mortality in 2014

2. Survival rates using IST formula
The calculated SRs are 41% in 2013, 26% in 2014 and 47% in 2015 (Table 68). The SRs arelower by 29.2% in 2013, 47.8% in 2014 and 33.5% in 2015 compared with the SRs calculated
through the DENR formula.
Table 68. Survival Rates Calculated Using the IST Formula,54-Ha. Non-NGP Site, Dinagat.
Accounting Entry
Title
Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Seedling Opening
27000
27000
27000
Stock
0
0
11171
13604
8027
Mortality (Reduction)
0
Net Surviving
15829
13396
18973
Seedling
0Additional Seedling or
11171
13604
0
Replanting0
Seedling Closing
27000
27000
18973
Stock
0
41.47
25.87
46.73
Survival Rate
0
3. Survival rates of other non-NGP sites
The survival rates of the non-NGP forest plantations in Dinagat are shown in Table 69.
Table 69. Survival Rates of Sampled CMC Areas, Dinagat.
CMC
Area
(Ha)
DENR
formula

54

11

10

34

10

6.5

6.2

6.8

2013
2014

58.63
49.61

58.63
49.61

78.98
87.51

47.93
48.61

75.54
48.34

98.00
95.83

72.33
46.41

72.00
51.09

157

3.5 Average

79.95
53.19

71.33
58.91

2015

70.27

70.27

74.66

71.64

69.81

83.13

75.08

75.21

69.76

73.31

IST
formula
2013
2014
2015

41.47
25.87
46.73

41.47
25.87
46.73

65.26
65.55
66.37

31.52
23.89
47.32

60.70
27.45
46.03

96.08
90.26
79.80

56.65
25.60
48.89

56.25
28.88
50.51

66.60
31.88
47.51

57.33
38.36
53.32

4. Weighted survival rate of non-NGP sites
The average survival rates (WSR) of the non-NGP sites were used in deriving the WSR in 2013,2014, and 2015. The results are indicated in Table 70. The 2015 WSR is higher than the WSR in2014 and 2013, which means that all the non-NGP sites have better protection and maintenanceactivities than the 2014 and 2013. Of the 3 years, 2014 has the lowest WSR, which indicates thatmortality is high and protection and maintenance did not perform well to reduce the mortality of
seedlings.
Table 70. Weighted Survival Rates of Non-NGP Sites.
Weighted Sum
2015
Area
54.0
11.0
10.0
34.0
10.0
6.5
6.2
6.8
3.5
142.0

DENR
70.27
70.27
74.66
71.64
69.81
83.13
75.08
75.21
69.76

IST
46.73
46.73
66.37
47.32
46.03
79.8
48.89
50.51
47.51

DENR
IST
3794.58 2523.42
772.97 514.03
746.60 663.70
2435.76 1608.88
698.10 460.30
540.35 518.70
465.50 303.12
511.43 343.47
244.16 166.29
10209.44 7101.90

WSR
DENR

IST

71.90

50.01

WSR
DENR

IST

Weighted Sum
2014
Area
54.0
11.0
10.0
34.0

DENR
49.61
49.61
87.51
48.61

IST
25.87
25.87
65.55
23.89

DENR
IST
2678.94 1396.98
545.71 284.57
875.10 655.50
1652.74 812.26
158

10.0
6.5
6.2
6.8
3.5
142.0

48.34
95.83
46.41
51.09
53.19

27.45
90.26
25.6
28.88
31.88

483.40 274.50
622.90 586.69
287.74 158.72
347.41 196.38
186.17 111.58
7680.10 4477.18

54.09

31.53

WSR
DENR

IST

62.26

46.61

Weighted Sum
2013
Area
54.0
11.0
10.0
34.0
10.0
6.5
6.2
6.8
3.5
142.0

DENR
58.63
58.63
78.98
47.93
75.54
98.00
72.33
72.00
79.95

IST
41.47
41.47
65.26
31.52
60.7
96.08
56.65
56.25
66.6

DENR
IST
3166.02 2239.38
644.93 456.17
789.80 652.60
1629.62 1071.68
755.40 607.00
637.00 624.52
448.45 351.23
489.60 382.50
279.83 233.10
8840.64 6618.18

5. Forest species that suffered mostIn the 80-ha NGP site, the top 3 indigenous forest species with the highest frequency of deadseedlings are Sagimsim (S. brevistylum), Nato (P. luzoniense) and Mangkono (X. verdugonianus)(Table 71). There is a need to assess the activities implemented concerning these species startingfrom the collection of seeds or wildlings, nursery operations, growth enhancement in the nursery,
seedlings transport from the nursery to the planting site, stocking method at the planting site, andhow site preparation, planting and protection and maintenance were implemented by the NGPpartners. Also, it is worth looking at how the project was designed and planned.
Table 71. Species that Suffered Most in the 80-Ha. NGP Site.
Species
Sagimsim (S. brevistylum)
Nato (P. luzoniense)
Mankgono (X. verdugonianus)
Bahai (O. calavensis)
Sili-sili (R. tuberosa)

Frequency
7542
5124
1063
148
115

159

%
54
37
8
1
1

In the same manner in the 66-ha. NGP site, Nato (P. luzoniense), Narra (P. indicus), Sagimsim(S. brevistylum), Agoho (C. equisetifolia) and Yakal (S. astylosa) are the top species thatcomposed the mortality in 2015 (Table 72). Again, the reasons why this happened in the 66-ha
NGP site is worth investigating by the PENRO so that next time around any errors uncovered
can be avoided in the future.
Table 72. Species that Suffered Most in the 66-Ha. NGP Site
SpeciesFrequency
Nato
2587
Narra
1692
Sagimsiman
920
Agoho
739
Yakal
429
YakalSaplongan
270
Guijo
222
Bagalunga
153
Akle
111
Bagtikan
52

%
24
15
8
7
4
2
2
1
1
0

In like manner, the percentages of dead species in the 44-ha. NGP site are show in Table 73. Just
like in the other NGP sites, Nato (P. luzoniense), Sagimsim (S. brevistylum), Narra (P. indicus)
and Mangkono (X. vedugonianus) are the species with high mortality (Table 73). The sameaction needed to investigate why these species are not making good in terms of survival in the
area.
Table 73. Species that suffered most in the 44-ha NGP Site.
SpeciesNato
SagimsimanNarrraMankgono
Agoho
Yakal-Saplungan
Yakal
Guijo
Akle
Bahai

Frequency
2105
1532
1045
460
383
358
207
190
183
116

160

%
30
22
15
6
5
5
3
3
3
2

6. How to increase survival rate of indigenous forest species
There are ways how to further increase the survival rate of indigenous forest species planted in
the NGP sites. These are:
1. Most indigenous forest species are partial- shade loving, provide first a nurse crop usuallynitrogen-fixing species of the pioneer species that grow faster than the intermediate andclimax species. Plant these nitrogen-fixing species ahead for one year, then when there issufficient shade already, plant the desired intermediate and climax species.
2. If the seedlings are already planted and they are showing signs of stress due to intense
sunlight, provide man-made cover to the affected seedlings. Shrubs may be used to cover
the seedlings.
3. Mulch the seedlings using locally available materials such as cogon and other shrubs cut
during site preparation and protection and maintenance. A thick mulch is better inpreventing soil moisture to evaporate.
4. Water the seedlings early morning or late in the evening.
5. Apply the right amount of fertilizer. The recommended quantity of fertilizer is from 250300 gm per seedling.
6. Construct a canal about 1 foot wide and 1 foot deep circling the hole where the seedlingis planted. During rainy season, the canal will collect rainwater. This rainwater will
gradually release to the seedling during summer.
10. NGP impact to the environment
1. Soil baseline characteristics
For subsequent soil fertility analysis of the NGP sites to determine the species’ NPK contribution
to the soil, the figures in the table provide a benchmark for assessing the present level of soil
fertility during the assessment period. Some of these NPK levels will be used by the species
planted but will also be replenished. To ascertain the NPK exchanges between the soil and theplants requires the research centers of the DENR to do a research on this.
The Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium content of the soil samples from the different sites areshown in Table 74. Generally, Phosphorus has the highest value among the three major nutrients.
When it comes to total percent of N in the soil, soil sample from Steep Boa has the highest
percentage of 0.427%; while sample from Rolling mixed area has the lowest with 0.045%.
Percent available Phosphorus is highest in Controlled F soil sample with 6.624% and lowest, in
Rolling mixed area which is less than the lower limit of detection (0.006%). Percent
exchangeable Potassium is highest in Steep Boa with 0.321% and lowest, again, in Rolling
Mixed area with 0.001%.

161

Comparing the averages of the NGP sites and Non-NGP sites with the control site (grassland)
showed that only the 80-ha and the 44-ha NGP sites had indicated positive effect in terms of
Nitrogen and Potassium. Whereas, the moisture content of the 80-ha NGP site indicated apositive effect while the 66-ha and 44-ha NGP sites showed negative effect to soil moisture
content.
One possible explanation is the age of the NGP plantations. The 80-ha NGP site is already mpre
than 2 years old while the 66-ha and 44-ha NGP sites are only one year old each. The older
plantation has more litterfalls that contribute to nitrogen and thicker humus and soil that absorb
moisture. While the 66-ha and 44-ha-NGP sites have less litter falls and thinner humus and soil.
Thus, their soil moisture absorptive capacities were negative compared to the control sites(grassland).
Table 74. NPK Base Characteristics of NGP Sites, Basilisa, Dinagat Province.
Weight ofSoil Sample(g)

Moisture
Content

Organic
CarbonOrganic
MatterSoil Sample Location

N%

P

K

80-HA NGP SiTE
Steep Boa
Rolling Katmonan
P7S1

0.427
0.265
0.238

0.321
0.07
0.089

380
300
400

7.31
4.93
3.93

1.7711
1.3982
1.86433.04482.40383.2051

Rolling mixed Area

0.045

0.001

420

3.47

1.95753.3653

Average
66-HA NGP Site
NGP Area 2-SteepNGP Area 2-Flat
NGP Area 2-Rolling
NGP Area 2Relatively Flat
Average
44-HA NGP Site
NGP Area 3-SteepNGP Area 3-Flat
NGP Area 3-Rolling
Average
Non-NGP Sites
Relatively flat(CMC
Plantation)
NN3P1
Average

0.2362

4.436
4.315
1.325
<LLD
(0.006)3.01070.1027375

4.910

1.74783.0048

0.075
0.075
0.208

3.97
2.31
4.644

0.042
0.093
0.07

300
300
350

4.19004.29504.53301.57501.35001.57502.56922.20222.5692

0.314

4.485

0.094

450

4.94402.02503.30330.168

3.85230.0748350

4.49051.63132.6610

0.103
0.06
0.229
0.13067

4.485
4.771
4.236
4.49733

0,076
0.039
0.121
0.05333

500
450
400
450

3.98303.70904.93304.20830.84780.76300.67820.76301.38291.2446
1.10641.2446

0.237

4.488

0.096

320

4.12701.49142.5641

0.205
0.221

3.5
3.994

0.039
0.068

350
335

4.88204.50451.63131.56132.80442.6843162

Control Sites(Grassland)
Steep slope
Flat area
Rolling area
Very Steep slope
Average
Difference between
NGP sites andControl Area
80-Ha vs. Grassland
66-HA vs. Grassland
44-HA vs. Grassland

N

P

K

0.216
0.305
0.2
0.143
0.216

4.325
5.584
6.624
6.056
5.64725

0.059
0.094
0.096
0.124
0.093250.02017-0.0480.08533-2.63658-1.7950.00942-0.01850.03992-1.14992

Weight ofSoil Sample
500
450
400
400
438

Moisture
Content
4.419
5.266
4.072
4.633
4.5975

Organic
Carbon
2.135
1.868
1.941
1.93
1.96850.31-0.107-0.221-0.337-0.378-0.721-0.389-1.206-2.138Organic Matter
3.66843.2096
3.33503.31613.3823

Non-NGP Sites VsGrassland
0.005-1.653-0.026-0.093-0.407-0.698
Note: The organic matter of the 80-ha NGP site was projected using Hinobaan data where the % organic matter is basedon the % organic carbon. This is given by the formula, % organic matter= %Organic Carbon (Dinagat) * %Organic
matter/%Organic Carbon (Hinobaan)
The ratios used are:
1. 80-ha NGP site =1.7192
2. 66-ha NGP site =1.6312
3. 44-ha NGP site = 1.6312
4. Grassland(control site) = 1.7182

2. Litter fall impact to soil
For NGP plantations with an age range of 2-3 years old, the indigenous forest can alreadycontribute to soil fertility. These are proven by the figures in Table 75.
There were many indigenous forest species planted in the NGP reforestation areas in Dinagat,
due to limitation in funding for soil laboratory analysis, only the species that are common in
Dinagat were submitted for NPK analysis. The litter fall contribution of each species is 300
grams for Sagimsim (S. brevistylum), 250 grams for Nato (P. luzoniense), 290 grams for Narra(P. indicus), 350 grams for Mangkono (X. verdugonianus), and 450 grams for Agoho (C.
equisetifolia).
The levels of contribution of these species to soil fertility are given by multiplying the NPK
percentages to the weights of the litter fall coming from a 2-year old plantation. The results163

showed that among the species , Narra (P. indicus) contributes the highest at 1.212, Mangkono(X. verdugonianus) is second at 0.927, and then Agoho (C. equisetifolia) at 0.911. For
phosphorus , Nato (P. luzoniense) shed off the highest at 0.102, followed by Narra (P. indicus)
and then Agoho (C. equisetifolia). For potassium, Sagimsiman (S. brevistylum)has the highest at
0.138, followed by Narra (P. indicus) at 0.103 and then Mangkono(X. verdugonianus) (Table
75).

Table 75. NPK Contribution of Species' Litter Fall in NGP Sites, Dinagat.

Leaf Litter
SamplesYear Planted

Sagimsim

2013

Nato

2014

Narra

2014

Mangkono

2014

Agoho (oldest)

2004

%P

%K

Weight of
Samples (g)0.018 ± 0.002

0.138 ± 0.011

300

0.105 ± 0.005

0.09 ± 0.009

250

0.062 ± 0.003

0.103 ± 0.003

290

0.029 ± 0.002

0.091 ± 0.002

350

0.022 ± 0.002

0.050 ± 0.004

450%N
0.545 ±
0.008
0.59 ± 0.039
1.212 ±
0.024
0.927 ±
0.011
0.911 ±
0.030

As the species grow through time, increase in species’ litter fall is expected. This will havecorresponding increase of NPK on the ground, if not totally carried down through soil erosion
during rainy season. To compute for the NPK contribution of the species planted on the NGP
sites, say N of Mangkono (X. verdugonianus), the nitrogen contribution is 0.927%. This ismultiplied by the litter fall sample taken from the NGP plantation.
3. NGP impact to soil accretion and temperature
Two of the NGP sites in Dinagat that were assessed and evaluated according to impacts to soil
accretion or erosion and temperature at the site level exhibited negative impact yet to soil
accretion. These sites have steep slopes and that surface runoff cannot be effectively controlled
yet by the small seedlings of the indigenous forest species that were planted. These are the sites
with negative sign. The NGP site with accretion impact of 0.07cm per planted seedling is the
80-ha site. Also, the non-NGP reforestation projects established by the mining companies inDinagat did not show positive soil accretion impact due to their steep slope locations.
In terms of the temperature impact of the NGP sites, all three sites have lower temperaturecompared to the grassland areas with a temperature difference of 0.95 for the 80-ha. Site, 0.38
164

for the 66-ha site, and 0.48 for the 44-ha site. These temperature gradients indicate that throughthe NGP plantations warming first at the site level can be reduced. As more forest is establishednationwide and as they grow older, temperature would be reduced substantially. It is expectedthat with nationwide reforestation of degraded uplands, the trend of climate change would bereversed, at least at the micro-site level to start with (Table 76).
Table 76. NGP Impact to Soil Accretion and Temperature, Dinagat, 2015.
Reforested Site80-Ha.
NGP Site
66-Ha.
NGP Site
44-Ha.
NGP Site
Non-NGP
Sites
46-Ha

NGP Reforested Area
Soil
Accretion orErosionGrassland

Temperature

Soil
Accretion orErosion

0.07

31.55

-0.35

Difference

Temperature

Soil
Accretion orErosionTemperature

-0.1

32.5

0.17

0.95

33.12

-0.45

33.5

0.10

0.38

-0.11

33.02

-0.32

33.5

0.21

0.48

-0.03

31.21

4. NGP impact to DRR
1. 80-ha NGP site
Vulnerability to DRR

The 80-ha. NGP site is situated in Brgy. Diegas,
Basilisa, Dinagat Island. The green colored –patches
show the land areas under the gentle slopeclassification with slope gradient of 0-18%, that is
3.78 hectares or 6.8% of the total area of the site.
Figure 27 . Map Showing the Highly
Vulnerable Slopes, NGP Site.
Dinagat165

Yellow-green patches represent those areas under the moderate classification with 19-36% slope
gradient, which is 25.63 hectares or 46.6% of the total area. Forty-five percent of the total area,that is, 25.02 hectares belong to the steep slope classification, with slope gradient ranging from36-55%. Very steep slope class covers the 0.36
hectares, although the percentage is very
negligible. These are the areas that are highly
vulnerable to disasters which should be
addressed in the reforestation design (Figure27).

2. 66-ha NGP site
Vulnerability to DRR

Figure 28. Slope Class Map of the 66-Ha.
NGP Site, Dinagat.
The 66-ha. NGP reforestation zone is located inBrgy. Geotina, Basilisa, in Dinagat Island (Figure 28). It is bounded by the polygon in the figure.
The gentle slope areas are the green patches. About 22% of the total area or 13.68 hectares areunder this slope class. Moderate slope areas are represented by the yellow-green areas, andcomprising the 60% of the site, which is 37.89 hectares. Steep slopes are represented by yellow
patches and is 17% of the total area or 11 hectares. Very steep slopes are those in red patches.
This area is only 1% of the total area of the site.
In terms of vulnerability to landslide, only the yellow green areas and the red areas arevulnerable. The reforestation designs in these areas are different from areas situated in gentle tomoderate slopes because of the need to reduce risk of landslides from possible rain-induced
disasters.
The reforestation design may include planting in close spacing of deep-rooted or root-trained
forest species so that when they grow older, their root system will be able to hold soil particles
from erosion or even landslides.
Hedge rows of nitrogen-fixing species of shrubs and small trees may also be planted along thecontours in very close spacing to control soil erosion.

1663. 44-ha. NGP site
Vulnerability to rain-induced disasters

Figure 29. Slope Class of the 44-Ha. NGP Site. 44-ha. NGP site

The 44-ha.NGP site is located in in Brgy.
Diegas, Basilisa, in Dinagat Island. The green
patches represent the gentle slopes with 16.29
hectares or 21% of the total area.
Moderate slope areas are represented by theyellow-green with an area of 47.25 hectares or
61% of the area.
Steep slopes are represented by yellow patcheswith an area of 12 hectares or 16% of the total.
Very steep slopes are the red patches with lessthan one hectare or 2% of the total area of thesite.
The areas that are highly vulnerable to raininduced disaster are those located in steep slopes and very steep slopes. This is only a little morethan 12 hectares.
Just like the other NGP sites, such vulnerable areas should be treated separately with thosetimber production forests to be established under the NGP in order to address DRR objectives(Figure 29).

5. NGP compliance to climate change
1. Carbon sequestration of the 3 NGP sites
The carbon sequestration estimate for the 3-year old 80-ha. NGP site in Basilisa, Dinagat isshown in Table 77. Due to young age, the carbon capture is still insignificant at 0.014 ton ofcarbon. How many tons of carbon is expected in the future if the indigenous forest will grow andsurvive.

167

Table 77. Present Carbon Sequestration of the 3 NGP Sites in Dinagat.

Particular
Variable/Unit
Area planted
hectares
Survival rate
percent
Original
seedling
density
NumberAge
years
Species
Diameter(cm)
cm
Total Ht(meter)m
BHT (less 25% of THT) (meter)
Volume/Tree 0.7854*D^2*BHT
Crown
Volume(15% of Vol/Tree)
Root Volume (13% of Vol/tree)
Total
Biomass(1+2+3)
Wood
Biomass(1 cum) = 0.7
Densityton
Carbon Seq(wood density * 0.3) tons

NGP Site
1
80
68

NGP Site
2
66
75

NGP Site
3
44
73

40000
33000
27000
3
2
2
Indigenous Indigenous Indigenous
0.49

0.89

0.54

0.94
0.70
0.050

0.34
0.25
0.545

0.43
0.33
0.000011

0.008
0.007

0.082
0.071

0.000002
0.027988

0.065

0.697

0.275578

0.045
0.014

0.488
0.146

0.192905
0.057871

2. Potential carbon sequestration of the 80-ha. NGP indigenous forest
The carbon sequestration estimates are shown in Table 78. The density of trees per hectare to be
maintained from year 4 to year 10 is 500 trees. On the 11th year when the branches of trees are
already overlapping, thinning will be conducted cutting one half of the 500 trees or leaving 250
trees. These 250 trees will be allowed to grow for the next 20 years up to year 30, on this year
another thinning activity will be conducted, cutting 125 trees per hectare and leaving another 125
trees to grow up to the year 59 and then final thinning by removing 25 trees per hectare, leaving
100 trees up to year 100.
A growing period of 100 years is selected for indigenous forest although there are indigenous
species that are growing beyond 100 years like narra, nato, yakal and other dipterocarps.
The potential carbon sequestration of the 80-ha is given by the summation of the thinned volume
at several periods and the growing stock.

168

The information given in the table are the projected diameter143, bole height (BHT)144, wood
volume per hectare145, total tree density per ha146, total wood volume of the forest147, crownvolume148, root volume149, total biomass150, wood density151, carbon sequestration152 and annual
carbon sequestration rate153.
Indigenous forest species have higher carbon per wood content but their growth rate is slower
compared to fast growing species. This is the reason why the forest’ growing period is 100 years.
Table 78. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the 80-Ha. NGP Site, Using a Simulated
Forest, Dinagat, 2015

Age(Years)
4
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70

Average Bole
Density
Dia
Height per Ha Vol/Ha
4.00
3.00
500
1.885
5.01
3.50
500
3.443
10.07
6.00
500 23.894
15.26
8.50
250 38.850
20.53
10.25
250 84.797
25.79
11.50
250 150.146
31.10
12.75
250 242.119
36.46
14.00
125.0 182.747
41.88
14.95
125.0 257.447
47.35
15.45
125.0 340.112
52.88
15.95
125.0 437.834
58.46
16.45
125.0 551.875
64.03
69.40
74.78

16.95
17.45
17.95

100.0
100.0
100.0

545.848660.170788.367

Total
Total
Biomass Biomass(80per Ha
ha)
2.41
193.024.41
352.5630.58
2446.7449.73
3978.19108.548683.17192.1915374.92
309.9124792.96
233.92
18713.31
329.5326362.62
435.3434827.44
560.4344834.22
706.4056512.03
698.68845.021009.11143

55894.79
67601.37
80728.74

Total
AnnualBiomass Carbon Carbon
DensitySeq
Seq
135.1154.05
246.7998.72
44.67
1712.72685.09 178.44
2784.73 1113.89 204.29
6078.22 2431.29 294.84
10762.44 4304.98 431.51
17355.08 6942.03 594.98
13099.32 5239.73 393.13
18453.83 7381.53 425.32
24379.21 9751.68 507.43
31383.95 12553.58 596.64
39558.42 15823.37 693.16
39126.35 15650.54 3150.60
47320.96 18928.38 686.74
56510.12 22604.05 767.94

Average diameter taken during measurement divided by the age of the forest (year planted to year ofevaluation)
144
Same as the diameter.
145
Wood volume/ha = 0.7854*D^2*BHT*density/ha
146
Actual count of the number of trees at a given survival rate. Taken during the assessment and evaluation.
147
Total wood volume= total wood volume/ha * total area.
148
Crown volume = 15% of wood volume (15% is based on actual assessment and accounting of the natural forest
in San Vicente Palawan).
149
Root volume = 13% of the wood volume (based on the San Vicente Palawan forest assessment and accounting)150
Total wood biomass = wood volume + Crown Volume + Root Volume)
151
Wood density = 0.7 ton/cubic meter * total biomass
152
Carbon sequestration = 0.4 carbon content of species * total biomass
153
Annual carbon sequestration increment = previous year carbon – present year carbon
169

75
80
85
90
95
100

80.16
85.55
90.94
96.34
101.74107.15

18.45
18.95
19.45
19.95
20.45
20.95

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

931.153
1089.245
1263.362
1454.229
1662.569
1889.111

1191.881394.231617.10
1861.412128.092418.06

95350.03 66745.02 26698.01 853.24
111538.65 78077.06 31230.82 942.66
129368.32 90557.82 36223.13 1036.21
148913.02 104239.11 41695.65 1133.92
170247.03 119172.92 47669.17 1235.79
193444.92 135411.44 54164.58 1341.84

3. Potential carbon sequestration of the 66-ha. NGP indigenous forest
The carbon sequestration potential of the 66-ha indigenous forest is shown in Table 79. The same
assumptions in the 80-ha hold through in this NGP site. The last 2 columns show the total annual
carbon intake and the annual carbon increment from year 4 to year 100. The figures in the table
will only happen if the NGP site will be managed well and become a forest in the future
Table 79. Potential Carbon Sequestration of the 66-Ha. NGP Site, Dinagat.

Age(Years)
4
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95

Average Bole
Dia
Height
(Cm)
(m)
4.00
3.00
5.01
3.50
10.07
6.00
15.26
8.50
20.53 10.25
25.79 11.50
31.10 12.75
36.46 14.00
41.88 14.95
47.35 15.45
52.88 15.95
58.46 16.45
64.03 16.95
69.40 17.45
74.78 17.95
80.16 18.45
85.55 18.95
90.94 19.45
96.34 19.95
101.74 20.45

Total
Tree
Biomass
Density Volume
per haper Ha (Cum/Ha) (Cum)
500
1.885
2.41
500
3.443
4.41
500
23.89430.58
250
38.85049.73
25084.797108.54250 150.146
192.19250 242.119
309.91125.0 182.747
233.92125.0 257.447
329.53125.0 340.112
435.34125.0 437.834
560.43125.0 551.875
706.40100.0 545.848
698.68100.0 660.170
845.02100.0 788.367
1009.11100.0 931.153
1191.88
100.0 1089.245 1394.23
100.0 1263.362 1617.10
100.0 1454.229 1861.41
100.0 1662.569 2128.09
170

Total
Biomass66-ha(Cum)
159.24290.862018.563282.01
7163.6112684.31
20454.20
15438.48
21749.16
28732.64
36988.2346622.43
46113.20
55771.13
66601.21
78663.77
92019.39
106728.86
122853.24
140453.80

Total
Biomass
Density(tons)
111.47203.611412.992297.415014.538879.02
14317.94
10806.94
15224.41
20112.85
25891.76
32635.70
32279.24
39039.79
46620.8555064.64
64413.57
74710.20
85997.27
98317.66

Carbon(tons)
44.59
81.44
565.20918.96
2005.813551.61
5727.174322.786089.768045.1410356.70
13054.28
12911.70
15615.92
18648.34
22025.86
25765.43
29884.0834398.91
39327.06

AnnualCarbonIncrement(tons)
36.85
147.21
168.54243.25356.00490.86324.33350.89418.63492.23571.86599.25566.56633.55703.92777.70854.88935.481019.52

100

107.15

20.95

100.0

1889.111

2418.06 159592.06 111714.44 44685.78

1107.02

4. Carbon sequestration of the 44-ha. NGP indigenous forest
The carbon sequestration of this forest is indicated in Table 80. The diameters and heights of thetrees are similar with those in the 80-ha and 66-ha NGP sites. Thus, tree volume and area volume
per hectare are also the same. They only differ in the total area where the indigenous forest
species are grown. In the table the total biomass volume, total biomass density and carbon
sequestration are computed using 44 hectares.
Table 80. Potential Carbon Seuqestration of the 44-ha NGP Site, Dinagat.

BHT
3.00
3.50
6.00
8.50
10.25
11.50
12.75
14.00
14.95
15.45
15.95
16.45

Densityper Ha
500
500
500
250
250
250
250
125.0
125.0
125.0
125.0
125.0

Vol/Ha1.885
3.443
23.89438.85084.797150.146242.119182.747257.447
340.112437.834
551.875

Total
Biomass
2.41
4.41
30.58
49.73
108.54
192.19309.91233.92329.53435.34560.43706.4060 64.03 16.95
65 69.40 17.45
70 74.78 17.95
75 80.16 18.45
80 85.55 18.95
85 90.94 19.45
90 96.34 19.95
95 101.74 20.45
100 107.15 20.95

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

545.848660.170788.367931.153
1089.245
1263.362
1454.229
1662.569
1889.111698.68845.021009.111191.881394.231617.10
1861.412128.092418.06

Age(Years)
4
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55

Dia
4.00
5.01
10.07
15.26
20.53
25.79
31.10
36.46
41.88
47.35
52.88
58.46

171

Total
Biomass,44ha
106.16193.911345.712188.014775.748456.21
13636.13
10292.32
14499.44
19155.09
24658.82
31081.62

Wood
Density
74.31
135.74942.001531.60
3343.025919.34
9545.297204.6310149.61
13408.57
17261.1721757.13

Carbon
Seq
29.73
54.29
376.80612.641337.212367.74
3818.122881.854059.845363.436904.478702.8530742.1337180.76
44400.81
52442.52
61346.26
71152.58
81902.16
93635.87
106394.7021519.49
26026.53
31080.57
36709.76
42942.38
49806.80
57331.51
65545.11
74476.29

8607.80
10410.61
12432.23
14683.90
17176.95
19922.72
22932.60
26218.04
29790.52

AnnualCarbon
Seq
24.57
98.14
112.36162.16237.33327.24216.22233.93279.09328.15381.241732.83377.71422.37469.28518.46569.92623.65679.68738.01

5. Methods of increasing carbon sequestration capacity of the NGP forest?
There are ways how to improve growth rate of forest in order to increase wood volume andcarbon sequestration. These methods may be applied to the NGP forest in Dinagat and otherareas that planted indigenous forest species.
These are:
1. When the branches of the trees are already overlapping with each other, perform thinning
operations. Thinning will require the following:a. Cutting of suppressed trees – those trees that are stunted in growth.
b. Maintain trees that are dominant and co-dominant trees in the forest.
c. Cutting of trees that are branchy, crooked, thin, and with damage.
d. Maintain an even distribution of trees in the forest to receive even sunlight.
2. Conduct thinning before the growth rate of the trees will pick up.
3. Thinning may be done in different periods by observing the different ages of the forest
where the crowns will overlap. For the final forest trees density of indigenous species, themaximum number of trees per hectare that will make the final forest is 45-100 trees per
hectare depending on the species composition.
4. Apply fertilizer after the thinning with the right amount required by each tree. This isbased on the result of the soil survey.

11. Impact to wildlife
Fauna spotted or observed by local residents in the area in the NGP sites in Basilisi, Dinagat
Islands. Just like in other NGP sites, the forest plantations attracted fauna. Top in the list are
species of birds, followed by mammals, then reptiles and amphibians. Fauna species are
instrumental to the dispersal of seeds from adjacent forest to the NGP sites. Thus, improving thebiodiversity of the NGP sites in Basilisa, Dinagat (Table 81).
Table 81. Fauna Spotted by Respondents in NGP Sites.
No
.
1
2

Class
Amphi
bia
Amphi

Family Name

Scientific Name

Bufonidae

Bufo marinus

Ichthyophiida

Ichthyophis weberi
172

Common Name
Giantmarine/common toad
Philippine caecilians

Filipino/Local Namekamfroghanlulubog

No
.

Class

Family Name

3
4

bia
Amphi
bia
Aves

e
RhacophoridaeAccipitridae

5

Aves

Bucerotidae

6

Aves

Alcedinidae

7

Aves

Rallidae8

Aves

Anatidae9

Aves

Anatidae10

Aves

Sturnidae

11

Aves

Nectariniidae

12
13
14
15
16

Aves
Aves
Aves
Aves
Aves

Ardeidae
Ardeidae
Ardeidae
Strigidae
Ardeidae17

Aves

Bucerotidae

18

Aves

Procellariidae

19

Aves

Caprimulgida
e

20

Aves

Cuculidae

21

Aves

Alcedinidae

Ceyx lepidus

22

Aves

Alcedinidae

Ceyx melanurus

23

Aves

Columbidae

Chalcophaps indica

24

Aves

Choropseidae

25

Aves

Apodidae

Scientific Name

Common Name

Filipino/Local Name

Common tree frogbakeChinese Goshawk

SakbitPolypedates
leucomystax
Accipiter soloensis
Acerosleucocephalus
Alcedo atthis
Amaurornis
phoenicurus

Writhed hornbill

kalaw

Common Kingfisher
White-breasted
WaterhenAnas luzonica

Philippine Duck

Susulbot/tingkarol
Korawakwak/Tiok/Tariwakwak/Salikuak
Pato delMonte/Papan/DumarasAnaspoecilorhyncha
Aplonis panayensis
Arachnothera
longirostra
Ardea cinerea
Ardea purpurea
Ardea sumatrana
Bubo philippensis
Bubulcus ibis
Buceroshydrocorax
Calonectris
leucomelas
Caprimulgus
manillensis
Centropus
bengalensis

Chloropsis
flavipennis
Collocalia mearnsi
173

Spot-billed duck

Bibi ihas

Asian Glossy Starling

Dalansiang

Little spiderhunter
Grey heron
Purple heronGreat-billed heron
Philippine Eagle-Owl
Cattle egret

Tallabong
Lapay
Talabong
KuwagoTabon

Rufous Hornbill

Tawsi or Kalaw

Streaked-shearwater

Kannaway

Philippine Nightjar

Kandarapa/Tukaro

Philippine Coucal

Kokok

Variable dwarfkingfisher
Philippine DwarfKingfisher
Common emerald
dove
Yellow throatedleafbird
Philippine swiftlet

Tikarol
Biding
Alimokon
Antolihaw
Sayaw

No
.

Class

Family Name

Scientific Name

26

Aves

Muscicapidae

Copsychus saularis

27

Aves

28

Aves

29
30

Aves
Aves

CampephagidaeCampephagidaePhasianidae
Dicruridae

Coracina
coerulescens
Coracina
mindanensis
Coturnix chinensis
Dicrurus annectans

31

Aves

PicidaeDryocopus javensis

32

Aves

Columbidae

Ducula aenea

33

Aves

Cuculidae

34

Aves

Caprimulgida
e

35

Aves

Muscicapidae

36
37
38

Aves
Aves
Aves

Rallidae
RallidaePhasianidae

Eudanamys
scolopacea
Eurostopodus
macrotis
Ficedula
hyperythra
Gallinula chloropus
Gallirallus striatus
Gallus gallus

39

Aves

Alcedinidae

Halcyon smyrnensis

40

Aves

41

Aves

42

Aves

Hirundinidae
CampephagidaeApodidae43

Aves

Locustellidae

44

Aves

Timaliidae

45

Aves

Picidae

46

Aves

47

Aves

48

Aves

Strigidae
Pachycephalid
ae
Bucerotidae

49

Aves

Accipitridae

Hirundo rustica
Lalagemelanoleuca
Mearnsia picina
Megalurus
timoriensis
Mixornis gularis
Mulleripicus
pulverulentus
Otus megalotis
Pachycephala
philippinensis
Penelopides panini
Pernisptilorhynchus
174

Common Name
Oriental Magpie
RobinBlackish cuckooshrike
Black-bibbed
Cuckoo-shrike
Blue-breasted Quail
Crow-billed drongo
White-bellied
Woodpecker
Green ImperialPegion

Filipino/Local Name
Dominiko

Kocok
Bontoguwak
Hambalatoc
Balud/BaudCommon Koel

Bahaw

Great Eared Nightjar

Layakan/Tahaw

Snowy-Browed
Flycatcher
Common moorhen
Barred RailRed Junglefowl
White-throatedkingfisher
Barn swallow
Black-and -white
Triller
Philippine needletail

Carab
Korowakwak/Tikling
Manok
Kasay-kasay
Sayaw
GitgitGitgitTawny grassbird
Striped tit-babbler
Great slaty
woodpecker
Philippine Scops-Owl
Yellow-Bellied
Whistler
Tarictic hornbill
Oriental
honeybuzzard

Tamsi or siwit
balatok
Botbot Kuwaw/Kuago

Talosi
Bonog

No
.

Class

Family Name

50

Aves

Columbidae

51

Aves

Columbidae

52

Aves

Columbidae

53

Aves

Rallidae54

Aves

Columbidae

55

Aves

Columbidae

56

Aves

Columbidae

Treron vernans

57

Turnicidae

Turnix sylvatica
Crateromys
australis
Cynocephalus
volansCynopterus
brachyotis
Macaca fascicularisParadoxurushermaphroditus

66
67

Aves
Mamm
als
Mamm
als
Mamm
als
Mamm
als
Mamm
als
Mamm
als
Mamm
als
Mamm
als
Reptilia
Reptilia

68

Reptilia

Gekkonidae

69

Reptilia

Viperidae

70

Reptilia

Varanidae

58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Muridae
CynocephalidaePteropodidae
Cercopithecid
aeViverridae

Scientific Name

Common Name

Phapitreron
amethystina
Phapitreroncinereiceps

Amethyst BrownDove
Dark-eared brown
dove

Phapitreron
leucotis

White-eared Brown
Dove

Porzana cinerea
Ptilinopus
leclancheri
Streptopelia
chinensis

White-Browed crakeBlack-Chinned FruitDove
Spotted dove
Pink-Necked Green
PigeonSmall Buttonquail
Dinagat Bushy-tailed
Cloud Rat
Philippine Flying
Lemur

Filipino/Local Name
Limukon/Kuro-kuo
Alimukol
Kurokuro/Limukin/BatoBatong Tulog
TighikManatadTokmo
Punay
Tikling
Bising, Visin-lagsoy
Kaguang, Kagwang

Short-nosed Fruit bat

KwaknitLong-tailed Macaque

TsonggoCommon Palm Civet

MusangPteropodidae

Pteropus vampyrus

Large Flying Fox

Paniki

Pteropodidae

Rousettus
amplexicaudatus

Common Rousette

KwaknitTarsiidae

Tarsius syrichta

Philippine Tarsier

Scincidae
Colubridae

Dasia grisea
Dendrelaphis pictus
Hemidactylus
frenatus
Tropidolaemus
wagleriVaranus salvator

Brown tree skink
Painted Bronzeback

Mago, Malmag, orMamagtabilihanlulukay

LizardButiki/tiki

Wagler's pit viper

cobra

Monitor lizard

Bayawak/halo

175

12. Stakeholders’ observations regarding NGP implementation
















The Social Mobilization campaign (treevolution) enjoins various stakeholders to plant theseedlings along the NGP sites. It was a cost-efficient measure since vast area of NGP
sites was planted simultaneously and also brings together different stakeholders to join
efforts for reforestation. Although some farmers noted that there are malpractices by
students and other participants on planting the seedlings causing them to replace more.
Centralized transaction for seedling operations since PENRO controls the planting anddistribution of seedlings
Relatively, uniform in planting is practiced within NGP sites but slightly differs with the
Mining Co.-operated NGPs
Soil survey and analysis is not a priority due to lack of technical capacity and facility
There are few comments from the planters on the payment system since there are few
instances of delayed release of funds
The PENRO and the farmers complain the little budget for protection and maintenance(P3000)
Mostly on-site demonstrations by the PENRO technical officers serve as trainings for the
farmers.
There are no Seed Production Area or Seed Orchard for sourcing seeds or wildings forseedling production
Intense problem with high temperature primarily causing the mortality of the seedlings.
Farmers find it hard to bring water from creek to uphill and it costs so much energy andtime. Making it difficult to water many seedlings as possible.
Technical officer lamented the high cost of potential water system to be constructed in
the upland but it is necessary.
There are also certain problems with local agricultural farmers on land conflicts andright-of-way.
Forest fires hit part of the Sagimsim plantation damaging a hectare of Saguimsim
according to PENRO Technical Officer
According to the PENRO Technical Officer, the slow rate of growth of the seedlings isdue to high mineral content of the soil.

4. Hinobaan NGP Sites

1. Survey, mapping and planning (SMP)176

In Hinoba-an, there were no SMP or feasibility study of the NGP reforestation sites. Just like theother NGP sites in Zambales and Dinagat the reason given was the urgency of accomplishing
more important site-based activities such as seedling production and preparation of the site forplanting.
The activities that were conducted are boundary or perimeter survey using GPS and mapping of
the surveyed NGP sites using GIS. Other important activities that were not conducted arefeasibility study, SMP, soil survey, vegetation survey and analysis, species- site matching,survey of CCA/M and DRR-related area.
On species-site matching, species recommended for planting were based on the forest species
growing in adjacent forested areas.
2. Capability building
According to the KII and FGD respondents, there was no formal training provided to the workersof the NGP sites. Demonstration on how to conduct the different reforestation activities weredone on site in every start of the activities. The respondents claimed that they were trained insimilar projects of the DENR before and that training them on how to raise seedlings, prepare thesite for planting, plant the seedlings and protect and maintain the planted seedlings is notnecessary anymore because they are experienced in reforestation projects.
3. Plantation quality assurance
According to the KII/FGD respondents, the field officers of the DENR were present during site
preparation, planting and protection and maintenance to oversee implementation of thereforestation activities. However, after planting, they do not have a regular inspection of theconditions of the plantations. Inspection comes only when it is time for billing and payment. The
frequency of site visit and inspection is quarterly according to the respondents.
Based on the answers of the respondents, there is no clear system on how the field officers of the
DENR will ensure the desired quality of the plantation.
4. Site preparation
Site preparation and planting are conducted simultaneously during the rainy season. Planting
holes have varying sizes ranging from the size of the plastic bag to about 4-6 inches and 6 deep.
When asked on whether they did clear the grass roots inside and within the vicinity of the holes,
some estimated that only about 30%-50% were cleared, while others had no idea.
They also prepared access roads and foot paths and temporary satellite nursery for temporarystorage of seedlings on site before planting.
177

5. Seedling production
The seedlings planted in the NGP sites came from NGP contractors. The estimated duration of
propagating, tending and taking care of the seedlings in the nursery to prepare them for planting
on site ranges from 4-10 months depending on the species while non-NGP sites grow them for
10 months (Table 82).
Table 82. Sources of Planting Materials, Duration of Propagation up to Outplanting,
Hinobaan.
Answer to QuestionNGP

NON-NGP27%

Sources of Seedlings
From Seeds Collected by Respondent

50%

From Wildlings Collected by Respondents

13%

Procured from Private Nurseries

8%

Procured from MENRO

2%

Procured from NGP contractor

100%

-

How many months did you take care of the seedlings in the nursery up to outplanting
in the NGP planting sites?
Rambutan

10 months-

Nangka10 months-

Lanzones

10 months-

Red Lauan

10 months-

White Lauan

10 months-

Tagwangin

10 months-

Alawihan

10 months

-

Lamio

10 months-

Mahogany

5-10 months

10 months

Gemelina

4-10 months

10 months

Mango

4-10 months-

Ipil-ipil

5-10 months-

178

Alipata

5-10 months-

Manguim5-10 months-

Eucalyptus

5-10 months-

Banuyo5-10 months-

Coffee-10 months

Cacao

-

10 months

The qualities of the seedlings planted on sites as described by the KII/FGD respondents areshown in Table 83.
Table 83. Qualities of Seedlings Planted, Hinobaan.
What were the qualities of seedlings hauled to planting sites?
Species

Diameter ofSeedlings (cm)Number of Leaves of Seedlings

Non-NGP
Site

NGP
Site

Non-NGP
Site

NGP
Site

Non-NGP Site

Ht of Seedlings(inches)
NGP
Site

Rambutan

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Nangka

-

20-30

-

2.5-4

-

15-20

Lanzones

-

20-30

-

2.5-4

-

15-20

Red Lauan

-

24-30

-

2.5-4

-

15-20

White Lauan

-

24-30

-

2.5-4

-

15-20

Tagwangin

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Alawihan

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Lamio

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Mahogany

15-24

24-30

1.3

4

10

15-20

Gemelina

15-24

24-30

1.3

4

10

15-20

Mango

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Ipil-ipil

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

179

Alipata

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Manguim

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Eucalyptus

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

Banuyo

-

24-30

-

4

-

15-20

-

1.3

-

10

-

-

1.3

-

10

-

Coffee
Cacao

15-24
-

Non-NGP sites collected their seedlings from wildlings and private nurseries. Nangka andLanzones are procured from private nurseries and other species are from the natural forest
around the site. On the other hand, seedlings to be used in NGP sites are procured by NGP
contractors.
6. Planting
The start of planting in the NGP and non-NGP sites (Table 84) showed that planting is done
during the rainy season in NGP sites while in the non-NGP sites, about 91% of the respondents
mentioned that planting is done during the dry season and about 9% said that they conductplanting even during the dry season. Planting is ended one week before the end of the rainyseason in the NGP sites while in the non-NGP sites, they extended planting even during the dry
season. Other practices of the workers are indicated in the table.
Table 84. Planting Practices of Workers in NGP and Non-NGP Sites.
QuestionNGP

NON-NGP

During Rainy Season

100%

91%

During Dry Season-

9%

Start of Planting

Stop of Planting
Two weeks before end of the rainy season
One week before the end of rainy season
First week of dry season

63%
100%

9.50%
9.50%

180

One month before dry season

18%

Soil Fertility Additives
Compost17%-

Forest Top Soil/Humus

65%

91%

Fertilizer

15%

-

-

9%

Cut and removed without breaking the soil ball

9%

91%

Cut and removed disturbing the soil ball

91%

9%

100%

82%

None
Removal of Soil from the plastic bag

How deep did you plant the seedlings?
Root collar same level with the ground surface
Root collar 3-4 inches below the ground surface

18%

Did you firmly plant the seedlings on the ground?
Yes

100%

No

82%
18%

Did you erect a stake in every planted hole?
Yes

100%

100%

No
After planting the seedlings did you provide some forms of mulch to collectand save soil moisture?
Yes

100%

-

No

-

100%

In filling soil fertility additive in the planting hole, planters in the NGP sites use all kinds offertile soil. But the well established plantation of Non-NGP sites used forest top soil/humus. As
they plant the seedlings, the planters in the NGP sites slit the base of the plastic bag without
removing it or breaking the soil ball. Seedlings are planted up to the root collar on the same levelwith the ground surface, same as what the Non-NGP did. Planting the seedling firmly on the
ground and erecting a stake every seedling, is also a common practice. They use 1 meter of split
181bamboo for staking. In addition, after planting, they provide dried leaves for mulching to collectand save soil moisture that may help for higher survival rates.
Coffee and cacao was planted first due to a commodity-based approach of NGP during the firstphase of implementation. But a high mortality of coffee was reported forcing the PO to request
for change in commodity for future planting. This happened due to absence of an SMP andfeasibility to evaluate the survival and growth potentials of the species to be recommended.
There was a variety of species of fruit trees planted. In the non-NGP sites, rambutan, langka,
lanzones, red lauan, white lauan, tagwangin, alawin, lamio, gmelina (Gmelina arborea),mahogany (Swietinia macrophyla) were selected for planting in the the non-NGP sites. In the
NGP sites, manguim (Acacia mangium) , mahogany (Swietinia macrophyla), coffee (Cofea
robusta) and cacao were planted.
7. Protection and maintenance
After planting in the NGP site, they inspect the planted areas on a quarterly basis to check thegrowth of the seedlings and to check whether there are seedlings that died and those that are not
growing well because of some health problems or affected by extremely high temperatures anddrought. They reported that there was an instance during the dry season where about 1.5 hectares
already planted with seedlings died because of drought. Because of this experience they realizedthat during summer they should be placing mulch to the seedlings after planting at least to lessen
the mortality of seedlings. They use live fern leaves as mulch and partial shades by bending themwithout cutting. Accordingly, there are plenty of fern plants that on the NGP site.
Forest fires and grass fires are not common in the area. For the respondents, fire breaks, fire lines
are not necessary for integration into the protection and maintenance activities because forest
fires or grass fires are not frequent in the area. Most areas affected are those in the buffer zone.
To continuously inform the residents in the nearest barangays, information and education
campaign is always undertaken during dry season in coordination with the barangay officials.
In terms of the soil fertility of the sites, the respondents reported to the KII/FGD team thatapplications of additional fertilizer is necessary because the NGP sites are not fertile anymore
considering that such sites have been exposed to changing weather conditions for so long.
Unfortunately the absence of a soil survey in the sites, made it difficult to estimate the level offertilizers to be applied per seedling.
When asked on their expectation on the survival rate of the area they planted, they said that it isabout 70% survival rate.
Species planted in the NGP sites:

There are only two species planted in the NGP sites. These are coffee (Cofea robusta) in the 119
ha NGP site and A.mangium in the 100 ha NGP site.
182

Basic profile of the NGP sites

Description of the area: Both the coffee and A. manium plantations are located in area where
the terrain is steep to very steep.
8. Survival rates
1. NGP Site – 119 ha coffee plantation
1.1.

Survival rates using the DENR formulaThis is the survival rates for the 119 hectares coffee plantation under the NGP in Bacuyangan,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental. Coffee is one of the favoured species for planting in themunicipality because the POs believed that they will benefit from it. According to the validationteam of the DENR that conducted the survival rate sampling in 2014, they counted 18,305 deadseedlings which they replanted during the year. The validation team commented in their reportthat the site is not suitable for coffee and cacao basing on the number of dead seedlings.
Nevertheless, through yearly replanting the mortalities are replaced so that every time there is asurvival rate validation, the survival rate appeared at least above the required survival rate. The
total mortality in 2015 is 17079 seedlings which is to be replanted during the rainy season.
The survival rates are shown in Table 85. In 2014, the survival rate is 69% and 86% in 2015.
Table 85. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula for the 119-Ha. NGP Site
Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanted
Ending Seedling Planted
Survival Rate

1.2.

Reforestation Management Period
2011 2012
2013
2014
2015
0
0
119000119000119000
18305
17079
0
0
100695101921
0

18305

0
0

119000100

101921
85.6

Survival rates using IST formula

The survival rate of the coffee plantation using the IST formula is shown in Table 86. Just likethe recommendations in the other areas, instead of relying on replanting most of the time, it isbetter to concentrate on the protection and maintenance of the original planting by implementing
all possible and effective cultural systems applicable to the species. This may be applied after
studying the causes of the mortalities and addressing these with the right solutions. The DENR

183

may refocus its research thrust by looking at the causes why the seedlings are dying after
planting.

Table 86. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 119-Ha. Coffee NGP Site in Hinobaan.2015.
Accounting Entry Title
Seedling Opening Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanted
Ending Seedling Planted
Survival Rate

Reforestation Management Period
2011 2012
2013
2014
2015
0
0 119000
119000119000
18305
17079
0
0
100695101921
0

18305

0
0

11900073.3

10192166.01

2. NGP site - 85-ha timber plantation
2.1.

Survival rates using the DENR formulaThis NGP site was planted with Mangium (Acacia mangium) a timber producing species thatgrows well in Mindanao. The density of seedling planted in the area is 42,500 (Table 87). The
annual mortalities from 2013 to 2015 are estimated according to field observations on the heightsof the seedlings in the absence of survival rate validation report (please see footnote). The annual
mortalities are not that high in 2013 and 2014 resulting in 99% survival rates for both years.
However, in 2015, there were dead seedlings counted plus those with a height range of 0.3m –0.35m seedlings considered newly replanted. Equating this number as the mortality for 2015
resulted in the reduction of the survival rate to 85%. Validating the forest plantation on thefollowing year will determine the survival rate for that year.
Table 87. Survival Rates Using DENR Formula, 85-Ha. NGP, Hinobaan.
Accounting Entry
Title
Seedling Opening
Stock
Mortality (Reduction)

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0

0
0

154

42500
625154

42500
42500
155
629
6250156

Based on the height range of 0.8-1.3m of seedlings/saplings replanted in 2013 and about 2 years old already in2015. The total number of seedlings under this height range is 625.
184

Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock
Survival Rate
2.2.

0

41875

41871

36250

0

625

629

0

0
0

42500
98.53

42500
98.52

36250
85.28

Survival rates using the IST formula

The results of the computation showed that the reduction is minimal compared to the other NGP
sites. The reason is due to the relatively small number of mortalities during the previous years.
This is a case where maintenance of the original plant density during the first 2 years, thus
minimizing mortality, will have no drastic reduction to the survival rates of the forest plantation(Table 88).
Table 88. Survival Rates Using IST Formula, 85-Ha. Hinobaan.
Accounting Entry
Title
Seedling Opening
Stock
Mortality (Reduction)
Net Surviving
Seedling
Additional Seedling or
Replanting
Seedling Closing
Stock
Survival Rate

Reforestation Management Period
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0

0
0

42500
625157

42500
42500
158
629
6250159

0

41875

41871

36250

0

625

629

0

0
0

42500
97.10

42500
95.70

36250
81.85

Based on the height range of 0.4m – 0.7m of seedlings/saplings replanted in 2014. These seedlings/saplings areabout 1 year old in 2015.The total seedling under this height range is 629.
155

156

Based on the actual count of dead seedlings and those with poor health condition in 2015 during the assessment
period plus those with a height of 0.3m – 0.35m as newly replanted seedlings in 2015. The counted dead seedlings
6250..
157

Same definition in Table 87.

158

Same definition in Table 87.

159

Same definition in Table 87.
185

2.3.

Weighted survival rate of NGP sites

The weighted survival rates of the NGP sites using DENR and IST are shown in Table 89. Using
the DENR formula, Hinobaan has a weighted survival rate of 86%while the IST formula yields
73%, the highest among the 3 provinces. The reforestation project management of the NGP sitein Hinobaan that planted A. Mangium did well in keeping the mortality to a minimum during thefirst 2 years.
Table 89. Weighted Survival Rates of NGP Sites.

NGP Site
CoffeeA.
Mangium

Area
116
85
201

Survival Rate
Weighted Sum
DENR
IST
DENR
IST
86.46
66.12 10029.36 7669.92
85.28

82.8

7248.87038
17278.16 14707.92

Weighted
Survival Rate
DENR
IST

85.96

73.17

3. Non-NGP Sites
To compare the NGP sites in terms of survival rate and growth performance with aged forest
plantations, two established forests in one of the watersheds in Hinobaan were inventoried.
These forests were established way back in the early 1990 and planted with mixed fast growing
species.
3.1.

100 ha. watershed forest (Gmelina Timber Production)

The original ground cover of this area is also cogon grass. It was planted with the same purpose
to revive the water productivity of the watershed. The site was planted in 1992 with Gmelina(Gmelina arborea) by the DENR. After 23 years, the area is now regenerated with other pioneer
species.
There were no data on the original density of trees planted in 1992. So, it considered the present
density inventoried as of assessment period. From 1992 to 2015, there were no records on
mortalities and replanting. Thus, the survival rate calculation will not make of use of the survival
rate accounting matrix used in NGP sites. The method is based on analyzing the present standand relating this backward to what most likely transpired in the past.
The results of the analysis are hereby stated. There are 17,378 trees inventoried. Of these trees,
11,742 trees are Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) and 5,636 trees are pioneer species. The pioneer
species must have occupied the spaces where the Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) trees weregrowing before. Although there is no record to support this, it is highly possible that throughnatural elimination process, the planted seedlings were weeded out by the pioneer species. Thus,

186

considered as the mortality rate in 2015. Based on these figures and assumptions, the survival
rate of the plantation is 68% (Table 90).

Table 90. Survival Rate of the 100-Ha Non NGP Site,
Hinobaan Watershed.
SpeciesNumber of Trees
160
Total density
17378

3.2.

Pioneer species161

5636

Remaining planted
species162

11742

Survival rate (%)163

68

109 ha. watershed forest (Agroforestry)

The original ground cover of the area is cogon grass. To reduce soil erosion and to sustain thefunction of the watershed for water production, the DENR planted mixed fast growing species
such as Gmelina (Gmelina arborea), Ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala) and mahogany (Swietenia
macrophyla), and fruit trees such as jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus), coffee (Cofea robusta),and rambutan (Nephelium lappaceum). After 20 years, the forest is now transformed naturally
into a second growth agroforest where pioneer species are growing together with the planted
species. The planted portion of the watershed has an area of 109 hectares and this was planted in
1995. Table 91 shows the survival rate in the 109 hectare Non-NGP site in Hinobaan.
Table 91. Survival Rate of the 109 Ha. Non NGP Site,
Hinobaan Watershed, 2015.
SpeciesNumber of Trees
164
Forest plantation species
4320
Pioneer species (natural
growing)165
7547

160

Total density is the actual count of surviving planted trees and pioneer species.

161

Pioneer species is the actual count of pioneer species in the area. This is also assumed to be the number ofmortality of the planted seedlings
162

Remaining planted species = total density – fruit trees.
Survival rate = remaining planted species / total density * 100
164
Forest plantation species are the remaining plants counted at assessment period.
163

187

Fruit trees166
Total agroforest density167

9242
21109

Remaining planted species168

13562

Survival rate (%)169

3.3.

64

Weighted survival rate of non-NGP site

The weighted survival rate of the two non-NGP sites, one site a 23-year old gmelina plantation
and a 20-year old agroforestry plantation is 65.91% (Table 92). There were no data on mortality
and replanting from the time the plantations were planted to the present period. So, the IST
survival rates were not calculated together with the weighted survival rate.
Table 92. Weighted Survival Rate Based on the DENR Formula of Non-NGP Site.

Non-NGP
Site

Area
(Ha)

Gmelina
Agroforestry

100
109
209

Survivalrate(%)

Weighted
Sum

68
64

6800
6976
13776

Weighted
Survival Rate
(%)

65.91

4. Stumpage buildup
4.1.

23 years old non-NGP reforestation projectThe 23 years old, 100 ha Non-NGP site planted with Gmelina is estimated to have a present
stumpage of 729.4 cum/ha or a total wood volume of 72,940 cum for 100 hectares. The
stumpage is the actual volume of the gmelina plantation at 68% survival rate based on a density
165

Pioneer species are natural growing in the area, not planted, assumed to have occupied planted spaces for bothforest plantation species and fruit trees.
166

Fruit trees are the remaining fruit trees counted.

167

Total agroforestry density is the sum of the remaining forest plantation species + fruit trees and pioneer species.
This summed to 21,109 trees.
168

Remaining planted species is the sum of remaining forest plantation species + counted fruit trees.

169

Survival rate = remaining planted species / Total agroforest density * 100188

of 500 trees/ha or equivalent to 340 trees/ha (assessed in 2015). While the volume in 23 years
looks high, the reality in Mindanao is that a 10 year old Gmelina plantation can already yield
250-300 cum/ha. However, in this plantation the yield at 10 years old is only 59.9 cum/ha whichis rather very low (Table 93).
It is also uncertain whether the Gmelina trees are still healthy when cut at the age of 23 years oldor already affected with center rot. If not, beyond 10-15 years old, the wood may become brittle
which makes it unfit for construction or furniture materials. Under this condition, the wood may
be used for pulp and paper, particle board, fuelwood and charcoal making. This of course has tobe proven through research by the ERDB or the regional research center of the DENR.
Table 93. Gmelina’s Stumpage Buildup of the 23 Years Old Non-NGP Forest Plantation,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.
Total
Trees/Ha

Volume/Ha

Total
Vol
(100Ha)Cum

No.

Cum/ha

Cum

0.0

340.0

0.1

6.0

4.9

0.0

340.0

0.5

48.0

1.1

7.3

0.0

340.0

1.6

161.9

9.1

1.5

9.7

0.0

340.0

3.8

383.7

2.9

11.4

1.9

12.2

0.0

340.0

7.5

749.4

15.4

3.4

13.7

2.3

14.6

0.0

340.0

12.9

1294.9

7.0

18.0

4.0

16.0

2.7

17.0

0.1

340.0

20.6

2056.3

8.0

20.6

4.6

18.3

3.0

19.4

0.1

340.0

30.7

3069.4

9.0

23.2

5.1

20.6

3.4

21.9

0.1

340.0

43.7

4370.3

10.0

25.7

5.7

22.9

3.8

24.3

0.2

340.0

59.9

5994.9

11.0

28.3

6.3

25.2

4.2

26.7

0.2

340.0

79.8

7979.2

12.0

30.9

6.8

27.4

4.6

29.2

0.3

340.0

103.6

10359.2

13.0

33.4

7.4

29.7

4.9

31.6

0.4

340.0

131.7

13170.8

14.0

36.0

8.0

32.0

5.3

34.0

0.5

340.0

164.5

16450.0

15.0

38.6

8.6

34.3

5.7

36.5

0.6

340.0

202.3

20232.8

16.0

41.2

9.1

36.6

6.1

38.9

0.7

340.0

245.6

24555.1

17.0

43.7

9.7

38.9

6.5

41.3

0.9

340.0

294.5

29453.0

18.0

46.3

10.3

41.2

6.8

43.7

1.0

340.0

349.6

34962.3

19.0

48.9

10.8

43.5

7.2

46.2

1.2

340.0

411.2

41119.1

20.0

51.5

11.4

45.7

7.6

48.6

1.4

340.0

479.6

47959.2

21.0

54.0

12.0

48.0

8.0

51.0

1.6

340.0

555.2

55518.8

22.0

56.6

12.5

50.3

8.4

53.5

1.9

340.0

638.3

63833.7

23.0

59.2

13.1

52.6

8.7

55.9

2.1

340.0

729.4

72940.0

Age

Base
Dia

Total
Height

Top
Dia

Bole
HeightAverage
Dia

Volume/Tree

(Yr)

(cm)

(m)

(cm)

(m)

(cm)

1.0

2.6

0.6

2.3

0.4

2.4

2.0

5.1

1.1

4.6

0.8

3.0

7.7

1.7

6.9

4.0

10.3

2.3

5.0

12.9

6.0

Base DIA is the diameter taken close to groundTotal HT is the height from the base to the tip of the tree
189

Top DIA is the diameter at the first branch of the tree
Bole HT is the clear stem height from base to the first branch
Average DIA is the average diameter (Base DIA+Top DIA)/2
Volume/tree = 0.7854*ADIA^2*BHT
All the column titles apply to other tables on stumpage determination

4.2.

20 years old 109 ha agroforestry project

The stumpage buildup for wood production comes from the plantation species (gmelina,
mahogany and Ipil-ipi)l components. While there are pioneer species growing side by side withthe plantation species, these were not considered for wood production. Instead, the pioneer
species are better reserved for environmental services.
Gmelina component
Gmelina is one of the fast growing exotic species planted for lumber production, pulpwood, andwooden decorative materials. It is also a good material for door jams, furniture, and cabinets. Its
wood residues are good for particle board, wood wool, and pulp and paper. It is planted in purestand or mixed with other species in agroforestry.
The computation of the stumpage buildup of tree component of the agroforestry project isseparated from the fruit tree component for 2 reasons: 1) Only the 1,809 trees were the remnantsof the old planting 20 years after; and 2) the fruit trees were enrichment planting, probably
planted about 4-5 years ago based on their diameters and heights (Table 94).

Table 94. Gmelina’s Stumpage of the 20 Years Old 109 Ha Agroforestry Project,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.
Base
Total
Top
Bole
Ave.
Total
Total
Age
Dia
HeightDia
HeightDia
Vol/Tree
Trees
Volume
(Yr)
(cm)
(m)
(cm)
(m)
(cm)
(Cum)
(No.)
(Cum)
1
1.42
0.39
1.22
0.26
1.32
0.00
1809
0.06
2
2.83
0.77
2.44
0.52
2.64
0.00
1809
0.51
3
4.25
1.16
3.67
0.77
3.96
0.00
1809
1.72
4
5.66
1.55
4.89
1.03
5.28
0.00
1809
4.08
5
7.08
1.94
6.11
1.29
6.60
0.00
1809
7.98
6
8.50
2.32
7.33
1.55
7.92
0.01
1809
13.78
7
9.91
2.71
8.56
1.81
9.23
0.01
1809
21.88
8
11.33
3.10
9.78
2.06
10.55
0.02
1809
32.67
9
12.74
3.48
11.00
2.32
11.87
0.03
1809
46.51
10
14.16
3.87
12.22
2.58
13.19
0.04
1809
63.80
11
15.58
4.26
13.45
2.84
14.51
0.05
1809
84.92
190

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

16.99
18.41
19.82
21.24
22.66
24.07
25.49
26.90
28.32
29.74
31.15
32.57
33.98
35.40
36.82
38.23
39.65
41.06
42.48

4.64
5.03
5.42
5.81
6.19
6.58
6.97
7.35
7.74
8.13
8.52
8.90
9.29
9.68
10.06
10.45
10.84
11.22
11.61

14.67
15.89
17.11
18.34
19.56
20.78
22.00
23.23
24.45
25.67
26.89
28.12
29.34
30.56
31.78
33.01
34.23
35.45
36.67

3.10
3.35
3.61
3.87
4.13
4.39
4.64
4.90
5.16
5.42
5.68
5.93
6.19
6.45
6.71
6.97
7.23
7.48
7.74

15.83
17.15
18.47
19.79
21.11
22.43
23.75
25.06
26.38
27.70
29.02
30.34
31.66
32.98
34.30
35.62
36.94
38.26
39.58

0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.17
0.21
0.24
0.28
0.33
0.38
0.43
0.49
0.55
0.62
0.69
0.77
0.86
0.95

1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809

110.25140.18175.08215.34261.34313.47372.11437.63510.43590.89679.39776.31882.03996.941121.421255.86
1400.63
1556.121722.71

Mahogany component
Mahogany is a good source of lumber for furniture and panel materials. It is good for veneer andplywood materials. The only problem with it is that it is an invasive alien species. Meaning, if
planted together with other equally important wood species, it will outgrow and kill those otherspecies. So no other species will grow and survive under it. It is therefore not advisable tointerplant this species in any agroforestry systems. It is only suitable in timber production areas.
Nevertheless, since it is already in this agrofoforestry system, estimating its potential stumpage isimportant for two reasons for assessing a)its potential carbon sequestration capacity; and b) its
potential to produce wood materials as a reserve for the local wood industry because it is situatedin a watershed in Hinobaan.
The volume of the mahogany component in this agroforestry system is shown in Table 95.
There are 1,217 trees of Mahogany in the 109 hectares agroforestry project. These trees are
growing together with the Gmelina, fruit trees, pioneer species and ipil-ipil component. In 10
years period, the Mahogany will have 54 cum and in 20 years, it will yield 432 cum.
Table 95. Mahogany’s Stumpage Buildup in the Agroforestry Project.

Age

Bole
HeightAverage
Dia

Volume perTree
191

Total
Trees

Total Volume

(Yr)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

(m)
0.54
1.08
1.63
2.17
2.71
3.25
3.79
4.34
4.88
5.42
5.96
6.50
7.05
7.59
8.13
8.67
9.22
9.76
10.30
10.84
11.38
11.93
12.47
13.01
13.55
14.09
14.64

(cm)
1.02
2.04
3.06
4.08
5.10
6.13
7.15
8.17
9.19
10.21
11.23
12.25
13.27
14.29
15.31
16.33
17.36
18.38
19.40
20.42
21.44
22.46
23.48
24.50
25.52
26.54
27.56

Cum per tree
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.15
0.18
0.22
0.26
0.30
0.35
0.41
0.47
0.54
0.61
0.69
0.78
0.87

No.
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217
1217

Cum
0.05
0.43
1.46
3.46
6.75
11.66
18.52
27.65
39.37
54.00
71.88
93.32
118.64148.18182.26221.19265.31
314.94370.40432.02500.12575.02657.05746.53843.79949.151062.93Ipil-ipil component
Ipil-ipil wood is good for pulpwood, fuelwood, and charcoal. The pith of Ipil-ipil wood is goodfor wood parquet used for flooring. It is one of the nitrogen-fixing species and its leaves can beused as green fertilizer. It is an important component of any agroforestry systems to supply
nitrogen to crops.
The total number of Ipil-ipil trees inside the 109 ha. agroforestry plantation is 1,559 trees.
Considering its wood component, it is estimated that it can provide 22 cum in 5 years, 126 cumin 10 years and 594 cum in 15 years provided that the number of trees will be maintained (Table

192

96). It will still grow to about 4,759 cum in 30 years assuming that there will be no dominant
species that will cover the individual trees.
Table 96. Ipil-ipil’s Stumpage Buildup of the Agroforestry Project.

Age

Bole Height

Average Dia

(Yr)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

(m)
0.73
1.46
2.19
2.93
3.66
4.39
5.12
5.85
6.58
7.31
8.05
8.78
9.51
10.24
10.97
11.70
12.43
13.16
13.90
14.63
15.36
16.09
16.82
17.55
18.28
19.02
19.75
20.48
21.21
21.94

(cm)
1.40
2.81
4.21
5.61
7.02
8.42
9.82
11.22
12.63
14.03
15.43
16.84
18.24
19.64
21.05
22.45
23.85
25.25
26.66
28.06
29.46
30.87
32.27
33.67
35.08
36.48
37.88
39.28
40.69
42.09

Volume per
Tree
Cum per
tree
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.11
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.31
0.38
0.46
0.56
0.66
0.78
0.90
1.05
1.20
1.38
1.56
1.77
1.99
2.23
2.48
2.76
3.05

193

Total Tree

Total Vol

No.
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559

Cum
0.18
1.41
4.76
11.28
22.04
38.08
60.47
90.26
128.51
176.28234.64304.62387.30483.73594.96722.06866.091028.091209.141410.28
1632.57
1877.082144.862436.962754.453098.38
3469.813869.804299.414759.69

5. Soil accretion and erosion and temperature
The impacts of the reforestation projects, NGP and non-NGP, to soil accretion or erosion andtemperature are indicated in Table 97. The NGP sites which are 2-3 years old have negative soil
accretion levels which mean that both have not yet totally reverted soil erosion to accretion. This
is attributed to the fact that both reforestation projects are still young and the seedlings planted
are not capable yet of significantly reducing soil erosion. Comparing each NGP reforestation
project to the control showed that the coffee plantation has reduced soil erosion to a height of
5.89 cm from the soil erosion rate of the grassland area. Similarly, the A. mangium plantation
has also reduced soil erosion to a height of 5.35 cm compared to the soil erosion rate ofgrassland. While the coffee plantation has higher impact to reducing soil erosion than the A.
mangium plantation, the difference is attributed to the presence of more underbrush vegetationsin the coffee plantations than in the A. mangium plantation as observed during the assessment.
While there is a difference in soil erosion impact of the two types of reforestation, the differenceis negligible and not significant.
Comparing the non-NGP sites, the agroforestry project and the mixed forest tree plantation
project, which are already 20 years and 23 years old, respectively, the soil erosion impacts arehigh at 5.78 cm (agroforestry) and 6.15 cm (mixed forest plantation).
The 23 years old mixed forest species reforestation project has already reverted soil erosion toaccretion although the level is still insignificant. This is due to the rough terrain in the area andhigh intensity of rainfall. A night before measurement, there was a high intensity of rainfall thatfell on the sites170 and perhaps this explains why both NGP and non-NGP sites have registerednegative soil accretion except the 23 year old mixed species forest plantation. Also, high slopes
accelerate surface runoff that causes soil erosion.
Comparing both reforestation projects with the control sites showed that there is already an
improvement in soil accretion from 5.62 cm in the NGP site to 5.965 cm in the non-NGP site.
The insight from this experience indicates that soil erosion control system, whether vegetative or
structural or combination, has to be integrated in reforestation projects especially in high slope
areas and where rainfall intensity is high. This could also be a lesson for reforestation planners
that due to climate change, the design should now take into consideration measures to effectively
control excessive soil erosion in rough terrain reforestation sites. Furthermore, even low
vulnerable areas to rain-induced disasters should now be installed with the most appropriate soil
erosion and land slide control measures.
Table 97. Soil Accretion and Temperature Impacts of NGP and Non-NGP
Reforestation Projects, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental. 2015.
Indicator
Area
Soil
Average
170

Reported by Forester Marvin Arlegui, the Field Survey Team Leader in Hinobaan NGP and Non-NGP sites
assessment.
194

Accretion/tree Temperature
NGP Site
Coffee plantation
Acacia mangium
Average
Non-NGP Site
Agroforestry area
Mixed species plantation
Average
Control grassland
Plot 1Plot 2Plot 3
Plot 4
Plot 5
Plot 6
Plot 7
Plot 8Plot 9Plot 10
Average
Comparison of Plantation Types toControl
Coffee plantation vs. Control
Acacia mangium plantation vs. Control
Non-NGP Agroforestry Vs. Control
Non-NGP Mixed forest species
plantation Vs. Control
Comparison of Project Site to Control
NGP site Vs. Control
Non-NGP site Vs. Control

119
100

-0.11
-0.65
-0.38

33
34.1
33.55

109
100

-0.22
0.15
-0.03532.31
34.1
33.205

-1.8
-1.2
0.1
-0.7
-0.5
-0.1
-0.2
-0.2
-0.9
-0.5
-6

36.5
36.3
36.5
36.2
35.9
35.7
36.5
36.8
35.4
36.9
36.27

5.89
5.35
5.78

-3.27
-2.17
-3.96

6.15

-2.17

5.62
5.965

-2.72
-3.065

6. Reforestation impact to temperature
Both reforestation projects have positive reduction in temperature. Between NGP sites, thecoffee plantation although the plants are still young has lower temperature than the A. mangium
plantation. The reason behind is the exposure or aspect of the slopes where the NGP sites arefacing. Areas exposed to the east, north-east, west to north-west have high temperature exposure.
Thus, the A. mangium has higher temperature than the coffee plantation because it is facing theeast compared to the coffee plantation. Similarly the mixed forest species plantation non-NGP
195

site is also facing the east. Thus, receiving most of the sunshine. This gives a higher temperaturecompared with the coffee plantation and the agroforestry plantation (non-NGP site).
Comparing both the NGP and non-NGP reforestation projects to the control sites showed thatthese are cooler by -2.72 degrees Celsius in the NGP site and -3.065 degrees Celsius in the nonNGP sites. The difference between the NGP and non-NGP sites is attributed to the condition
that older forests are cooler than younger forests. The explanation to this is that in the older
forests there is higher photosynthetic activity than in young plantation. Furthermore, the larger
the canopy area in older plantation the better is the sunlight trapping effectiveness of the canopy.
Thus, creating cooler temperature under the forest canopy. It is expected that as the forest andagroforest plantations grow, their effectiveness in tempering temperature would be further
enhanced (Table 97).
7. Carbon sequestration
7.1.

NGP reforestation projects

The present capacity of the NGP plantations to sequester carbon is 36.17 tons of carbon for the
A.mangium plantation at age 3 and 0.0066 ton for the coffee plantation (Table 97). Theseestimates are as good as the present survival rates of the NGP sites. Any reduction in the future
will have a corresponding deduction in the carbon sequestration capacity of the two sites.
Since coffee is a small tree, its carbon sequestration would not increase so much as the A.
mangium plantation. The only way to increase the carbon capture of the coffee trees is tointegrate other bigger fruit trees or forest species that will not interfere with the normal growthrate of the coffee trees.
Table 98. Carbon Sequestration of NGP Mangium Plantation,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.
NGP Site Profile
A.Magium
CoffeeTotal tree density
35307
51445
Area
100
119
Age
3
2
Diameter
4.35
0.2152418
Total HT
3.46
0.2220739
Bole Ht
2.59
Total volume
115.340.0000010
Crown Biomass Factor
17.30
0.0000001
Root Biomass Factor
14.99
0.0000001
Total Biomass
147.630.0532102
Wood density factor (wt to Cum)1
103.340.0266051
Approximate carbon factor
0.35
0.2500000
Total carbon sequestered
36.17
0.0066513
196

7.2.
a.

Non-NGP reforestation projects
100 ha gmelina plantation
The present carbon sequestration capacity of the 100ha-gmelina plantation is shown in
Table 99. The last two columns contain the level of carbon capture and annual carbon
rate at any given time from year 1 to year 30. The plantation’s carbon sequestration atpresent after 23 years is 228.74 tons/ha and 28.55 tons carbon capture rate (22,874
tons/100 ha) and (2,855.7 tons/100 ha). This is quite high compared to the 55.8 tons/ha in
Leyte and also 38 tons/ha to 54 tons in Mindanao (Lasco, et al, 1999) of the same species
with ages ranging from 7 to 9 years old plantations171.

Table 99. Carbon Sequestration of the 23-Year Old 100ha Non-NGP Gmelina Plantation,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental. 2015.

Age
(Yr)

Bole
HeightAverage
DiameterTree
Density/Ha

Wood
Vol/Ha

Total
Wood
Vol
(100ha)

1.0

0.4

2.4

340.0

0.1

6.0

7.7

5.4

1.9

0.0

2.0

0.8

4.9

340.0

0.5

48.0

61.4

43.0

15.0

13.2

3.0

1.1

7.3

340.0

1.6

161.9

207.2

145.0

50.8

35.7

4.0

1.5

9.7

340.0

3.8

383.7

491.1

343.8

120.3

69.6

5.0

1.9

12.2

340.0

7.5

749.4

959.2

671.4

235.0

114.7

6.0

2.3

14.6

340.0

12.9

1294.91657.51160.2

406.1

171.1

7.0

2.7

17.0

340.0

20.6

2056.32632.01842.4

644.8

238.8

8.0

3.0

19.4

340.0

30.7

3069.43928.82750.2

962.6

317.7

9.0

3.4

21.9

340.0

43.7

4370.35594.03915.81370.5

408.0

10.0

3.8

24.3

340.0

59.9

5994.97673.55371.4

1880.0

509.5

11.0

4.2

26.7

340.0

79.8

7979.210213.4

7149.42502.3

622.3

12.0

4.6

29.2

340.0

103.6

10359.2

13259.8

9281.83248.6

746.4

13.0

4.9

31.6

340.0

131.7

13170.8

16858.6

11801.04130.4

881.7

14.0

5.3

34.0

340.0

164.5

16450.021056.014739.2

5158.71028.4

15.0

5.7

36.5

340.0

202.3

20232.825898.0

18128.6

6345.01186.3

16.0

6.1

38.9

340.0

245.6

24555.1

31430.6

22001.4

7700.51355.5

17.0

6.5

41.3

340.0

294.5

29453.037699.8

26389.99236.51536.0

18.0

6.8

43.7

340.0

349.6

34962.3

44751.7

31326.2

10964.2

1727.7

171

Total
Biomass
VolumeTotal
Biomass
Density

CarbonSequestration

AnnualCarbonSequestration
Rate

Rodel D. Lasco and Florencia B. Pulhin (2003). Philippine Forest Ecosystems and Climate Change: Carbon
stocks, Rate of Sequestration and the Kyoto Protocol. Annals of Tropical Research 25(2): 37-51
197

19.0

7.2

46.2

340.0

411.2

41119.1

52632.4

36842.7

12894.9

1930.8

20.0

7.6

48.6

340.0

479.6

47959.2

61387.842971.515040.02145.1

21.0

8.0

51.0

340.0

555.2

55518.871064.1

49744.917410.7

2370.7

22.0

8.4

53.5

340.0

638.3

63833.7

81707.2

57195.0

20018.3

2607.6

23.0

8.7

55.9

340.0

729.4

72940.093363.2

65354.2

22874.02855.7

24.0

9.1

58.3

340.0

828.7

82873.6

106078.2

74254.7

25989.1

3115.2

25.0

9.5

60.8

340.0

936.7

93670.4

119898.1

83928.7

29375.03385.9

26.0

9.9

63.2

340.0

1053.7105366.4

134869.0

94408.3

33042.93667.9

27.0

10.3

65.6

340.0

1180.0117997.7

151037.1

105725.937004.1

3961.2

28.0

10.6

68.0

340.0

1316.0131600.1

168448.2

117913.7

41269.84265.7

29.0

11.0

70.5

340.0

1462.1146209.7

187148.5131003.945851.4

4581.6

30.0

11.4

72.9

340.0

1618.6161862.4

207183.9

145028.7

50760.1

4908.77.3.

109 ha agroforestry plantation

Gmelina component
The capacity of the agroforestry plantation to sequester carbon is presented in Table 100. The
oldest component of the plantation is the Gmelina trees numbering 1,809 trees in the whole area.
The other vegetations are fruit trees believed to be planted 4-5 years ago. The carbon
sequestration of the fruit trees is treated separately and presented in another table.
The 1,809 trees are already 20 years old. Their total carbon sequestration stock is only 160 tons
or 44.4 tons/ha at 500 trees/ha. The carbon sequestration rate at age 20 is 22.83 tons/year and still
increasing while the trees are growing up to 30 years. The carbon sequestration rate compared
to studied gmelina plantation indicates that this site has lower sequestration rate compared to the55.8 tons/ha to 88.1 tons/ha in Leyte (Lasco, et al, 1999) but quite higher compared to the 38.6
tons/ha to 39.3 tons/ha studied in Mindanao (Kawahara, et al, 1981 as reported by Lasco andPulhin)172
Table 100. Carbon Sequestration of the 20 Years Old 109 Ha Gmelina Plantation in the
Non-NGP Site, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.

Age
(Yr)
1
2
3
4
172

Bole Average Total Total
HeightDia
Trees Volume(m)(cm)(No.) (cum)0.26
1.32 1809
0.06
0.52
2.64 1809
0.51
0.77
3.96 1809
1.72
1.03
5.28 1809
4.08

Total
Total
AnnualBiomass Biomass Carbon Carbon
Volume Density
Seq
Seq Rate
(cum)
(ton)
(ton)
(ton/year)
0.08
0.06
0.02
0.00
0.65
0.46
0.16
0.14
2.21
1.54
0.54
0.38
5.23
3.66
1.28
0.74

Ibid.
198

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

1.29
1.55
1.81
2.06
2.32
2.58
2.84
3.10
3.35
3.61
3.87
4.13
4.39
4.64
4.90
5.16
5.42
5.68
5.93
6.19
6.45
6.71
6.97
7.23
7.48
7.74

6.60
7.92
9.23
10.55
11.87
13.19
14.51
15.83
17.15
18.47
19.79
21.11
22.43
23.75
25.06
26.38
27.70
29.02
30.34
31.66
32.98
34.30
35.62
36.94
38.26
39.58

1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809
1809

7.98
13.78
21.88
32.67
46.51
63.80
84.92
110.25140.18175.08215.34261.34313.47372.11437.63510.43590.89679.39776.31882.03996.941121.421255.86
1400.63
1556.121722.71

10.21
17.64
28.01
41.81
59.54
81.67
108.70141.12179.43224.10275.63334.52401.24476.30560.17653.36756.34869.62
993.671129.00
1276.081435.421607.50
1792.811991.832205.07

7.15
12.35
19.61
29.27
41.68
57.17
76.09
98.79
125.60156.87
192.94234.16280.87333.41
392.12457.35529.44608.73695.57790.30893.261004.791125.251254.961394.28
1543.55

2.50
4.32
6.86
10.24
14.59
20.01
26.63
34.58
43.96
54.90
67.53
81.96
98.30
116.69137.24160.07185.30213.06243.45276.60312.64351.68393.84439.24488.00540.24

1.22
1.82
2.54
3.38
4.34
5.42
6.62
7.94
9.38
10.94
12.63
14.43
16.35
18.39
20.55
22.83
25.23
27.75
30.39
33.15
36.04
39.04
42.16
45.40
48.76
52.24

Fruit tree component
The carbon sequestration of the fruit tree component of the agroforestry reforestation project(non-NGP) is shown in Table 101. There are 9242 fruit trees growing in the area. The fruit trees
are jackfruit, coffee, and rambutan. Coffee and rambutan are generally small trees while jackfruit
is a medium size tree. Fruit trees are not expected to yield higher wood volume than forest
species. Nevertheless, they also sequester carbon. These are shown in the last two columns.
There are no studies yet on the carbon sequestration of jackfruit, coffee and rambutan that could
be used to compare the results in the table.
Table 101. Carbon Sequestration of the Fruit-Tree Plantation, Non-NGP Site,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.
Age

BHT

ADIA

Total
Tree

Total
VolumeTotal
Biomass
199

Total
Biomass

CarbonSeq

AnnualCarbonVolumeDensity

(cum)

(cum)

(ton)

Seq Rate

(Yr)

(m)

(cm)

(No.)

(ton)

(ton/year)

1

0.58

0.82

9242.00

0.34

0.44

0.31

0.11

2

1.15

1.64

9242.00

1.37

1.75

1.23

0.43

0.32

3

1.73

2.46

9242.00

3.08

3.95

2.76

0.97

0.54

4

2.30

3.28

9242.00

5.48

7.02

4.91

1.72

0.75

5

2.88

4.10

9242.00

8.57

10.96

7.67

2.69

0.97

6

3.45

4.92

9242.00

12.33

15.79

11.05

3.87

1.18

7

4.03

5.74

9242.00

16.79

21.49

15.04

5.26

1.40

8

4.60

6.56

9242.00

21.93

28.07

19.65

6.88

1.61

9

5.18

7.38

9242.00

27.75

35.52

24.86

8.70

1.83

10

5.75

8.20

9242.00

34.26

43.85

30.70

10.74

2.04

11

6.33

9.02

9242.00

41.45

53.06

37.14

13.00

2.26

12

6.90

9.84

9242.00

49.33

63.15

44.20

15.47

2.47

13

7.48

10.66

9242.00

57.90

74.11

51.88

18.16

2.69

14

8.05

11.49

9242.00

67.15

85.95

60.17

21.06

2.90

15

8.63

12.31

9242.00

77.09

98.67

69.07

24.17

3.12

16

9.21

13.13

9242.00

87.71

112.26

78.58

27.50

3.33

17

9.78

13.95

9242.00

99.01

126.74

88.71

31.05

3.55

18

10.36

14.77

9242.00

111.00142.08

99.46

34.81

3.76

19

10.93

15.59

9242.00

123.68158.31110.82

38.79

3.98

20

11.51

16.41

9242.00

137.04175.41122.79

42.98

4.19

21

12.08

17.23

9242.00

151.09193.39135.37

47.38

4.41

22

12.66

18.05

9242.00

165.82212.25148.57

52.00

4.62

23

13.23

18.87

9242.00

181.24231.98162.39

56.84

4.83

24

13.81

19.69

9242.00

197.34252.59176.82

61.89

5.05

25

14.38

20.51

9242.00

214.13274.08191.86

67.15

5.26

26

14.96

21.33

9242.00

231.60296.45207.51

72.63

5.48

27

15.53

22.15

9242.00

249.76

319.69223.78

78.32

5.69

28

16.11

22.97

9242.00

268.60343.81240.67

84.23

5.91

29

16.68

23.79

9242.00

288.13368.80258.16

90.36

6.12

30

17.26

24.61

9242.00

308.34394.68276.27

96.70

6.34

Indigenous forest species (IFS) component
The carbon sequestration of the indigenous forest species component composed of 9105 trees isshown the last 2 columns (Table 102). At 500 density of trees per hectare, this is equivalent to18.2 hectares. The wood volume is 90.7 cum/ha with a carbon sequestration of 28.7 tons/ha. The
forest type is generally of the pioneer species approximating a secondary forest without
dipterocarp species.The sequestration capacity is very much inferior with the carbon

200sequestration of secondary forest studied by Lasco and Pulhin in Leyte in 1999. This probably
due to the absence of dipterocarp species in the area which are usually found in secondary forest.
Table 102. Carbon Sequestration of the Indigenous Forest Species, Non-NGP Agroforestry
Plantation, Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.
Total
Total
AnnualBole Average
Tree
Total Biomass Biomass Carbon Carbon
Age Height
Dia.
Density Volume Volume Density
Seq
Seq. Rate
(Yr)
(m)
(cm)
(No.)
(cum)
(cum)
(ton)
(ton)
(ton/year)
1
0.33
0.94 9105.00
0.21
0.26
0.19
0.06
2
0.66
1.87 9105.00
1.65
2.12
1.48
0.52
0.45
3
0.99
2.81 9105.00
5.58
7.14
5.00
1.75
1.23
4
1.32
3.75 9105.00
13.22
16.92
11.85
4.15
2.40
5
1.65
4.68 9105.00
25.82
33.05
23.14
8.10
3.95
6
1.98
5.62 9105.00
44.62
57.11
39.98
13.99
5.89
7
2.31
6.56 9105.00
70.85
90.69
63.48
22.22
8.23
8
2.63
7.49 9105.00 105.76
135.38
94.76
33.17
10.95
9
2.96
8.43 9105.00 150.59
192.75134.93
47.22
14.06
10
3.29
9.37 9105.00 206.57
264.41185.09
64.78
17.56
11
3.62
10.30 9105.00 274.94
351.93
246.35
86.22
21.44
12
3.95
11.24 9105.00 356.95
456.90319.83 111.94
25.72
13
4.28
12.18 9105.00 453.83
580.90406.63 142.32
30.38
14
4.61
13.11 9105.00 566.82
725.53507.87 177.76
35.43
15
4.94
14.05 9105.00 697.17
892.38624.66 218.63
40.88
16
5.27
14.99 9105.00 846.10 1083.01
758.11 265.34
46.71
17
5.60
15.92 9105.00 1014.87 1299.03
909.32 318.26
52.93
18
5.93
16.86 9105.00 1204.71 1542.03
1079.42 377.80
59.53
19
6.26
17.80 9105.00 1416.85 1813.57
1269.50 444.33
66.53
20
6.59
18.73 9105.00 1652.55 2115.26
1480.68 518.24
73.91
21
6.92
19.67 9105.00 1913.03 2448.68
1714.08 599.93
81.69
22
7.24
20.61 9105.00 2199.54 2815.41
1970.79 689.78
89.85
23
7.57
21.54 9105.00 2513.32 3217.05
2251.93 788.18
98.40
24
7.90
22.48 9105.00 2855.60 3655.17
2558.62 895.52
107.3425
8.23
23.42 9105.00 3227.63 4131.37
2891.96 1012.19
116.6726
8.56
24.35 9105.00 3630.65 4647.23
3253.06 1138.57
126.3927
8.89
25.29 9105.00 4065.89 5204.34
3643.04 1275.06
136.4928
9.22
26.23 9105.00 4534.59 5804.28
4062.99 1422.05
146.9929
9.55
27.16 9105.00 5038.00 6448.64
4514.05 1579.92
157.8730
9.88
28.10 9105.00 5577.35 7139.01
4997.31 1749.06
169.14201

Mahogany component
The carbon sequestration of the Mahogany trees is shown in Table 103. There are 1,217
mahogany trees in the agrofoforestry reforestation project. The carbon sequestration in year 10 is
16.94 tons with a carbon sequestration rate of 4.59 tons. As the mahogany trees grow up to year
30, carbon sequestration will also increase to 457 tons with a carbon capture rate of 44 tons/year.
Table 103. Mahogany’s Carbon Sequestration of the Agroforestry Plantation,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.
AnnualTotal
Total
CarbonBole Average Total
Total Biomass Biomass Carbon
Seq
Age Height
Dia
Trees Volume Volume Density
Seq
Rate/Yr
(Yr)
(m)
(cm)
No.
Cum
Cum
Ton
Ton
Ton
1
0.54
1.02 1217
0.05
0.07
0.05
0.02
2
1.08
2.04 1217
0.43
0.55
0.39
0.14
0.12
3
1.63
3.06 1217
1.46
1.87
1.31
0.46
0.32
4
2.17
4.08 1217
3.46
4.42
3.10
1.08
0.63
5
2.71
5.10 1217
6.75
8.64
6.05
2.12
1.03
6
3.25
6.13 1217
11.66
14.93
10.45
3.66
1.54
7
3.79
7.15 1217
18.52
23.71
16.60
5.81
2.15
8
4.34
8.17 1217
27.65
35.39
24.77
8.67
2.86
9
4.88
9.19 1217
39.37
50.39
35.27
12.35
3.67
10
5.42
10.21 1217
54.00
69.12
48.39
16.94
4.59
11
5.96
11.23 1217
71.88
92.00
64.40
22.54
5.61
12
6.50
12.25 1217
93.32
119.45
83.61
29.26
6.72
13
7.05
13.27 1217 118.64
151.86106.30
37.21
7.94
14
7.59
14.29 1217 148.18
189.67132.77
46.47
9.26
15
8.13
15.31 1217 182.26
233.29163.30
57.16
10.69
16
8.67
16.33 1217 221.19
283.13198.19
69.37
12.21
17
9.22
17.36 1217 265.31
339.60237.72
83.20
13.84
18
9.76
18.38 1217 314.94
403.13282.1998.77
15.56
19 10.30
19.40 1217 370.40
474.12331.88 116.16
17.39
20 10.84
20.42 1217 432.02
552.99387.09 135.48
19.32
21 11.38
21.44 1217 500.12
640.15448.11 156.84
21.36
22 11.93
22.46 1217 575.02
736.03515.22 180.33
23.49
23 12.47
23.48 1217 657.05
841.02588.72 206.05
25.72
24 13.01
24.50 1217 746.53
955.56668.89 234.11
28.06
25 13.55
25.52 1217 843.79 1080.05
756.04 264.61
30.50
26 14.09
26.54 1217 949.15 1214.91
850.44 297.65
33.04
27 14.64
27.56 1217 1062.93 1360.56
952.39 333.34
35.68
202

28
29
30

15.18
15.72
16.26

28.59
29.61
30.63

1217 1185.47
1217 1317.07
1217 1458.07

1517.40
1685.85
1866.33

1062.18
1180.101306.43

371.76413.03457.25

38.43
41.27
44.22

Ipil-ipil component
There are 1,559 Ipil-ipil trees in the agroforestry project. The trees are estimated to sequester
carbon from year 1 to year 30. These are shown in the last 2 columns (Table 104). The total
carbon sequestered for a given age of the Ipil-ipil trees is given in the second to the last column
while the withi rate of increase of carbon is shown in the last column while carbon sequestration
rate is indicated in the last column.
Table 104. Carbon Sequestration of the Agroforestry (Ipil-ipil) Non-NGP Site,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.
AnnualTotal
Total
CarbonBole Average Total Total Biomass Biomass Carbon
Seq.
Age Height
Dia
Tree
Vol
Volume density
Seq.
Rate
Ton
per
(Yr)
(m)
(cm)
No.
Cum
Cum
Ton
Ton
Year
1
0.73
1.40 1559
0.18
0.23
0.16
0.06
2
1.46
2.81 1559
1.41
1.81
1.26
0.44
0.39
3
2.19
4.21 1559
4.76
6.09
4.26
1.49
1.05
4
2.93
5.61 1559
11.28
14.44
10.11
3.54
2.05
5
3.66
7.02 1559
22.04
28.21
19.74
6.91
3.37
6
4.39
8.42 1559
38.08
48.74
34.12
11.94
5.03
7
5.12
9.82 1559
60.47
77.40
54.18
18.96
7.02
8
5.85
11.22 1559
90.26
115.53
80.87
28.30
9.34
9
6.58
12.63 1559 128.51
164.49115.15
40.30
12.00
10
7.31
14.03 1559 176.28
225.64157.95
55.28
14.98
11
8.05
15.43 1559 234.64
300.33210.23
73.58
18.30
12
8.78
16.84 1559 304.62
389.91272.94
95.53
21.95
13
9.51
18.24 1559 387.30
495.74347.02121.46
25.93
14
10.24
19.64 1559 483.73
619.17433.42151.70
30.24
15
10.97
21.05 1559 594.96
761.55533.09186.58
34.88
16
11.70
22.45 1559 722.06
924.24646.97226.44
39.86
17
12.43
23.85 1559 866.09 1108.59
776.01271.61
45.17
18
13.16
25.25 1559 1028.09 1315.96
921.17322.41
50.81
19
13.90
26.66 1559 1209.14 1547.70 1083.39
379.19
56.78
203

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

14.63
15.36
16.09
16.82
17.55
18.28
19.02
19.75
20.48
21.21
21.94

28.06
29.46
30.87
32.27
33.67
35.08
36.48
37.88
39.28
40.69
42.09

1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559
1559

1410.28
1632.57
1877.082144.862436.962754.453098.38
3469.813869.804299.414759.69

1805.162089.692402.662745.423119.313525.703965.934441.364953.35
5503.256092.40

1263.61
1462.79
1681.86
1921.79
2183.52
2467.992776.15
3108.95
3467.35
3852.274264.68442.26511.98588.65672.63764.23863.80971.651088.131213.57
1348.30
1492.64

63.08
69.71
76.68
83.97
91.60
99.56
107.86116.48125.44134.72144.34The other components that were not measured are the grasses and the soils in the area.
7.4.

Total carbon sequestration of the non-NGP agroforestry plantation

The total is given by the summation of the carbon sequestration by year of the 4 components(Table 105). In 10 years, the total carbon sequestration of the agroforestry plantation is 167.75
tons and in 20 years, 1299 tons of carbon. This is equivalent to 11.9 tons per ha. Comparing itwith some agroforestry systems studied by Lasco and Pulhin (1999), this has a much lower
carbon sequestration capacity than those estimated from 43.6 to 113 tons per ha in the Makilingforest.

Table 105. Total Carbon Sequestration of the Non-NGP Agroforestry Project,
Hinibaan, Negros Occidental, 2015.

Age

CarbonSeq

AnnualCarbonSeq
Rate

Gmelina(Yr)

Tons

CarbonSeq

AnnualCarbonSeq
Rate

Fruit Trees

Tons/yr

Tons

CarbonAnnualCarbonSeq
Rate

Pioneer Species

Tons/yr

Tons

CarbonSeq

AnnualCarbonSeq
Rate

CarbonSeq

Mahogany

Tons/yr

0.06

Tons

Tons/yr

0.02

AnnualCarbonSeq
Rate

CarbonIpil-Ipil
Tons

1

0.02

0

0.11

2

0.16

0.14

0.43

0.32

0.52

0.45

0.14

0.12

0.44

3

0.54

0.38

0.97

0.54

1.75

1.23

0.46

0.32

4

1.28

0.74

1.72

0.75

4.15

2.4

1.08

5

2.5

1.22

2.69

0.97

8.1

3.95

6

4.32

1.82

3.87

1.18

13.99

7

6.86

2.54

5.26

1.4

8

10.24

3.38

6.88

9

14.59

4.34

8.7

AnnualCarbonSeq Rate

Total

Tons/yr

Tons/yr
0.26

0.00

0.39

1.69

1.42

1.49

1.05

5.21

3.52

0.63

3.54

2.05

11.77

6.56

2.12

1.03

6.91

3.37

22.32

10.55

5.89

3.66

1.54

11.94

5.03

37.78

15.46

22.22

8.23

5.81

2.15

18.96

7.02

59.11

21.34

1.61

33.17

10.95

8.67

2.86

28.30

9.34

87.27

28.14

1.83

47.22

14.06

12.35

3.67

40.30

12.00

123.16

35.90

204

0.06

Tons

10

20.01

5.42

10.74

2.04

64.78

17.56

16.94

4.59

55.28

14.98

167.75

44.59

11

26.63

6.62

13

2.26

86.22

21.44

22.54

5.61

73.58

18.30

221.97

54.22

12

34.58

7.94

15.47

2.47

111.94

25.72

29.26

6.72

95.53

21.95

286.78

64.80

13

43.96

9.38

18.16

2.69

142.32

30.38

37.21

7.94

121.4625.93

363.10

76.32

14

54.9

10.94

21.06

2.9

177.76

35.43

46.47

9.26

151.7030.24

451.89

88.77

15

67.53

12.63

24.17

3.12

218.63

40.88

57.16

10.69

186.5834.88

554.07102.20

16

81.96

14.43

27.5

3.33

265.34

46.71

69.37

12.21

226.4439.86

670.61116.54

17

98.3

16.35

31.05

3.55

318.26

52.93

83.20

13.84

271.6145.17

802.42131.8318

116.69

18.39

34.81

3.76

377.8

59.53

98.77

15.56

322.4150.81

950.48148.0519

137.24

20.55

38.79

3.98

444.3366.53

116.1617.39

379.1956.78

1115.70

165.2320

160.07

22.83

42.98

4.19

518.2473.91

135.4819.32

442.2663.08

1299.04

183.33

21

185.3

25.23

47.38

4.41

599.9381.69

156.8421.36

511.9869.71

1501.42202.4022

213.06

27.75

52

4.62

689.7889.85

180.3323.49

588.6576.68

1723.82

222.3923243.45

30.39

56.84

4.83

788.1898.4

206.0525.72

672.63

83.97

1967.15243.32

24

276.6

33.15

61.89

5.05

895.52

107.34234.11

28.06

764.2391.60

2232.35265.2125

312.64

36.04

67.15

5.26

1012.19116.67264.6130.50

863.8099.56

2520.39288.0326351.68

39.04

72.63

5.48

1138.57

126.39297.6533.04

971.65107.862832.19

311.8127

393.84

42.16

78.32

5.69

1275.06

136.49333.3435.68

1088.13116.483168.69

336.5028439.24

45.4

84.23

5.91

1422.05146.99371.7638.43

1213.57

125.443530.85362.16

29

488

48.76

90.36

6.12

1579.92

157.87413.0341.27

1348.30134.723919.61388.7530

540.24

52.24

96.7

6.34

1749.06

169.14457.2544.22

1492.64144.344335.89416.287.5.

NGP Impacts to soil fertility, Organic Matter, Organic Carbon and Moisture
Content.

The NGP impacts to nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, organic matter and organic carbon andmoisture contents are indicated in Table 106. Two readings on soil moisture contents in thecontrol sites were marked with a question mark to indicate that there was a heavy rain during thenigh previous to the gathering of soil samples. This makes the data gathered irregular.
The two NGP sites together with the non-NGP sites have positive impacts to NPK, organic
matter, organic carbon and soil moisture when compared with the control site. On the other hand,
one NGP site and another non-NGP site have negative organic matter when compared with thecontrol site. It is possible that these sites were also hit by heavy rains that carried the organic
matter from the soil through soil erosion.

Table 106. NGP Impact to Soil Fertility, Organic Matter, Organic Carbon and Moisture
Content.

Area

Slope
Class

N

P
(mg/kg)K
205

Weight(g)

Organic
Matter(%)

Organic
Carbon(%)

Moisture
Content (%)

NGP-100 has

Average
NGP-119

F
R
S
VS

F-R
S-VS

0.0680%0.0720%0.0785%
0.0935%0.0780%0.2005%0.0525%0.1195%0.1242%0.1395%0.1915%

39.74
25.12
0.52
1.5
16.72
0.42
0.17
0.53
0.37
1.59
1.11

0.14
0.14
0.39
0.11
0.195
0.88
0.34
0.2
0.47
0.29
0.35

500
450
420
300
417.5
350
400
400
383.33
790
620

1.36%
1.44%
1.57%
1.87%
1.56%
4.01%
1.05%
2.39%
2.48%
2.79%
3.83%

0.79%
0.84%
0.91%
1.09%
0.90%
2.33%
0.61%
1.39%
1.44%
1.62%
1.88%

14.21
16.93
15.00
16.51
15.66
12.25
15.6
24.88
17.57
20.32
21.65

F-R
S-VS

0.1655%0.0885%0.0875%

1.35
5.44
1.04

0.32
0.21
0.14

705
680
650

3.31%
1.77%
1.75%

1.75%
1.03%
1.02%

20.98
8.24
8.52

0.0880%
3.24
0.175
665
1.76%
0.1015%
0.07
0.08
380
2.03%
0.1290%
0.05
0.08
410
2.58%
0.1320%
0.21
0.09
380
2.64%
0.1208%
0.11
0.083
390
2.42%
Comparison of NGP and Non-NGP sites to Control Sites
0.0428%16.6100
11.1667%-0.8567%
0.0033%0.263339.0000%
0.0667%0.0447%1.240023.6667%
0.8933%0.0328%3.13009.1667%-0.6567%

1.03%
1.18%
1.50%
1.54%
1.41%

8.38
3.18
16.74?
30.44?
3.18

F
R
S

Average
NON-NGPSO.
CAMALONGAY
100 HasAverage
NON-NGP
WATERSHED109 HasAverage
Grassland/Control
Average

NGP-100 ha.
NGP-119 ha
Non-NGP 100 ha
Non-NGP109 ha

7.6.

F
R
S

0.4992%0.0367%0.3433%0.3817%

Litter fall contribution to NPKThe NGP species contribute to NPK enhancement on the ground. A one year old mangium beinga nitrogen fixer has the highest nitrogen contribution at 1.179% while a two year old coffee has
only 1.061% nitrogen yield to the ground. Other species planted in non-NGP sites like durian in2009 has 1.176% while gmelina planted in 1992 and 1995 has 0.738% and 0.783% nitrogen,respectively. Mahogany planted in 1992 and 2014 has .709% and .911% of nitrogen, repectively.
While the older plantations appeared to have low nitrogen yields, the total litter fall per tree ishigher than the younger ones per seedling. The actual annual NPK yield of every species isdetermined by multiplying the percentage with the total annual weight of litter fall per tree
(Table 107).
206

12.4825
14.3967
17.8050
5.2000Table 107. NPK Contribution of NGP and Non-NGP Plantations in Hinobaan, Negros
Occidental.
Leaf Litter Analysis for Hinoba-an
Leaf Sample
Mangium
Kape
DurianGmelinaGmelina
Mahogany
Mahogany

7.7.

Year Planted
2014
2013
2009
1995
1992
1992
2014

%N
1.179±0.030
1.061±0.006
1.176±0.007
0.738±0.010
0.783±0.011
0.709±0.022
0.911±0.006%P
0.040±0.002
0.093±0.003
0.092±0.001
0.101±0.002
0.051±0.0001
0.041±0.001
0.079±0.001%K
0.334±0.15
0.328±0.017
0.648±0.043
0.263±0.041
0.579±0.021
0.184±0.001
0.147±0.002% OC
39.249±0.143
29.183±0.147
35.561±0.202
34.076±0.191
35.290±0.068
38.914±0.096
33.889±0.202

Wieght of Samples
(g)
200
280
110
300
300
300
280

DRR compliance of NGP Sites

1. 100-ha Mangium plantation

Figure 30. Slope Map of NGP
Site, Hinobaan, Negros
Occidental.
The DRR-sensitive areas in the
NGP site are those colored orange
and red. Their slopes are within thevulnerable areas to rain-induced landslides due to climatechange. These areas should be designed, planned andimplemented to address potential disaster risks due toclimate change.

207

Slope
Class

Area (Ha)

Vulnerability

0-18%

53

Not
Vulnerable

19-36%

104.94Lowvulnerable

37-55%

38.16

Moderately
vulnerable

>55%

3.3

HighlyVulnerable

2. 119-ha coffee plantation

Slope
Class

Area (Ha)

Vulnerability

0-18%

45.36

Not
Vulnerable

19-36%

64.5

Low
vulnerable

37-55%

9.9

Moderately
vulnerable

>55%

0

HighlyVulnerable

Figure 31. Slope Map of NGP Site,
Hinobaan, Negros Occidental.
The slope map shows the relative locations of the different slope classes. Those located below
37% are not classified vulnerable to climate change and DRR. Areas above 37% are generally
vulnerable. The DRR-sensitive area is colored orange. This is almost 10 hectares in the 37-55%
slope. There are no areas above 55% slope.
In the case of the coffee plantation, there are 64.5 ha and 9.9 ha that are low vulnerable andmoderately vulnerable, respectively. These areas need careful planning considering DRR and
CCA/M. In these areas, other forest tree species may be interplanted with coffee to make theground stable. The only problem during the feasibility study and design of the plantation is theidentification of compatible tree species that are DRR and CCA/M compliant at the same time
will allow the coffee to grow.
3. Recommended DRR measures for both NGP sites
The forest or agroforest plantation design may take a simple one where contour planting andwider spacing for timber production or fruit production will suffice to reduce soil erosion in the
0-18% slope. However, the effectiveness of planted trees in soil erosion control will take effectwhen the trees are already 5-10 years old or older. Coffee trees are small trees and not as
effective in controlling soil erosion as bigger trees. Combining coffee species with bigger trees
or hedgerows for erosion control is more effective than having a monoculture of coffee plants.
If the use of the forest or agroforest plantation is for multiple use, such as timber plus water or
fruit plus water production in watershed, it is important to prevent or minimize soil erosion in its
surroundings to reduce siltation of the water basin. In this case a provision for erosion control
may be integrated into the plantation development plan. This may cover the 19-36% slope. The

208

most common form of erosion control that may be used is the establishment of strips ofhedgerows at given interval across the slope using suitable fruit-bearing annual or perennial
crops intercropped with nitrogen-fixing species. The most common forest species forintercropping is Kakawate. It is mandatory that the hedgerow strips should follow the groundcontours and the spacing of the hedgerow species should be as close as possible but not tosacrifice the normal growth rates of the species.
The procedures to be followed to integrate climate change and DRR concerns in the reforestation
design are:a. Conduct a topographic profiling of the area to be designed with DRR and CCA measures.
Existing topographic map may be enhanced by taking in detailed features of the ground.
b. Draw a strip profile following the contour.
c. Analyze potential surface runoff movements from high elevation to low elevation, checkon the lower elevation areas where surface runoff may find its way and settle down on
water lag areas. When water lag areas can no longer carry its water load, it will collapse
creating a landslide.
d. Areas within the strip must be planted with deep-rooted173 or trained-root indigenous
forest species. They should be planted close enough to reduce the speed of surface runoff
and trap eroded soil. Select the species that is indigenous in the area.
e. To prevent landslides, reduce the volume of water in the water lag areas by making acanal big enough to drain the water.
f. In cases where vegetative method is not effective because of the long time lag between
seedlings to matured trees, use structural method. Locally available materials like rocks
and stone may be used in making ripraps or retaining walls, and check dams.
g. Combine the use of vegetative approach and structural approach when necessary.
4. Recommended climate change adaptation and mitigation measures in reforestation
projects
For future reforestation projects, the following measures are recommended:a. Plant indigenous forest species preferably medium wood density to hard wood density
species. Forest species classified as premium ones have high carbon factor than softwood
species. Most of the hardwood species such as Mangkono, Saplungan, Guijo, Yakal,
Molave, Mabolo, Ipil, Tindalo and other dipterocarp species in general have carbon
factor of 0.4 to 0.5. The only problem with these species is that they are slow grower. It
may take longer time for them to reach their maximum carbon sequestration capacities.
b. In production forest, fast growing species with a rotation age of 8 years may sequester
more carbon than indigenous forest species. This is explained by having several rotations
173

Big trees are generally deep-rooted. Most dipterocarp species are deep-rooted ones.
209within the growing period of indigenous forest species. Using a hypothetical example:
Dipterocarp species, say in 50 years will only have 250 cum/ha wood volume equivalent
to about 125 tons of carbon, while Gmelina at 10 years rotation yielding 90 cum/ha wood
volume equivalent to about 45 tons of carbon. Multiply this by 4 times equals to 180 tonsof carbon.
c. Plant species that are deciduous or shed-off their leaves annually. Dried leaves and otherplant litter add up to soil carbon. Some of the deciduous species are Akle174, Narra175,
Kalumpit176 , Philippine Teak177, Talisay178, Ipil179. Molave180
d. Intensify protection of plantations to prevent forest fires or grass fires. Grass fires andforest fires cause carbon emission when they are burned.
5. Impact to wildlife
According to the KII respondents in the area, the species of fauna observed in the locations of the
NGP sites are shown in Table 108. Through time these fauna species would bring in fruits andseeds of indigenous forest species from adjacent forests. Such seeds would regenerate the NGP
sites in a matter of time.
Table 108. Fauna Species Observed by Residents in the NGP Site, Hinobaan, Negros
Occidental, 2015.
No
.
1
2

Class
AmphibiaAmphibi
a

3

Aves

4

Aves

Family Name

Scientific Name

Common Name

Filipino/Local
Name

RanidaeRana saguinea

Southeast Asian Wood Frog

manwitRhacophoridae

Polypedates macrotis

Dark-Striped Tree Frog

paki

Tachybaptus ruficollis

Little Grebe

wild duck

Egretta garzetta

Little Egret

tolabong

Podicipediformes
Ardeidae174

Rafi.org.ph/greenin-philippines/green-almanac/akle/
https://www.google.com.ph/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=PfKwVemuMqbC8Afu65v4BQ#q=what+forest+species+shedoff+their+le175

Ourhealingmoments.com/2011/03/24/tree-of-righteousness/ http://ourhealingmoments.com/2011/03/24/tree-ofrighteousness/
176

www.bar.gov.ph › ... › October-December 2012 Issue (Vol. 14 No. 4)177

http://www.pnh.com.ph/category/6-Plants-and-Orchids/28-Plant-Feature-Philippine-teak-page-1.html

178

http://writingonthepagesoflife.com/2014/11/04/falling/179

www.worldagroforestry.org/treedb/AFTPDFS/Intsia_bijuga.PDF

180

http://www.marketmanila.com/archives/speculating-on-a-molave-tugas-tree
210

No
.
5
6
7

Aves
Aves
Aves

Accipitridae
Phasianidae
Rallidae8

Aves

Rallidae9

Aves

Pssittaculidae

10
11
12
13
14

Aves
Aves
Aves
Aves
Mamalia

Pssittaculdae
Strigidae
Dicruridae
Passeridae
Muridae

Pithecophaga jefferyi
Coturnix chinensis
Galliarallus torquatus
Amaurornis
phoenicurus
Tanygnathus
lucionensis
Prioniturus montanus
Strix seloputo
Dicrurus annectans
Passer montanus
Rattus tanezumi

15

Mamalia

Pteropodidae

Cynopterus brachyotis

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Mamalia
Mamalia
Reptilia
Reptilia
Reptilia
Reptilia
Reptilia
Reptilia
Reptilia
Reptilia

SuidaePteropodidae
Gekkonidae
Gekkonidae
Colubinae
Colubridae
Viperidae
ElapidaeVaranidae
Scincidae

Sus scrofa
Pteropus hypomelanus
Gecko gecko
Hemidactylus frenatus
Boiga dendrophila
Dendrelaphis pictus
Tropidolaemus wagleri
Ophiophagus hannah
Varanus salvator
Dasia grisea

Class

Family Name

Scientific Name

Philippine Eagle
Blue Breasted Quail
Barred Rail

Filipino/Local
Name
dapay
umbok
rail

White Breasted Waterhenkwak kwak

Blue-Naped Parrot

pikoyMontane Racquet-TailSpotted Wood Owl
Crow-Billed Drongo
Eurasian Tree Sparrow
Asian House Rat
Lesser Short-Nosed Fruit
Bat
Wild Boar
Island Flying Fox
Tokay Gecko
LizardMangrove Snake
Painted Bronzeback
Pit Viper
King Cobra
Monitor Lizard
Brown Tree Skink

managing
bukao
uwak
maya
ilaga

Common Name

kulakwit
bakatin
kabog
tuko
tiki
manog
handulukay
dupongmagkalhalotabili

6. Stakeholders’ observations on NGP implementationa. No fire breaks or fire lines constructed to most areas since, according to planters,
no fire incidences recorded in NGP sites yet. According to a law enforcer fromCENRO, fire break to other areas are not as effectives as it should be since fires
occur inside the buffer.
b. No soil analysis/survey was conducted to determine appropriate species
c. Problem with the release of budget and the transparency of budget distribution
from contractor to planters, as they reported very late receipt of payment.
d. Farmers suggested that, not only increase the budget for operations but also to
release it timelye. Coffee and cacao fruit-tree species were planted first due to a commodity-based
approach of NGP during the first phase of implementation. But a high mortality ofcoffee was reported. Because of this, the PO requested for change in commodity,
for future planting.

211

f. Small-scale gold mining was seen near the site (though haven’t verified if this is a
conflicting issues on land use)g. Hinoba-an has problem with water deficiency, during summer nights water
distribution is switched off in the entire municipality. The water deficiency
problem is the reason why the municipal government entered a co-partnershipagreement with DENR declaring Alanaban as a watershed. The area was formerly
tenured land under ISFP. The ISFP tenure holders are now called ‘water tenders’.
They are now employed by the municipality and work under the supervision of
the forestry technicians of MENRO.
h. Very steep slopes pose a problem in watering and tending the planted seedlings.
Planters do not practice watering and rely mainly on rainfall. Moreover, it inhibits
to frequently patrol the site.
i. An operation of 2 chainsaw confiscation was co conducted. According to law
enforcers, the illegal loggers claim the rights to harvest for they planted the trees
but they lacked proper permit and documents to do so. The logged areas are under
the custody of Philex mining.
j. Planters reported that some areas are low in soil fertility.
k. Seedlings are provided by the contractor.
l. There is a seedling production area in the NGP site
IX.

Sites Evaluation

The bases of evaluating the NGP, non-NGP sites and control sites are presented in the following tables.

1. Characteristics of NGP and non-NGP sites and control sites
a. Sta. Cruz, Zambales
NGP Impacts

Area
Compliance to Guidelines
SMP
Survival Rate
DENR Formula
IST Formula
Soil Accretion
NPK (Soil)
N
P
K
Soil Moisture
Litterfall

ZAMBALES
NGP
150

99

Control
Site
131

No

No

No NA

88.00
35.60
0.27

87.00
72.25
0.16

90.00 NA
80.00 NA
0.35

0.11
1.67
1.51
21.65

0.10
1.87
1.09
19.18

0.17
0.17
1.82
2.02
0.95
1.35
19.48 nd

212

N
P
K
Temperature
Carbon Sequestration
Wildlife
Class Amphibia
Class Aves
Class Mammalia
Class Reptilia
Stumpage build-up
Dominant
Co-dominantThird layer

0.71
0.02
0.12
31.90
9.16

0.65
0.02
0.12
33.40
24.20

0.17
1.82
0.95
33.70
41.31

0.00
15.00
5.00
11.00
2187.62564.751374.20

35.90

NA
NA
NA
NA
2165.74559.101360.46

2209.06 NA
570.28 NA
1387.67 NA

b. Basilisi, Dinagat
NGP Impacts

DINAGAT
Non-NGP
44
54
CMU

NGP
Area
Compliance to
Guidelines
SMP
Survival Rate
DENR Formula
IST Formula
Soil Accretion
NPK (Soil)
N
P
K
Soil Moisture
Litterfall
N
P
K
Temperature
CarbonSequestration
Wildlife

Control

80

66

85.75

88.17

85.55

54.12

66.50 NA

85.75
55.43
0.07

88.17
57.26
-0.35

85.55
56.83
-0.11

54.12
33.67
-0.03

66.50 NA
49.62 NA

0.24
3.01
0.10
4.910

0.17
3.85
0.07
4.4905

0.13
4.50
0.05
4.21

0.237
4.488
0.096

0.205
3.5
0.039

4.13

4.88

0.84
0.05
0.09
31.55

33.12

33.02

31.21

0.01

0.15

0.06

213

0.22
5.65
0.09
4.60

Class Amphibia
Class Aves
Class Mammalia
Class Reptilia
Stumpagebuild-up
Dominant
Co-dominantThird layer

3.00
54.00
8.00
5.00

3.00
54.00
8.00
5.00

NA
NA
NA
NA

NA
NA
NA

c. Hinobaan, Negros Occidental
NGP Impacts

Area
Compliance to
Guidelines
SMP
Survival Rate
DENR Formula
IST Formula
Soil Accretion
NPK (Soil/Litter)
N
P
K
Soil Moisture
Litterfall
N
P
K
Temperature
CarbonSequestration
Wildlife
Class Amphibia
Class Aves
Class Mammalia
Class Reptilia
Stumpage build-up
Dominant

HINOBAAN
NGP
119

85

Non-NGP
100
109

Control
site

86.46

85.28

68.00

64.00

0.00

86.46
66.12
-0.11

85.28
82.80
-0.65

68.00
0.00
0.15

64.00
0.00
-0.22

0.00
0.00
-6.00

0.00
0.37
0.47
15.66

0.00
16.72
0.20
17.58

0.00
1.35
0.32
20.99

0.00
3.24
0.18
8.38

0.00
0.11
0.08
3.18

0.94
0.07
0.35
33.00

34.10

34.10

32.31

36.27

0.01

36.17

228.74160.07

0.00

2.00
11.00
4.00
8.00

2.00
11.00
4.00
8.00

NA
NA
NA
NA

72940.00 2352.73 NA
214

Co-dominantThird layer

NANA

2. Experts’ ratings on the NGP, non-NGP sites and control sites
The NGP sites, non-NGP sites and control sites were rated using their characteristics byexperts in reforestation. High positive characteristics by indicator are rated 5 while low
positive characteristics are rate 1.
DINAGATHINOBAANZAMBALESNGP Impacts
NGP
Area
Survival Rate
DENR Formula
IST Formula
Soil Accretion
NPK (Soil/Litter)
N
P
K
Soil Moisture
Temperature
CarbonSequestration
Wildlife
Total
Average

80

66

NonNGPNGP Control
44
119 85

3
5
3

3
5
3

3
5
3

3 NA
5 NA
2

3
2
1
5
2

3
2
1
5
2

3
1
1
5
2

2
1
2
1
28 25
2.8 2.5

1
3
28
2.8

Non-NGP100

Control
site
NGP
109
99

1

5
5
3

5
5
2

3
0
5

3 NA
0 NA
5

3
2
1
3
1

1
1
1
1
0

3
2
1
5
2

3
2
1
3
2

3
2
1
5
4

1
1
22
2.2

1
0
6
0.75

3
2
3
3
32 28
3.2 2.8

5
5
33
3.3

ControlSite
150 131

1

5
5
5

5
5
2

5 NA
5 NA
3

1

3
2
1
5
4

1
1
1
1
0

3
2
1
5
5

3
2
1
4
3

3
2
1
5
3

1
1
1
1
0

5
5
33
3.3

1
0
6
0.75

2
3
36
3.6

1
2
28
2.8

2
1
30
3

1
0
6
0.75

3. Statistical evaluation among NGP site, Non-NGP site and Control site within theprovince.
This evaluation did not materialize because of insufficeiency in the number of sites tocompare with in the province. The number of data to lend itself to statistical analysis was not
sufficient for an ANOVA analysis.
4. Statistical evaluation among NGP site, Non-NGP site and Control site in the 3
provinces/municipalities.

215

1. NGP vs. Non-NGP vs. Control
The indicators to be used in the statistical evaluation are survival rates (both DENR and
IST formulas), soil accretion/erosion, temperature, NPK, soil moisture, carbon
sequestration and wildlife.
In every indicator, the null hypothesis is, are the NGP sites, non-NGP sites, and control
sites in the 3 municipalities the similar considering the same indicator. The alternate
hypothesis is, are the NGP sites, non-NGP sites and control sites different from eachother considering the same indicator.

1.1.

DENR survival rates

The ANOVA is shown below, the p value= 0.0014, less than 0.05, therefore, reject the null
hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis. This means that all the plantation sites are
not statistically similar in terms of survival rates determined through the DENR formula.
Therefore, the NGP sites and non-NGP sites in the 3 municipalities are statisticallysignificant that they are different from each other.
Analysis of VarianceSS
df

SourceMS

F

Between groups
Within groups

32.6785714
14.25

2
11

16.3392857
1.29545455

Total

46.9285714

13

3.60989011

Bartlett's test for equal variances:

1.2.

chi2(
1) =

12.61

0.5562

Prob > F
0.0014

Prob>chi2 =0.456

IST survival rates

The ANOVA is shown below, the p value= 0.0003, less than 0.05, therefore, reject the null
hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis. This means that all the plantation sites are
not statistically similar in terms of survival rates determined through the IST formula.
Therefore, the NGP sites and non-NGP sites in the 3 municipalities are statisticallysignificant that they are different from each other.

SourceAnalysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

Between groups
Within groups

61.6071429
18.75

2
11

30.8035714
1.70454545

Total

80.3571429

13

6.18131868

1.3.

Soil accretion

216

F
18.07

Prob > F
0.0003

The ANOVA shows that the p value= 0.1537, greater than 0.05, therefore, the null
hypothesis is accepted, thus rejecting the alternate hypothesis. This means that all theplantation sites are statistically similar in terms of soil accretion.
Analysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

SourceF

Between groups
Within groups

7.60714286
18.75

2
11

3.80357143
1.70454545

Total

26.3571429

132.02747253

Bartlett's test for equal variances:

1.4.

chi2(
1) =

2.23

2.6874

Prob > F
0.1537

Prob>chi2 =0.101

Nitrogen in the Soil/Litter

The null hypothesis is rejected because the p value of 0.0018 is less than 0.05. Thus, the NGP
sites, non-NGP sites and control sites have significant difference in terms of nitrogen from litter
fall/soil.
Analysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

SourceBetween groups
Within groups

6.42857143
32
11

3.21428571.272727273

Total

9.42857143

13.725274725

1.5.

F
11.79

Prob > F
0.0018

Phosphorus in the Soil/ Litter

There is a significant difference among the NGP, non-NGP and control sites. The p-value of
0.0449 is less than 0.05. This means that all the NGP, non-NGP sites and control sites are notsimilar in terms of Phosphorus in the soil/litter.
Analysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

SourceF

Between groups
Within groups

1.23214286
1.625

2
11

.616071429.147727273

Total

2.85714286

13.21978022

Bartlett's test for equal variances:

1.6.

chi2(
1) =

4.17

0.4836

Prob > F
0.0449Prob>chi2 =0.487

Potassium

The data variation for potassium is not significant thus doing ANOVA does not make sense. Thismeans that all the NGP sites and non-NGP sites have more or less the same evaluation data.

217

1.7.

Soil moisture

There is significant difference among the NGP, non-NGP sites and control sites in terms of soil
moisture. The p-value is 0.0073 less than 0.05 (please refer to the ANOVA table).
Analysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

SourceF

Between groups
Within groups

21.4821429
14.8752
1110.7410714
1.35227273

Total

36.3571429

13

2.7967033

Bartlett's test for equal variances:

1.8.

chi2(
1) =

7.94

3.7433

Prob > F
0.0073Prob>chi2 =0.053

Temperature

In terms of temperature, the NGP and non-NGP sites have no significant difference at p value of
0.0938 greater than 0.05. This is probably due to the fact that both sites have the same vegetative
cover types which have the same reducing effect to temperature.
Analysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

SourceF

Between groups
Within groups

11.0892857
20.6252
11

5.54464286
1.875

Total

31.7142857

13

2.43956044

Bartlett's test for equal variances:

1.9.

chi2(
1) =

2.96

1.8429Prob > F
0.0938Prob>chi2 =0.175

Carbon sequestration

Considering the carbon sequestration capacity of the NGP sites and non-NGP sites, there is no
significant difference. Thus, they are all similar. The p value is 0.2055, greater than 0.05 making
the null hyphotesis accepted.
SourceAnalysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

F

Between groups
Within groups

6.5
19.5

2
11

3.25
1.77272727

Total

26

13

2

Bartlett's test for equal variances:

218

chi2(
1) =

1.83

5.7832

Prob > F
0.2055

Prob>chi2 =0.016

1.10 Wildlife
Similarly, when the number of wildlife families is considered, the p value is 0.15 greater than the
0.05. This means that the NGP and non-NGP sites have more or less similar impact to wildlife
species in number. Thus, the null hypothesis is selected (see ANOVA table) in the following
section.
Analysis of Variance
SS
df
MS

SourceF

Between groups
Within groups

10.6785714
26.25

2
11

5.33928571
2.38636364

Total

36.9285714

132.84065934

Bartlett's test for equal variances:

chi2(
1) =

2.24

4.9202

Prob > F
0.1530Prob>chi2 =0.027

5. Spearman’s correlations of indicators
The results of the Spearman’s correlations of indicators are presented in the following boxes.

DENR Survival Rates vs.
Environmental Indicators
DENR Formulavs.

IST Formula

DENR Formulavs.

Soil Accretion

DENR Formulavs.
DENR Formulavs.
DENR Formulavs.

p-value.003.733**

.101

.457

.001

.764**.003.736**

.057

.520

.009

.667**

.118

.438

.051

.530

N
P
Soil Moisture

DENR Formulavs.

Temperature

DENR Formulavs.

Carbon Sequestration

DENR Formulavs.

correlation coefficient

Wildlife219

α=0.05

Conclusions:
There is positive strong linear relationship between DENR formula and IST
formula.
There is positive strong linear relationship between DENR formula and N.
There is positive strong linear relationship between DENR formula and P.
There is positive strong linear relationship between DENR formula andTemperature.

IST Survival Rates vs. Environmental
Indicators

p-valuecorrelation coefficient

IST Formula vs

DENR Formula.003.733**IST Formula vsSoil Accretion

.469

.211

IST Formula vs

N

.005

.701**IST Formula vs

P

.057

.519

IST Formula vsSoil Moisture

.122

.433

IST Formula vsTemperature

.394

.248

IST Formula vsCarbon Sequestration

.838

-.060

IST Formula vsWildlife

.561

.170

Conclusions:
There is a positive strong linear relationship between IST Formula and DENR
FormulaThere is a positive strong linear relationship between IST Formula and N

Soil Accretion vs. Environmental Indicators

220

p-valuecorrelation coefficientSoil Accretion vs

DENR Formula

.101

.457

Soil Accretion vsIST Formula

.469

.211

Soil Accretion vs

N

.003

.739**

Soil Accretion vs

P

.020

.610*

Soil Accretion vsSoil Moisture.000.923**

Soil Accretion vs

Temperature.000.871**

Soil Accretion vs

Carbon Sequestration.003.738**

Soil Accretion vsWildlife.000.809**

Conclusions:
There is a positive strong linear relationship between Soil Accretion and P.
There is a positive very strong linear relationship between Soil Accretion and Soil
Moisture
There is a positive very strong linear relationship between Soil Accretion andTemperature
There is a positive strong linear relationship between Soil Accretion and Carbon
Sequestration.
There is a positive very strong linear relationship between Soil Accretion and Wild life.

Nitrogen vs Environmental
Indicators
N
vs
N
vs
N
vs
N
vs
N

pvaluecorrelation coefficient.001.764**.005.701**.003.739**.000.826**.001.794**

DENR Formula
IST Formula
Soil Accretion
P
Soil Moisture
221

vs
N
vs

Temperature

NvsCarbon Sequestration

N
vs

.003

.734**

.075

.491

.003

.729**

Wildlife

Conclusions:
There is a positive strong linear relationship between N and DENR Formula.
There is a positive strong linear relationship between N and IST Formula.
There is a positive strong linear relationship between N and soil accretion
There is a positive very strong linear relationship between N and P
There is a positive strong linear relationship between N and Soil moisture
There is a positive strong linear relationship between N and Temperature
There is a positive strong linear relationship between N and wildlife

Phosphorus vs. Environmental
Indicators
Pvs

DENR FormulaPvs

IST Formula

P
vs
P
vs
P
vs
P
vs

p-valuecorrelation coefficient.003.736**

.057

.519

.020

.610*

.000

.826**

.026

.590*

.007

.687**

Soil Accretion
N
Soil Moisture
Temperature

222

P
vs
P
vs

.025

.595*

.002

.762**

Carbon Sequestration
Wildlife

Conclusions:
There is a positive strong linear relationship between P and DENR Formula.
There is a positive strong linear relationship between P and Soil accretion
There is a positive very strong linear relationship between P and N
There is a positive moderate linear relationship between P and Soil Moisture
There is a positive strong linear relationship between P and Temperature
There is a positive moderate linear relationship between P and Carbon
Sequestration
There is a positive strong linear relationship between P and wildlife.

Soil Moisture vs. Environmental Indicators

p-valuecorrelation coefficient

Soil Moisture vs

DENR Formula

.057

.520

Soil Moisture vsIST Formula

.122

.433

Soil Moisture vsSoil Accretion.000.923**

Soil Moisture vs

N

.001

.794**

Soil Moisture vs

P

.026

.590*

Soil Moisture vsTemperature.002.761**

Soil Moisture vsCarbon Sequestration

.022

.605*

Soil Moisture vsWildlife.007.688**

Conclusions:

There is a positive very strong linear relationship between soil moisture and soil
223

accretion
There is a positive strong linear relationship between soil moisture and N
There is a positive moderate linear relationship between soil moisture and P
There is a positive strong linear relationship between soil moisture and Temperature
There is a positive strong linear relationship between soil moisture and Carbon
Sequestration
There is a positive strong linear relationship between soil moisture and wildlife

Temperature vs. Environmental Indicators

p-valuecorrelation coefficient

Temperature vs

DENR Formula.009.667**

Temperature vsIST Formula

.394

.248

Temperature vsSoil Accretion.000.871**

Temperature vs

N

.003

.734**

Temperature vs

P

.007

.687**

Temperature vsSoil moisture.002.761**

Temperature vsCarbon Sequestration.008.675**

Temperature vsWildlife.001.779**

Conclusions:
There is a positive strong linear relationship between temperature and denr formula
There is a positive very strong linear relationship between temperature and soil
accretion
There is a positive strong linear relationship between temperature and N.
There is a positive strong linear relationship between temperature and P
There is a positive strong linear relationship between temperature and Soil moisture
There is a positive strong linear relationship between temperature and carbon
sequestration
There is a positive strong linear relationship between temperature and wildlife.

224

Carbon sequestration vs. environmental
indicators

p-valuecorrelation
coefficient

Carbon Sequestration vs

DENR Formula

.118

.438

Carbon Sequestration vsIST Formula

.838

-.060

Carbon Sequestration vsSoil Accretion.003.738**

Carbon Sequestration vs

N

.075

.491

Carbon Sequestration vs

P

.025

.595*

Carbon Sequestration vsSoil moisture

.022

.605*

Carbon Sequestration vstemperature.008.675**

Carbon Sequestration vsWildlife.001.766**

Conclusions:
There is a positive strong linear relationship between carbon sequestration and soil
accretion
There is a positive moderate linear relationship between carbon sequestration and P.
There is a positive strong linear relationship between carbon sequestration and soil
moisture.
There is a positive strong linear relationship between carbon sequestration andtemperature
There is a positive strong linear relationship between carbon sequestration andwildlife

Wildlife vs. Environmental Indicators

pvaluecorrelation
coefficient

wildlife vsDENR Formula

.051

.530

wildlife vsIST Formula

.561

.170

wildlife vsSoil Accretion.000.809**

wildlife vs

N

.003

.729**

225

wildlife vs

P

.002

.762**

wildlife vsSoil moisture.007.688**

wildlife vstemperature.001.779**

wildlife vscarbon sequestration.001.766**

Conclusions:

There is a positive very strong linear relationship between wildlife and soil
accretion
There is a positive strong linear relationship between wildlife and N
There is a positive strong linear relationship between wildlife and P
There is a positive strong linear relationship between wildlife and soil
moisture
There is a positive strong linear relationship between wildlife and temperature
There is a positive strong linear relationship between wildlife and carbon
sequestration
X.

Conclusion and Recommendations
1. Sustaining the NGP Plantations
The NGP planted sites (with ages ranging from 1 to 3 years) that have been assessed andevaluated were found to have positive impacts on temperature reduction, soil accretion,soil fertility, soil moisture, carbon sequestration, and wildlife although such impacts arestill negligible. It is envisioned that the positive environmental impacts will spread further
as NGP forests grow under future conditions where forest plantations are well-maintained.
Long-term and sustainable partnership among the DENR and the POs, particularly on
effective protection and maintenance activities of young plantations, is imperative in
producing mature forests. In line with this, it is equally important for the national
government to continuously provide forest protection funds to the DENR and the POs
especially in areas that are able to maintain the minimum survival rate or those with higher
than minimum survival rates.

226

2. Indigenous forest species as replanting materials
In areas where replanting is necessary and an adequate shade is already present, the use ofindigenous forest species for replanting must be considered instead of using the same
species which do not have higher chance of surviving.
3. Proper execution of reforestation activities
The high mortality of planted seedlings in the NGP sites during the first and succeeding
years proved that important guidelines, best practices, and standards were not properly
undertaken in the field. Activities crucial to any reforestation projects are survey,
mapping, and planning, feasibility study, capability building, plantation quality assurance,
seedling production, site preparation, planting, and protection and maintenance. Proper
execution of these activities will result in the right quality of outputs and will produce best
quality forest plantations. It is therefore imperative that such activities be correctly
implemented.
4. Changing the survival rate formula to the IST formula
The success of NGP plantation from the DENR’s point of view is measured in terms ofsurvival rate which is patched with series of replanting during the entire reforestation
management period. The definition of survival rate is limited to the actual number ofliving seedlings as a percentage of the total density of seedlings planted and paid,
regardless of the total number of seedlings replanted in the same area. The impact study
team found that the DENR formula does not give the true survival rate because it isclouded by the replanting of seedlings. Due to this, an alternative formula is recommended
by the team – the Impact Study Team (IST) Formula. This alternative formula provides ameasure of efficiency in the management of reforestation projects by providing a true
survival rate that is based on the total living seedlings as a percentage of the total numberof seedlings planted and replanted in the area. The impact study team highly recommends
the implementation of the formula in the NGP sites and all similar reforestation projects
that will be implemented in the future.
5. Construction of a reforestation access road in all reforestation areas.
The NGP sites are usually located two to four travel hours from the CENRO and/or thecommunities, rendering the location hardly conducive especially during emergency casessuch as forest fires. Reforestation access roads must be built in into the design of any
reforestation project. These access road should be a single lane width provided withturnouts in every 250 meters exclusive for small vehicles such as compact pickup trucks,“kuliglig,” tricycles, and motorcycles. To minimize expenses, it is recommended that only
wheel tracks of the access road be cemented.

227

6. Establishment of a CENRO-sub-office
Furthermore, a CENRO sub-office manned with reforestation and protection staff and PO
members should be established at the center of reforestation areas in every barangay orclusters of barangays depending on the reforestation areas. The purpose is to have a
DENR field office that is situated right on site and can make decisions and execute
immediate actions in times of emergencies such as putting off forest or grass fires andassisting the barangays in community development.
7. Forest restorability assessment
There was no time for a full blown SMP and FS in all the NGP sites sacrificing thisbecause there was a need to meet the target of reforestation for the year. SMP and FS areimportant because these are the blueprints of the project. Without these two, reforestation
will become a shut-gun approach which is not good. To prevent this to happen in futurereforestation projects, the CENRO together with the BLGU should make a continuing
assessment of the restorability of the potential sites into forest. The CENRO and the
BLGU may share the cost of assessment. There are only 2 primary indicators of
restorability that they will have to assess. These are existing vegetation and soil depth. If
the vegetation and soil depth are favorable for forest restoration, then an SMP and FS will
be conducted probably 3-5 months ahead of the scheduled implementation of areforestation project.
8. Climate change and DRR vulnerability assessment
DRR and CCA/M objectives of any reforestation project should outline clear instructions
for design, SMP, and field implementation. The design during SMP should incorporate
climate and disaster vulnerability assessment of the reforestation sites. Those areas that arehighly vulnerable should be treated separately with those that are not vulnerable in termsof species and spacing. For vulnerable areas, the recommended species are deep-rooted
trees or root-trained trees. Spacing should be close enough to have an intertwining rootsystem when the trees grow older or a combination of vegetative approach and structural
method. As a general rule, the design, species, and spacing should be capable of holding
the soil from landslides.
9. Enhancement of reforestation design
DENR has a research bureau and regional research centers which can assist the CENRO’s
in further enhancing the SMP and in enhancing reforestation projects. The research office
can assist the CENRO’s on the following:a. Species-site matching (nitrogen-fixing pioneer, intermediate and climax species
suitable to any site)b. Conduct of forest restorability assessment.
c. Preparation of SMP and FS reports together with the CENRO and BLGU staffs.
228

d. Studies on the causes of seedling mortalities
e. Trial planting of indigenous species from the highest elevation to the lowest elevationof denuded areas. Growth performance evaluation should be assessed regularly by thesame office.
f. Design of forest restoration in disaster risk areas and climate change adaptation andmitigation.
10. Monitoring impacts of reforestation projects
In the monitoring of the forest plantations, the CENROs and the Ecosystems Research andDevelopment Bureau (ERDB) should establish a regular monitoring system for the forest
plantations to include not only survival rates but also the environmental impact parameterspresented in this report. In this regard, permanent plots should be established.
11. Review of literature of forest species
For the selection of forest species, a review of literature of the species to determine where
they can grow and what the growth performance is would help the CENRO on species-site
selection.
12. Methodology of environmental impact study
In case the DENR would be interested in an environmental impact assessment study inother NGP areas, the methodology used in this study may be used with modification on
the sampling of the seedlings. A 30% sampling of the planted seedlings may be usedinstead of 100% inventory. The reason is that it is expensive to do a 100% inventory.
13. Statistical differences of the NGP sites, non-NGP sites and control sites
According to statistical evaluation using F-test or ANOVA, the sites are significantly
different from each other considering survival rates (both DENR and IST formulas),Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and soil moisture. The sites have no significant difference in termsof temperature and carbon sequestration. Data on potassium are inadequate for an F-test or
ANOVA. Since the statistical evaluation is a preliminary one, it will be recalculated when
all the NGP sites, non-NGP sites and control sites in phase 2 will be completed.
14. Reiteration of specific recommendations
There are specific recommendations on the following topics. These are all discussed inevery NGP municipality and reiterated in this section.
m. Improvement of the SMP guidelines
n. Improvement of survival rates
o. Assessment of the causes of mortality
p. Integration of DRR and CCA/M design in the NGP plantations and even in futurereforestation program.
229

15. Recommendations for the second phase
Based on the experiences in the first phase, the following are the recommendations thatshould be considered in phase 2 of the environmental impact study component:
a. Make use of purposive sampling in determining the remaining 3 provinces to be coveredin the study. Target those provinces with the oldest NGP sites (2011) and Non-NGP sites(6 years and above) in different ecosystems such as watershed, production forest,
protection forest, mangrove, and agroforest areas.
b. To cover more NGP sites in each selected municipality in the remaining 3 provinces,
reduce the sampling intensity from 100% to 30% in every NGP site. The reason is that
there is uniformity in plantations. The survival rates assessed through 100% are similar tothe survival rates assessed through a 30% sampling. The area affected in the reduction of
the sampling intensity will enable the study to cover 2 additional different NGP sites inthe same municipality.
c. In the same manner, reduce the sampling intensity of the Non-NGP sites from 100%
sampling to 30% sampling intensity. The area covered in the reduction of sampling
intensity will make 2 additional NGP sites. Thus, a total of 5 NGP sites and 1 Non-NGP
site are to be sampled in the selected municipality.
d. In the original budget, the cost of soil and litter fall laboratory analysis was not included.
This activity was subsidized by the study’s budget. It also resulted in the reduction of
species for litter fall analysis due to the high cost of NPK analysis per sample. Some of
the NGP sites have 10-15 indigenous forest species, which need to be assessed on their
NPK impacts to the soil. This study component is requesting an additional budget forlaboratory analysis for soils and litter fall by species.
e. Determination of the optimal area allocation for the different commodities in the NGP
sites nationwide. This will make use of optimization mathematical models like linear
programming or goal programming to determine the best mixture of forest and agroforest
species and their area requirements that should be planted given the terrain condition,
rainfall, temperature, available plantable area, forest restoration techniques, budget, andavailable labor. The model can have several variants by varying the objective functions
subject to the same constraints. It will be processed using the following objectives: a)maximize revenue; b) minimize cost; c) minimize DRR/CC impacts; and d) maximize
carbon sequestration. Additional funding for this study is needed.

230

References:

Aquino BS III. February 242011. Executive order 2011-26: declaring an interdepartmental
convergence initiative for a national greening program. Malacañang Palace, Manila,
Philippines: Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines 106 (23). Retrieved 18 December
2014 from http://www.gov.ph/2011/02/24/executive-order-no-26-2/. 3195p.
Arroyo GM. 2. October 2006. Republic act no. 9355: an act creating the province of Dinagat
Islands. Metro Manila, Philippines: Thirteenth Congress, Third Regular Session. A PDF file.
Retrived 21 January 2015 from http://www.congress.gov.ph/download/ra_13/RA09355.pdf.
Ayoubi, S., Khormali2, F., Sahrawa, K.L., and Rorigues de Lima A.C. 2011. Assessing Impactsof Land Use Change on Soil Quality. Indicators in a Loessial Soil in Golestan Province, Iran. J.
Agr. Sci. Tech. (2011) Vol. 13: 727-742
Balangue, T.O. 2014. Best Practices in Philippine Reforestation Using Indigenous Forest
Species: Learning from the Field. Energy Development Corporation. Metro Manila.
Baguinon, N.T. M.O. Quimado and G.J. Francisco. n.d. Country report on forest invasive
species in the Philippines: The unwelcome guests. Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific forest
invasive species ...
University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Forest Management Bureau, Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources (DENR)
http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/ae944e/ae944e09.htm
Begueria, S., 2006. Changes in land cover and shallow landslide activity: A case study in the
Spanish Pyrenees. Geomorphology 74: 196–206
Campbell, Marti. May 2012.Benefits of forest restoration: literature review coalition for theupper south platte. Retrieved fromfile:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/fujitsu/My%20Documents/Downloads/Review%20of%20literature%20envi%
Carating, R.B., Galanta, R. G. and Bacotio, C.D. 2014. The Soils of the Philippines. World soil
book series.
Combalicer, Marilyn S. 1, Don Koo Lee2, Su Yong Woo3, Yong Kwon Lee4 and Yun Ho Jang5.
September 2005. Early Growth and Physiological Characteristics of Planted Seedlings in La

231

Mesa Dam Watershed, Philippines. Early Growth and Physiological Characteristics of Seedlings.
THE PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURAL SCIENTIST ISSN 0031-7454.Vol. 88 No. 3, 305 - 316
Combalicer, Marilyn S. August 23 2011. Planting exotic nitrogen-fixing species may improveforest restoration and rehabilitation. http://www.searca.org/index.php/knowledgemanagement/seminar-series/641-planting-exotic-nitrogen-fixing-species-may-improveforestrestoration-and-rehabilitation-study-saysCorrea, S. M. and Scull, P. 2005. The Impact of Reforestation on Soil Temperature. Departmentof Geography Colgate University, Hamilton , NY, 13346
Cinco, Thelma A., Flaviana D. Hilario, Rosalina G. de Guzman and Emma D. Ares. October
2013. Climate Trends and Projections In The Philippines. 12th National Convention on Statistics(NCS) at EDSA Shangrilla.
Elliot, Stephen, Puttipong Navakitbumrung, Cherdsak Kuarak, Sudarat Zangkum, Vilaiwan
Anusarnsunthorn, David Blakesley. 2003. Selecting framework tree species for restoringseasonally dry tropical forests in northern Thailand based on ﬁeld performance. Forest Ecology
and Management 184. 177–191. ELSEVIER
Gozun EA, Acosta RT and Diaz CP. August 31 2004. DENR administrative order no. 2004-51.
Quezon City, Philippines: Department of Environment and Natural Resources. A PDF file.
Retrieved 13 January 2015 from http://www.denr.gov.ph/policy/dao2004/dao2004-51.pdf.
Gray, D.H., and Megahan, W.F., 1981. Forest vegetation removal and slope stability in the Idaho
Batholith. USDA Forest Service. Paper INT-127: 23.
Helmenstine Anne. n.d. How Much Oxygen Does One Tree Produce?
http://chemistry.about.com/bio/Anne-Marie-Helmenstine-Ph-D-7815.htm
Kapoor S. 2007. Eastern Mindanao biodiversity corridor – Philippines. A PDF file. Retrieved 26
January 2015
fromhttps://library.conservation.org/Published%20Documents/2009/Eastern%20Mindanao%20B
iodiversity%20Corridor-Philippines-2007.pdf.
Lanuza RL. June 7 2013 . From Osmeña reforestation project to experimental forest station:
potentials and implications. Philstar. Retrieved 13 January 2015 fromhttp://www.philstar.com/cebu-news/2013/06/07/951173/osmena-reforestion-projectexperimental-forest-station-potentials-and.

232

Lasco, Rodel D. and Florencia B. Pulhin.2009. Carbon Budgets of Forest Ecosystems in thePhilippines. Journal of Environmental Science and Management 12(1):1-13. ISSN 0119-1144
Lasco, Rodel D. and Juan M. Pulhin. 2006. Environmental impacts of community-based forest
management in the Philippines. Int. J. Environment and Sustainable Development, Vol. 5, No. 1,
http://www.worldagroforestrycentre.org/downloads/publications/PDFs/bc06025lasco.pdf
Mero, Danilo C. 1992. Financing community based watershed reforestation in the Philippines.
Department of Forestry, College of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Mindanao State
University, Marawi City, Philippines; Tel.: +63-633-520982; Cell phone No.: +63-9194383905; E-mail:danmero@eudoramail.comftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ad496e/ad496e04.pdf
Minasny, B., A.E. Hartemink, A.B. McBratney & H.J. Jang. 2013 Citations and the h index ofsoil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar PeerJ 1:e183;
DOI 10.7717/peerj.183
Moghiseh, E., Heidar, A. and Ghannadi, M. (2013). Impacts of deforestation and reforestation on
soil organic carbon storage and CO2 emission. Soil Science Department, University of Tehran,
Iran. Soil Science Society of Pakistan (http://www.sss-pakistan.org).
Nguyen Van So, n.d. The Potential of Local Tree Species to Accelerate Natural Forest
Succession on Marginal Grasslands in Southern Vietnam
Paje, RJP. 2011. DENR memorandum circular 2011-01: guidelines and procedures in theimplementation of the national greening program. Quezon City, Philippines: Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources. A PDF file. Retrieved 18 December 2014 fromhttp://www.rainforestation.ph/news/pdfs/NGP%20PDFs/MCNo201101_Philippines_08Mar2011.pdf.
Palmer, J. Jeff. 1999. Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT): Nitrogen Fixing
Agroforestry for Sustainable Soil and Water
Conservation, A publication of the Mindanao Baptist Rural Life Center (MBRLC). ** p
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20585279/NitrogenFixing-Agroforestry-for-Sustainable-UplandFarming
Panopio JK and Pajaro M. 2014. State of the Philippine Birds. Haribon Foundation for theConservation of Natural Resources, Incoporated. A PDF file. Retrieved 21 January 2015 fromhttp://www.haribon.org.ph/media-manager/files/State-of-the-Philippine-Birds-July-2014.pdf.

233

Regalado FGB. September 2014. Philippine standard geographic codes. Makati, Philippines:
National Statistical Coordination Board, Philippine Statistics Authority. A PDF file. Retrieved 21
January 2015 from http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/PSA-MAKATI-PSGC_SUMSEPT2014.pdf.
Rickli, C. and Graf, F. 2009. Effects of forests on shallow landslides – case studies in
Switzerland. WSL Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research, CH-8903
Birmensdorf, Switzerland.
Tagupa , Lopez and Caperida, et al. 2010. Carbon dioxide (co2) sequestration capacity oftampilisan forest -international scientific research journal issn: 2094-1749 volume: 2 issue: 3,
182
Taha, H., 1996. Modeling impacts of increased urban vegetation on ozone air quality in theSouth Coast Air Basin. Atmospheric Environment 30, 3423–3430.
Vestil JK. 2014. 8 face raps for cutting trees. Cebu, Philippines: Sun.Star Publishing, Inc.
Retrieved 13 January 2015 from http://50.28.66.108/cebu/local-news/2014/04/07/8-face-rapscutting-trees-337122.
Vestil JK. 27 March 2014. City sent chainsaw to cut trees. : Sun.Star Publishing, Inc. Retrieved
13 January 2015 from http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2014/03/27/city-sentchainsaw-cut-trees-335377.
Yang, J., et. Al 2004. The urban forest in Beijing and its role in air pollution reduction.
Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California at
Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-3110, USA. Institute of Forestry Science, Chinese Academy ofForestry Science, Beijing 100091, China.

Colorado State University. 2013. Plant Growth Factors: Photosynthesis, Respiration andTranspiration. Retrieved from http://www.ext.colostate.edu/mg/gardennotes/141.html
Department of Tourism. 1994. Final Report for the Tourism Master Plan for Region III (Central
Luzon). Engineering and Development Corporation of the Philippines (EDCOP). Retrieved 30
March 2015 from www.visitmyphilippines.com/c0f9687a5cb00ee5454203ec778be85d
Dinagat Provincial Planning and Development Office. 2010. Dinagat Islands socio economic
fact book. Retrieved 11 February 2015 from http://www.scribd.com/doc/25455336/DinagatIslands-Socio-Economic-Fact-Book#scribd.

234

Forest Management Bureau. 2015. NGP database as of 1-7-15. NGP Workshop last January 9,
2015.
National Statistics Office (NSO) http://www.census.gov.ph/content/2010-census-population-andhousing-reveals-philippine-population-9234-million
Pangga Dinagat. 2012. Geography of Dinagat. Official Website of the Municipality of Dinagat,
Dinagat Islands, Philippines. Designed and developed by karlspace.web.solutions. Retrieved 11
February 2015 from http://www.dinagat.gov.ph/index.php/about-dinagat/geography-of-dinagat.
Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration. 27 January
2014.http://pagasa.dost.gov.ph/Philippine Eagle Foundation. 2008. 1. Introduction [Eastern Mindanao Biodiversity Corridor].
A PDF file. Retrieved 21 January 2015 fromhttp://s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/www.geo.umass.edu/ContentPages/430367241.pdf.
Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau- Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2009.
4th Philippine national report to the convention on biological diversity. A PDF file. Retrieved 26
January 2015 fromhttp://www.ph.undp.org/content/dam/philippines/docs/environment/4th%20Philippine%20Natio
nal%20Report%20to%20the%20Convention%20on%20Biological%20Diversity.pdf. 10p
Rainforest Conservation Fund. 2015. Forest maintenance and succession.
http://www.rainforestconservation.org/rainforest-primer/rainforest-primer-table-ofcontents/f-forest-maintenance-and-succession/
Resources, Environment and Economics Center for Studies. 2005, Impact Assessment of theCommunity-Based Resource Management Project. Department of Finance.
Typhoon2000 official website. Retrieved from: http://www.typhoon2000 .ph/stormstats/ Worst
LuzonTyphoons.htm
World Wildlife Fund. 2015. Southeastern Asia: Philippines. Retrieved 2015 fromhttp://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/im0129.
AccuWeather, Inc. 2015. Dinagat, PH local weather. Retrieved 21 January 2015 fromhttp://www.accuweather.com/en/ph/dinagat/262993/januaryweather/262993?monyr=1/1/2014&view=table,

235

Biyahero Philippine Travel Portal. n. d. Towns and cities: general information (Dinagat Islands).
Biyahero Philippine Travel Portal. Retrieved 11 February 2015 fromhttp://www.biyahero.net/index.php?option=com_sobi2&sobi2Task=sobi2Details&catid=86&sob
i2Id=2027&Itemid=56.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2015. http://r6.denr.gov.ph/index.php/aboutus/regional-profile1
Province of Dinagat Islands. 2015. General profile. PDI: Dinagat Islands Provincial Website.
Retrieved 21 January 2015 from http://dev.dinagatislands.gov.ph/executive/ppdo-main/socioeconomic-profile-2/general-profile/.
http://www.census.gov.ph/content/2010-census-population-and-housing-reveals-philippinepopulation-9234-million
Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Negros_Natural_Park236

Appendix Figure 1. Theory of Change for the National Greening Programming (N. Lasmarias,
2015)

237

Appendix Table 1. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Survey, Mapping and
Planning.
FINDING
BASIS

DENR
Guidelines

PROCESS/ CRITERIA/
INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

Survey, mapping andplanning
A. Survey
1. Boundary
2. Soil survey (pH, fertility
and soil profile depth)
3. Vegetation survey
4. Species-site matching
5. Topographic updating
survey or based on
secondary information

DRR
Framework

6. DR areas
7. Climate risk areas such as
A. Rain-induced
landslides
B. Flooding
C. Drought

CCA/M
Framework

8. Plantable sites
9. Non-plantable sites
B. Mapping
1. All the above survey
outputs leading to thesuitability map of different
forest species that may growin the area.
C. Planning

1. Feasibility design(evaluating alternative
species that will mostly
likely result in high survival
rates with the highest
benefit.
2. Forest restoration plan(answering what, when,
where, how and how much)

238

POSITIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

NEGATIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

Best
Practices
Benchmark1. Making climate change
indicators such as rainfall,temperature, el nino and lanina projections as inputs
to designing and planningthe forest restoration plan.
2. Fitting forest restoration
targets with household
capacity to plant, protect
and maintain establishedforest and on an optimal
rainfall window conducive
for establishing forests.
3. Transforming the Forest
Restoration Plan into Task
Plan that are easily
understood by people inthe barangays that will be
engaged in theimplementation of the plan.

Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites or contains
binary entries. An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means the activity was notconducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site and
Non-NGP site. Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also given when the
NGP site rating is higher than the BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site andthe Non-NGP site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP site. It is also given
when the NGP site rating is below the BPB.

239

Appendix Table 2. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Capacity Building of NGPWorkers.
FINDINGBASIS

CRITERIA/ INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

POSITIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

NEGATIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

A. Training of the workers on
important technical aspectsof the NGP
1. Seedling production
2. Site preparation
3. Planting
4. Protection andmaintenance
5. Replanting
B. Orientation on monitoringand evaluation of thecondition of the established
C. Orientation on billing
procedure
D. Orientation on prescribedbookkeeping and accounting
procedure
E. Hands-on demonstration
training how to plant
Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites orcontains binary entries. An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means the activity
was not conducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site and
Non-NGP site. Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also given when the
NGP site rating is higher than the BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site andthe Non-NGP site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP site. It is also given
when the NGP site rating is below the BPB.

240

Appendix Table 3. Process Assessment and Evaluation for NGP Plantation Quality
Assurance.
FINDINGBASIS

CRITERIA/ INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

POSITIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

NEGATIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

Best
Practices
Benchmarka. Activity implementation
inspectionb. Activity output inspectionc. Proper sequential
implementation of forest
restoration activities
d. Payment deduction due
to poor quality of seedlings
e. Payment deduction due
to low survival rate
Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites orcontains binary entries. An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means theactivity was not conducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site
and Non-NGP site. Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also given
when the NGP site rating is higher than the BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site
and the Non-NGP site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP site. It isalso given when the NGP site rating is below the BPB.

241

Appendix Table 4. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Seedling
Production.
FINDINGBASISBPBCRITERIA/ INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

POSITIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

NEGATIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

1. Sources of planting
materials
a. Mother tree whereseeds were taken
b. Mother tree where
wildlings are takenc. Mother tree wherecloned are taken
d. Mother tree whereplanting materials where
taken for procured
seedlings
2. Growing period of
seedlings raised in nurserya. Seedlings fromseeds
b. Seedlings fromwildlings
c. Seedlings fromcloning
Quality of planting
materials
1. Height of seedlings
hauled to planting sites
2. Diameter of seedlings
hauled to planting sites
3. Number of leaves ofseedlings hauled to plantng
sites

Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites orcontains binary entries. An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means theactivity was not conducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site
and Non-NGP site. Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also
given when the NGP site rating is higher than the BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP
site and the Non-NGP site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP
site. It is also given when the NGP site rating is below the BPB.
242

Appendix Table 5. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Site
Preparation.
FINDINGBASIS

CRITERIA/ INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

POSITIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

NEGATIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

1. Start of the preparation
activities
2. Quality of strips and rings(size of planting strips/
rings)
3. Size of planting holes
4. Staking density per ha
5. Soil fertility
enhancement (composting,humus addition, fertilizer
application)
6. Water systemconstructed
7. Access roads and foodpath constructed
8. Satellite nurseries
constructed in the planting
site
Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites orcontains binary entries. An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means theactivity was not conducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site
and Non-NGP site. Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also
given when the NGP site rating is higher than the BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP
site and the Non-NGP site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP
site. It is also given when the NGP site rating is below the BPB.

243

Appendix Table 6. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Planting NGP Sites.
FINDINGBASIS

CRITERIA/ INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

1. Start of planting
a. End month of thedry season
b. Start month of therainy seasonc. Middle of the firstmonth of the rainy season
2. Stop planting
a. Last month of therainy season
b. First month of thefollowing dry season
3. Filling fertile soil
(compost, fertilizer, humus)

BPB

a. Soil from the hole
only (no mixture withcompost, fertilizer, humus)
b. Soil from hole with
mixture (compost, fertilizer,
humus)
c. Total soil
replacement with compost,
fertilizer mixed with soil,
forest humus
4. Removing plastic bag
properly by cutting one sideand base without disturbing
the soil
5. Depth of planting
6. Cover planted seedlingwith soil. Press the soil
firmly.
7. Staking after planting
1. Mulched seedlings after
planting

244

POSITIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

NEGATIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

2. Water sysem constructed(impounding pond per
hectare, improvised drip
method, ditch aroundseedlings or along plantlines, etc) for wateringcontingency during dry
season3. Planting healthy andquality seedlings
Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites orcontains binary entries. An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means theactivity was not conducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site
and Non-NGP site. Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also
given when the NGP site rating is higher than the BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP
site and the Non-NGP site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP
site. It is also given when the NGP site rating is below the BPB.

245

Appendix Table 7. Process Assessment and Evaluation for Protection and
Maintenance.
FINDINGBASIS

CRITERIA/ INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

POSITIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

NEGATIVE
RATING
NonNGP
NGP
Site
Site

1. Forest plantationassessment
a. Frequency of forest
plantation assessmentb. Assessed forest
plantation problems
2. Protection andmaintenance activities
a. People's forest
governancei. IECii. 24/7 patrolingand guarding and forest fire
protectioniii. Exit and entry
management of planted
areas
b. Technical activities
i. Fire line or fire
breaksii. Grass density
managementiii. Replanting
iv. Fertilizer input(frequency of applicationand quantity applied per
hectare)v. Others
Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites orcontains binary entries. An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means theactivity was not conducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site
and Non-NGP site. Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also
given when the NGP site rating is higher than the BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP
site and the Non-NGP site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP
site. It is also given when the NGP site rating is below the BPB.

246

Appendix Table 8. Environmental Impact Evaluation for NGP sites.
FINDINGBASIS

CRITERIA/ INDICATOR

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

POSITIVE RATING
ControlSite

1. Survival rate
2.NGP Impact to soil
accretion/erosion
3.NGP Impact to soil
indicators
a. Nitrogenb. Phosphorousc. Potassiumd. Organic Mattere. Carbon
f. Soil moisture
4.NGP species nutrients
contribution to soila. Nitrogenb. Phosphorousc. Potassiumd.Carbon
5.NGP Impact totemperature
6.NGP compliance to DRR
a. DRR design in slope
36-55%
i. Area planted withdeep-rooted species
ii. % area planted overtotal area of NGP siteb. DRR design in slope>55%
1. Area planted with deeprooted species
2. % area planted over total
area of NGP sitec. DRR design invulnerable
streams/rivers/creeks
1. Area planted
2. Deep-rooted species
planted3. % planted area of 3.ad. DRR design in existinggullies
1. Area planted

247

NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

Control
Site

NEGATIVE RATING
NonNGP
Site

NGP
Site

ControlSite2. Deep-rooted species
planted3. % planted area of d.
e. DRR design in existingland slides
5.a. Area planted
5.b. Deep-rooted species
planted3.c. % planted area of 5.a.
NGP climate change to CCA
measures1. Construction ofintercepting ditches todivert surface water frompassing through plantedareas
2. Planting of deep- rooted
forest species in close
spacing
3. Planting of hedge rows of
kakawate and deep rooted
forest species in between
hedgerows.
4. Construction of diversion
canals to deviate surface
runoff from gully directions
and planting of gullies withdeep –rooted forest species
to hold back the soil.
5. Provision of improvised
water system such as rainwater harvesting, drip
method of watering
seedlings, tapping of springwater, stream water for the
NGP plantations. Plantingof water loving plants or
drought resistant species
before desired forest
species are planted
NGP climate change
mitigation measures
1. Total carbon
sequestration of softwood
species planted
2. Total carbon
sequestration of medium
hardwood species planted248

3. Total carbon
sequestration of hardwood
species planted
4.NGP Impact tobiodiversity conservation
5. NGP Impact to wildlife
1. Flora
2. Fauna
6.Diversity of forest species
planted in NGP site
Note:
1. Finding by indicator contains qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the NGP and Non-NGP sites or contains binary entries.
An entry of 1 means the activity indicator was conducted. Zero entry means the activity was not conducted.
2. Positive rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site and Non-NGP site.
Positive is given when the NGP site’s rating is higher than the Non-NGP site. It is also given when the NGP site rating is higher thanthe BPB (Best Practices Benchmark).
3. Negative rating by indicator contains the numerical difference of the weight or rate between the NGP site and the Non-NGP
site. Negative rating is given when the NGP site rating is lower than the Non-NGP site. It is also given when the NGP site rating is
below the BPB.

249

Annex 1. KII/FGD Guide for Survey, Mapping and Planning

Key Informant Interview/Focus Group Discussion Guide
This guide is intended for the following respondents (PENRO, CENRO, NGP PENRO
Coordinators, NGP CENRO Coordinators, Region NGP Coordinator, PO Officers, SMP
contractor, if contracted to third party) engaged in SMP.
Name (Complete)
Address
Cellphone number
Age
Function in the
NGP
NGP site
FGD/KII by
Date of KII
1. Before the start of NGP implementation, was there a Survey, Mapping and Planning or
feasibility study, or appraisal or comprehensive site development planning conducted inevery NGP site?
SMP activity

Indicators measured (% sampled in the area Not
if any)considered

Soil survey

Soil depth

Acidity

NPK

250

Reason for
not includingin the survey

2. On species-site matching, how did the SMP identify the right species that will grow andsurvive in the NGP sites?
SMP Activity

Check appropriate
activity

Remarks

Based on the soil
survey result
Based on forest
species growing in
the field
Based on ERDB
recommendation
Combination of theabove
Others (pls specify)

END OF FGD/KII GUIDE

251

Annex 2. KI/FGD Guide for Insuring the Quality of NGP Forest Plantations

Key Informant Interview/Focus Group Discussion Guide
This guide is intended for the following respondents (PENRO, CENRO, NGP PENRO
Coordinators, NGP CENRO Coordinators, Region NGP Coordinator, PO Officers, NGA’s
counterpart) engaged in ensuring the quality of NGP plantations.
Name (Complete)
Address
Cellphone number
Age
Function in the
NGP
NGP site
FGD/KII by
Date of KII
3. After the conduct of a specific NGP activities, did the CENRO and site coordinators inspect
the quality of NGP activity outputs according to quality standards?
NGP Activity% Quality
OutputSeedlings produced
Site preparation
1. Size of strip
brushed
2. Size of ringbrushed3. Size ofplanting hole
252

Remarks

4. Actual
number of
stakes/ha
5. Fertile soil
filled in thehole
6. Fertilizer
appliedPlanting (actual
density/ha)Protection andmaintenance
1. Replanting
2. Fire breaks
and fire lines
3. Ring weeding
4. Mulching
5. Others

4. Were the workers advised on what to undertake to correct the inadequacies in theirperformance based on no. 1 answers?
Inadequacies% compliance of theworkers

Any written agreements between DENR
and the PO workers (describe agreement
or attach agreement if any)253

5. Did the DENR use the above quality standards in the payments of outputs of the workers?
NGP Activity% Payment
beforecompliancewithout
deduction% Payment
beforecompliance withdeduction% Payment
aftercompliance

Remark

6. How many months payment is made after planting the seedlings?
SpeciesNumber ofweeks/months
payment is madeReasons

7. Were there activities conducted to grade or cull out inferior quality of seedlings?
NGP Activity% Culled Out% Acceptable grade
254

Actionrecommended forculled seedlings
Seedlings at thenursery before
hauling to NGP sites
Seedlings at the NGP
sites ready forplanting
Planted seedlingafter planting
Health condition ofplanted seedlings

END OF FGD/KII GUIDE

255

Annex 3. KII/FGD Guide for Capability Development of NGP Workers

Key Informant Interview/Focus Group Discussion Guide
This guide is intended for the following respondents (PENRO, CENRO, NGP PENRO
Coordinators, NGP CENRO Coordinators, Region NGP Coordinator, PO Officers, NGA’s
counterpart) engaged in training the nursery workers, site preparation workers, planters,
and protection and maintenance workers.
Name (Complete)
Address
Cellphone number
Age
Function in the
NGP
NGP site
FGD/KII by
Date of KII

256

8. Before the start field NGP activities, were there trainings conducted to re-orient thecontractors on the establishment, protection, maintenance and management of thecontractors (PO members, workers, etc.) of the different NGP activities?
Title ofTrainings

Attendee

Number of days of
training withdemonstration

Resource
Persons

9. Were the workers trained by their officers on the same subject matters taught to themduring their trainings?
Title of training
Approach of training Attendee and their
Remarksfunctions in the NGP

257

10. How did the trained workers demonstrate their learnings in the training?
Learnings
Absorbed andPractised

Indicate approximate compliance of workers in their NGP activities(estimate compliance in terms of % consistency with instructions or
guidelines of NGP)
Below 50 %Average of 80%

Higher than
80%, but not
more than
100%

100%

Nursery
operations
Site preparation
Planting
Protection andmaintenance
Others

11. What were the reasons for compliance below the average of 80%?
Reasons

Rank
Reasons

Was not invited during the training
conducted by the PO officers
Not attentive during the training
Resource persons were not effectivein transferring the knowledge thatthey want to impact
Insufficient subject matters discussed
during the training.
258

RemarkTraining was purely lecture without
actual demonstration how to conduct
the activities in the field.
Others (please specify)

12. Were there follow up training to upgrade the skills and to address some inadequacies on
the skills and knowledge of the NGP workers after the first year of NGP activities?
Title of Training

Attendees% of improvementin NGP activities
resulting fromincreased survival
rates of NGP
plantations

END OF FGD/KII GUIDE

259

Remarks

Annex 4. KII/FGD Guide for Seedling Growers

Key Informant Interview/Focus Group Discussion Guide
This guide is intended for the following KII respondents (20 seedling growers). ). If theworkers participated in all plantation establishment activities, increase the number of
KII/FGD t0 50 respondents.
Name (Complete)
Address
Cellphone number
Age
Function in the

260

NGP
NGP site
FGD/KII by
Date of KII

13. What is/are the sources of seedlings? (please check appropriate box/blank in the tablebelow).
Species From Seeds
Collected
byRespondent

From
Wildings
Collected
byRespondent

From
From
Cuttings
ClonedCollected
Seedlings
byRespondent

ProcuredfromPrivateNurseries

Procuredfrom
DENR/
Personnel

14. How many weeks did you take care of the seedlings in the nursery up to outplanting in the
NGP planting sites?
261

Species

From
Seeds

From
From
From
Wildlings Cuttings Cloned

Procured Procured Procured from
Seedlings from
DENR/Personnel

15. What were the qualities of seedlings that were hauled to planting sites?
Species

Ht of Seedlings (incm)

Diameter ofSeedlings (mm)Number of
Leaves ofSeedlings

END OF FGD/KII GUIDE
262

Annex 5. KII/FGD Guide for Workers Engaged in Site Preparation

Key Informant Interview/Focus Group Discussion Guide
This guide is intended for the followingI respondents (20 plantation workers engaged in site
preparation of NGP sites). ). If the workers participated in all plantation establishment
activities, increase the number of KII/FGD t0 50 respondents.
Name (Complete)
Address
Cellphone number
Age
Function in the
NGP
NGP site
FGD/KII by
Date of KII

16. When did you start straight/contour strip/ring brushing of the plantable sites? (pleasecheck appropriate box/blank in the table below).
1 month before
rainy season

2 weeks
beforerainyseasonDuring dry
season263

During rainyseasonsimultaneouslywith planting

17. Quality of the strip/ring brushed area?
1 meter strip

0.5
meter
radiusring

Grassroots allremovedwithinstrip/ring

Stakes erected inevery planting hole

18. What is the size of the planting hole?
Species

Width or Diameterof Hole264

Depth of Hole19. Did you add or fill compost, forest top soil or humus or fertile soil into the planting holeafter hole digging? Please check appropriate column.
No compost or
fertile soilWith compost

With fertilesoil

Forest top soil
or humus20. Did you consider tapping and/or constructing a water system (pond, rain water harvesting
system, etc.) in the plantation sites where water during dry season may be sourced forwatering the planted seedlings?.
Please describe in this box the water system that you constructed.

26521. Did you prepare access roads and foot paths to support planting in NGP sites?
Please describe in this box the access roads and foot paths that were constructed in the
NGP sites?

22. Did you prepare temporary satellite nurseries in the NGP planting sites where seedlings
were temporary stored before planting?
Please describe in this box

END OF FGD/KII GUIDE

Annex 6. KII/FGD Guide for Workers Engaged in Planting Seedlings in NGP sites

Key Informant Interview/Focus Group Discussion Guide
This guide is intended for the following respondents (20 plantation workers engaged inplanting seedlings in the NGP sites). If the workers participated in all plantation
establishment activities, increase the number of KII/FGD t0 50 respondents.

Name (Complete)
Address
Cellphone number
Age
Function in the
NGP

266

NGP site
FGD/KII by
Date of KII

23. When did you start planting? (please check appropriate box/blank in the table below).
1st week of therainy season

2nd weekof therainyseasonDuring therainy season

During the dry
season24. When did you stop planting?
2 weeks before endof the rainy season

1 week before
end of the267

1st week of thedry season

Othersrainy season

25. Did you fill soil fertility additive ( compost, forest top soil/humus or fertilizer) in the holeduring planting?
SpeciesCompostType of fertile soil
Forest top
soil/humus

268

Fertilizer

26. Did you remove the plastic bag of the seedling without breaking the soil ball during
planting?
Cut andremovedwithout
breaking thesoil ballCut andremoveddisturbing thesoil ballSlit the plastic
base only
without
removing it.

Others

27. How deep did you plant the seedlings?
Species

Root collar
same levelwith thegroundsurface

Root collar
3-4 inches
below thegroundsurface269

Root collar 2
inches above
the groundsurface

Others28. Did you firmly plant the seedlings on the ground?
Please describe process in this bon

29. Did you erect a stake in every planted hole?
Type of material used as stakes (split
bamboo, timber pole or branch, etc.)

Length or height of stake

30. After planting the seedlings did you provide some forms of mulch to collect and save soil
moisture?
Please describe in this box

END OF FGD/KII GUIDE

270

Annex 7. KII/FGD Guide for Workers Engaged in Protection and Maintenance of NGP
Planted Sites

Key Informant Interview/Focus Group Discussion Guide
This guide is intended for the following respondents (20 plantation workers engaged inprotection and maintenance of the planted NGP sites). If the workers participated in allplantation establishment activities, increase the number of respondents to 50 respondents.

Name (Complete)
Address
Cellphone number
Age
Function in the
NGP
NGP site
FGD/KII by
Date of KII
31. After planting the NGP site, how often did you inspect the planted seedlings?
No inspection
after planting

Weeklyafter
planting

Monthly after
planting

271

Quarterly after
planting

Yearly after
planting

32. What were the common problems that caused the reduction of survival rates in the NGP
planted areas?
Types of Problem
Area Affected (in ha) Rank of the problem Remarks
1. Drought
2. Grass fires
due tograzing
3. Kainginmaking
4. Wildlife
Hunting
5. Treasurehunting
6. Improper
planting
7. Inferior
seedlings
planted8. Others (plsspecify)

33. What were the protection and maintenance activities did you perform?
Speci
es

Ring
weedi
ng

Mulching

Fertilize Firer
break orapplicati fire lineonconstruction
272

Replanting

Watering

Forest/gr
ass fireprotectio
n

IE
C

Foot
patr
ol

34. During the last inspection that you conducted, what was the survival rate of the planted
NGP site before replanting?
Species

Survival
rate

Cause(s) of
mortalities

What activities haveyou implemented toreduce seedlingmortality (only thosethat directly affected
reduction ofmortalities)

35. How tall and thick the grasses and weeds in the NGP plantations before ring weeding?

273

Year Planted

Types of grass

Ht of grasses

Density of grasses

36. How many seedlings were replanted?
SpeciesArea
replanted(hectares)

Number of
seedlings
replanted

274

Quality of
replanted
seedlings (ht,dia. # of leaves)Year ofreplanting

37. Did you apply fertilizer during the inspection period to nutrient- deficit seedlings?
Species

Type of fertilizer
Mykovam

NPK
Inorganic
fertilizer

NPK
organic
fertilizer

Conditions of seedlings after
fertilization
Dead
Improving Others
in growth

38. Forest or grass fires that affected the NGP plantations?
Species

Area Burned

Measures
Conducted toprevent forest
or grass fires

275

Measuresconducted tocontrol spreadof forest or
grass fires

Other
Measures39. Based on your observations, what should be done to improve the conditions (survival rateand health conditions) of the NGP plantations in order to have a good quality NGP forestsin the future?
Suggestion

Rank
according topriority of
implementation

Straight 3 years contract to PO withresponsibility to protect and maintainwhat they have planted.
Allocate additional budget for water
system to be used in watering theplantations during drought. Zambales has
only 3 months of rainy season andtemperature is becoming intense.
Since most of the grassland and brushlandareas in Zambales are already deteriorated
apply soil fertility enhancing organic
materials to support plant growth
Prioritize reforestation along theperiphery of forest lines along creeks
expanding uphill.
OthersEND OF FGD/KII GUIDE

276

ANSWERS TO THE OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS OF DR. PACENSIA MILAN,
NRM CONSULTANT, ON THE SCOPING AND PROCESSES ASSESSMENT AND
EVALUATION OF THE NATIONAL GREENING PROGRAM: ENVIRONMENTALCOMPONENT

Observation/comments:

A.

Based on the objectives of the study:
1. "to validate the survival rate and growth performance of the NGP forest plantation", anobjective assessment of such should be made because mortality is quite high in some areas,
quality of seedlings was not paid any attention, and reforestation may be a failure if more ofarea covered under NGP are more production forests and less restoration forest.
Answer:The quality of seedlings planted in the NGP sites where assessed and evaluated according tocompliance of the PO’s to DENR standards of the seedlings to be planted. This is also thebasis of payment of seedlings by DENR. Considering that this was the basis of payment, it
follows that all seedlings planted satisfied the quality standards prescribed by the DENR. The
second check on the quality of seedlings planted in the area was determined through
FGD/KII of the seedling growers and planters. Results showed consistency between thesurvival rates and FD/KII results. This means that the perceptions/observations of the POs,
seedling growers and planters were unbiased and objective. The third check was conductedduring the field inventory of the seedlings where the health conditions of the seedlings were
evaluated.

Ideally, evaluation of the quality of the seedlings should have been done during the seedling
production stage and planting activities. This will ensure the planting of the right quality of
seedlings because only those seedlings that will pass the standards will be transported toand planted in the reforestation sites. Unfortunately, the Environmental Impact Study came
5 years after the start of the NGP. The EIS should have started from the very first NGP field
activity implementation to establish baseline information where impacts should be based
upon. Perhaps, for future third party assessment and evaluation of reforestation projects,
this should be synchronized with the schedules of reforestation activities.

277

On the survival of planted seedlings dependent solely on the quality of seedlings, aside fromthe quality of seedlings, there are other factors that contribute to the survival and growth
performance of planted seedlings. These are site conditions include the characteristics ofsoils, climate (rainfall, temperature, and drought) of the site, appropriateness of species-site
matching, and correctness of activities implemented before, during and after planting. Suchfactors should have been fully covered in the survey, mapping and planning (SMP). This,
however, was not conducted in all the NGP sites. These aspects where discussed in the 3
NGP sites that were studied.

2. "to assess the impact in improving environmental condition in terms of soil build up, water
recharge, impact to DRR and CCA and biodiversity enhancement; there was no proper
assessment of the pre-NGP status of the site especially in terms of soil analysis andvegetation study.
Answer:

It is not necessary to conduct a pre-NGP status study as part of the Environmental
Impact Study (EIS) because all the NGP sites covered in the EIS are grasslands. A pre NGP study covering not only the soils and vegetation types, but also wildlife,hydrology, topography and other relevant factors should have been done by the
DENR through the SMP based on their guidelines and not this EIS before the start of
the NGP. These indicators are important in the identification of the right speci essuitable for planting that will most likely survive on site. Unfortunately the SMPs of
the NGP sites covered only the boundary surveys using GIS, soil type only (without
the other important soil properties), and topographic map, and dominant vegetative
ground cover. In the absence of detailed relevant site information, the impacts ofreforestation projects to soil build up and water recharge can be compared to thesoil build up and water recharge of adjacent grassland areas. The difference gives theimpacts of the reforestation projects.

In terms of the DRR impact, the risks that are commonly encountered inreforestation areas are rain-induced landslides, erosions and droughts. The forest
species that are effective in minimizing landslides and erosions are those species
with deep-rooted forest species. Forest species that can survived under drought
condition are those that have inherent mechanisms to control plant respiration andconserve water. These factors were not considered in the identification of f orest
species recommended for planting in the NP sites.
The same species were planted in the same area regardless of slopes and elevations,soil characteristics, and end use (whether for timber production, protection, fordisaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation and mitigation CCA/M)).
There should be different forest species for different site characteristics and end use.

278

Ideally, sloping areas should be planted with deep-rooted seedlings, while in flat
areas, deep-rooted seedlings may not be necessary.
To address climate change-related issues, species which are high in density and at
the same time fast growing are expected to have higher carbon sequestration rates.
These were not considered in the NGP sites. The net impact is determined whencompared to the carbon sequestration rates of the grasses in the NGP sites.

Observation/Comment:

Idoubt if impact to DRR and CCA were even in the agenda of local partners or POs.

Answer:Answer to this comment is best addressed in the social impact study of the NGP where thestudy is expected to determine the IECs conducted by the DENR field offices. In fairness,issues on DRR and CCA/M importance of reforestation might have been discussed by the
NGP extension officers with the POs.

Observation/Comment

Likewise, the natural vegetation of the area was not considered in restoration. Planting
was made depending on available seedlings, native plus exotic, and in instances where native
species of trees were available, they were planted in monoculture.

Answer:On the use of natural vegetation not used in restoration, this is correct. However,there were logical reasons forwarded by the DENR field personnel. These are:
1. Natural vegetation hardly survived in open areas or grasslands. Newly planted
seedlings need partial shade in order to survive.
2. Planting materials/seeds from natural vegetation are insufficient to meet the
NGP target. The NGP planned to plant indigenous forest species in protectedareas (NIPAS) and combinations of indigenous forest species and fast growing
forest plantation species in production forests during the planning stage.
However, upon assessment of the supply of planting materials, there were not279

many seeds from the natural forest because prior to NGP the same seedling
production areas suffered from climate change-related events such as strong
typhoons and droughts that changed the physiological processes of the forest
species to bear fruits. The target areas for reforestation were so high that cannot
be supplied with right quantity of planting materials from the natural forest.
To meet the forest plantation establishment targets to provide immediate forest
cover to grasslands, the field offices considered contingent planting materials.
On diverse forest species, except for the NGP sites in Negros Occidental whichplanted in monoculture coffee in its agroforestry site and in another NGP site
planted in monoculture of exotic fast growing species, the NGP sites in Zambales
planted a combination of indigenous forest species and plantation species while
Dinagat planted indigenous forest species. The NGP sites that were assessed
planted indigenous forest species.

Observation/Comment:
How about wildlife recruitment? All the issues should be considered if such restoration is able
to contribute biodiversity enhancement both flora and fauna. In this study, complete tree
species listing and faunal observation and/or listing could have contributed to a correct
assessment of the attainment of objective #2. What observations were noted with regard to
monoculture and planting of exotic species?

Answer:100% inventory was conducted in each of the NGP site. Thus, all forest species, whether
exotic or indigenous were identified and counted. Also, 100% counting of the coffee
plantation was conducted. The presence of fauna in the communities where the NGP sites arelocated were based on the KII/FGD with the community respondents. These are presented in
the report.
Observation/Comment:
In addition, one of the provisions of NGP is to encourage "Rainforestation" or the use of"native trees in the protected areas» (EO 26 Annex 1). No mention on this is made in the
study/report. Even in the methods of restoration, Rainforestation was not mentioned.

Answer:280

Actually, NGP did address the use of indigenous forest species
in protected areas. These are reported in the report
particularly in the NGP sites in Zambales and Dinagat
province.
Observation/Comment:
Lastly, impacts of NGP, D RR and CCA were not considered as noted by the choice of forest
trees with deep rooting systems to hold more soil. There was no mention of this in the
choice of seedlings to be raised in nursery. If the POs and partners understood this, this will
enhance the success of NGP.
Answer:This is mentioned in the report. As to the understanding of the POs, this is captured in thesocial study component.
Observation/Comment:

B.
The secondary objective should have included how the DENR assisted the contractors inunderstanding the processes of EO 26 in the face of continuous decrease of forest cover and its
impact on climate change.
Answer:

The social study component covers this concerns.

Observation/Comment:C.
If this Process Evaluation Phase of the Environmental Impact of the NGP is solely based on EO
26 signed February 24, 2011, it did not capture with due diligence the biodiversity conservation
enhancement of the Executive Order as provided in the Declaration of Policy.
Answer:281

The planting of different species in each of the NGP sites indicatesbiodiversity conservation enhancement. These are reported in thereport.

Observation/Comment:

The following issues need to be addressed: a) whether the coverage of the NGP included private and A
and D land;

Answer:

The NGP fund, being a government fund, is not eligible for financing reforestation projects of the
DENR in A and Lands. This is against the law.

b) if Rainforestation or the use of native tree species was encouraged in protected areas

Answer:Native or indigenous species were used in the forestation of protected areas (please see answer of similar
question above)c) for pre-NGP status of the area selected for restoration were studied in terms of soil status,
vegetation assessment, flora and fauna inventory;

Answer:

Pre-NGP status supposedly studied and reported in the Survey, Mapping and Planning conducted by
DENR. Unfortunately, the above concerns were not addressed due to the need to meet the targets, which
are more important from the point of view of the DENR.

It is not also part of the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) report because this study started 5 years after
the start of the NGP.
282d ) appropriate training of partner(s) NGOs, POs or community in nursery establishment, preparation ofplanting materials, species matching, quality of seedlings to be planted and purposive technicalassistance from DENR personnel and other line agencies.

Answer:

The EIS reported the above concerns.

Observation/Comment:D.
It is clear that certain provision of EO 26 was not followed/accomplished particularly in theissues of biodiversity conservation. Even in the list of species, there is no clear mention of the impact
of NGP on this although one can reason out that impact cannot be measured in a short time. However,this report should have included a complete list of native tree species which is an indicator that there
was this attempt to enhance forest genetic resources in the reforestation sites under NGP.
Answer:A list of native species before the NGP implementation is not available. Thus, there is no basis for acomplete enumeration of native species. The EIS report included a list of the native species planted in the
NGP sites. There were no other native species other than those that were planted in some of the NGP
sites. The other species present were mostly cogon in between the planted seedlings.

Observation/Comment:

E.
There was an NGP Partnership's Agreement that considered highly the environmental aspectof NGP (see Annex 2). In the NGP Partnership Agreement signed among these partners, namely, DENR,PTFCF and FPE, these agencies jointly agreed to monitor the implementation of NGP particularly in use
of native tree species and to create a roadmap that would insure the planting of Philippine native trees
in all future reforestation project. However, it was further noted that up to 2015, the use of native trees
was very negligible and current report in Region 8 and other regions states that mahogany and coffee
were planted in uplands which are appropriate as Restoration Site.
Answer:283

The implementation of the partnership agreement is under the Institutional Study component.
Probably those areas planted with mahogany are production forest area while those areas plantedwith coffee are livelihood enhancement area to help the upland poor.

Observation/Comment:

F.
Major NGP goals such as biodiversity conservation and climate change adaptation andmitigation is unclear to the POs evident on the manner of seedling production and the ratio of
species type to number of seedlings planted. Baseline information, apart from being the reference forthe succeeding monitoring and evaluation process, is also one of the bases for accounting NGP efforts
to climate change adaptation and mitigation as planting trees does not necessarily accounts for
mitigating and adapting the climate change. One cannot overstate the importance of a valid, wellestablished baseline hand in hand with good, diligent record keeping for a proper analysis orcomputation say for the amount of carbon being sequestered by the trees planted and nurtured throughthe NGP program.
Answer:To reiterate, the areas that were selected for NGP sites were grassland areas with cogon as the major
type of vegetation. They did not clear a forested area only to be planted with NGP-preferred forest
species. This is probably the reason why DENR had nothing to report on native tree species in their SMPs.
At least in the NGP areas that were randomly selected for assessment and evaluation in this impact study.
So, from their point of the view, the baseline vegetation is cogon. In terms of carbon sequestration, cogon
has lesser carbon sequestration rate compared to tree species.
The other reason why baseline information survey was not pursued probably is because it is also an
expensive and time consuming activity and what is more important is to meet their targets within the 6
years period.

Observation/Comment:

By large, the DENR-PTFCF-FPE partnership agreement for the implementation of the National
Greening Program proved to be one of the biggest documented CSOs and National Government
collaboration for forest restoration and development. Effort, time and resources have been
continuously poured in by the CSOs in resources and services for the program which s trengthen
further the clamor of monitoring and evaluation.

Answer:284

Partnership with CSOs should be encouraged for a more successful implementation of any
reforestation program. Sharing of technologies, manpower and financial resources between DENR and
the CSOs is also encouraged.

Observation/Comment:G.
In relation to the Information Education and Communication (IEC) strategy for NGP, gaps arestill evident on a very little understanding of direct implementers of the program. Awareness on the
NGP project seemed insufficient despite several IEC activities implemented.
Answer:This concern will be relayed to the Social Study component to further enrich their recommendations.

Observation/Comment:

The report is quite comprehensive and captures the goal of the entire study as a whole. However, muchis still to be desired in understanding the over-all impact of NGP in increasing the forest cover andthe environmental impact of National Greening Program in the country.

Answer:

The NGP is a 6-year forestation program. It envisioned to provide forest cover to 1.5 million hectares.
Within the 6 years period, effort to protect and maintain the NGP forest plantations will be carried out
by the DENR. Assuming that it will be able to maintain the desired minimum survival rate of 85% up to2016, there will still be uncertainties beyond this period whether the next leadership of thegovernment will still support protecting the NGP forest plantations in terms of continuous funding,funding for the protection of existing natural forests, and funding for the implementation of a wellplanned forestation program for the next government.

Successful forestation, protection and maintenance program will contribute substantially to increaseof forest cover in the country.

285

286