RECLAMATION DISGUISED AS FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT

RECLAMATION DISGUISED AS FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT

Let’s be frank: something smells fishy in our flood-control machinery. We’re told a grand “flood control” project is underway along the shores of Laguna de Bay. But when the protective veil is lifted, the reality appears to be land reclamation—benefitting private interests more than the public, and threatening the environment more than protecting it.

According to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), what has been presented as a flood-control initiative along the C6 Road in Laguna de Bay is actually reclamation within the lake. Satellite imagery reportedly reveals new land-fill activity. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the local regulator Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) confirmed that no reclamation permits have been issued since April 2025—yet construction continues. The DENR’s Undersecretary Carlos Primo David even flagged the misrepresentation, warning the so-called flood control project could worsen flooding in lakeside communities.

At first glance this reads like yet another “ghost project” scandal—which we’ve seen before. But it’s even more insidious: rather than a ghost (non-existent) project, this is a “false” project where the title given (“flood control”) masks a completely different reality (real estate reclamation). The proponents may claim they’re protecting us from floods—but in truth, they may be building land for future sale. That’s a double-win for private hands: get funding for “public infrastructure,” reclaim land, then monetize it. Meanwhile, the environment and the public pay the price.

Victims #1: The environment
Every square metre of lake-bed or shallow water reclaimed is lost to nature. The lake is more than a body of water: it performs ecosystem services, houses fisheries, provides a cooling and irrigation source, and offers recreation. The LLDA lists lakeshore fisheries (about 13,000 fishermen rely on Laguna de Bay, producing about 80,000–90,000 metric tons of fish per year) as one of the lake’s primary uses. Reclamation threatens that. The lake has also long served as a flood-detention basin—a critical role under stress as siltation, development and changing rainfall patterns shrink its capacity to absorb runoff. Indeed one technical study shows that the lake’s capacity has dropped, making what used to be floods every 5–7 years now happening annually.

Victims #2: The lakeside communities
If the project is truly flood-control, then heavy rain and runoff should lessen in affected towns. But if instead it is reclamation that reduces the lake’s free volume, we’re inviting disaster: flood‐waters have less place to go and are more likely to inundate shallow areas—or persist for longer. According to a 2018 JICA study on the basin, when water levels exceed the 12 meter datum, inundation depths in residential areas can reach 1.5 to 2 metres, lasting months in some cases. The communities—fisherfolk, barangay households, small businesses—stand to lose first.

Why this matters
We are not dumpster-diving for gossip. This is about governance and accountability. The mis-labelling of infrastructure projects erodes transparency. When flood-control budgets are used for land-grab reclamation, the public cannot trust what is being done in its name. And the stakes are high: one report shows that 15 contractors have cornered about ₱100 billion worth of “flood control” contracts since 2022. Moreover, the science is clear: the catchment area of Laguna de Bay is about 4,522 km² with the lake itself about 871 km² and average depth a mere 2.8 m. Each reclamation hectare chips away at that containment and storage capacity, making floods worse, not better.

Questions we should demand answers to

• Who is behind this “flood control” project—what private interests, what government-connected companies?
  
  

• What is the detailed scope and design of the project: how much area is being reclaimed, what permits were submitted (if any) and who signed them?
  
  

• Has there been a proper Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or hydrologic modelling to show the flood‐risk before/after the project?
  
  

• Are lakeside communities informed, consulted, compensated if at all? Fisherfolk made to move? Is restoration of ecology in the plan?
  
  

• Finally, do we have independent monitoring of the lake’s water levels, siltation trends, flooding incidents—and is that data made public?
  
  

Suggestions for action
The following modular response can be pursued by LGUs (local government units), civil society organisations (CSOs), watchdog groups and the public:

• Transparency Audit: Review flood-control budgets, procurement records, land and fill permits, and overlay with satellite imagery (Google Earth, Sentinel) to detect where actual land filling is happening.
  
  

• Community Briefings: Lakeshore barangays must be educated on their rights, the real risks, and what to watch out for (e.g., loss of shoreline, unexpected flooding after the project).
  
  

• Legal Mobilisation: File complaints with LLDA/DENR, ask for investigations of permit irregularities, challenge projects that lack proper EIA, invoke citizen suit provisions under Philippine environmental law.
  
  

• Policy Advocacy: Push for stronger oversight of “flood control” projects—not just approving engineering drawings—but ensuring the project is scientifically sound, ecologically safe, socially just. Congress and oversight committees need to treat these like infrastructure + environment. For example, include in future budgets specific funding for lake dredging, siltation removal, and restoration rather than reclamation disguised as flood control.
  
  The agenda may be clear: sell the idea of flood-control, get the money, reclaim the land, monetise it — all while the lake shrinks, the flood threat grows, and the poor fishers and barangays bear the cost. But the twist is this: once more honest actors—within government, CSOs, media—are inspecting the ledger and the aerial imagery, we may be entering a phase where these practices are exposed. The question is: will we allow them to continue unchecked, or will we hold the system accountable? The lake, the communities and the future will judge.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com 04-11-2026