Arguments, no matter how impressive, are no match to actual data culled from research. This was the observation given by a scientist who was asked to comment on the brewing debate over the proposed reclamation project in Panglao. “There is no substitute to a comprehensive environmental survey. Every honest scholar will tell you that,” the scientist remarked. The statement of the scientist came days after no less than Dr. Caesar Saloma aired the same view. Saloma, a native of Baclayon who was recently installed as chancellor of the University of the Philippines (UP), expressed his preference for the conduct of an environmental study during live interviews in local radio stations. The UP chancellor cited the need for a new study because the existing data is already outmoded so the new study is important to spot the changes in the biodiversity. Saloma added that while the reclamation project is destructive “at face value”, only a comprehensive environmental study can prove that.

The proposed Panglao reclamation project has stirred debates for various reasons although opponents initially raised environmental concern as their basis. Since then, the debate has drifted into other directions since it became clear that the opposition comes largely from resort owners fearful of the competition that the project will bring when it is completed. The controversy has also revealed for the first time that there are actually two groups that are interested to put up their respective reclamation projects. This has complicated the issue since the two projects proposed by different proponents are technically different from each other. The second group is eyeing a much bigger area to be constructed by a local company while Oasis Leisure Island Development Inc. is more compact and to be undertaken by a prestigious foreign firm.

The scientist refused to give his personal opinion on the controversy saying that to do so would at best be based on a personal opinion. “Whatever existing data would not be sufficient since they were taken several years earlier and therefore no longer reliable considering the changes that have occurred since then,” he added. He expressed surprise why the environmental research has not been conducted since this is the normal thing to do before proceeding with the project. “I heard that even the fishing villages in the area that will be directly affected by the project are clamoring for it. This is a positive development because in many areas these are the people who oppose projects of this magnitude,” he added. The scientist admitted that every development project has its own environmental impact “including all the existing projects in Panglao”. His declaration supported the comments of local observers who dismissed the hypocrisy of some critics of the projects who have violated existing environmental laws. Some have gone as far as challenging other critics to denounce existing environmental violations instead of picking on the proposed reclamation projects.

The scientist said that the most that critics can do is delay the conduct of the environmental study saying they cannot prevent this forever. “Sooner or later you have to come to terms with the need for the conduct of a similar study not necessarily for this project but for other proposed projects,” he pointed out. His observation is shared by stakeholders who now insist that other future projects in Panglao should be subjected to the same strict guidelines. A resort owner said strict guidelines would be good for those who have existing businesses but would make it difficult for incoming investors. The scientist said the controversy spawned by the reclamation project has raised the bar for environmental protection in Panglao but added it is too early to tell if the destruction caused by the erring industry players would not be enough to spoil the tourism trade in the long run.