Overfishing, coastal development, deforestation, and pollution are major environmental problems threatening the Philippines' marine and land environments. Overfishing has led to a 90% drop in some fisheries' catches and costs $420 million annually. Coastal development including infrastructure, aquaculture, and reclamation has damaged coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses, reducing mangroves to 36% of historic levels. Deforestation endangers biodiversity as many endemic species depend on forests, which cover only 3% of original area. Poor waste treatment pollutes water sources as only 10% of sewage is treated. Weak enforcement of regulations exacerbates these problems.

1. Environmental problems in
the Philippines
Saving precious remains
There are few signs today of the Philippines' once sprawling rainforests. With
a growing trend in human population, it is hoped that the country's marine
environment will not suffer the same fate.
Overfishing and destructive fishing
Fishers in the Philippines are increasingly coming home with pitiful catches. Of a number of
factors which have led to this situation, one stands out: over-fishing in many areas.
According to the Asian Development Bank (ADB), there has been a drop of 90% in the
quantity of marine organisms that can be trawled in some traditional fishing areas of the
Philippines.
This isn’t just a question of declining fish stocks and biodiversity, but also of social impacts
and economic losses. Mismanagement of fisheries resources is estimated to cost US$ 420
million annually in lost revenues.
At the root of the overfishing problem is weak fisheries management, ineffective policies
and poor enforcement of fishery laws.
Coastal infrastructure development
Coastal zone development has been particularly damaging to the Philippines’ marine
environment, especially to coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses.
As populations have increased, so have their needs for construction materials and living
space. Excavation, dredging, and coastal conversion to accommodate coastal development
have seen corals being extracted for reclamation and construction, especially in coastal
villages.
Mangroves have particularly suffered from coastal development, notably at the hands of the
aquaculture industry. In the Philippines, aquaculture has reduced mangrove stands to only
36% of 1900 levels.
Deforestation
After decades of deforestation, which has left about 3% of the original cover, forests
continue to be under threat from agriculture and urbanization, illegal logging and forest
fires.

2. Sustained forest loss in the Philippines is causing severe soil erosion, and is threatening the
country’s rich biodiversity. This is particularly worrying as many of the Philippines’ species,
which depend on these forests, are endemic (they cannot be found anywhere else in the
world). For example, of 180 native terrestrial mammal species here, about 61% are
endemic.
Inconsistent laws, inadequate regulations, weak enforcement and lack of funding are
making forest conservation a major challenge.
Pollution
Only about 10% of sewage in the Philippines is treated or disposed of in an environmentally
sound manner. The rest goes back to nature – usually the sea.
In this context of poor waste treatment and high population growth, water pollution is a
growing problem for the country’s groundwater, rivers, lakes, and coastal areas. Polluting
industrial material is also found in abandoned mining areas, with mercury pollution affecting
water bodies in these areas.
These problems are unfolding in a context of poor planning, and weak management and
enforcement of regulations.
What's the problem?
Whales are still being killed across the world’s oceans, despite an international ban on
commercial whaling.
Why is it happening?
The International Whaling Commission banned commercial whaling in 1986 to try to
conserve species on the brink of destruction. But over 1,000 whales – including
endangered whales and some populations already depleted from centuries of
overhunting – are still killed every year.
Japan has continued by claiming that whales are being killed for scientific research, and
Iceland exploits loopholes in the ban in order to keep slaughtering whales for profit.
Why does it matter?
Over the years, commercial whaling has depleted a number of whale populations, some
near extinction. With the adoption of rules to protect them, many whales have made a
comeback, but their survival remains fragile.
And whaling – along with hazards such as ocean noise, ship strikes, pollution,
unsustainable fishing practices, oil and gas development and climate change –

3. continues to be a threat to these intelligent creatures who play a significant role in
ocean ecosystems.
What can be done?
Despite an international moratorium on commercial whaling, Iceland’s whaling has
dramatically increased in recent years. In 2010 alone, Icelandic whalers killed hundreds
of whales – including endangered fin whales – and shipped more than 750 tons of
whale meat and products to Japan, whose market is already glutted with whale meat
from its own "scientific research whaling" program.
In the past, the U.S. has taken the diplomatic route in an attempt to negotiate with
Iceland. And the U.S. government recently led a joint demarche joined by 10 other
nations. This is a positive first step, but strong words and diplomatic pressure are clearly
not enough to curtail Iceland’s illegal whaling. Now is the time to put pressure on
Iceland’s illegal whaling industry by imposing targeted trade sanctions.
NRDC and over a dozen other conservation groups recently petitioned the Obama
administration to take strong action against Iceland under the Pelly Amendment to the
Fisherman’s Protective Act. The Amendment allows the President to impose trade
sanctions against a country that is "diminishing the effectiveness" of conservation
agreements – in Iceland’s case, the whaling moratorium and another international treaty
that prohibits trade in endangered species. The Pelly petition identifies several Icelandic
companies as potential targets for trade sanctions, including major seafood industry
players that are directly tied to Iceland’s whaling industry.
The United States has a unique opportunity to engage in efforts outside of the IWC that
will encourage Iceland to end the killing of whales for commercial purposes. Taking
these actions against Iceland is consistent with the United States’ historic role as a
global leader in whale conservation.