Tree-savers to ask CA to stop Naga clearing
People opposed to the cutting of trees to pave the way for the building of a track and field oval in the City of Naga are racing against time as City Hall workers have already chopped down at least 34 trees as of 1 p.m. yesterday.
Saying that he did not sign the endorsement of the Parents and Teachers Association (PTA) of the Naga City Central School, PTA president Winley Dela Fuente said he is filing before the Court of Appeals today a petition for an Environmental Protection Order to stop the cutting of trees.
Mayor Valdemar Chiong said that of the 79 trees they have secured a permit to cut, only 58 will be felled, saving 21 trees that are far from the oval perimeter.
“Nirespeto mi sa mga opinion sa kadaghanan pero kami nagtuo gyud nga maayo ni nga development sa syudad sa Naga (We respect the opinion of many, but we are firm in our belief that this project is good for the development of the City of Naga),” Chiong said.
Dela Fuente said that he has spoken with activist-priest Fr. Robert Reyes who plans to come to Cebu next week for a meeting with DENR Regional Director Isabelo Montejo on the issue.
But Mayor Chiong said they are putting the P68-million project on a fast-track, hopefully by this month.
“By this project, we can build future national athletes, host international events and invite investors in the City of Naga,” Chiong said.
Last Tuesday, workers started clearing a 3.2-hectare lot for the project.
The international standard athletic field will have an oval with eight 400-meter lanes with rubberized surface.
It is being built in a 3.2-hectare lot within the Naga Central School which is owned by the city government.
Related Stories:
Tree expert’s verdict: ‘No need to cut Naga trees’
Mountaineer climbs Naga tree; all cutting suspended
3 Naga trees can heal: Tree doctor starts 3rd party check
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.
