Based on the information I found, here are some key points you can use in your debate against

the resort built in the Chocolate Hills:

1. Violation of Environmental Laws: The resort, known as Captain's Peak, was

constructed within the Chocolate Hills protected area, which is a violation of
environmental laws. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)
issued a cease and desist order against the resort due to this violation[^1^].
2. Absence of Required Documents: The resort continued construction even though it
lacked the necessary documents, such as the Environment Certificate of Compliance
(ECC). This led to the provincial government of Bohol urging the DENR to take legal
action[^5^].

3. Impact on Natural Heritage: The Chocolate Hills is recognized as a UNESCO Global

Geopark and a natural monument. The construction of the resort has caused public
outrage, as it is considered a defacement of this natural heritage[^2^] [^4^].

4. Accountability of Local Officials: Questions have been raised about the role of local
officials in allowing the resort to be built. There's a demand for accountability from those
who permitted the construction and operation of the resort[^2^] [^3^].

5. Potential Legal Action: The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)
has created a task force to investigate the issue and has warned that local officials found
complicit or negligent with respect to any violation will face legal action[^1^].

6. Impact on Tourism: The Chocolate Hills is a symbol of Bohol tourism. The resort's
construction could potentially harm the tourism industry, as it disrupts the natural beauty
of the area [^2^].

7. Public Sentiment: There is significant public disapproval of the resort's construction.

This sentiment could be leveraged in the debate to highlight the societal impact of the
controversy[^3^].

Remember to present these points in a structured manner and provide evidence to support your
arguments. Good luck with your debate!

[^1^]: DILG creates task force to investigate illegal Chocolate Hills resort
[^2^]: Bohol governor wants truth in Chocolate Hills development | Inquirer News
[^3^]: Controversial resort at Bohol's Chocolate Hills faces House probe
[^4^]: Miss Universe Philippines-Bohol ‘bleeds’ for Chocolate Hills
[^5^]: Chocolate hills resort: Bohol governor tells DENR to take legal action ASAP | Cebu Daily
News
How has the construction of the resort violated environmental laws?
The construction of the resort near the Chocolate Hills is considered a violation of environmental
laws due to several reasons:

1. Construction within the vicinity of the Chocolate Hills: The Department of

Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has been urged to protect the Chocolate
Hills by stopping the construction of structures within its vicinity. The construction is
seen as a threat to the long-term protection and conservation of the area.
2. Illegal and informal structures: The construction of "illegal and informal" structures,
including swimming pools, slides, and cottages, too close to the mounds has also been
seen as a violation. These structures are considered too invasive to the natural landscape.

3. Defacement of the Chocolate Hills: There has been an investigation into the defacement
of the Chocolate Hills due to illegal structures. The structures were built at the foot or
sides of at least three hills, which is seen as damaging to the natural formations.

4. Violation of protected area management rules: Some officials believe that the
Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) failed to explain why it allowed the resort to
use at least a 20-percent portion of the Chocolate Hills, which is seen as a violation of the
rules governing protected areas.

However, the resort management claims that they have followed all laws and regulations set by
the government. They also pledge to take care of the Chocolate Hills that surround the area[^1^].

[^1^]: Bohol official: Protect Chocolate Hills from development | Cebu Daily News
How can the resort claim to have followed all laws and regulations despite the concerns raised by
officials?
I'm sorry, but I wasn't able to find specific information about the resort's claim of following all
laws and regulations despite the concerns raised by officials. It's possible that the resort may
have provided documentation or evidence to support their claim, such as permits, certificates, or
inspection reports. They might also have addressed the specific concerns raised by officials,
either by making necessary changes or providing explanations for their practices. However,
without more specific details, it's difficult to provide a more accurate answer. Would you like me
to search more on this topic or is there anything else you would like to know?
Is there any information available about the permits, certificates, or inspection reports obtained by the
resort to ensure compliance with laws and regulations?
According to the information I found, the owner of the resort in the Chocolate Hills, known as
Captain's Peak Garden and Resort, obtained a building permit and a permit to operate from
the Sagbayan Municipality. However, it was revealed that the resort was never issued an
Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) by the Environmental Management Bureau
(EMB), which is a requirement for construction in protected areas like the Chocolate Hills.

The resort owner claimed that they were granted a business permit and had obtained resolutions
from the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) endorsing the project. However, one of the
specific conditions given by PAMB was to obtain an ECC before conducting any activity,
including construction.

Despite not having the necessary ECC, the resort continued its construction, citing the presence
of a building permit issued by the local government. They also applied for an ECC but were
unable to submit the complete documents. The resort's operation was eventually ordered to cease
and desist, and it is currently being monitored to ensure compliance.

It is important to note that the resort's claim of following laws and regulations may be disputed,
as the absence of an ECC and the violation of protected area management rules raise concerns
about their compliance with environmental laws.

Source: Chocolate Hills resort granted building permit by LGU even sans ECC - Asean Observer
even though they complied with few of the legal documents needed before construction, is it still okay or
advisable to built that resort there
As an AI, I don't have personal opinions, but I can provide you with some perspectives on the
matter.

The advisability of building a resort in the Chocolate Hills is a subjective topic that depends on
various factors and viewpoints. Here are a few considerations:

1. Environmental Impact: The Chocolate Hills is a unique natural landscape and a

recognized UNESCO Global Geopark. Building a resort in such a sensitive area could
have significant environmental consequences, including habitat destruction,
disturbance to wildlife, and alteration of the natural landscape. Some argue that
preserving the natural beauty and ecological integrity of the Chocolate Hills should take
precedence over tourism development.
2. Cultural and Touristic Value: The Chocolate Hills is one of the iconic landmarks and
tourist attractions of the Philippines. It holds cultural and historical significance and
attracts visitors from around the world. Some argue that the construction of a resort in the
vicinity of the Chocolate Hills could enhance the tourism industry, provide job
opportunities, and contribute to the local economy.

3. Sustainable Development: If the resort were to be built, it would be crucial to ensure

sustainable development practices. This includes minimizing the environmental impact,
implementing proper waste management systems, conserving water resources, and
 respecting the cultural and natural heritage of the area. Adhering to sustainable
development principles can help strike a balance between tourism development and
environmental preservation.

4. Public Opinion: The public sentiment regarding the construction of the resort in the
Chocolate Hills is an essential consideration. If there is significant opposition and
concern from local communities, environmental groups, and the general public, it may
indicate that the project is not widely supported.

Ultimately, the decision of whether it is okay or advisable to build the resort in the Chocolate
Hills depends on weighing the potential economic benefits against the environmental and
cultural impacts. It is essential to consider the long-term sustainability and the preservation of the
natural and cultural heritage of the area.

Please note that this response is based on general considerations, and specific circumstances and
local perspectives may vary.

we will be having a debate tomorrow about a controversy which is about the resort that was built
on one of the seven wonders of the world and one of the tourist destination in the Philippines, the
Chocolate Hills in Bohol. And our instructor to prepare and research about it. Apparently, we are
the anti group or con with the resort built in chocolate hills. Can you provide or give all
importantt informations and details that we may use during the debate
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
Certainly! The Chocolate Hills in Bohol, Philippines, are a natural wonder consisting of at least
1,260 cone-shaped hills spread over an area of more than 50 square kilometers. Here are some
key points and arguments against building a resort in the Chocolate Hills:

1. Environmental Impact:
 The construction of a resort in the Chocolate Hills would likely lead to significant
environmental degradation. The delicate ecosystem of the hills could be disrupted
by infrastructure development, deforestation, and pollution from tourist activities.
 Endangered species that inhabit the area could be threatened by habitat loss and
disturbance.
2. Cultural and Heritage Concerns:
 The Chocolate Hills hold immense cultural and historical significance for the
people of Bohol and the Philippines as a whole. They are a symbol of national
pride and identity.
  Building a resort in such a revered natural landmark could be seen as disrespectful
to the cultural heritage of the region and could lead to the commercialization of a
sacred site.
3. Aesthetic and Visual Pollution:
 The natural beauty of the Chocolate Hills could be marred by the construction of a
resort and associated infrastructure such as hotels, restaurants, and roads.
 The visual impact of large-scale development on the landscape could diminish the
unique charm and appeal of the hills, ultimately detracting from the tourist
experience.
4. Sustainable Tourism Concerns:
 Promoting sustainable tourism practices is crucial for preserving the natural
integrity of the Chocolate Hills and ensuring their long-term viability as a tourist
destination.
 Instead of building a resort, efforts should be focused on developing low-impact
tourism initiatives that allow visitors to appreciate the beauty of the hills without
causing harm to the environment.
5. Alternative Economic Opportunities:
 Rather than relying on large-scale development projects like resorts, there may be
alternative economic opportunities that can benefit local communities while
preserving the integrity of the Chocolate Hills.
 Investments in eco-tourism, community-based tourism, and sustainable
agriculture could provide livelihoods for residents while protecting the natural
environment.
6. Legal and Regulatory Considerations:
 The construction of a resort in the Chocolate Hills may face legal and regulatory
hurdles, including environmental impact assessments, zoning regulations, and
cultural heritage protections.
 Violating these regulations could result in legal challenges and backlash from
environmental and community advocacy groups.
7. Long-term Sustainability:
 Building a resort in the Chocolate Hills may provide short-term economic
benefits, but the long-term sustainability of such development is questionable.
 The potential damage to the environment and cultural heritage could outweigh
any economic gains, leading to negative consequences for both local communities
and the tourism industry.

By incorporating these arguments and supporting evidence into your debate, you can make a
strong case against the construction of a resort in the Chocolate Hills. Remember to emphasize
the importance of preserving this natural wonder for future generations and promoting
sustainable tourism practices that respect both the environment and local communities.

You
as to the law, can you give imformations about it
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
Certainly! When discussing the controversy surrounding the construction of a resort in the
Chocolate Hills in Bohol, Philippines, it's essential to consider the legal aspects involved. Here
are some key points you might want to explore:

1. Environmental Laws and Regulations: Research the environmental laws and

regulations in the Philippines, particularly those related to the protection of natural
wonders and heritage sites. For example, you could look into the Philippine
Environmental Impact Statement System (PD 1586) and the National Integrated
Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Act (RA 7586), which aim to conserve and protect the
country's natural resources, including its cultural and natural heritage sites.
2. Local Zoning and Land Use Laws: Investigate whether the construction of the resort
complies with local zoning ordinances and land use regulations in Bohol. Check if there
are specific restrictions or protections in place for the Chocolate Hills area, such as
designated conservation zones or heritage preservation laws.
3. Public Consultation and Participation: Look into whether there was adequate public
consultation and participation in the decision-making process regarding the construction
of the resort. Evaluate whether local communities, environmental groups, and other
stakeholders were given the opportunity to voice their concerns and provide input on the
project's potential impacts.
4. Heritage Preservation Laws: Explore any laws or regulations specifically aimed at
preserving cultural and natural heritage sites in the Philippines. Consider how the
construction of the resort might impact the integrity and authenticity of the Chocolate
Hills as a UNESCO World Heritage Site and one of the country's most iconic landmarks.
5. Legal Challenges and Court Decisions: Research any legal challenges or court cases
related to the construction of the resort in the Chocolate Hills. Look for precedents or
rulings that could support your argument against the project, such as cases where similar
developments were contested on environmental or cultural heritage grounds.

By delving into these legal aspects, you can build a strong case against the construction of the
resort in the Chocolate Hills during your debate. Be sure to gather specific evidence, statutes, and
case studies to support your arguments effectively.

You
one of our concerned is that , they said that they built the resort there because it is a private
property and they made legal documents with the DENR in Bohol,,,, How can we counterattack
this?
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
If the proponents of the resort argue that it was built on private property with legal
documentation from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) in Bohol,
here are some counterarguments you could consider:

1. Environmental Impact Assessment: Even if the resort is on private property, it's

important to assess the potential environmental impact of the development on the
surrounding area, including the Chocolate Hills. Emphasize the need for a thorough
 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to evaluate the project's effects on biodiversity,
ecosystems, and cultural heritage.
2. Public Interest vs. Private Property Rights: Highlight the broader public interest in
preserving natural wonders like the Chocolate Hills for future generations. While private
property rights are important, they must be balanced with the collective responsibility to
protect irreplaceable cultural and natural heritage sites that hold significance for the entire
nation.
3. Community Opposition and Stakeholder Concerns: If there is local opposition to the
resort project, emphasize the importance of considering the concerns of affected
communities and stakeholders. Even if the land is privately owned, the impacts of the
development extend beyond the property boundaries and can affect the wider
environment and local livelihoods.
4. Heritage Protection Legislation: Emphasize any specific legislation or regulations
aimed at protecting cultural and natural heritage sites in the Philippines, such as the
National Cultural Heritage Act and the NIPAS Act. These laws may impose restrictions
on development activities in designated heritage areas, regardless of land ownership
status.
5. Sustainable Development Principles: Advocate for sustainable development practices
that prioritize the long-term conservation and stewardship of natural resources. Argue
that responsible tourism development should seek to minimize environmental
degradation and respect the integrity of iconic landmarks like the Chocolate Hills.
6. Alternative Development Options: Explore alternative locations or development
models that would allow for tourism development without compromising the integrity of
the Chocolate Hills. Suggest creative solutions that balance economic interests with
environmental and cultural preservation objectives.

By addressing these points, you can challenge the assertion that the resort construction is
justified solely on the basis of private property rights and legal documentation, highlighting the
broader ethical and environmental considerations at stake.

how can we counterattack their argue where in if they would say that it will help in economical growth
When countering the argument that a certain action will help in economic growth, you can
consider the following points:

1. Long-term sustainability: While short-term economic growth may be possible, it is

important to evaluate the long-term sustainability of the proposed action. Consider the
potential negative impacts on the environment, social welfare, and future generations.
2. Distribution of benefits: Assess whether the economic growth will benefit all segments of
society or if it will primarily benefit a select few. If the benefits are concentrated in the
hands of a few individuals or groups, it may lead to increased inequality and social
unrest.
 3. Externalities: Take into account the external costs and benefits associated with the
proposed action. For example, consider the environmental impact, health implications,
and social consequences that may arise as a result of the economic growth. These
externalities should be factored into the overall assessment of the argument.

4. Alternative approaches: Explore alternative strategies that can achieve both economic
growth and other desirable outcomes, such as environmental sustainability, social equity,
and well-being. It is important to consider a holistic approach that takes into account
multiple factors and stakeholders.

5. Long-term economic stability: Evaluate whether the proposed action will contribute to
long-term economic stability or if it may lead to economic volatility or unsustainable
practices. Consider the potential risks and unintended consequences that may arise from
focusing solely on short-term economic growth.

By considering these points, you can present a well-rounded counterargument that goes beyond
the narrow focus on economic growth and takes into account the broader implications of the
proposed action.

SAPA – SPECIAL USER AGREEMENT AND PROTECTED AREAS

NIPAS ACT
BAWAL ANG ENTERPRISE SA PROTECTED AREAS