|
|
|
|
|
After my six(6) months of conducting research on CBFM
in 3 sites in Mindanao, the results will finally be presented in
a forum on the 5th of October 2007 from 9:00 AM – 4:30 PM at the
Manila Function room, Regalia Tower Suites, 150 P. Tuazon corner EDSA,
Cubao, Quezon City.
The Forum will feature case study presentations focused on community
experiences on the implementation of Community Based Forest Management
Program.
Two other presenters are going to join me in the forum. One
presentation is from Enterprise Works Worldwide with “ Baseline and
Re–assessment Results of Cagayan Valley ... |
|
|
|
|
|
The picture above shows one of the two landslides I
encountered on my way back from the CBFM site I visited in Zamboanga.
The landslide occurred between seven and 11 km. respectively from the
highway of Rosseler Lim, Sibugaey Province this areas are about 33 km
from the community I visited.
The road became so dangerous to pass by for any vehicle and even by
people. On the first landslide, I had to plunge into the water and find
boulder support to cross the river because the bridge was completely
washed away. People tried to figure out how to ... |
|
|
|
|
|
The third CBFM area I visited is located between the forest
block of Zamboanga del Sur and Zamboanga del Norte. According to
literatures Zamboanga used to be known as Sambangan (1593), a place
where there used to be plenty of wild flowers and beautiful women.
Zamboanga from Cagayan de Oro is accessible through the national road
passing Lanao del Norte, Pagadian City, then through the
municipalities of Sibugaey province. From the municipality of R.T Lim
of Sibugaey, an hour ride with “habal habal”(single motor) going
through the road of Barangay Guinabucan, Kilometer 19, Barangay Cuyan,
then Kilometer 27 ... |
|
|
|
|
|
It is common knowledge that in one way or another,
communities in the past cut, extract and even commercially utilized
forest resources in different modes and mechanisms. All of the upland
communities utilize timber and other resources in order to subsist.
With the entry of cash economy, people in the upland cut trees and
extracted forest resources in exchange for cash and other goods from
the lowland necessary to improve their existence.
Today, the question as to the sustainability of community logging could
be answered from different perspectives: Others said that it is
sustainable and viable by the mere ... |
|
|
|
|
|
A study by J.J Canonizado and L.L Rebugio in September 2004,
reported that there were 72,000 people in 42 barangays in the four
municipalities covered by SAMMILIA.
On the other hand, SAMMILIA accounts for 28,000 or 40% of this
population. This covered 19 of the 42 barangays of the four
municipalities. Initially 21 organizations took part in the
formation
of the organization; it dwindled to 15, later to 12.
In my recent visit, there were only eight cooperatives left.
Some
informants reported that most of these cooperatives were no longer
existing or broke away from the mother organization ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am quite reluctant to
write
something around this topic because to me this a complex issue
that
even today no single model actually exists. For years, this has
been
the subject of debate and discussions among natural
I am quite reluctant to
write
something around this topic because to me this is a complex issue
that
even today no single model actually exists. For years, this has
been
subject of debate and discussions among natural resource
practitioners,
loggers and community leaders.
While waiting for a ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philippine forest policy has gone towards a
couple of directions, the past few years. One towards log ban whether total or
selective and the other towards devolution of forest management. A no. of
provinces has implemented a logging moratorium and have shown modest outcome.
On the other hand, efforts in community manage forest show promising results
for forest conservation and economic upliftment of the communities living near
forests. Let us discuss log ban first.

The total log ban bill along with the
selective log ban bill is an old story in the Philippine legislature. The first
bill was filed under the Aquino administration by Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr.
mandating a 25-year countrywide logging ban. After the Pimentel bill, other bills sprouted advocating
selective log on areas with 40% forest cover , with 30% forest cover and yet
another bill for areas with 50% forest cover. Other lawmakers suggested a 12
year log ban. After years of debate and deliberation that even caused personal friction
among legislators, a logging ban bill was never passed into law.
After more than a decade, Senator Pimentel
again filed a bill to ban all commercial logging for 25 years. The bill was passed
after a landslide in Quezon-Aurora that
caused deaths and took nationwide attention. The landslide was mainly
attributed to logging activity in the upland watershed. The resurrection of the
bill meets opposition and difficulties.

I have no doubt on the intention of the
bill in arresting the country old problem of deforestation and environmental
degradation. There some points to ponder though.
Foremost is the plight of the IPs who cut
and utilized trees in the forest. Their methods may no longer be sustainable
due to already scarce resources and perhaps limited skills. Their timber
utilization practices although tiny dot compared to the impact of the past
logging concessionaires is always seen and environmentally destructive and is always blamed for environment
destruction.
Another challenge for a log ban policy is
the effect it will it will cost to the wood industry. When logging was banned,
thousands of jobs were lost and this contributed to the already cancerous
problem of unemployment in the country. It also cause more dollar loss because
we became an importer of wood raw materials for domestic consumption rather
than exporter of raw material and finished wood products.

I am in favor of total commercial log ban
if this means that all logging companies will be closed for operations. These
should include the plantation forests set up by the logging companies as
consolation for the enormous wealth they grabbed. The policy should only exempt
privately owned or titled land with plantation trees. The government should
recognize the IPs authority to utilize forest resources, including timber. Prohibiting
them to utilize their resources they have protected only endangers the forest
we protect. It will then open to indiscriminate illegal harvesting since local
communities will have no stake in these resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My exposure with the Indigenous Peoples (IPs) in one CBFM
site in Lantapan, Bukidnon and the retired logging employees of Lianga, Surigao
del Sur has drawn me to the persisting issue of defining, who the community is in
Community- based Forest Management programs?
In Mt Kitanglad there’s a conflict between two IP peoples
organizations (PO), both claiming authority
over a CBFM site. One PO claims they have
greater authority as they are actual occupants of the contested area. The other PO claims leadership over the
entire IP territory
of Mt Kitanglad and since the CBFM area is within the claimed territory the
actual occupants of the contested site have to submit to this bigger IP
leadership.
In addition, there are issues
between tenured migrants being considered under the program as a legitimate
community for forest management. Some
groups of IPs contested this because they claim themselves to be the “community”
with rightful claim in the management forests.

The question of “who is the community in CBFM”
is getting more and more attention today not only from different community
forestry practitioners but more so with the government. There is now more
literature about redefining the “community” and a continuous review of this
definition along with the evolution of community forestry in the country.

The CBFM under the SAMMILIA
federation of Surigao del Sur also underwent different conflicts in defining
the “community” in CBFM Program. Locals argue that the rightful claimants or
the “community” are the actual occupants of the area while others said that the
IPs should have more legitimate claim. Still others contested that the
displaced laborers of the previous company are the legitimate claimants because
they are the “community” affected by the conversion from TLA to CBFM and that
they are more adept in managing the area than any other groups or communities.

The SAMMILIA federation of
primary cooperatives from four different municipalities covered by the claim
now holds the legal rights to manage the CBFM area under the program. The
federation, under the provisions of the program, is the “community” in CBFM.
SAMMILIA is said to represent the communities since it is a federation of peoples
cooperative and they said that IP community is part of the federation and well
represented. On the other hand, accusations that most of these leaders and
managers do not occupy any area in the CBFM continues. In addition, some said
that most of these cooperatives are inactive or even non-existent at present;
therefore the federation has no representation from the real “community”. The
SAMMILIA leadership is said to have managed and resolved these conflict through
the help of DENR and some politicians. They are said to have proven to be
rightful community in CBFM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
After a couple of
days in Surigao, I continued my trip to Compostela Valley
where I get to visit another CBFM site. I have been here a year ago. From the
municipalty of Marihatag, my next stop was San Francisco, Agusan del Sur. San Frans as
it is called by locals is a lot different
than it was years ago. There are more business establishments, clean wide road,
more banks, more people and it seems that the local economy is booming. I heard
it is going to be a city soon. Though it took me hours to get an air-conditioned
bus from the terminal, it pays to wait;
it is a good cape from the dusty road of Surigao del Sur. I slept on my way toCompostela Valley. Actually, even in my sleep, I
would know when I am already Comval. The temperature is quite different, its
cooler, I do not know why, perhaps due to its higher elevation and higher
density of vegetation.

Comval gives me a feeling as if I am in the
countryside of the US; maybe
with more trees and rivers, it would feel like I’m in West Virginia. Comval has big four-lane
road, not much residential houses along the road, there are sprouting seedling
vendors, many big trucks passing by, and it’s foggy specially if you arrived
late in the afternoon. It is a very calm,
still and cool place.
There were however, some things I observed peculiar,
there are more piled logs on the road now than before. There is only maybe an interval
of 100 to 200 meters and there’s another
pile of cut logs on the road
ready to be hauled. In fact, I saw many laborers loading trucks with logs and
few trucks transporting them. Most of these logs were owned by big businessmen
and other private individuals. Some people said these logs came from privately owned lands.
However, some of the informants I met that said that most of these came from
the public land or from the TLA area of the previous companies.
The increased demand for seedlings is
perhaps the reason why many individuals ventured into selling seedlings. These seedling
vendors along the road are privately owned and others are from cooperatives
just like the one owned by SAROMCO.

After a short rest at Comval hotel I visited the San Roque Multi –purpose
Cooperative or SAROMCO. The cooperative is a CBFM holder in San Roque,Nabunturan, Compostela Valley.
This cooperative gives a good impression to community forestry researchers.
They seemed to have a successful CBFM program because they already have a sawmill, they have implemented several
government forestry programs and they have been assisted by organizations from
the previous programs and projects. Lending institutions offered
and showed confidence for them, they have also a considerable stand of wood
stocks ready for utilization, and perhaps they are one of the first CBFM holders
having issued a Wood Processing Permit or (WPP).
At the back of this facade are terrible
problems, anyone would not expect from a simple peoples organization. They are
now facing a case filed against them for cuddling an illegal bandsaw and case
from a certain businessman who lost his truck during one of their business
operations. Aside from these, are other complications brought about by other
business deals between them and other big-time businessmen.

Another problem they have is their RUP.
They applied for RUP to utilize their harvestable gmelina yet they were trapped
with bureaucracy and did not get the permit until now. According to them, the
previous document needed was the stand and stock table, which they had a hard
time completing. Today, the situation got even worst; they were required to
present the tally sheet of the whole 30-50 hectares of gmelina plantation. This
means that they need to scale again, rewrite, and collate the dimension and
other statistics of every tree standing. That is no joke, each tree standing in
harvestable stage has to be scaled. All these are expected to be completed by
the grassroots cooperative without assistance fro m DENR. I ask why they would
not request DENR’s help. They said that they have no money—and it is literally
needed when you ask for help.
Prior to the start of the plantation
program, the common slogan “plant a hectare of gmelina tree for a million
tomorrow” encouraged them to participate. Today, members are impatient and
could no longer wait for their RUP.
They wanted to reap from their hard labor of
planting and maintaining these trees before they die—other members already died
before they could even see the logs cut. The biggest worry today is that, by
the time the RUP is granted all the harvestable trees might already been illegally
cut and sold.
These were their issues since 2005. They
wrote this case. IIRR provide them venue to air their case in the presence of
DENR top executives. Now, after almost two years, nothing has change. The
cooperative still survive but they have to make both ends meet, “parang kapit sa patalim” sometimes they
have to do some “gray” things to survive.
How long will SAROMCO
have to endure the cycle of red tape and
legal battles? As of now the biggest question they have in order to comply with
the technicalities required for their RUP is, how long it will take them finish
the log tally sheets? They already consumed about 500 pages of yellow paper
already and lots of tuba wine. Anyone please help!


|
|
|
|
|
|
A
second thought on federation
Most of the CBFM areas I have been to are logged over areas of big logging companies
with Timber Licence Agreements. A TLA is
a licence to utilize timber within government-declared timberland. Most, if not
all, these TLAs were given to big corporations and businessmen. The document
gave them the rights to cut, transport, and sell a certain volume of timber
from the forest. They were also obligated to manage the area especially in
replacing timber resources they extracted through the concession.

These corporations
invest technology, big equipment and large financial capital for huge expected
returns. They hired local people especially IPs living in the concession area
to serve as laborers of the concessions. They paid dues to the tribal elders
and taxes to the government. They also maintained the roads and bridges going
to their concessions in order to make a smooth operation of harvesting and
transporting logs. The concessions were accountable only to the national
government who gave them the permit for the said venture. There are logging
companies that did not comply with the agreed responsibilities. Others cut
timber outside their allowed area of extraction. Others cut bigger volume of
timber far beyond what is allowed by the
government. Still others have problems with the laborers because of the low
wages they gave to their employees.

The defunct Lianga Bay Logging Company
Incorporated used to be one of the biggest TLA concessionaires in the province of Surigao del Sur. The company operated
with decent profit and good reputation with the local people. According to the
local people of the place, the company used to pay their workers higher than
what the government offered for their own employees. Some people also said that
the company owner was conscious of the impact that the enterprise gave to the
environment and was very careful with the harvesting and transportation
processes in order to reduce environmental damage.
After some internal problem, the LBLCI was
sold to other owners including a Marcos crony. Subsequently it was sequestered by the government under the Aquino
administration and eventually awarded to SAMMILIA under the Community Based
Forest Management Program.
The times for the TLAs are now gone and the
forest management in the Philippines
is going on the direction of decentralization and devolution through the
Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM)
program.
SAMMILIA is a federation of cooperatives in
the Municipalities of San Agustin, Marihatag, San Miguel and Lianga, which is
now the CBFMA holder, who have the right to manage the 59,000 hectare of
previously LBLCI logging concession area.
According to the SAMMILIA leadership, they
are not really earning the same way as the TLA holder who used to operate in
the area. One reason is the very limited and irregular Allowable Cut that the
government granted them. Another is the long processing of their Resource Use
Permit, a periodical document necessary to continue the harvesting operation.
The long wait of approval and the red tape and corruption within the DENR made
it more difficult to profit with the enterprise. The lack of financial capital
made it hard for them to dictate the price. They became dependent with the
price imposed by the buyer who provided the operational capital.
Despite this, the federation was able to
maintain the roads and bridges going to their concession, which benefited
upland communities within their concession area. They were also able to provide
employment for people now working with their office, their nursery,
reforestation, and with the harvesting of the timber.

However, the federation is accused of being
like the logging company who used to operated in the area and even worse. Local
people accused the federation of many things like; harvesting beyond the
allowed cutting limit, cutting timber outside the area allowed of operation,
under pricing their timber, and being a dummy of a big businessman and
politician.
Like the logging corporation, few people
run the federation and the members of the different cooperative have no say
with the operation because of the lack of venue for member’s participation. The
local communities within the CBFM Area, especially the IPs, have no participation
except as laborers of the federation during harvesting and reforestation
activities. On top of these, most of the planners and leaders of the
federations lived at the town centers and most of them are logging executives
during the heights of TLA concessions in the area.
According to most of the local informants,
“the federation is very much like TLA except for the name.” Some literally said
that it is “the same dog with different collar.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|