Logging Ban
This entry was posted on 7/3/2007 4:08 PM and is filed under uncategorized.
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.
