The problem has become very serious due to the continuing encroachment of the country’s growing population on forest lands. This has resulted in unabated conversion of forests into settlement and agricultural areas. For lack of other livelihood opportunities, construction materials and fuel sources, upland communities constantly cut young trees for firewood, timber and charcoal or engage in kaingin or slash-and-burn agriculture. Deforestation is not a problem in licensed areas that total a mere 600,000-700,000 hectares because they have adequate private security protection in their concession areas. However, illegal logging is rampant in open-access areas as no one is responsible for forest protection because there are not enough government forest guards to ensure adequate security in these vast areas.
The problem is not confined to the Philippines. Globally, there are approximately 2,000 million hectares of tropical forests. It is estimated that 14 to 16 million hectares of tropical forests are being converted each year to other uses, mostly agricultural. The economic and environmental consequences of deforestation are some of the most critical issues facing our global society.
Q:
Is logging to blame for the recent disasters in Quezon and Aurora provinces?
A:
Studies by the Mines and Geo-sciences Bureau, the University of the Philippines-Los Banos, and former Phivolcs chief Raymundo Punongbayan indicate that illegal logging was only an aggravating factor. The main cause had been the confluence of heavy rainfall and the topographical conditions of the landslide sites, which are classified by the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) as high-risk areas. Due to their steep slope and location along the Philippine trench, which is generally unstable and characterized by loose soil and fractured rock formations, the areas have been declared unfit for settlement for reasons of public safety. Unfortunately, majority of communities still continue to settle near the river banks despite repeated danger warnings.
Q:
How can deforestation be best addressed?
A:
Deforestation can be minimized through the proper protection and management of the remaining forests; socioeconomic development in rural areas, and policy and institutional reforms. All classified forestlands can be put under responsible and accountable stakeholders with fixed tenures, be they local communities, private corporations, the local government units or socio-civic groups. A united action among all stakeholders, with the use of all scientific data gathered over the years, should guarantee sustainable forest management. Alternative sources of livelihood to upland communities should be provided as well as sources of fuel wood (e.g. ipil-ipil). There should be a guarantee of sustainable legal sources of wood as a basic need and the education of the society on the importance and care and management of forests.
Q:
Are there enough laws and regulations to protect our remaining forests?
A:
Yes, there are enough laws and regulations (e.g. EO 318) to protect Philippine forests. However, these have been prone to changes from administration to administration. Actually, the forestry sector is over-regulated. What needs to be done is to enforce the laws and to curb the corruption that makes it possible for illegal loggers to circumvent the rules. Furthermore, Congress and the Senate must pass the long-term Forest Management Act to ensure the permanency of forest policy and assure stakeholders of long-term viability of their investments.
Q:
Can a total log ban solve the deforestation problem?
A:
The imposition of a total log ban will not solve the deforestation problem. On the contrary, past experience has shown that it will hasten the destruction of forests. There is a basic need for wood as the least expensive fuel, building material, for furniture and many others. As such, demand for wood will always be there. The upland settlers cut wood for their fuel. It is estimated that there are more than 24 million upland settlers, each consuming one cubic meter of wood per year. On the other hand, the housing sector needs about 2.5 million cubic meters annually.
Unless legitimate sourcing is rationalized, illegal sourcing will thrive. The DENR does not have the resources to enforce a total log ban. Resources should be devoted to providing livelihood to upland communities, rather than to policing the forests. A total log ban will benefit illegal loggers and penalize legitimate and responsible wood producers. Their population of upland dwellers could also easily increase once a total log ban is imposed because previously managed forest areas will become very accessible. Past experience has shown that a total log ban would exacerbate illegal logging. Previous Timber License Agreement (TLA) concession areas—where only mature trees were harvested and forest cover was maintained—were almost completely denuded by illegal loggers, wood gatherers and kaingineros. A total log ban will mean that the Government will be responsible for the protection of all forests.
Q:
How effective is the government reforestation program?
A:
Records indicate that it cannot be done. In the 1960s, it will be recalled that a percentage of the timber fees paid by loggers were to have been applied to reforestation. Instead. the fee went straight to the general fund, where it was spent on other matters except reforestation. Government must guarantee reforestation projects so companies can get funding because the investments are big. Government’s budget for reforestation is only P60 million per year, at P25,000 per hectare, it can cover 2,400 hectares only. Given these figures it will take the Government more than 3,333 years to reforest roughly 8 million hectares.
Q:
What are the likely socio-economic consequences of a total log ban?
A:
A total log ban will eradicate hundreds of thousands of legitimate jobs at a time when the economy needs to generate massive employment. It is estimated that more than two million workers are directly and legitimately involved in forestry activities, including those directly employed in the wood, furniture and construction industries. Companies that have invested in the development and maintenance of their wood-dependent businesses will suffer severe financial losses. Investments of at least P10 billion will be wiped out.
The Philippines will have to import much of its wood requirements at a cost of US$500 million-US$1 billion, not to mention we stand to lose $280 million in furniture exports. A total log ban will also deprive the National Government and LGUs of substantial revenues from “national wealth” taxes.
Q:
Is legitimate commercial logging compatible with environmental conservation?
A:
Yes. Holders of timber licensing agreements (TLAs) and industrial forestry management agreements (IFMAs) need to protect the forests to make their businesses viable. Hence, they harvest only mature trees. Practically all productive forest areas are inside TLA concessions where they are being protected and conserved through modern and scientific methods.
Studies have shown that forest development and bio-diversity can effectively work in harmony, as conducted by such prestigious organizations as the International Timber Trade Organization and UN Food and Agriculture Organization.
Q:
What percentage of total industrial Philippine wood requirements do legitimate/licensed wood producers account for?
A:
The legitimate loggers produce 500,000 cubic meters of logs annually and a total of 1,000,000 cubic meters of log & lumber are imported. Approximately 1,000,000 cubic meters more are unaccounted for.
Q:
Where does the rest of the timber/wood supply come from?
A:
From unscrupulous and illegal loggers, along with kaingineros, firewood gatherers, charcoal makers and upland settlers (who convert forest land into agricultural plots), account for 80-90% of forest depletion. They cut trees indiscriminately, harvesting immature stands and making no provision for reforestation.
Q:
How much does the government/nation lose due to illegal logging?
A:
Government loses over P2 billion in revenues every year due to illegal logging.
Q:
Why does illegal logging continue to thrive in the Philippines?
A:
Illegal logging thrives because of poverty and weak enforcement of forestry laws. Hundreds of thousands of people in/near forest areas rely on illegal logging, kaingin or forestland conversion, firewood gathering and charcoal making for lack of alternative means of livelihood. Big illegal loggers line the pockets of corrupt bureaucrats and enjoy protection from either corrupt military elements or the New People’s Army. The Government cannot enforce the law adequately since it can only deploy one forest guard per 4,000 hectares of forest lands.
Q:
How can illegal logging be stopped?
A:
First and foremost, hundreds of thousands of families in upland areas would need alternative sources of livelihood. Strict enforcement of current forestry laws and regulations would arrest further dissipation of the forest reserves.
