The resource management in ancestral lands : the
Bugkalots in northeastern Luzon
Aquino, D.M.
Citation
Aquino, D. M. (2004). The resource management in ancestral lands : the Bugkalots in northeastern Luzon. Retrieved from
https://hdl.handle.net/1887/8388
Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown)
License: Leiden University Non-exclusive license
Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/8388
Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if
The Bugkalots in Northeastern Luzon
PROEFSCHRIFT
ter verkrijging van
de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden, op gezag van de Rector Magnificus Dr. D.D. Breimer,
hoogleraar in de faculteit der Wiskunde en Natuurwetenschappen en die der Geneeskunde,
volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties te verdedigen op donderdag 17 juni 2004
klokke 15.15 uur
door
Dante Medina Aquino
Promotiecommissie:
Promotor: Prof.dr. R. Schefold Co-promotor: Dr. G.A. Persoon
Referent: Prof.dr. O.D. van den Muijzenberg (Universiteit van Amsterdam) Overige leden: Prof.dr. J. Prill-Brett (University of the Philippines, Baguio)
Prof.dr. L.J. Slikkerveer Prof.dr. P. Spyer
The Bugkalots in Northeastern Luzon
Dante M. Aquino
Photograph credits
Dante M. Aquino Figures 4.1, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5-7, 5-9. 5-13. 6-2' 6-3. 6-5.6-6 <1/4)- 6-7. and 7.3
Gerard A. Persoon Figures 5.1 (inset), 5.10, 5.11, 5.12,6.1,6.3 (inset), 6.4, 6.6 (3/4), 7.1, 7.2, and cover photographs
Laurence L Wilson Figures 4.3 and 5.8 [scanned from llongot Life and Legends (1947)]
© CML Institute of Environmental Sciences Leiden University
P.O. 60x9518 2300 RA Leiden The Netherlands
English language editing: Judith Laffan, Leiden Cover design: Bern Persoon, Alphen a/d Rijn Layout: Sjoukje Rienks, Amsterdam
This book is the fulfillment of a great endeavor, which has a long history of its own. Events have come and gone and actions have unfolded one after the other as a series of unending sequences of precedents and consequences. I suppose things started to take form during my first official visit to Isabela State Uni-versity (ISU), Cabagan, Isabela in the Philippines during the last quarter of 1987. I was then with the ISU, Echague, Isabela where I had been employed since my graduation in 1975. On a university vehicle, the trip started from the ISU campus in Echague with Dr. Roberto R. Arano and two Dutchmen: Timo van Tilburg and Gerard Persoon. While the trip was an initiation for my then im-pending transfer to the ISU Cabagan campus the following year, the Dutch vis-itors from Leiden University in the Netherlands were scouting for a Philippine university suitable for the establishment of a joint program in what was then the in vogue subject of environment and development.
Starting January 1988,1 was transferred to the College of Forestry at the ISU in Cabagan. It was also during this year that the Cagayan Valley Programme for Environment and Development (CVPED) was established as a joint program between the College of Forestry at the ISU and the Centre of Environmental Science (CML) at Leiden University. Eventually, the College of Forestry expand-ed and became the College of Forestry and Environmental Management (CFEM). As an offshoot of my transfer, I pursued and completed a Master of Science degree in Environmental Studies at the University of the Philippines, Los Banos, with my thesis partially funded by the CVPED.
Meanwhile, my part-time engagements in some projects provided opportu-nities for becoming involved in environment and development undertakings. My experiences in these part-time consultancy projects in different regions of the Philippines widened my horizons and field exposure. Among these projects was a community-based natural resources management planning project in one area of the ancestral domain of the Bugkalots and a similar one for the Manda-yas, an indigenous people in Mindanao, in what is now Compostela province. This project exposed me to community-based natural resources management planning. The conduct of the tedious biophysical and social resources invento-ries, the community-consultation processes, and the participatory planning exercises opened new ground for me.
Natural Resources (DENR) of a community-based forest management agreement through a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC). After feedback from CML and the corresponding revisions at the ISU, the PhD proposal was final-ized at CML. With the CML fellowship from Leiden University, the research was ready for implementation and I undertook fieldwork at the Bugkalot ancestral domain to gather data for this book.
Initially it seemed easy. With the necessary protocols accomplished, permits, endorsements, and introductory letters obtained, all that was required was to implement and follow the finalized research proposal in toto. However, the field realities were too diversified and it was necessary to adjust to the situation and capture the dynamics of the subject as a whole while at the same time not losing detail of its component parts. Study sites that could represent the major resources used in the entire Bugkalot domain were selected after some weeks of reconnaissance and preliminary data gathering. Fieldwork proceeded at last.
I had a bias for quantifiable data because of my training in, and exposure to 'Philippine science.' My field notes were short ones, usually telegraphic and de-cipherable only by me, and sometimes just a few words of unintelligible phras-es. This process of data collection was undertaken for almost two years with a trip at the midpoint for consultations with my promotors in the Netherlands to fill gaps and fine-tune data gathering for the remaining period.
Despite some papers presented at conferences and the subsequent publica-tion of articles on the findings of various aspects of the research in journals or book chapters, it was difficult to produce a book integrating all the dynamics of the resource management practices of the Bugkalots. Especially one that would relate these to the appropriate scientific discourse on ancestral land rights and indigenous peoples.
From its inception to its completion, this book has gone through turbulent times. The effort of accomplishing it was continuous in some periods, sometimes intermittent, at times deserted and at worse abandoned. Despite the inconsis-tent and irregular atinconsis-tention, there were moments of inspiration that motivated me to carry on and bring all exertions to a fruitful conclusion. At such moments of stimulation, I could not help but realize that there are institutions and peo-ple who gave direct or indirect contributions, or even applied pressure, to my endeavors. To them, I would like to extend my due recognition and acknowl-edgment:
The Bugkalots, the subject indigenous people of this study, have been won-derful and supportive hosts. They accepted me without much ado and immedi-ately got used to my intrusive presence in their villages, their activities, and their lives. They were all cooperative, and willingly answered my questions. My in-volvement with their leaders, key informants, and the people in the villages where I stayed, established links that maintained my connection and personal rela-tionships with these indigenous people. The Barangay Captains of the three study sites during the fieldwork and their families, were hospitable and provid-ed a home during my stay in their respective jurisdictions. The long hours of conversations with them were a great help in providing direction, literally and figuratively, for this research. Their introductions and endorsements immense-ly facilitated my immersion within their respective villages. They were integral parts of the study and a component of this book.
The provincial government units of Quirino and Nueva Vizcaya through various line agencies provided useful secondary data. Governor Pedro Bacani of Quirino was generous enough to allow me to join him for a number of days during con-sultations in some Bugkalot villages. The permission, special interest, consid-erations, and the special endorsement of former Mayor Andres Blando of Nagti-punan, Quirino facilitated my introduction and entry into various villages of the municipality. Listening to his wisdom, gained through vast experience as a pio-neering government forester was always beneficial. The municipal government of Nagtipunan was also supportive during my fieldwork. Personnel from both its executive and legislative branches always found time to attend to my requests. Being the government agency that issued the Administrative Order, which legitimized the issuance of certificates of ancestral domain claims to indige-nous peoples, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) was the moving force in its implementation. Hence, the help and support pro-vided by the officials at various levels of its administrative hierarchy were indis-pensable. The officials and personnel of the DENR both at the Community Environment and Natural Resources Office (CENRO) at Nagtipunan and the Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office (PENRO) at Diffun, Quirino were very accommodating and supportive in my endless requests for documents and interviews on matters related to the implementation and oper-ation of the community-based forest management agreements of the Bugka-lots. The PENRO of Nueva Vizcaya and the CENRO at Dupax del Norte also pro-vided help during some stages of the fieldwork. Special mention is given to Forester Oscar Tuliao of CENRO Nagtipunan, whose house was my embarka-tion point when I went to the field on that side of the Bugkalot, and to Forester Clarita Bermosa of PENRO Quirino, both of whom served as my contact per-sons in the DENR. Other DENR personnel, both at the provincial and commu-nity offices, who were appointed in various capacities to the commucommu-nity-based programs included: Joe Corpuz, Max Domingo, Paul Gaffiid, John Macarilay, Alex Querido, Narding Ramos, Oca Tuliao; Del Baculanta, Tante Espiritu, Cora Aquitano, and Angie Burton.
The then Office of Northern Cultural Communities (ONCC), through the Nueva Vizcaya Provincial Office headed by Ruben Bastero, was of great help in establishing the initial linkages within that side of the Bugkalot domain includ-ing in Aurora. Their database on indigenous peoples within Nueva Vizcaya was very informative and helpful. Despite our few encounters, the Provincial Officer of Aurora, Napoleon Ebenga - a Bugkalot himself - was also of great help. Former Regional Director Damian facilitated many transactions with various field offices, particularly in Diffun, Quirino. Now as the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), the agency will, hopefully, benefit greatly from this book in future arduous tasks with indigenous peoples.
Force, Bert Olivare, was always accommodating to an outsider in their group. Isabela State University (ISU), especially President Dr. Miguel P. Ramos and for-mer President Dr. Rodolfo C. Nayga, who both supported my professional growth, and particularly my PhD fellowship under the framework of the Caga-yan Valley Programme for Environment and Development (CVPED).
Dean Dr. Edmundo C. Gumpal and former Deans Dr. Roger Z. Guzman, Prof. Nelson L. Yanez, and Dr. Leon M. Gonzales of the College of Forestry and Environmental Management (CFEM), who were all supportive during their re-spective times for my absence on official study leave. I would like to thank the CFEM faculty members for their camaraderie and those who took on an addi-tional load in their official functions because of my absence. Those from the Department of Environmental Science and Management (DESAM) of CFEM: Marino Romero, Eileen C. Bernardo, and Prof. Myrna T. Ramos, for their extra official burdens, personal commitments and concerns, I also thank.
Leiden University, particularly the Centre of Environmental Science (CML), for its generosity in providing my PhD fellowship. There are special persons whose supervision and guidance were of great influence in the writing of this book but who, because of institutional tradition, will remain unnamed. I also wish to thank my many colleagues and friends at CML - my Dutch hosts and fel-low expatriates - whose camaraderie made my stay away from home pleasant and enjoyable.
I thank Dr. Roberto R. Arano, former Dean of CFEM and the first Filipino Coordinator of the Cagayan Valley Programme of Environment and Develop-ment (CVPED), who initiated my diversion from forestry to environDevelop-mental sci-ence. He was instrumental in my transfer to ISU-Cabagan from ISU-Echague, influential in my taking an MSc in Environmental Studies, and strongly encour-aged my pursuit of a PhD. Dr. Gerhard M. van den Top, the first and pioneering Dutch Coordinator of CVPED, has been very supportive of my professional un-dertakings throughout his stay in the Philippines. The successive Dutch coor-dinators of CVPED after Gerhard - Dr. Denyse Snelder, Drs. Lilian Spijkerman, and Drs. Jan van der Ploeg, as well as their Filipino counterpart, Dr. Andres B. Masipiquena - all deserve special mention for their indispensable help and wonderful support of my undertakings during their incumbencies.
I would like also to acknowledge those people who were instrumental in one way or another in the final form of this book:
and the swidden farm of the Bugkalots in yesteryears; Drs. Maarten van 't Zelfde of CML for the base maps used in this book; and Bern Persoon for the cover design.
Prof. Marcelo D. Yasto Jr., a former colleague at the ISU-Echague campus, and a friend, was very accommodating and helpful in editing an earlier draft and the final copy of the manuscript. He assisted me in a similar manner dur-ing my earlier professional pursuits. For all of this, I remain grateful and indebt-ed to him.
Ms. Annelies Oskam of CML for taking the extra time to edit versions of this book, and who has been very efficient in making all the necessary administra-tive arrangements and official requirements for my visits to the Netherlands. My family has been very supportive to me throughout my studies. My wife Cristeta P. Aquino was both father and mother during my absences while I was abroad or on fieldwork. Our children Laya Fe (Ly), Dianne Joy (DJ), Jason Ralph (JRJ, D' Cresta (DC) are continual sources of inspiration and always integral parcels of my endeavors.
To my younger sister Menchie A. Mauricio and her family, who were very supportive to my family in my absences and even when I was around, always treating my family as hers; to my brother Benjamin O. Aquino, his wife Ma-crina, and their children who were once the family my sisters and I had, before we had our own; and to the ever-increasing Aquino and Medina clans, relatives all, for always being there.
Finally, to the memory of my parents Moises Ramos-Aquino and Peregrina Pascua-Medina, and those who have been inadvertently omitted but played a role in the fulfillment of this endeavor, I remain grateful and indebted.
Lists of Tables, Maps, Boxes, Figures and Appendix Tables 19 Acronyms 25 Pronunciation Guide 27
1 Introduction
The Bugkalots and Resource Management 29
1.1 Background of the Study 29 1.2 The Resource Management Project 31 1.3 The Study Area 38 1.4 Objectives of the Study 39 1.5 Data Gathering Methods 40 1.6 Organization of this Book 42
2 Philippine Policies for Forest Conservation
'People Power' and Averting Resource Exploitation 43
3 Indigenous People for Forest Conservation
Relinquishing the Burden to the 'Trespasser'? 79
3.1 People Participation: Some Concepts 79 Identifying People 80 Distinguishing Local 81 Defining Participation 83 3.2 People Participation for Forest Conservation 85 Issues on People for Forest Conservation 85 People-Oriented Forest Conservation 87 Indigenous Peoples for Forest Conservation 88 Collective Rights and Forest Conservation 94 Indigenous Peoples and Collective Rights 95 Financial Institutions and Forest Conservation 97 3.3 Defining Indigenous Peoples of the World 98 3.4 Labeling Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines 104 Indigenous Peoples under Colonial Rule 105 Indigenous Peoples under Philippine Governments no Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claims for Indigenous Peoples 113 3.5 Collective Land Rights for Philippine Indigenous Peoples 116 Land Rights and the Domain Certificates 116 3.6 Forest Degradation, Indigenous Peoples and the Study 119
4 The Bugkalots in Perspective
An Indigenous People in Transition 121 4.1 The Bugkalot Ancestral Domain 121 Colonization and the Boundaries 122 The Bugkalot Domain of the Past 123 The Present Bugkalot Domain 125 Political Boundaries and Accessibility 127 Political Boundary Conflicts 128 Quirino Province and the Bugkalots 130 4.2 The Bugkalot People 131 The 'Bugkalot' Term and Its Origin 13! Bugkalot Population 132 The Bugkalot Appearance 134 Bugkalot Clothing 135 Language in the Domain 136 Bugkalot Houses 138 Household Implements 143
Division of Labor r^4
Settling after Marriage 159 4.3 Headhunting: An Expression of Passion 161 The 'Myths' on Headhunting 162 The Motivations for Headhunting 164 The Practice of Headhunting 165 The Demise of Headhunting 167 Headhunting and Consequences 168 4.4 Conversion to the Flock: Embracing Christianity 169 4.5 Migration into the Bugkalot Domain 171 Colonization through Migration 172 The Cordillera Exodus 176 The Logging Boom 178 Building the Economy urith Nature's Bounty 179
Roads Bring Wood out and People in 181
Coping with Migration 183 4.6 Institutions and the Bugkalots 185 Schools and the Bugkalots 185 National Government Agencies 187 Local Government Units 190 Non-Government Institutions 191 4.7 The Study Sites 192 4.8 Conclusions 1965 Agriculture in Progression for Survival
5-3 Irrigated Farming: Paddies in the Uplands 222 Irrigated Farming in the Area 2.3.2.
Farm Development and Practices 224
Raising Seedlings 225
Field Preparation 226 Uprooting and Transplanting Seedlings 228 Maintenance of the Irrigated Farm 228 Harvesting and Post-Harvest Activities 230 Harvesting Rice from Irrigated Farms 230 Post-Haruest Activities 231 Environmental Considerations 233 5.4 Permanent Dry Farming: Perpetuating Production 234 Permanent Dry Farming in the Area 234 Farm Development and Practices 236 Field Preparation 237 Cropping System 237 Harvesting and Post-Harvest Activities 238 Environmental Considerations 239 5.5 Backyard Garden: Supplementing the Kitchen 239 Backyard Gardening in the Area 239 The Backyard Gardens and Practices 241 Animal Husbandry: A Pig under the House 244 Environmental Considerations 245 5.6 Farming in the Domain: The Overall Scenario 246 5.7 Cropping Schedule and Labor Requirements 250 Cropping Schedule 250 Labor Requirements 250 5.8 Conclusions 254
6 Co-Management for Sustaining Forest Resources
Conclusions 274
6.3 Timber Extraction for Other Purposes 275
6.4 Gathering Non-Timber Forest Products 276 6.5 Hunting Game and Wildlife 280 Group Hunting: Team Work in Practice 281 Individual Hunting 285 Trapping Wildlife 288 Taboos in Hunting 289 Environmental Considerations 290 6.6 Conclusions 291
7 Managing Water for Pragmatic Utility
Use on Non-Use of a Resource in Abundance 293 7.1 Introduction 293 Philippine Policies on Water Resources 293 Water Resources and the Bugkalots 294 7.2 Water for Transport: Shooting the Rapids 295 7.3 Resources in Water: Fish and Others 299 Group Fishing 300 Individual Fishing 301 Water Resources 302 7.4 Water for Domestic Use 303 7.5 Water for Agriculture 304 7.6 Water for Irrigation and Power Generation 306 7.7 The Casecnan River Transbasin Project 307 The Resistance 308 The Conflict Resolution 309 The Social Measure Task Force for Casecnan 311 7.8 Conclusions: Need for Water Conservation? 313
8 Community-Based Forest Management: A Synthesis
People Empowerment 322 Ancestral Domain: What Now? 323 8.5 Defining the'Domain': Social and Physical Realities 323 Defining Social Boundaries of the Domain 324 Defining Physical Boundaries of the Domain 325 Designing Management Strategy for the Domain 327 8.6 Conclusions Part I: Ancestral Land Rights and Forest Conservation
in the Philippines 329 On Ancestral Domain Boundaries 330 On Indigenous People and Resources Conservation 331 On Collective Rights for Resource Conservation 331 8.7 Conclusions Part II: Ancestral Land Rights and Forest Conservation
in the World 332 8.8 Parting Words 336 Appendix Tables 339 Appendix:
Appendix Tables
List of Tables
3.1 Indigenous Peoples in International policy guidelines 102 4.1 A profile of the study area showing the comparison of the three study
sites based on some criteria. 194 5.1 The situation of swidden farming in the study sites showing the
number of households and the area involved. 203 5.2 Swidden farming stages, activities done, and tools used. 207 5.3 Common crops raised in swidden farms (also for permanent dry
farms and gardens). 212 5.4 Rice pose-harvest activities, equipment and processing byproducts. 217 5.5 Labor arrangements used in farming activities. 218 5.6 The situation of irrigated farming in the area showing the number
of households and the area involved. 224 5.7 Local farming practices and tools and equipment used in irrigated
rice farming and their descriptions. 227 5.8 The situation of permanent dry farming in the area showing the
number of households and the area involved. 235 5.9 The situation of backyard farming in the area showing the number
of households and the area involved. 241 5.10 The overall scenario of farming in the area showing the number of
households involved and the area covered by farming category. 247 5.11 Average farm area per farming category for each ethnic grouping by site
(based on those with farms and on all households). 248 5.12 Indicative cropping calendar for various crops in the Bugkalot domain. 251 5.13 Manday allocation per hectare for each farming category and the
cost equivalent in Philippine Pesos (PhP). 253 6.1 The Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claims of the Bugkalots showing
coverage of the six towns in the three provinces. 260 6.2 Plant non-timber forest products used in the domain. 278 6.3 Animal, non-timber forest products and derivatives used in the domain. 279 6.4 Some Bugkalot terms and descriptions of equipment and equipment
20 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN ANCESTRAL LANDS
7.1 Local terms related to water resource use and management. 295 7.2 Fishing methodologies and terminologies used by the Bugkalots. 301
7.3 Water resources (fish, crustaceans, amphibians, shells) caught, c
aptured, and used in the household. 303 7.4 The modifications made on the Casecnan Transbasin Project to
address issues and concerns of some opposition groups. 311
List of Maps
1.1 Northeast Luzon area, the Cagayan Valley Region; also known as
Region 02 for government administrative purposes. 34 1.2 The Study Area, the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim of the
Bugkalots of Quirino, municipality of Nagtipunan, province of Quirino, Philippines. 39 3.1 Ethnographic map of the Philippines in 1890 reflecting ethnic groups
in three categories: Christianized Hispano-Filipinos, non-Christians
and infidels, and Muslims (Moros). 107 3.2 Peoples of the Philippines: The 'Filipinos' (Christianized Peoples) and
the 'Others' (Pagans, Moros, Negritos). 109 3.3 Ethnographic map of the Philippines showing relative location of the
ancestral land of each indigenous people. 112 4.1 The extent of what was the Bugkalot domain in the past before
migration in the 19505 and the domain area to which they are currently confined. 126 4.2 The area under dispute, contested between the provinces of Nueva
Vizcaya and Quirino. 129 4.3 The web-like network of logging roads, coming from all directions that
enhanced migration into the Bugkalot ancestral domain. 182 4.4 The relative location of the three study sites, with their points of
access indicated by arrows. 193 6.1 The six CADC areas awarded to the Bugkalots in six municipalities
of three provinces. 259 7.1 The relative locations of the three proposed project sites for the
List of Boxes
4.1 A Trip to a Wedding 154 4.2 Attending a Wedding Feast 156 4.3 After Marriage, His or Her Place 160 5.1 The Saving Grace 243 6.1 One Hunting Day 281 6.2 The Hunt That Failed 287
List of Figures
4.1 The headhunting bolo (knife), still sometimes worn by male Bugkalots, but more for adornment. 136 4.2 The old Bugkalots still keep their customary attire, which is used only
during special occasions, such as in a courtship or headhunting dance
performances during a feast. 137 4.3 The Bugkalots used to live in tree houses well-hidden and camouflaged
in the forest (source: Wilson 1947). 139 4.4 The stove area, situated in one corner of the house with a suspended
platform above for multi-purpose drying (e.g., firewood and crop
harvests). 141 4.5 A Bugkalot house with a hornbill design dominating each end of the
roof, indicative of the old ways. 142 4.6 A typical Bugkalot village accessible by road: houses made of reinforced
concrete, galvanized iron sheets and sawn wood. 142 4.7 A chapel of the New Tribes Mission is a usual landmark in Bugkalot
villages. 150 5.1 Loping the branches and the crown before felling the tree in opening
the swidden farm, now done for a different purpose. 206 5.2 Clearing the swidden farm by half-cutting the trees and felling a large
tree for a 'domino effect'. 208 5.3 A swidden farm planted with corn as the primary crop with a mix of
secondary crops. 210 5.4 A coffee plantation established in a secondary forest area requires very
little maintenance. 210 5.5 A drying platform (biyantay) erected within the vicinity of the
swidden farm. 214 5.6 The rice granary (ang) situated on the farm. Some are situated within
22 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN ANCESTRAL LANDS
5.7 The mortar-and-pestle pair is necessary equipment in the household.
Meal preparation usually starts with pounding rice for cooking. 216 5.8 The Bugkalots' 'old way' of swidden farming: the big trees were not
cut; their branches were just pollarded. 221 5.9 Irrigated rice farms are found along the flat areas along rivers and
creeks within the heart of the domain area. 223 5.10 Enterprising 'outsiders' bring in portable rice threshers for contract
work in the irrigated parts of the domain. 232 5.11 The rice granary (ang) is brought from the swidden farm into the
irrigated farm. 233 5.12 Prolonged use of swidden farms tends to their conversion to permanent
dry farms. 236 5.13 A garden such as this may be located not adjacent to the house, but
some walking distance away. 242 6.1 A placard on the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC) of the
Bugkalots of Quirino. 258 6.2 Tree marking, one of the requirements before logging; a tree in the
boundary corner is marked. 265 6.3 A log pond (stocking area), such as this one, is supposed to be used and
maintained. 267 6.4 The logging restrictions or cut limits conspicuously displayed. 268 6.5 With great demand in Metro Manila and Central Luzon, furniture
making is a lucrative business in Quirino thus causing sustained
pressure on timber resources, particularly on Narra. 269 6.6 Signs on the logging moratorium of Quirino displayed in strategic
places but not respected. 271 6.7 The power sawmill, a 'man-powered' log carriage with integrated
edging and trimming saws. 272 7.1 At strategic points of the Cagayan River, people have to go by boat to
cross the river to continue their journey. 297 7.2 The laborious way of transporting market goods upstream in the rapids,
which abound in the rivers of the domain. 298 7.3 Diverting irrigation water from streams has developed into
List of Appendix Tables
3.1 The integrated social forestry program. Phases, objectives and activities. 340 4.1 Summary of descriptive statistics of some household variables in the
study area, by study site and ethnic group. 341 4.2 Descriptive statistical analyses for some household variables by
study site. 342 4.3 Comparison of some household variables between Bugkalots and
non-Bugkalots by site using the t-test. 348 5.1 Showing the number of households and the hectarage involved per
site by farming category. 358 5.2 Descriptive statistical analyses per farming category by study site. 361 5.3 Comparison of the number of Bugkalot and non-Bugkalot households
by farming category by site using the Chi-Square test. 368 5.4 Comparison of Bugkalot and non-Bugkalot farm area per farm category
by site with the use of the t-test. 370 5.5 Different nomenclatures of the common crops raised in farms within
the study sites. 378 5.6 Mandays and cost equivalents based on households with farms and
Acronyms
BFD Bureau of Forest Development (now the FMB) CADC Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claims
CDA Cooperatives Development Authority
CDRF Conservation and Development of Residual Forests
CENRO Community Environment and Natural Resources Office (or Officer, for the head of the Office)
CFEM College of Forestry and Environmental Management [of ISU] CVPED Cagayan Valley Programme for Environment and Development
DA Department of Agriculture
DAI Development Alternatives, Incorporated DAO Department Administrative Order DAR Department of Agrarian Reform
DECS Department of Education, Culture and Sports DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DESAM Department of Environmental Science and Management [of CFEM] DILG Department of Interior and Local Government
DOLE Department of Labor and Employment
DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development DTI Department of Trade and Industry
E.O. Executive Order [by the Office of the President] FMB Forest Management Bureau
FSO Forest Service Organization
IPRA Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 IRR Implementing Rules and Regulations ISU Isabela State University
LOI Letter of Implementation [by the Office of the President] MAO Ministry Administrative Order
MNR Ministry of Natural Resources (now DENR)
NCCP- National Council of Churches in the Philippines - People's Action for PACT Cultural Ties
NCIP National Commission on Indigenous Peoples NEDA National Economic and Development Authority
NGO Non-Government Organization NIA National Irrigation Administration NPC National Power Corporation
OSCC Office for Southern Cultural Communities P.D. Presidential Decree
PENRO Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office (or Officer, for the head of the Office)
RDC Regional Development Council [of NEDA]
SEC Securities and Exchange Commission
Pronunciation Guide
This Guide is based solely on practical ways that may guide readers on how the local words used in this text are pronounced. The general principles hereunder are solely based on practical (personal) logic and not on standard pronuncia-tion guides.
Throughout the book, words in italics (usually enclosed in parentheses), are Bugkalot terms; otherwise, the language is specified [for example Ilocano, Taga-log]. The pronunciation of such words is based on a Filipino pronunciation prin-ciple: Kumj anoncj bay bay siya ang bigkas [Tagalog]; roughly translated: 'Spelling is literally the pronunciation.' This means that a word is pronounced by sylla-ble with each letter clearly pronounced (no silent or unpronounced letters). Each of the vowels is always pronounced 'similarly alike.' In the same manner, each consonant is pronounced alike and based on the adjacent vowel. The fol-lowing syllabication and pronunciation rules, with some simple examples, illu-strate how Bugkalot terms and words are pronounced:
Syllabication (grouping letters for pronunciation):
1 A vowel is usually grouped (and pronounced) with a preceding consonant. Hence, a consonant is usually pronounced with the vowel following it. 2 A vowel is grouped (and pronounced) with a consonant following it only if
the consonant is the last letter of the word. Hence, when no vowel follows the consonant, it is pronounced with the preceding vowel.
3 When no consonant precedes a vowel, the vowel stands (and is pro-nounced) alone.
Examples:
1 agemet: a - ge - met (rule 3, i, i & 2, respectively) 2 bee: be-e (rulei, 3)
3 kaget: ka-get (rule i, i & 2)
4 eyaga-. e-ya-ga (rule 3, i, i)
Pronunciation (relative to pronunciation of some English words):
1 a is pronounced as in 'away'; e as in 'enable'; i as in 'in'; o as in 'only'; u as in 'full.'
2 ba as in butter; da as in dam; ga as in gather; ha as in hallow; ka as in car; la
as in lad; ma as in mother; na as in nadir; TUJ as in coming or as in singer; pa as in palm; ra as in ravine; sa as in saddle; ta as in tackle; wa as in waddle or
aw as in allow; ya as in yam. For the other vowels (e, i, o, u), the
pronuncia-tion rules follow the same logic and manner. Examples:
1 agemet (a-ge- met) is pronounced as: a in 'away'; ge as in 'get'; met as in 'met'.
2 bee (be - e) is pronounced as: be (benefit), e (enable). 3 kaget (ka - get) is pronounced as-, ka (car), get (get).
4 eyaga (e - ya - ga) is pronounced as: e (enable), ya (ya), ga (gamble). 5 kaaben (ka - a - ben) is pronounced as: ka (cadaver), a (away), ben (benzene). 6 agimeng (a - gi - meng) is pronounced as: a (away), gi (give), meng (me in met
Introduction
The Bugkalots and Resource Management
1.1 Background of the Study
I remember the Bugkalots long ago from my early childhood days. This was in the 19605 when these people were still known as Ilongots - the ferocious head-hunting tribe found in the mountainous areas within the headwaters of the Cagayan, the largest river in the Philippines that traverses the whole length of the Cagayan Valley in northeastern Luzon. During those days, they became well known; their headhunting forays reported in the newspapers. Although the few newspapers then were not well-circulated in the remote provinces, Ilongot notoriety became famous within northeastern Luzon because of the fear creat-ed by stories of innocent victims and the gruesome descriptions on how they were beheaded.
The perception of the notoriety of the Ilongots as headhunters and as 'out-casts' of the mainstream society was perpetuated in the communities, in the home, and even in the schools, albeit informally. Incidents involving Ilongot wildness and ferocity, usually exaggerated and sensationalized, were the 'talk of the town.' In the home, many parents reprimanded their misbehaving children with threats that they may be abducted and beheaded by the Ilongots. In the school, class idlers were discouraged and pupils were admonished to go straight home after classes to avoid being kidnapped and subjected to Ilongot brutality. Even social misbehavior and common misdeeds were erroneously linked to the Ilongots. An unruly person, or one who did not follow commands religious-ly, or one who was not able to fulfill a promised obligation, was usually describ-ed as being 'like an Ilongot.' Such a reputation influencdescrib-ed my earlier percep-tions, just like those of other Filipinos, of these people.
Partly because of the declaration of Martial Law in 1972, Ilongot headhunt-ing diminished. Gradually, talk of headhuntheadhunt-ing stopped. The 'current' and 'hot' news was now related to the Martial law regime. With no news on the Ilongots, their notoriety was gradually forgotten. Like others of my generation, my mem-ories of the Ilongot became a part of my childhood.
occur-red in the Philippines. These happened throughout the country in all its admin-istrative regions.1
The northeastern Luzon region or Cagayan Valley, one of the least developed regions of the country, was known for being rich in natural resources. In the two short decades of the seventies and eighties, the biophysical and social sce-nario was drastically changed. Road construction and other infrastructure devel-opment coupled with massive electrification of the municipalities, improved accessibility and communication within the region. News once limited to radio broadcasts and social interaction became prominent and 'more concrete' with the proliferation of television sets among households as an aftermath of elec-trification. With the boob tube, daily news became available and disseminated through television networks in Metro Manila, the political and commercial cen-ter of the country. The eye-catching news became the sensational reports of cur-rent events. These included the 'war' in the Muslim areas in the southern island of Mindanao and the cases of'kidnap for ransom' victimizing rich families in Metro Manila and other urban centers. This was aggravated by the ambuscades of the New Peoples Army, the revolutionary arm of the Communist Party of the Philippines, usually on the military or vice versa. Added to all these crises were the hold-up and rape crimes by drug-crazed youths in the cities and the more densely populated areas. Such news, sensationalized and highlighted by vivid TV coverage, all 'live' and in color, easily caught people's attention. The images were easily registered and retained in their minds and memories of the less-col-orful events of the recent past were gradually forgotten.
The Philippine general public was in this situation at the onset of the nineties. Having been involved in forestry education since the mid-seventies, my child-hood memories on the Ilongots were just that - a memory of the past - a part of my youth. But this was not for long.
As an aftermath of the popular 1986 'People Power' revolution, where an op-pressive government was overthrown and a new leadership in government was formed, drastic government policies were introduced. This ushered in popular and democratic policy directions. People's participation in government affairs became a major government policy. The government involved non-government organizations (NGOs) in programs especially those pertaining to natural re-source management, most notably in the forestry sector.2 In various capacities, I was involved in different projects of such a nature. In one such venture in 1993, my memory of the Ilongots was triggered because the project was
direct-1 The Philippines is subdivided into direct-13 administrative regions, aside from the Cordillera Auto-nomous Region (CAR) and the AutoAuto-nomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). One such region is the Cagayan Valley located in northeastern Luzon.
THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT J1
ly connected with them. However, now, because of the notoriety associated with the term 'Ilongot,' they preferred to be known as 'Bugkalots.' At this time, as a holder of a baccalaureate in Forestry and of a Master of Science degree in En-vironmental Studies, I was a faculty member at the Isabela State University. Af-filiated with two local non-government organizations, I was involved in part-time contract consultancy work on one project concerned with the preparation of a plan for the resource management of a forestland found within the ances-tral domain of the Bugkalots. The project provided me with the opportunity to actually meet these people and see them in person. They, who had existed only in my youthful imagination enriched through intimidation, threat, and fear, became a reality.
For the first time, I had a face-to-face encounter with Bugkalots when the project was implemented in 1993.1 discovered that they are not as I had once imagined, but rather a far cry from my perceptions. In their build and physical features, they cause neither fear nor terror, even among children. In their looks, they are not in any way different from other Filipino. In fact, since they under-stand and fluently speak two languages - the predominant regional language, Ilocano and the national language, Tagalog - they are 'very' Filipino in every sense of the word. My involvement with these people started to foster my inter-est in their way of life and on their natural resource management. Little did I know then that all these experiences were to become the foundation of a per-sonal professional pursuit.
The background and events that paved the way for the implementation of the planning project for the Bugkalots is hereby briefly described to elucidate how I became interested in these people's method of natural resource management. It is this interest that stimulated the preparation of a research project three years later that eventually led to the conduct of the study on the management of Bug-kalot natural resources and my writing of this book. This background will serve as an introduction on how this research was conceptualized and implemented.
1.2 The Resource Management Project
Among other things, the criteria for selecting project sites included the presence of adequately stocked secondary-and old-growth forests. The overall idea was to preserve the old-growth forests by allowing sustained forest utilization only in the secondary-growth forests. The maximization of on-site benefits was tar-geted. At the same time, the project aimed to identify and tap alternative sources of income to reduce people's dependence on forestry resources. It was envi-sioned that decreased dependence on these resources would result in their con-servation.
Three pilot project sites were initially planned, strategically located throughout the country. These were to be distributed among the major island groups - one each in Luzon, in the Visayas, and in Mindanao.
The preliminary phase of the project involved the validation of some bio-physical and social inventory methodologies and instruments within the three initially identified regions where the pilot sites were to be located. The most adaptable inventory methods - based on accuracy and applicability - were to be selected for use and to be adopted during the actual planning exercise in the three pilot projects sites.
For the island of Luzon, the pilot project was situated in the Cagayan Valley, otherwise known as Region 02 (map i.i).3 For the Visayan islands, the pilot
project was slated on Samar island. Due to problems with peace and order, Samar being a known bailiwick of the New Peoples Army, the pilot project site was later relocated to Surigao del Sur, a province in Mindanao, within the Lian-ga Bay area. For the island of Mindanao, the pilot project was located in the province of Davao del Norte (within the municipality of New Bataan that later became a part of the new province of the Compostela Valley).
During the Project's preliminary phase, the validation of some inventory me-thodologies was undertaken in the three initially identified pilot sites. The De-velopment Alternatives, Inc. (DAI), an NGO based in the United States, facili-tated the validation process. This was participated in by DENR personnel at var-ious levels (from national down to regional, provincial and community) and with some participants coming from the non-government sector.
For the purposes of the Luzon site in the Cagayan Valley, the validation of biophysical and social inventory methodologies and instruments was conduct-ed in the forest areas of the Sierra Madre mountain ranges within San Pablo, the northernmost town of Isabela. Among the different methods of forest
THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT 33
ry used, cluster plot sampling was found to be the most acceptable (based on accuracy, applicability and the relative cost).4
For the social dimension of the project, the survey method adopted was coined as a social, institutional, demographic, and economic (SIDE) approach. This method is an adaptation and integration of social research methods and tools such as rapid rural systems appraisal and agroecosytem analysis.
While the preliminary activities were undertaken, potential pilot project sites (those with adequately stocked secondary-growth forests with dependent com-munities within the fringes) were identified and evaluated.
In the Cagayan Valley, provinces with existing adequately stocked second-ary-growth forests were considered. Candidate sites were situated in logged-over areas clogged-overed by timber license agreements (TLAs) or commercial logging concessions that were either suspended or expired. Potential sites were found within the provinces of Cagayan (in the municipality of Baggao), Isabela (San Mariano), and Quirino (Nagtipunan).
The Baggao and Nagtipunan sites both met the criterion on forest stand, but the former had the advantage of accessibility, particularly from the regional capital ofTuguegarao, Cagayan; hence, it was the first choice and initially cho-sen as the pilot site. However, the local political leadership was not supportive of the project. The municipal executive did not like the program because of a conflict of interests; he was known to be involved in illegal logging. Thus, the alternative area at Nagtipunan was considered.
The Nagtipunan site stood out because of the complete support of the town's Mayor, a retired District Forester of the then Bureau of Forest Development (BFD, now the Forest Management Bureau or FMB) of the Department of Environ-ment and Natural Resources (DENR). The Sangguniang Bayan, the municipal legislative council composed of elected members, likewise manifested its sup-port. With these developments, the final pilot project site for Luzon was chosen at Nagtipunan, Quirino.
The community-based planning project was implemented by the DAI. The DAI employed foreign and local technical assistants or consultants to supervise and implement the project.
The delineation of the forest area within the Nagtipunan pilot project was undertaken by the DENR in collaboration with the local government of Nagti-punan. This necessitated contracting the services of a Manila-based company for the aerial photogrammetry and interpretation of the potential forest area. From the composite map of the aerial photographs, the boundary of the project site was delineated. It covered a contiguous area of 8000 hectares found within
SOUTH
CHINA
SEA
Cagayan Valley
LUZON/ Region
^-Archipelago
MAP i.i - Northeast Luzon area, the Cagayan Valley Region; also known as Region 02 for
THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT 35
the geographical jurisdiction of three adjacent barangays,5 all of which have
Bugkalots as the dominant population.
While the validation activities on inventory methods were undertaken, the Terms of Reference for the project implementation were published. Project ac-tivities were to be contracted with capable and deserving NGOs pre-qualified and selected through public bidding. National and regional NGOs were cate-gorized by the DENR into NGOs and Forest Service Organizations (FSOs).6 Only those classified under the latter category were pre-qualified to submit bid proposals for the pilot projects.
The bidding for the pilot project at Nagtipunan was contested by at least three forest service organizations. For the preparation of bidding proposals, a reconnaissance survey of the proposed project area was conducted to obtain biophysical conditions and to get the social status within the proposed project site. These benchmark data were used as the bases in preparing the technical and financial proposals.
After submission of bidding documents by the pre-qualified parties, the bids and awards committee of DENR Region 02 evaluated all submitted bids based on technical and financial feasibility. After deliberations, the committee awarded the project to the 'winning' bidder based on the average of ratings given by each of the seven members of the committee according to pre-agreed criteria. The second-ranked bidder questioned this result. Although this contender ranked first for a majority of the committee members, it lost by one percentage point in its overall average. This 'losing' bidder produced documentation that showed through statistical theories and principles that the excessively low rat-ing given by one evaluator to the second-in-rank bidder was improbable. It be-came obvious that there was an adjustment in one member's ratings on the two highest bidders. Based on the formal complaint filed and the supporting docu-mentation provided, the committee reconsidered the bidding and awarded the project to the second-in-rank bidder.
The final winning bidder was an NGO (a DENR-categorized FSO) in partner-ship with a University-based Foundation. The NGO, as the contractor, took charge of the implementation of the whole project and also managed the inven-tory (both its biophysical and social) aspects, while the partner Foundation, on the other hand, took control of the planning aspect of the project.
The project was implemented in 1993. My affiliation in both the FSO (as an officer) and the Foundation (as a member) provided the opportunity for my in-volvement in the project. For the Foundation, I was involved as the Assistant Coordinator for the Planning Aspect and at the same time the Coordinator of
5 The baranga\j is the smallest political unit in the Philippines. It has a complete political setup headed by a 'captain.' In rural areas it is composed ofsitios, a group of households. A town or mu-nicipality is composed of barangays, and a province is composed of towns.
Data Processing and Analysis. For the NGO, I was also involved in the overall implementation of the project.
The pilot project at Nagtipunan, Quirino was implemented based on the tech-nical and financial parameters of the winning proposal. As mentioned earlier, the major on-site activities included an inventory of both biophysical and social resources.
As the project was initially implemented, it became evident that some social realities had not been depicted fully in the preparation of the proposals. Some unforeseen problems related to the communities and their people started to unveil. The implementation of the project started in the more accessible village with the biophysical inventory and consultation meetings conducted simulta-neously. At least two villagers were employed in each of the seven teams deploy-ed for the biophysical inventory, either as guides or camp guards. The social survey teams likewise involved villagers as guides and interpreters. For the first village, everything went as planned and scheduled.
When the teams transferred to the second village, however, problems arose. Some of the villagers were apprehensive of the activities conducted by the bio-physical inventory teams in the first bararujay. The survey equipment and timber inventory instruments were suspected of being special devices used for treasure hunting. For this reason, the teams were not allowed to go into the project area within the jurisdiction of the village. Project schedules as planned and reflected in the technical and financial proposals were drastically affected by this devel-opment.
To avert further delays, a series of consultations was held at the barangay in-volving various village groups. Members of the local government unit of the vil-lage were already amenable and convinced, as they were previously consulted and appraised during the preparation of the project proposals. However, it emerged that even with the favorable sanction of the village's local government council, the elders of the village did not want the project to be implemented with-in their area of jurisdiction. The elders, based on their tradition, must unani-mously agree and all must be in favor before a project can be implemented. Hence, the elders were approached individually by the social survey team in order to convince them. Two of the three elders were later convinced and agreed on the implementation of the project. But the third remained steadfastly against the project.
THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT 37
As the project progressed and as activities at the second barangay were almost finished and the survey teams were about to transfer to the third barangay, the leader of the latter village demanded some concessions. Aside from the villa-gers being employed as members of the forest resources inventory teams as well
as in the social inventory team, the leader demanded remuneration from the project implementer/contractor, purportedly for the development of his village. Because the amount demanded was restrictive and related problems were fore-seen, the contractor-NGO presented the problem to the Program coordinators. With their (DENR/NRMP and the DAI) consent, the ^oo-hectare part of the delineated pilot project area situated within the third village's jurisdiction was withdrawn, transferred and allocated into the other two villages, to ensure a total 8000 ha area. Thus, finally, the project covered only two villages over which the forest resources inventory teams where able to expand their coverage.
The planning exercise required repeated consultations with the villagers. During the biophysical inventory and the social surveys, the people's perceptions and the resource management practices they wanted were documented. Based on these inventory and survey results, planning options were defined. It was in these consultation meetings on the definition of options, and much later the presen-tation of scenarios given the various options defined for the people's evalua-tion, that I had interactions with the Bugkalots. I found both official (for proj-ect planning) and unofficial (personal individual contacts) involvement with the Bugkalots rewarding in terms of opportunities to understand them.
My personal experiences in the implementation of the pilot project in these two Bugkalot barangays were both intriguing and interesting in relation to nat-ural resource management within this people's domain. I thought then that there must be something in these people that influence the way they treat and use the natural resources within their domain. I also suspected that their meth-ods of resource management resulted in their relatively better preserved forestry resources.
When the Cagayan Valley Programme for Environment and Development (CVPED) announced the opening for submission of research proposals for Doc-toral studies in environmental science, I was among those who responded.71 proposed a research project specifically focused on natural resource manage-ment practices within the unique setting in the lands of the Bugkalot as a gov-ernment-awarded ancestral domain claim. After a two-year gestation period, my proposal was approved and I was granted a research fellowship by Leiden University to implement the PhD program. It came to pass that my involvement with the Bugkalots in the development project became the starting point for a lasting intellectual pursuit and an endearing personal and professional quest.
1.3 The Study Area
While the Conservation and Development of Residual Forests (CDRF) pilot proj-ect was implemented in the two Bugkalot villages in Nagtipunan, the Depart-ment of EnvironDepart-ment and Natural Resources (DENR) promulgated a policy for ancestral domain areas. It issued Department Administrative Order No. 2, series 1993 (DAO 2, s. 1993). The Order recognized the rights of indigenous peoples over their ancestral lands by issuing them a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC) for specifically delineated portions of their ancestral domain fol-lowing procedures and requirements as provided for by the Order.
For the Bugkalots of Quirino, particularly those living within the munici-pality of Nagtipunan, a contiguous area of 108,000 hectares situated in 12
baran-gaijs was identified and delineated. This delineated area, shown in map 1.2, was
awarded to them by the issuance of an ancestral domain certificate (CADC) by the DENR. The 8,000 hectare area covered by the Conservation and Develop-ment of Residual Forest (CDRF) pilot project including the two villages, is with-in the declared and CADC area for the Bugkalots of Quirwith-ino.
The study area, as initially envisioned during the preparatory stages of the PhD research proposal, was the 108,000 ancestral domain covered by the domain certificate awarded to the Bugkalots within Nagtipunan, Quirino. Hence the re-search proposal was specifically prepared and finalized to cover the delineated Bugkalot CADC area. However, when the reconnaissance survey was done with-in the proposed study area, it was realized that the area proposed was not ideal and could not be strictly adhered to.
Firstly, some of the villages covered by the Certificate are accessed not from the town of Nagtipunan proper but from other towns in another province -Nueva Vizcaya. Secondly, some of the villages within the area covered by the Certificate are actually politically under the jurisdiction of other towns in the other province and not in Nagtipunan. In fact local government officials of these villages directly function under these other towns. Thirdly, the socio-political realities within the villages covered by the CADC, although not directly linked, are intertwined with the other Bugkalot villages outside the awarded domain area.
OBJ ECTIVES OF TH E STUDY 39
MAP 1.2 - The Study Area, the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim of the Bugkalots ofQuirino, municipality of Nagtipunan, province of Quirino, Philippines.
i .4 Objectives of the Study
The study was conducted to examine the natural resource management prac-tices of the Bugkalots, the environmental (social and biophysical) factors, past and present, that influences such practices and how these practices are affect-ed by the ancestral land right policy of the government, particularly the Cer-tificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC).
To pursue the above general objectives, answers to the following broad ques-tions were pursued by the study:
i What are the major natural resource uses and management practices of the Bugkalots?
What are the natural resource management practices adopted by the Bug-kalots? What factors influenced their adoption?
Will these present natural resource management practices, which have been retained or adopted, lead to sustainable resource management?
What effects does a 'development' program, such as the Certificate of Ances-tral Domain Claim (CADC), have on the environment, on natural resource use and on management practices?
1.5 Data Gathering Methods
The study was anchored on the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC) awarded by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to the Bugkalots ofNagtipunan, Quirino. Hence, the study was conducted based on the time frame starting from June 1994 when the CADC was awarded to them, in accordance with Department Administrative Order No. 2, series 1993 (DAO 2, s. 1993) issued by the DENR. The time frame ends in June 1998 when the Order was superseded upon the issuance of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA '97) the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), a government body creat-ed by the Act.
DATA GATHERING METHODS 41
area were also defined. At the same time, potential study sites were identified and evaluated. Three barangays, adequately representative and strategically lo-cated within the domain were selected as study sites for thorough studies on the major resource use categories.
For each of the study sites, data on the uses and the management of re-sources for each of the identified major resource categories (agriculture, forest, and water) were gathered using the participant observation technique in com-bination with informal and key informant interviews. To facilitate this approach I stayed and lived for a period of at least four months at each site. During these periods, I observed, recorded, documented, and verified data and other infor-mation on the use of resources and the resource management practices of the Bugkalots. I also observed how these related to each other and to the Bugkalot way of life.
Where available, secondary data were also gathered from barangay, munici-pal, provincial and even from line agencies and other sources. For those that pertained to the three study sites, verification and triangulation were undertak-en by taking represundertak-entative samples concerning the data gathered. Through these samples, each secondary data set was verified and validated through on-site observations at the farms, in the forest, in the rivers, in backyards, or in the households. When found insufficient, these were supplemented by gathering primary data. As a participant observer, I was privileged to have access to exist-ing records of the barangay local government units, which greatly facilitated data gathering from the three study sites.
Similarly, biophysical data gathered from secondary sources were initially validated during the reconnaissance survey or later during the ly-month partic-ipant observation phase of the study. Resource uses and management practices were gathered directly from field observation during the same period. Primary data were also gathered during the participant observation phase of the study. Data gathered were sorted and analyzed using appropriate basic descriptive sta-tistical tools. This was done not so much for the necessity of accurate quantita-tive analysis and precise numerical results, but more so as the basis for a better understanding of the situations and trends that would help in better explana-tions for the qualitative data.
The results of the analyses are generalized scenarios of natural resource man-agement practices for each major resource use category in the Bugkalot domain. Each of these major categories was prepared as a case (see chapters 5, 6 and 7). Although the Bugkalots are only one of the many indigenous peoples in the Philippines, their situations could have a broader significance that transcends national boundaries. Some interesting glimpses encountered or experienced during the conduct of the study and relevant and interesting events are high-lighted in each case where appropriate.
local natural resources, which would otherwise not have been gathered through interviews or discussions with respondents. In my brief stay, the opportunity of being allowed to join them, interact with them, participate in their activities, and live with them gave me the chance to understand them better, empathize with their feelings, and look at things from their perspective. I hope that I can do justice to the Bugkalot in integrating all their natural resource management practices, in presenting an analysis on how these interrelate with ancestral land rights in general, and in forming appropriate conclusions that will hopefully contribute to the enrichment of discourse on development and the environ-ment. This book is the result of my effort towards this end.
1.6 Organization of the Book
Chapter i (this chapter) acquaints the reader with the origins of my involvement with the Bugkalots and my interest in their use and management of natural resources. It gives a brief description of the study area and explains the objec-tives and the data gathering methods used for the study.
Chapters 2 and 3 present a theoretical background and the framework that highlights and makes the case for the Bugkalot as an interesting subject of study. These two chapters also demonstrate their relevance to environmental theory and practice, particularly for community-based natural resource man-agement schemes implemented by governments. These chapters cover forest policy development and resource management practices, especially communi-ty-based ones and those involving indigenous peoples for forest conservation.
Chapter 4 describes the Bugkalot domain, its people and interrelated factors that form and integrate the Bugkalot ancestral domain claim, and also presents a description of the three study sites that were used to represent the domain and its people. Chapters 5, 6 and 7 identify the resource uses and management prac-tices of the Bugkalots for the three major natural resources in the domain, thus chapter 5 concentrates on agriculture, chapter 6 on forests, and chapter 7 on water. Each chapter details actual resource management practices and points out factors that influence their adoption or practice.
Philippine Policies for Forest Conservation
'People Power' and Averting Resource Exploitation
2.1 Introduction
People have the propensity to use and abuse natural resources. On the one hand, industrialized countries have the partiality to import resources in order to satisfy their endless needs. On the other, third world countries have the incli-nation and willingness to export theirs to meet their domestic economic de-mands. Adding to the pressure on the forests is the situation in these countries whereby many of the people rely on these natural resources for subsistence and survival. At the start of the twentieth century, peoples' needs and wants were rel-atively simple and few - nature was still teeming with bounty - hence almost everything that people needed was available for the taking.
Over the years, the population has rapidly multiplied, particularly in the Third World. Consequently, people needed more space and resources; their wants also correspondingly increased. Furthermore, people's inventions and use of equipment became more ingenious; they discovered ways of exploiting natural resources. The once abundant riches of nature were not able to cope with the unceasing exploitation of people to satisfy their insatiable needs. Nature mani-fested signs of declining resilience; resources started to dwindle at increasing rates. After many years of abuse, nature conceded defeat. It was just a matter of time before its eventual surrender. Despite all this deterioration, people were never fully satisfied. Undaunted, they wanted more; they continue in their un-abashed resource exploitation ways.
Global Concern for Forest Degradation
One major focus of global environmental concern pertains to the very alarming rate of deforestation, especially in the tropics. Tropical deforestation has be-come a major issue over the past few decades. People's interest has been stim-ulated by the increased prevalence of natural disasters. Destruction caused by typhoons and floods, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and other calamities are given sensational media coverage that has increased awareness among people. As a result, general environmental issues have gained public interest, including the impact of natural resource use and extraction on the environment, on human life and on people's well-being. The apathy and apparent neglect of govern-ments has been critically blamed because such use and extraction activities are undertaken with their consent or sanction and under their direct supervision. Government development projects have become the subject of protests and mass actions. Logging, mining and oil exploration, dam construction and other devel-opment programs, usually undertaken within forest areas, are considered detri-mental to the environment. They are perceived to cause direct undesirable im-pacts on the environment like pollution, floods, landslides, soil erosion, dislo-cation of people or even the cultural extinction of indigenous peoples, includ-ing global warminclud-ing and the subtle loss of biodiversity. Hence, implementation of such projects are questioned and critically opposed. Indeed, environmental degradation has affected humanity and has become a global concern.
According to the World Resources Institute estimates (1998), forests once cov-ered almost half (4/percent) of the world's land surface. This was estimated, by Demmer and Overman (2001), to be roughly the area of North and South Ame-rica and AfAme-rica combined. Based on data from various sources, Demmer and Overman (2001: 21-24) made calculations that depict the following picture of deforestation in the tropics:
1 During the 19805, n percent of the forest area of tropical Africa was defor-ested, 12 percent of tropical Asia, and eight percent of tropical Latin Ame-rica and the Caribbean. Within the io-year period, the average annual defor-estation rates for each continent group were i.i percent, 1.2 percent, and 0.8 percent, respectively. The average worldwide tropical deforestation rate was i.o percent.
INTRODUCTION 45
2.1 During this five-year period, 12 countries showed deforestation rates of three times or more than the average world rate of 0.7 percent. With their average rates in the igSos compared with their average annual defor-estation for the 1990-1995 period, these countries are: Costa Rica (from 3.0% to 3.1%), El Salvador (2.5-3.5%), Haiti (8.1-5.2%), Honduras (2.1-2.3%), Guatemala (1.8-2.1%), Jamaica (7.5-8.0%), Malaysia (2.1-2.5%), Nicaragua (1.4-2.6%), Panama (1.9-2.2%), Paraguay (2.5-2.7%), the Philippines (3.3-3.6%), Sierra Leone (2.8-3.0%), and Thailand (3.4-2.8%).
2.2 During the same five-year period, u countries lost more than 3,000 square kilometers of forest per year: Brazil, Bolivia, the Central African Republic, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Indone-sia, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Sudan, Tanzania, Venezuela and Zam-bia. Their collective total was 75,950 square kilometers or 64 percent of worldwide deforestation in the tropics.
2.3 As of 1995,13 countries possessed at least 300,000 square kilometers of natural tropical forest. Collectively their total forest area was 12 million square kilometers or 76 percent of the remaining tropical forest, more than third of which was found in Brazil. These countries are Brazil, Bo-livia, the Central African Republic, Columbia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Sudan, Tan-zania, Venezuela and Zambia.
In developing countries, environmentally destructive operations are hardly checked, thus accelerating the worldwide destruction of the natural environ-ment. Furthermore, the improvement of the quality of life of these people has become an illusion (Rikken 1989: 44). Large scale mechanized logging is often cited as the major cause of tropical deforestation (Van den Top 1998, Plumwood and Routley 1982). In 1982, more than 82 percent of worldwide tropical hard-wood was produced by only six countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Brazil and Côte d'Ivoire. With eight other countries (Colum-bia, Ecuador, Gabon, Ghana, Nigeria, Costa Rica, Burma and Thailand), the total rises to 90 percent. In 1992, a significant decline in production was report-ed in the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Thailand and Ecuador and most of the African countries despite 140 million cubic meters of tropical hardwood being produced by member countries of the International Tropical Timber Orga-nization (ITTO 1993: 9). Of course, mechanized logging is just one of the major causes of the forest degradation. Deforestation is a result of a complicated sce-nario of social dynamics and intricate interrelationships of various factors (see for example Van den Top 2003).
