WATERSHED Writers Aileen de Guzman Joyce Reyes Editors Chay Florentino-Hofileña Giselle Baretto-Lapitan Project Management Amihan R. Perez Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs (ACSPPA) Technical and Editorial Team Rene “Bong’Garrucho, LGSP Mags Maglana, LGSP Tess Gajo, LGSP Myn Garcia, LGSP Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. (OIDCI) Art Direction, Cover Design & Layout Jet Hermida Photography Ryan Anson
Watershed Management: SAVING FORESTS, STORING WATER FOR THE FUTURE
Watershed Management: Saving Forests, Storing Water for the Future Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government Copyright @2003 Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) All rights reserved The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program encourages the use, translation, adaptation and copying of this material for noncommercial use, with appropriate credit given to LGSP. Although reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this book, the publisher and/or contributor and/or editor can not accept any liability for any consequence arising from the use thereof or from any information contained herein. ISBN 971-8597-05-0 Printed and bound in Manila, Philippines Published by: Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) Unit 1507 Jollibee Plaza Emerald Ave., 1600 Pasig City, Philippines Tel. Nos. (632) 637-3511 to 13 www.lgsp.org.ph Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs (ACSPPA) ACSPPA, Fr. Arrupe Road, Social Development Complex Ateneo de Manila University, Loyola Heights, 1108 Quezon City This project was undertaken with the financial support of the Government of Canada provided through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).
A JOINT PROJECT OF
Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)
National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA)
Agriteam Canada www.agriteam.ca
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) www.fcm.ca
Canadian International Development Agency
CONTENTS FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PREFACE ACRONYMS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION
i iii v vii xiii 1
CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SECTOR Water as the Major Concern of Watershed Management Watershed Defined Watershed as a Planning and Management Unit Nature of Watershed Degradation and Its Consequences Causes of Watershed Degradation Guiding Principles for Improved Watershed Management Watershed Management Interventions
7 7 8 9 11 13 13 14
CHAPTER 2: LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT General Watershed Management/Forestry Development Planning Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) Industrial Forest Management Ancestral Domain Protected Areas Mining Environmental Impact Assessment of Forestry Activities Others International Covenants
19 19 27 28 34 35 36 38 42 43 44
CHAPTER 3: IMPLEMENTATION AND POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Policy Gaps Technical and Funding Capabilities of LGUs
47 47 49
S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
CONTENTS Socio-Economic Conditions in LGUs Coordination of Sectoral Plans and Activities CHAPTER 4: GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT Forest Land Use Planning Community-Based Forest Management and Tenure Security Forest Management and Protection Information, Education, and Advocacy Multisectoral Participation Fund Support Generation Environmental Performance Monitoring
51 53 57 57 63 70 80 84 88 92
CHAPTER 5: REFERENCES AND TOOLS Study Tour Sites References
97 97 101
ENDNOTES ANNEXES Philippine Strategy for Watershed Management Allocation and Management of Timberlands : Why Municipalities Should Get Involved Community-Based Forest Management No Forest Without Management
107 109 109 137 145 161
S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
he Department of the Interior and Local Government is pleased to acknowledge the latest publication of the Philippines Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP), Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government; a series of books on eight (8) service delivery areas, which include Shelter, Water and Sanitation, Health, Agriculture, Local Economic Development, Solid Waste Management, Watershed and Coastal Resource Management. One of the biggest challenges in promoting responsive and efficient local governance is to be able to meaningfully deliver quality public services to communities as mandated in the Local Government Code. Faced with continued high incidence of poverty, it is imperative to strengthen the role of LGUs in service delivery as they explore new approaches for improving their performance. Strategies and mechanisms for effective service delivery must take into consideration issues of poverty reduction, peopleâ€™s participation, the promotion of gender equality, environmental sustainability and economic and social equity for more long- term results. There is also a need to acquire knowledge, create new structures, and undertake innovative programs that are more responsive to the needs of the communities and develop linkages and partnerships within and between communities as part of an integrated approach to providing relevant and sustainable services to their constituencies. Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government offer local government units and their partners easy-to-use, comprehensive resource material with which to take up this challenge. By providing LGUs with practical technologies, tested models and replicable exemplary practices, Service Delivery with Impact encourages LGUs to be innovative, proactive and creative in addressing the real problems and issues in providing and enhancing services, taking into account increased community participation and strategic private sector/civil society organizational partnerships. We hope that in using
S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
these resource books, LGUs will be better equipped with new ideas, tools and inspiration to make a difference by expanding their knowledge and selection of replicable choices in delivering basic services with increased impact. The DILG, therefore, congratulates the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) for this milestone in its continuing efforts to promote efficient, responsive, transparent and accountable governance.
HON. JOSE D. LINA, JR. Secretary Department of the Interior and Local Government
S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
his publication is the result of the collaboration of the following individuals and institutions that support the improvement of the delivery of watershed management by local governments to their constituents The Local Government Support Program led by Alix Yule, Marion Maceda Villanueva and Rene “Bong” Garrucho for providing the necessary direction and support The Orient Integrated Development Consultants Inc. (OIDCI), particularly Becky Paz, Remy Esteban, Joy Cabo, Cherry Al-ag and Dr. Nick Uriarte for undertaking the research and roundtable discussion and preparing the technical report which was the main reference for this resource book; and for assisting in the review of the manuscript Participants to the Roundtable Discussion on Watershed Management held last August 8, 2002 in Davao City. Their expertise and the animated exchange of opinions helped shape the technical report on which this publication is based: Ma. Bella Guinto of Carmona; Ver Tiongson of Nueva Vizcaya; Edna Tongson of Agusan Sur; Egnar of Bukidnon; Mario Villanueva and Felipe Allaga of Bagumbayan; Nestor Obrero, Leah Rose Calatrava, and Dulcesima Padilla of Davao del Sur; Ferdinand Bautista of Maragusan; Noel Cuartero and Gegi Irong of Tandag; Ray Roquero of LMP; Cecille Helmi Halim of DA-ARMM; Virginia Rivera and Dr. Efraim Nicolas of DA-ATI SoCSKSarGen; Richard Rubis of DA-ATI Panabo; Priscilla Sonido of NEDA-XI Boy Balayon and Dodie Gualberto of PCEEM; Wiebe Van Rij and Mimi Arcillas of UDP; Jessica Salas of PWMC; Rory Villaluna, Lyn Capistrano and Ratan Budhatoki of PCWS; Ricky Nuñez of Balik-Kalikasan EWF; Ago Tomas of ESSC-Agusan del Sur; Ulysses Triambulo of ATRE; Lorena Navallasca of PROCESS Foundation;
S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
Kantong Salipada of MDFI; Delza Fuentes of EcoGov; Bien Dolom of OIDCI; Marie Nu単ez and Gemma Iturralde LGSP Manager Abe de la Calzada; Advisor Jing Lopez; Program Officers Rizal Barandino,Victor Alfaro, Vicente Iriberri and Cecille Isubal Tess Gajo for providing feedback that helped ensure that the resource book offers information that is practical and applicable to LGU needs and requirements Amihan Perez and the Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs for their efficient coordination and management of the project Chay Florentino-Hofilena and Giselle Baretto Lapitan for their excellent editorial work Aileen de Guzman and Joyce Reyes for effectively rendering the technical report into user-friendly material Mags Z. Maglana for providing overall content supervision and coordination with the technical writers Myn Garcia for providing technical and creative direction and overall supervision of the design, layout and production Sef Carandang, Russell Fari単as, Gigi Barazon and the rest of the LGSP administrative staff for providing support.
ervice Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government are the product of a series of roundtable discussions, critical review of tested models and technologies, and case analyses of replicable exemplary practices in the Philippines conducted by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) in eight (8) service sectors that local government units (LGUs) are mandated to deliver. These include Shelter, Water and Sanitation, Health, Agriculture, Local Economic Development, Solid Waste Management, Watershed and Coastal Resource Management. The devolution of powers as mandated in the Local Government Code has been a core pillar of decentralization in the Philippines. Yet despite opportunities for LGUs to make a meaningful difference in the lives of the people by maximizing these devolved powers, issues related to poverty persist and improvements in effective and efficient service delivery remain a challenge. With LGSPâ€™s work in support of over 200 LGUs for the past several years came the recognition of the need to enhance capacities in service delivery, specifically to clarify the understanding and optimize the role of local government units in providing improved services. This gap presented the motivation for LGSP to develop these resource books for LGUs. Not a â€œhow to manual,â€? Service Delivery with Impact features strategies and a myriad of proven approaches designed to offer innovative ways for local governments to increase their capacities to better deliver quality services to their constituencies. Each resource book focuses on highlighting the important areas of skills and knowledge that contribute to improved services. Service Delivery with Impact provides practical insights on how LGUs can apply guiding principles, tested and appropriate technology, and lessons learned from exemplary cases to their organization and in partnership with their communities.
This series of resource books hopes to serve as a helpful and comprehensive reference to inspire and enable LGUs to significantly contribute to improving the quality of life of their constituency through responsive and efficient governance. Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)
ACRONYMS A&D ASEAN AusAID AWP BFD CADC CADT CALC CARP CBFM CBFMA CBFMO CBFMP CDAs CENR CENROs CFP CFPC CIDA CLUP CRM CSC CSOs DAO DAR DECS
Alienable and Disposable Association of South East Asian Nation Australian Agency for International Development Annual Work Plan Bureau of Forest Development Certified Ancestral Domain Claims Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title Certificate of Ancestral Land Claim Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Community-Based Forest Management CBFM Agreement CBFM Office Community-Based Forest Management Program Community Development Assistants Community Environment and Natural Resources Community Environment and Natural Resource Offices/Officers Community Forestry Program CARAGA Forest Plantation Corridor Canadian International Development Agency Comprehensive Land Use Planning Community Resource Management Certificate of Stewardship Contract Civil Society Organizations DENR Administrative Order Department of Agrarian Reform Department of Education, Culture & Sports
ACRONYMS DENR DILG DOE DOF ECC EcoGov EIA EIS EMB ENR ENRC ENRO EO EPM ESSC FLUP FMB FPE FSSI FTAA HLURB IAF ICC ICRAFT IEC
Department of Environment and Natural Resources Department of the Interior and Local Government Department of Energy Department of Finance Environmental Compliance Certificate Philippine Environmental Governance Project Environmental Impact Assessment Environmental Impact Study Environmental Management Bureau Environment and Natural Resources Environment and Natural Resources Council Environment and Natural Resources Office Executive Order Environmental Performance Monitoring Environmental Science for Social Change Forest Land Use Planning Forest Management Bureau Foundation for the Philippine Environment Foundation for a Sustainable Society, Inc. Financial or Technical Assistance Agreements Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board Institute of Agroforestry Indigenous Cultural Community International Center for Research in Agroforestry Information Education Communication
ACRONYMS IEE IFMA IFMP IP IPR IPRA IRA ISF ISWM JBIC KAPAWA KSPFI LBP LGA LGSP II LGU LGUSCP LMP LOGOFIND LRPs MA MAGAGDA MGB MIWD MOA
Initial Environmental Examination Industrial Forest Management Agreement Industrial Forest Management Program Integrated Peoples Individual Property Rights Indigenous Peopleâ€™s Rights Act Internal Revenue Allotment Integrated Social Forestry Integrated Solid Waste Management Japan Bank for International Cooperation Kahublagan Sang Pumuluyo Sa Watershed Kahublagan Sang Panimalay Foundation, Inc. Land Bank of the Philippines Local Government Academy Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program II Local Government Units Local Government Units Support Credit Program League of Municipalities of the Philippines Local Government Finance and Development Project Local Resource Partners Mineral Agreement Mati Green AgroForestry Development Association Mines and GeoSciences Bureau Metro Iloilo Water District Memorandum of Agreement
ACRONYMS MPDCs MPFD MPSA NAMRIA NIA NCIP NGAs NGOs NIPAS NPC NRMP OIDCI PAMB PAO PASSO PASST PASu PAWB PCARRD PCEEM PENR PENROs PMWC PO POF PPDO x
Municipal Planning and Development Coordinators Master Plan for Forest Development Mineral Production Sharing Agreement National Mapping and Resource Information Administration National Irrigation Administration National Commission on ICCs/IPs National Government Agencies Non-Government Organizations National Integrated Protected Area System National Power Corporation Natural Resources Management Program Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. Protected Area Management Board Provincial Agriculturist’s Office Provincial Assessor’s Office Philippines Australia Governance Facility Protected Area Superintendent Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau Philippines Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research Development Philippines-Canada Environmental and Economic Management Project Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Provincial Environment and Natural Resource Offices/Officers Philippine Watershed Management Coalition People’s Organization People Oriented Forestry Provincial Planning and Development Office
ACRONYMS RA RDC RED RTD RUP SALT SANREMCRSP SEC SFM SIFMA SIFMP SMP SP SWM TLAs TREES USAID VALMA VMPCI WIDA WMIC WRDP
Republic Act Regional Development Council Regional Executive Director Roundtable Discussion Resource Use Permit Sloping Agricultural Land Technology Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources Management Collaboration, Research Support Program Securities and Exchange Commission Sustainable Forest Management Socialized Industrial Forest Management Agreement Socialized Industrial Forest Management Program Special Mines Permit Sangguniang Panlalawigan Solid Waste Management Timber License Agreements Tropical Resources and Ecosystem Sustainability United States Agency for International Development Valderama Lumber Manufacturers, Inc. VIBANARA MultiPurpose Cooperative, Inc. Wood Industry Development Authority Watershed Management Improvement Component Water Resources Development Project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RATIONALE FOR WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
n the Philippines, watersheds are tapped as vital sources of water supply for domestic, irrigation, and industrial purposes. They also provide the socio-economic base to a growing population and help maintain ecological balance, minimize the occurrence of floods and droughts, and mitigate the effects of adverse climatic changes. However, forest cover in many watersheds are now dwindling and are considered in critical state due to overexploitation and mismanagement (PCARRD, 1991). Deforestation and the large-scale transformation of the original vegetation of the country's forests to non-forestry purposes, coupled with inappropriate land-use practices, have disrupted the hydrological condition of watersheds. Likewise, population growth, pollution and indiscriminate development are depleting the nationâ€™s water sources. These have brought about flash floods and prolonged drought. Other adverse consequences are accelerated soil erosion, siltation of water bodies and reservoirs, and poor water quality. In the past, public awareness on watershed management opportunities for economic and water resource development projects rarely existed. The public failed to appreciate the inherent and vital role of watersheds in supplying water as well as providing other economic benefits.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK The Philippine Constitution mandates the State to protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature. Through the Local Government Code of 1991, the task of protecting and advancing the right of the people to a balanced
and healthful ecology was devolved from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to Local Government Units (LGUs). This task includes the management of watersheds and forested lands as well as delivering basic services and facilities to their constituents. LGUs play a critical role in controlling the continuing degradation of forests and uplands, and other related problems of flooding and soil erosionâ€”all of which are adversely affecting downstream areas. As a matter of fact, a number of circulars, administrative orders, and memoranda have been issued by both DENR and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) to help guide LGUs address these issues.
WHAT LGUS CAN DO There have been limited LGU initiatives in watershed management. In many cases, these initiatives are not sustained. This situation indicates a continuing need for LGUs to know and understand the importance of the watershed ecosystem, along with the scope of their mandate, the range of watershed management activities they can pursue at their level and the external resources that they can tap and mobilize. LGUs will need relevant information, skills upgrading and technical assistance to develop projects that respond to their conditions and needs.
WHAT SOME LGUS HAVE DONE One initiative LGUs have done is to formulate forest land use plans (FLUPs) to rationalize the uses of forestlands and determine the appropriate tenure arrangements for their management. Available FLUP guidelines allow the integration of forest land use plans into LGUsâ€™ comprehensive land use plans (CLUPs). The province of Agusan del Sur and the municipality of Baggao in Cagayan Valley are among those that have pioneered forest land use planning and implementation.
Other LGUs have implemented an aggressive information, education, and communication (IEC) campaign to heighten the awareness of citizens on watershed management issues. The City of Baguio and the province of Iloilo are among those with an innovative IEC campaign. And there are LGUs who have been successful in actual site development activities. The province of Nueva Vizcaya developed some novel approaches to forest management that are not only pro-environment but also pro-people. The Claveria case highlights the LGUâ€™s support for the Community-Based Forest Management Program that has protected the areaâ€™s water supply. This resource book focuses on doable measures for watershed management at the LGU level, rather than the very technical aspects of watershed management. This book is designed to provide information and insights that will enable LGUs to expand their current knowledge of watershed management practices and experiences in various parts of the country.
ohn Wesley Powell, a scientist and a geographer defines a watershed as â€œthat area of land, a bounded hydrologic system, within which all living things are inextricably linked by their common water course and where, as humans settled, simple logic demanded that they become part of a community.â€? A watershed is a complex ecosystem with interacting natural components. It is a vital source of water supply, provides socio-economic base to a population, and helps maintain ecological balance. However, human activities have a direct impact on the quality and quantity of surface water, groundwater, and other natural resources present in the watershed. By its very nature, watershed management must be integrated. It should address both water and the related land resources that affect or are affected by water. Water resources include surface water (rivers, streams and lakes) and groundwater. Land resources include wetlands, forests, flora and fauna. Issues related to water and land resources pertain to flooding, water quality, and soil erosion. The premise that everything is connected to everything else lies at the very heart of watershed management. The presence of various complex interacting natural components in a watershed is also the cause of conflicts. This is also the reason why it has been difficult to address the various issues related to watershed management. These issues include: (a) how can a watershed accommodate a growing population; (b) how can it sustain its support to an expanding urban area; and (c) how does one properly allocate land and water for various uses while ensuring that the waterâ€™s quality and quantity suit the needs of the stakeholders. These are a few of the various problems local watershed managers must face. In the Philippines, local governments are tasked to help resolve the conflicts arising from this complex ecosystem. To help LGUs face this challenge, this resource book on Watershed Management was developed. The materials collated here aim to: (1) provide LGUs information on the development of
solutions to challenges, working models and specific watershed management activities that can be studied and replicated when appropriate; (2) enhance LGUs understanding of their mandates with respect to watershed management and help them identify opportunities for their involvement; and (3) guide LGUs in identifying sources of assistance that would help them formulate and improve their watershed management efforts. This book attempts to show examples on watershed management efforts, with the involvement of different sectors: upland communities, municipalities, national government agencies, water supply managers ,civil society groups and the private sector. This book takes a holistic view, exploring the causeeffect relationships of human activities on natural functions and processes that extend across jurisdictional boundaries, and considering actions that go beyond the usual tree planting activities. LGUs can use this resource book to help them prepare watershed management projects. Users of this book are presented with innovative ways of providing the needed services to their communities in order to address the various issues related to watersheds. This book also encourages LGUs to start small, think big, and scale up fast in implementing service delivery projects. Watershed management is something that LGUs cannot do alone. The book relates information that is clear, interesting, and relevant to real life situations. The concepts presented here are expressively direct and clear. The following chapters comprise this resource book: Chapter 1. Overview of the Watershed Management Sector. This serves to introduce the reader to important concepts and principles that are used in watershed management. Chapter 2. LGU Mandates on Watershed Management. This provides a list of policies that relate to watershed management with a brief description of each. The policies are classified into sectors: general policies, watershed/forest management planning, CBFM, industrial forest management, protected 2
areas, ancestral domain, mining and others. Also provided is a list of relevant international covenants of which the Philippines is a signatory. Chapter 3. Implementation & Policy Issues and Recommendations. This contains the issues and concerns as well as recommendations that have been identified. The section covers issues on policy gaps, technical and funding capabilities of LGUs, socio-economic conditions of LGUs, and coordination of sectoral plans and activities. Chapter 4. Good Practices in Watershed Management. This puts together and describes actual experiences of LGUs, communities and DENR on what practitioners and experts consider as good practices in watershed management. In view of the complexity of â€œwatershed management,â€? good practices that relate to it cover a broad range of activities and do not only focus on actual rehabilitation (e.g., reforestation) and protection works. Chapter 5. References and Tools. This contains a list of materials that could serve as good reference for LGUs. These materials cover a broad range of topics, from general concepts and programs to very specific projects and approaches. This section also contains study tour sites that LGUs could visit should they want to observe good practices in watershed management. The Annex features articles that could help deepen LGU appreciation of the challenges and doables in watershed management. The Philippines Strategy for Improved Watershed Resources Management outlines the philosophy, guiding principles, and key elements of the countryâ€™s strategy, and the actors that will be involved in its implementation. Another article elaborates on community-based forest management as a national strategy for watershed improvement. Finally, two documents examine the need for management of forestlands and the roles of municipalities particularly with respect to allocation and management of timberlands.
Much of the content of this resource book was developed with the assistance of the Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc., which is also involved in the implementation of the Philippine Environmental Governance Project (EcoGov). A companion book published by the Local Governance Support Program (LGSP), titled â€œResource Finder: Financial and Technical Assistance for LGUs,â€? provides additional information on the different types of assistance that LGUs can access from government agencies, government financing institutions, ODA, and civil society organizations. Watershed management is among the service areas covered by the Resource Finder.
OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SECTOR
Overview Of The Watershed Management Sector
❙ WATER AS THE MAJOR CONCERN OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT Time magazine predicted that a Third World War would be triggered by competition for water. The world has begun to experience abnormalities in the supply of water in recent years. As demand increases and the supply of good quality water diminishes, more and more communities will experience water shortages. At the same time, flooding has become more frequent in some areas, supplying excessive amounts of water that these communities do not need. Thus, the sayings: “thirst in the midst of plenty” and “scarcity in times of need.” Like other tropical countries, the Philippines is experiencing this extreme imbalance between the demand for and supply of water. This disparity can be largely attributed to human actions that adversely affect the water cycle. Over the last few years, a lot of effort and resources have been poured by the government to watershed management in order to overcome this problem and to ensure the steady supply of water to meet the ever-increasing resource demand from competing users. Little has been achieved, thus far. This only means that this effort entails more action and involvement from all sectors that are to benefit from this endeavor.
Watershed n. A watershed is the total land area that contributes to the flow of a particular water body (e.g., river, creek, or stream), including the area where the water drains out.
Watershed management is primarily concerned with the quantity and quality of water. Yet the “regimen” or schedule (i.e., availability of water when needed) of this prized resource is also critical.1
1 Watershed MANAGEMENT
❙ WATERSHED DEFINED A watershed is the total land area that contributes to the flow of a particular water body (e.g., river, creek, or stream), including the area where the water drains out. The outlet can be a dam, irrigation system, or water supply take-off point. It can be a place where the stream or river discharges into a larger water body such as a bigger river, a lake, or the sea.2 A watershed is a natural system whose boundary is determined on the ground by the highest points or ridgeline near or around a water body. Ridgelines, also referred to as a topographic divide, separate one watershed from another.3 In other regions, the term “watershed” is also known as a catchment area or drainage basin. Several related watersheds are sometimes referred to as a river basin. In general, the term “watershed”can be used to refer to a small catchment area or to several sub-watersheds that make up a river basin. A watershed does not refer only to forests or the upper reaches of mountains or uplands. The complete watershed continuum (e.g., of a large river basin) includes the uplands (which include the headwaters or the origin of the water system), the lowlands, and the coastal zone where the outlet of the river system is located.4 Main River
There is a strong interdependence among the uplands, lowlands, and coastal areas within a watershed. Activities in the uplands affect the lowlands and coastal area (e.g., deforestation brings about siltation in rivers and coastal areas), while some developments in the lowlands have implications on the resources in the uplands (e.g., population growth and lack of employment opportunities in lowland areas encourage migration to the uplands).
OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SECTOR 1
Headwaters Hills Plains
Since it is a natural system, watersheds transcend political boundaries. Rarely do political boundaries follow the ridgeline. A watershed can encompass one or more barangays, municipalities, or even regions (e.g., the headwaters of the Agusan River Basin are located in Compostela Valley in Region 11 and the river discharges into Butuan Bay). Therefore, the management of a watershed that covers two or more political units requires the concerted efforts of the concerned local government units (LGUs).
❙ WATERSHED AS A PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT UNIT The reasons for the use of “watershed” as a planning and management unit can be viewed from both technical and social standpoints.
1 Watershed MANAGEMENT
A watershed is a holistic frame of reference. It is the most practical unit for an ecosystem approach in resolving environmental issues. The diagnosis of such issues must be thoroughâ€”from the headwaters down to the coastal zone.
The river system links the headwaters and the estuary, and the land, water, forest, farmland, urban and rural settlements.
It uses a fixed natural boundary, rather than an arbitrary one such as political boundaries. This minimizes confusion as to the actual size of the area it covers. With a well-defined area, it also becomes easier to monitor the impact of watershed management on soil, vegetation, animal life, microclimate, and other factors.
Water is the critical factorâ€”the medium through which energy, elements, soil, and pollutants circulate in the biosphere. The quantity and quality of water is the main indicator in monitoring the impact of watershed management interventions.
The activities of people upstream have an impact on the lives of people downstream. In the watershed approach, upstreamdownstream relations and interdependencies are dealt with. It is easier to identify the stakeholders and the interests they represent (e.g., loggers and miners in the headwaters, farmers in lowlands, business groups and water users in urban centers). It encourages multisectoral and participatory planning and management processes.
Everyone in a given watershed depends on the health and quality of the watershed for drinking water, flood protection, food, raw materials, and other life-sustaining elements.
The quantity and quality of drinking water is unrivaled as an environmental concern.
Many environmental issues cannot be resolved within the limits of LGU boundaries. The watershed framework identifies the LGUs that will need to collaborate with each other.
OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SECTOR 1
The watershed approach simply means taking the whole watershed as a planning and management unit and employing an integrated, comprehensive, and ecosystem-based approach to problem analysis, planning, and implementation. A shift to the watershed approach by LGUs would mean the following: Encouraging LGU planners, who may be focused on concerns that are within the limits of the LGU's political boundaries, to think beyond their political boundaries A better understanding by LGU planners of the ecological processes occurring within the watershed that govern upland-lowland relationships Understanding of a broad range of issues, which may cover different ecosystems, and which may be occurring beyond the political boundaries of an LGU Putting more emphasis on planning skills and providing basic training on proper mapping and spatial analysis in planning Involving more leaders in planning and implementation; encouraging multi-sectoral and interLGU collaboration Educating decision-makers on the rationale and merits of the watershed management approach
❙ NATURE OF WATERSHED DEGRADATION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES The country has a land area of 30 million hectares. In 1934, 57 percent or 17 million hectares of these were still covered with forests. In 1980, this was reduced to 7.4 million hectares. Recent estimates indicate that there are only about 5.33 million hectares, roughly 18 percent of the total land area, still covered with forests. These figures show the gravity of watershed degradation. If allowed to continue, this situation will have great repercussions on economic activities, and the health and social well being of communities within and beyond the watershed.
1 Watershed MANAGEMENT
Watershed degradation takes on several forms, or a combination of the following: Soil degradation - decline in soil productivity as the topsoil erodes and the hydrological, biological, chemical, and physical properties of the soil are changed. As soil productivity falls, yields from croplands, pastures and forests also decline. This could mean lesser vegetative cover, thus further increasing the rate of soil degradation. Vegetation degradation - decrease in vegetative ground cover and the decline in the quality and quantity of natural biomass. The reduction of vegetative ground cover results in sedimentation and siltation in rivers, water supply reservoirs, irrigation systems, and hydropower plants. The downstream siltation of lakes, coral reefs, and mangroves adversely affects coastal and marine resources. Biodiversity degradation - reduction in the diversity of species. The most extreme form of degradation is the extinction of some species of fauna and flora. This decreases the gene pool and the global biological heritage. Water degradation - decrease in the quantity and quality of both surface and ground water and increased risk of downstream flood damage. This results primarily from the loss of vegetative cover. Manifestations of water degradation include decreasing groundwater discharge, drying up of springs and streams, and extreme fluctuations in stream flows and fishkills due to the decrease of the water's quality. Climate degradation - changes in the micro-climatic conditions that increase the risk of crop failure due to a decrease of available water. This could have severe consequences on food supply. Land conversion - dwindling arable and forestlands due to land use change such as urban settlements, industrial parks, roads, and golf courses. This will seriously affect food security. Landscape degradation - diminished scenic value of natural landscapes since these are destroyed by visual and physical intrusion of urban and industrial development, mining and quarrying. It takes some time before the consequences of watershed degradation become apparent; hence they are often not immediately recognized. Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a disaster for LGUs and communities to realize the value and urgency of taking care of their watersheds.5
OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SECTOR 1
❙ CAUSES OF WATERSHED DEGRADATION6 Direct Causes
Deforestation and removal of natural vegetation Over extraction of surface and groundwater Improper management of cultivated arable land (e.g., no soil erosion control measures) Improper management of natural forests and tree plantations (e.g., use of destructive harvesting technologies) Overgrazing Industrial activities (e.g., road cuttings, chemical pollution) Unregulated land conversion
Population growth and migration to the uplands Increased urbanization and development in the lowlands (increased demand for water, raw materials) Insecure land tenure (in forestlands) Poverty and economic disadvantage Lack of markets for upland products Inappropriate conservation technologies Lack of access to financing Limited institutional support services Conflicting mandates of different institutions Conflicting policies Exploration of natural resources (the true value of natural resources is not recognized so that users are not encouraged to use them efficiently)
❙ GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR IMPROVED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT To ensure the sustainability of the natural resources of watersheds, the following guiding principles need to be followed: 7 Ecological Sustainability – The technologies and production processes involved in using and developing a watershed’s natural resources should not have adverse environmental effects. Social and Cultural Sustainability – The use and development of the watershed’s resources
1 Watershed MANAGEMENT
should be compatible with the culture and values of the people affected by it and should strengthen community identity. Moreover, there must be equitable sharing of costs and benefits between, and within, communities and households. Economic Sustainability – Resources must be used and managed in an economically efficient manner and must benefit the greatest number of people. The potential of the resources to support future generations must also be ensured. Institutional Sustainability – Community-based organizations, NGOs, LGUs, and national agencies involved in watershed management planning, implementation, and monitoring should have the financial and human resources to sustain the delivery of services.
❙ WATERSHED MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS Watershed degradation has numerous causes. Degradation occurs in different forms and the consequences can be long-term and far-reaching. Watershed management is thus a complex process that requires an integrated set of interventions at different levels—national, provincial, municipal, community, and farm. These interventions can be classified into three: Policy and Legislation Institutional Support Services Technology
◗ WHAT ARE DOABLE AT THE LGU LEVEL?8 Policy and Legislation Integrate watershed management planning concepts and principles into provincial and municipal level comprehensive land use planning procedures. Integrate a forestland use plan into the LGU’s comprehensive land use plan.
OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SECTOR 1
Identify and focus attention on watersheds that require priority based on locally developed, rather than nationally determined criteria. These may include watersheds that are supporting local water supply and irrigation systems, biodiversity areas, important socio-cultural areas, eco-tourism areas, and even hazard areas. Enter into joint management agreement with DENR for specific watersheds. Define specific areas within watersheds that require total protection (e.g., habitats of rare and endangered species, critical water sources). Collaborate with DENR in defining the permanent forest lines. In consultation with DENR, establish local laws for regulating land use within watersheds. Enforce national forestry laws consistently and in a transparent manner. Establish or strengthen multisectoral forest protection groups to help enforce forestry laws and ordinances. Encourage local investments for improved watershed management. Institutional Support Services Adopt a multisectoral, inter-LGU and inter-agency approach to watershed management; collaborate and plan together with LGUs that share a watershed; create a multisectoral Watershed Resource Management Committee/Council. Stimulate support and demand for improved watershed management at the community level. Identify and get the views of key stakeholders or groups of people who depend on the watershed, such as upland farmers, water districts, and irrigators’ associations. Establish a system for the collection, review, and dissemination of critical watershed information. Support the community-based forest management (CBFM) program of the national government. This program considers the upland communities as de facto “forest resource managers.” LGUs may support CBFM by helping upland communities organize themselves, apply for tenure, prepare management plans, and adopt more sustainable forest management and farming practices. LGUs can also provide them with the necessary support services. Develop an integrated upland agriculture/forestry extension support service that makes use of people-centered learning processes. S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
1 Watershed MANAGEMENT
Implement an Information, Education and Communications (IEC) program that would enhance environmental awareness in communities. Build partnerships and tap external organizations providing both technical and funding support to sustain LGU activities in watershed management. Technology Conduct research and/or observe upland technologies that have been successfully used elsewhere. Organize study tours for upland farmers and LGU officials to these areas. Initiate community-based watershed management projects such as agro-forestry, soil and water conservation projects, communal forests, and reforestation using technologies that are simple, low-cost, low-risk, flexible, and conservation-effective; and which build on indigenous practices. Develop and utilize simple, primarily qualitative, biophysical indicators and tools for detecting degradation trends and monitoring effects of interventions. Help DENR monitor management practices of those given tenure over forestlands within the LGU territory to make sure these forestlands are being used as planned. Support the establishment of small- to medium-scale forest-based industries. Allocate resources to market-based mechanisms (e.g., improve market access of upland communities, identify market opportunities for upland commodities, develop local processing capabilities). The success of watershed management projects in the Philippines relies not only on the support of the local governments and communities but also on the legal mandates on which these projects can be anchored. The next chapter presents various laws (both national and local), mandates, directives, and administrative orders that provide the backbone necessary to implement watershed management activities in the country.
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Article 11 of the Constitution maintains that the State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accordance with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7160: THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES (1991) This devolves from the DENR to the LGUs certain forest management functions, specifically the following: Implementation of Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) Management of and control over communal forests with an area of 50 square kilometers or less Establishment of tree parks and greenbelts Enforcement of laws related to mangrove resources conservation within municipal waters The Local Government Code (LGC) requires conducting consultations with the concerned LGUs, NGOs, and other concerned sectors for any proposed project or program. It also defines the shares of the LGU in the proceeds from the development and use of the national wealth.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
The pertinent provisions with respect to watershed/forest management are cited below. “SECTION 17. Basic Services and Facilities. (a) Local government units shall endeavor to be self-reliant and shall continue exercising the powers and discharging the duties and functions currently vested upon them. They shall also discharge the functions and responsibilities of national agencies and offices devolved to them pursuant to this Code. Local government units shall likewise exercise such other powers and discharge such other functions and responsibilities as are necessary, appropriate, or incidental to efficient and effective provision of the basic services and facilities enumerated therein.” “(b) Such basic services and facilities include, but are not limited to, the following:” Province “Pursuant to national policies and subject to supervision, control and review of the DENR, enforcement of forestry laws limited to community-based forestry projects, xxx.” Sec. 17, (b) (3) (iii) Municipality “Extension and on-site research services and facilities related to… and enforcement of fishery laws in municipal waters including the conservation of mangroves.” Sec. 17 (b) (2) (i) “Pursuant to national policies and subject to supervision, control and review of the DENR, implementation of community-based forestry projects, which include integrated social forestry programs and similar projects; management and control of communal forest with an area not exceeding fifty (50) square kilometers, establishment of tree parks, greenbelts, and similar forest development projects.” Sec. 17 (b) (2) (ii) City “All the services and facilities of the municipality and provinces….” Sec.17 (b) (4)
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
The other provisions of the Code that pertain to forest management functions to be performed by the local government units are: Municipal Mayor “For efficient, effective and economical governance the purpose of which is the general welfare of the municipality government, and in this connection shall: … Adopt adequate measures to safeguard and conserve… forest, and other resources of the municipality;” Sec. 444 (b) (3) (vii) Sangguniang Bayan “Approve ordinances and pass resolutions necessary for an efficient and effective municipal government, and in this connection shall: …Protect the environment and impose appropriate penalties for acts which endanger the environment, such as … illegal logging and smuggling of logs, smuggling of natural resources products and of endangered species of flora and fauna, slash and burn farming….” Sec. 447 (a) (1) (vi) “Approve ordinances which shall ensure the efficient and effective delivery of the basic services and facilities as provided for under Section 17 of this Code, and in addition to said services and facilities, shall: Provide for the establishment, maintenance, protection, and conservation of communal forests and watersheds, tree parks, greenbelts, mangroves, and other similar forest development projects.” Sec.447 (a) (5) (i) City Mayor “ Ensure the delivery of basic services and the provision of adequate facilities as provided for under Section 17 of this Code….” Sec. 455 (b) (4) Sangguniang Panglungsod “Approve ordinances and pass resolutions necessary for an efficient and effective city government, and in this connection, shall: … Protect the environment and impose appropriate penalties for acts which endanger the environment, such as … illegal logging and smuggling of logs, smuggling of
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
natural resources products and endangered species of flora and fauna, slash and burn farming….” Sec.458 (a) (1) (vi) “Approve ordinances which shall ensure the efficient and effective delivery of basic services and facilities as provided for under Section 17 of this Code, and in addition to said services and facilities, shall: Provide for the establishment, maintenance, protection and conservation of communal forests and watersheds, tree parks, greenbelts, mangroves, and other similar forest development projects.” Sec. 458 (a) (5) (i) Provincial Governor “For efficient, effective and economical governance the purpose of which is the general welfare of the province and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this Code, the provincial governor shall: “Adopt adequate measures to safeguard and conserve…forest and other resources of the province, in coordination with the mayors of component cities and municipalities:” 465 (b) (3) (v) “Ensure the delivery of basic services and the provision of adequate facilities as provided for under Section 17 of this Code….” Sec. 456 Sangguniang Panlalawigan Approve ordinances and pass resolution necessary for an efficient and effective provincial government and in this connection, shall: “Protect the environment and impose appropriate penalties for acts which endanger the environment, such as…illegal logging and smuggling of logs, smuggling of natural resources products and of endangered species of flora and fauna, slash and burn farming….” Sec 468 (a) (1) (vi) Barangay The Local Government Code did not devolve any specific forest management functions to the barangays.
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER 92-30 Guidelines for the Transfer and Implementation of DENR Functions Devolved to Local Government Units This order identifies specific DENR functions, programs, and projects to be devolved to LGUs for each of the sectors: forest management, protected areas and wildlife management, land management and mines development. In forest management, the implementation of the following community-based forestry projects was devolved: ISF projects; establishment of new regular reforestation projects (except those areas located in protected areas and critical watersheds); completed family and communitybased contract reforestation projects; Forest Land Management Agreements; and Community Forestry Projects. Also devolved are the management and control of communal forests with an area not exceeding 50 square kilometers or 5,000 hectares; management, protection, rehabilitation and maintenance of small watershed areas that are sources of local water supply; enforcement of forest laws in community-based forestry project areas, small watershed areas and communal forests, including the apprehension of violators of forest laws, and the confiscation of illegally extracted forest products on site. In addition to their Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), LGUs are to allot funds for financing local development and livelihood projects, and for protecting and developing the environment and natural resources. These funds will come from LGUsâ€™share of 40 percent of the gross collection derived by the national government from mining taxes, royalties, forestry charges and other taxes, fees, or charges enumerated in the Code. The DENR shall transfer to the concerned LGUs the personnel and assets including pertinent records and equipment corresponding to the devolved functions. The DENR and the concerned LGUs shall
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
organize, within six months from the approval of this Order, an Environment and Natural Resources Council (ENRC). This council shall consist of appropriate LGU and DENR officials and representatives from the concerned LGU. The ENRC shall review and recommend the implementation of programs and projects, and perform oversight functions on matters pertaining to environment and natural resources.
DENR-DILG JOINT MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 98-01 Manual of Procedures for DENR-DILG-LGU Partnership on Devolved and Other Forest Management Functions This document indicates how to build an effective partnership between the LGUs and the DENR in forest management. The partnership is anchored on the Local Government Code and DENR Administrative Order No. 30, Series of 1992. The salient provisions of the Circular are: “Creation of a National Steering Committee to formulate policies and programs toward strengthening and institutionalizing the DENR-DILG-LGU partnership on devolved and other forest management functions. Regional Steering Committees will likewise be created to oversee and monitor the DENR-DILG-LGU partnership and to prepare a strategic plan which shall include, among others, joint land use planning, resources sharing, and training for LGU capacity building on forest management.” “The appointment or designation of an Environment and Natural Resources Officer and the creation of an ENR Office in the LGUs shall be encouraged.” “Forest management projects (reforestation, communal forests, forest or tree parks, greenbelts) and functions devolved from the DENR (and personnel, equipment and other resources so transferred from the DENR) to the LGUs shall be fully documented and covered with a Memorandum of Agreement.” “The review and assessment of existing CBFM projects and the implementation of new CBFM projects shall be reviewed and assessed jointly. “
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
“The DENR and the LGUs shall coordinate closely in forest protection and enforcement of forest laws and regulations. Joint DENR-LGU forest protection teams in the regional, provincial, municipal and barangay levels shall be created.” “DENR and LGU will jointly identify potential community watershed areas in the LGUs’jurisdiction through joint forestland use planning. Upon request by the LGUs’ Sanggunian, the DENR will declare the identified area as a Community Watershed.” “The issuance by DENR of tenurial instruments in forestlands and for forest products’utilization shall be in coordination with the LGUs. “ Note that this Memo Circular is currently under review under the Philippine Environmental Governance Project (EcoGov) to enhance the concept of partnership between DENR and LGUs.
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 192 Providing for the Reorganization of the Department of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources, Renaming it as the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and for other Purposes (1987) This Order mandates the DENR as the primary government agency responsible for the conservation, management, development, and proper use of the country’s environment and natural resources, specifically forest and grazing lands of the public domain, as well as the licensing and regulation of all natural resources. This EO created the Forest Management Bureau (FMB), which would absorb the powers and functions of the Bureau of Forest Development (BFD) and the Wood Industry Development Authority (WIDA). The FMB shall advise the Secretary on matters pertaining to forest development and conservation. The EO also created a Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau (PAWB) to take over wildlife and marine parks of the BFD, all national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and game preserves previously managed by the Ministry of Human Settlements and national parks reservations.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 705 Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines (1975) This Decree assigns the Department to study, devise, determine, and prescribe the criteria, guidelines, and methods for the proper and accurate classification and survey of all lands of the public domain into agricultural, industrial or commercial, residential, resettlement, mineral, timber or forest, and grazing lands, and other classes. This PD also establishes the multiple uses of forestlands by providing that the numerous beneficial uses of the timber, land, soil, water, wildlife, grass and recreation or aesthetic value of forest lands, and grazing shall be evaluated and weighed before allowing their utilization, exploitation, occupation or possession. According to this PD, “only the utilization, exploitation, occupation or possession of any forest lands and grazing lands, or any activity therein, involving one or more of its resources which will produce the optimum benefits for the development and progress of the country and public welfare, without impairment or with the least injury to its resources, shall be allowed”. “The Code is open to the development or use of all forest reservations as long as they are consistent with the principal objectives of the reservation. Critical watersheds, national parks, and established experimental forests, however, shall not be subject to commercial logging or grazing operations, and game refuges; bird sanctuaries, marine and seashore parks shall no be subject to hunting or fishing and/or activities of commercial nature.” “No person may utilize, exploit, occupy, possess or conduct any activity within any forest and grazing land, or establish, install, add and operate any wood or forest products processing plant, unless he has been authorized to do under a license agreement, license, lease or permit. Upon the recommendation of the appropriate government agency, the President may, pending the conduct of appropriate hearing, order the summary suspension of any such contract, concession, license, permit, lease or privilege granted for violations of any of the conditions.” 26
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
“In order to achieve the effective protection of the forest lands and the resources therein from illegal entry, unlawful occupation, kaingin, fire, insect infestation, theft, and other forms of forest destruction, the utilization of timber shall not be allowed except through license agreements. Holders of such licenses however have the obligation to adopt all the protection and conservation measures to ensure the continuity of the productive condition of said areas, conformably with multiple use and sustained yield management. Penalties will be imposed for the illegal cutting, gathering and/or collecting timber or other products.”
❙ WATERSHED MANAGEMENT/ FORESTRY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-01 Adoption of the Watershed and Ecosystems Planning Framework The DENR officially adopts the Watershed and Ecosystems Planning and Management Framework. Thus, all DENR offices are to review and realign all programs and projects, including their budgets, in accordance with the priority watershed areas of the regions.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER 97-02 This requires the creation of a set of criteria for defining a watershed, prior to the formulation of a watershed management plan.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 95-15 Revised General Guidelines in the Implementation of the Sub-Classification of Forestlands and other Inalienable Lands of the Public Domain The Order defines the various forestland classification categories and criteria that will be used for classification. This AO also describes the procedures for the survey, zoning and mapping, processing and approval of the sub-classification.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 92-23 Institutionalization of the Master Plan for Forestry Development within DENR and Defining Functions of Offices for the Purpose This document provides implementation support within the DENR organization for the Philippine Master Plan for Forest Development. This AO also created various support groups and defines their composition and functions.
❙ COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT (CBFM) EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 263 Adopting Community–Based Management as the National Strategy to Ensure the Sustainable Development of the Country’s Forestland Resources and Providing Mechanisms for its Implementation (1995) This EO grants organized communities (including indigenous peoples) access to the forestland resources under long-term tenurial agreements, provided they employ environment-friendly, ecologically sustainable, and labor-intensive harvesting methods.
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
This Order also creates a multi-agency CBFM Steering Committee headed by the DENR to formulate and develop policy guidelines needed to effectively carry out CBFM. The DENR is mandated to establish a CBFM special account to provide a financial and professional incentive system for deserving communities. It is also tasked to consult with government financial institutions about creating favorable financing mechanisms for communities and organizations. Superseded by Executive Order 263: DENR Administrative Order No. 93-22 Revised Guidelines for Community Forestry Program Revised under Executive Order 263: DENR Administrative Orders No. 91-04 Revised Regulations Governing the Integrated Social Forestry Program
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 96-29 Rules and Regulation for the Implementation of Executive Order 263, otherwise known as the Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) Strategy The Order establishes the CBFM Program to implement EO 263. Under this program, local organized communities shall be issued tenure instruments and will be assisted by DENR, LGU and other organizations in the preparation of a Community Resource Management Framework. The framework shall serve as a guide in the access, development, use, and protection of resources in areas to be managed by the communities. The Order describes in detail the activities under each stage of the community-based forest management program. LGUs are to be actively involved in CBFM. Specifically, they should be involved in: (a) conducting an Information Education Communication (IEC) campaign with DENR; (b) identifying, selecting, and validating CBFM areas; (c) endorsing PO applications for CBFMA; and (d) assisting in community appraisal, organization, and resource management planning. LGUs may also help finance CBFM development, conservation, and harvesting activities.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2000-44 Amending Certain Provisions of DAO 96-29 and Providing Specific Guidelines for the Establishment and Management of Community-Based Projects Within Protected Areas This Order allows community-based projects inside multiple-use and buffer zones of protected areas, except any form of logging, or timber cutting that involves the natural forest. Qualified tenured migrant communities may participate in the Community-Based Projects and may be issued CBFMAs (Community-based Forest Management Agreements) within protected areas. These agreements (CBFMAs) will be endorsed by the Protected Area Management Board.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2000-29 GUIDELINES Regulating the Harvesting and Utilization of Forest Products within Community-Based Forest Management Areas These guidelines require holders of tenurial instruments under the CBFM program of DENR to secure a Resource Use Permit before they can use naturally grown and/or planted forest resources. The tenure holders should have an affirmed Community Resources Management Framework and Annual Work Plan. The extraction of forest products will be limited only to identified production zones. The remaining forest areas should not be less than 80 cubic meters per hectare after harvesting.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE NO. 99-35 Revised Guidelines in the Implementation of the Resource Use Permit in CommunityBased Forest Management Programs The Order suspends the processing and issuance of resource use permits for CBFM holders and other people-oriented forestry projects. This Administrative Order provides more guidelines for the formulation and approval of resource use permits.
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-29 Amendments to DAO No. 96-29 which Prescribes the Rules and Regulations for the Implementation of Executive Order No. 263, Otherwise Known as the Community-Based Forest Management Strategy DAO No. 99-29 makes changes to DAO 96-29, which prescribes the implementing rules and regulations of EO 263. In particular, DAO No. 99-29 repeals the requirement in DAO No. 96-29 for LGUs to endorse/affirm the CRMFs, AWPs and RUPs of CBFM POs. Instead, LGUs should be provided copies of approved CBFMs, CRMFs, AWPs. REDs, PENROs, and CENROs are to continue/enhance their close coordination with concerned LGUs
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-28 Amendment to Certain Provisions of DENR Administrative Order No. 12 Series of 1993 entitled “Revised Guidelines Regulating the Implementation and Management of DENRCARP Activities” This Order redefines DENR’s involvement in the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) to include the allocation of non-alienable lands suitable to agroforestry through the implementation of CBFM. This order also mandates DENR to train LGUs and Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) staff in order to enhance their technical expertise to support the implementation of the CBFM Program. The Order also describes in detail the DENR-CARP organizational structures and their functions.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-11 Amending DAO 98 Series of 1988 to Include CBFMP Under the Coverage of Program D of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and the National Anti Poverty Program Program D of CARP should now include public A and D lands, as well as forestlands. To implement agrarian reform in public lands, the program should also include both land transfer and nontransfer CBFM schemes. The allocation of lands through the CBFM Strategy should conform to the provisions of DAO 96-29. S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 98-41 Guidelines on the Establishment and Management of Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) Projects Within Watershed Reservations These guidelines concern the implementation of the CBFM strategy inside watershed reservations, which must be in accordance with the provisions of the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) law and be consistent with the principles of multiple use, sustainable management, and biological diversity conservation. The tenurial instruments and the procedure for implementing CBFM Projects inside watershed reservations will follow DAO 96-29 and related policies, provided that the Protected Area Superintendent and the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) are involved in all phases of CBFM implementation. LGUs are tasked to provide assistance and help monitor the implementation of the affirmed CRMF and AWP.
DENR MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 98 â€“ 08 Guidelines on Contracting Inside CBFM Areas The Order sets the rules and regulations to hasten and systematize two types of contracting inside CBFM areas: (a) service contract for the extraction, transport, processing, and marketing of forest products, and (b) development contract for the development of portions of CBFM areas into plantations, agro-forestry, livestock production, eco-tourism and other developmental activities as contained in the affirmed Community CRMF of the POs. The guidelines provide that the PO should furnish the LGU with a copy of any service or development contract and that the CENRO and LGUs shall jointly and periodically monitor the implementation of the contracts.
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
DENR MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 97-12 Guidelines for the Formulation of the Community Resource Management Framework and Annual Work Plan for Community-Based Forest Management Areas This Circular defines the content and procedures for the preparation and affirmation of the Community Resource Management Framework (the communityâ€™s strategic plan for managing and benefiting from the forest resources on a sustainable basis) and Annual Work Plan.
DENR MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO 97-11 Operationalization of the CBFM Program at the Regional, PENR, and CENR Offices The Regional Offices are tasked to organize a CBFM Office to coordinate the implementation of the CBFM Program in the region. This office will be under the Regional Technical Director for Forest Management Services. CBFM Teams at the CENRO are also created to undertake, monitor, and support field implementation.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 96-30 Integration of All Community-Based Forest Management and People-Oriented Forestry (POF) Programs and Projects into the DENR Regular Structures This Order seeks to integrate all DENR programs and CBFM and POF projects. It also aims to provide a smooth transition in the turnover of all CBFM and POF programs and projects to the Forest Management Bureau (FMB). The Order also creates the CBFM Office (CBFMO) in FMB and a CBFM Advisory Committee to provide technical and administrative guidance to the CBFMO during the transition period.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
DILG MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 96-143 Enjoining Support for the Community Forestry Program (CFP) Directs local authorities, particularly cities and municipalities, to undertake community-based forestry efforts and other initiatives in protecting the natural ecosystem. The Community Forestry Program (CFP) preceded CBFM.
â?™ INDUSTRIAL FOREST MANAGEMENT DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-53 Regulations Governing the Industrial Forest Management Program (IFMP) This Order repeals DAO 91-42, DAO 93-60, and DAO 97-04. The Order defines the areas available for IFMP, which comprise the following: (a) open and denuded lands, brushlands (b) degraded residual natural forests (c) areas covered by cancelled/expired Forest Land Grazing Agreement or pasture permits or leases (d) government reforestation projects or portions thereof found to be more suitable or can be better developed as IFP (e) production residual natural forest that may be best included in any of the aforementioned areas and be a part of the managed forest under the Integrated Forest Management Agreement (IFMA) (f ) areas under cancelled and expired Tenurial Land Agreements (TLAs). The Order also establishes procedures in the processing of applications and approval of IFMAs, defines the terms and conditions of the IFMA, and the incentives and profit-sharing arrangements under the program.
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
Repealed by DENR AO 99-53: DENR Administrative Order No. 97-04 (Rules and Regulations Governing the Industrial Forest Management Program)
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 96-24 Rules and Regulations Governing the Socialized Industrial Forest Management Program (SIFMP) This provides for the issuance of a Socialized Industrial Forest Management Agreement (SIFMA) to qualified tree planters. SIFMAs may cover all grasslands, brushlands, and open and denuded forest lands under the jurisdiction of the DENR—including those within government reforestation projects—and not otherwise to be classified under the NIPAS or subject of CADC, CALC, vested rights, licenses, permits or management agreements. The Order outlines the procedures to be followed from the selection of SIFMA sites to the award of the SIFMA itself. LGUs are involved in the validation and mapping of potential SIFMA sites, in the conduct of information campaigns, and in site monitoring and evaluation.
❙ ANCESTRAL DOMAIN REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8371 An Act to Recognize, Protect and Promote the Rights of Indigenous People, Establishing Implementing Mechanisms, Appropriating Funds Therefore, and For Other Purposes (1997) This Act recognizes the applicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain. The Government shall identify lands that Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) or Indigenous Peoples (IPs) traditionally occupy and guarantee effective protection of their rights of ownership and possession through the issuance of a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT). S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
This RA further provides the procedures for the delineation process and guidelines of options regarding the management of critical watersheds, mangroves, wildlife sanctuaries, wilderness, and protected areas within ancestral domains. This Act creates the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), which is mandated to formulate and implement policies, plans, and programs to promote and protect the rights and well being of ICCs/IPs, and recognize their ancestral domains. Superseded by the IPRA of 1997: DENR Administrative Orders No. 96-34 and 93-02
â?™ PROTECTED AREAS REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7586 National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS) Act (1992) The law calls for the establishment of a National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) and adopts the following categories of protected areas: (a) strict nature reserve; (b) natural park; (c) natural monument; (d) wildlife sanctuary; (e) protected landscapes and seascapes; (f ) resource reserve; and (g) natural biotic areas. It places the NIPAS under the control and administration of the DENR. For each of the established protected area, a Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) should be created. The law also creates a trust fund to be known as Integrated Protected Areas Fund for funding NIPAS projects. 36
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 92-25 National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Implementing Rules and Regulations This Order describes the various steps to be taken by DENR in the (a) establishment of the initial component of the NIPAS, (b) establishment of additional protected areas, and (c) establishment of some protected areas. It also sets the guidelines for the preparation, approval, and adoption of protected area management plans, as well as a description of the various management zones and a detailed outline of the plan. It includes a salient provision on the creation and composition of the PAMB, which has representatives from the provincial, municipal and barangay LGUs.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-21 Superseding DAO No. 97-05 and Prescribing the Revised Guidelines in the Implementation of the Pertinent Provisions of R.A. 1273, P.D. 705 and P.D. 1067 This Order provides that the following be demarcated and preserved as permanent timberland: (a) strip of 40 meters wide starting from the bank on each side of any river or stream; (b) 20-meter strips of land along the edge of the normal high waterline of rivers and streams with channels of at least five meters wide; and (c) strips of mangrove or swamplands at least 20 meters wide, along shorelines facing oceans, lakes, and other bodies of water, and strips of land at least 20 meters facing lakes. The necessary surveys will be undertaken to reflect these areas in maps and titles.
DENR MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 93-16 Guidelines on the Establishment and Management of Buffer Zones for Protected Areas The purpose of this Circular is to prevent destruction of the protected area by establishing buffer zones outside its boundaries. The Circular establishes the ecological, social, and economic criteria
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
for setting a buffer zone; procedures for boundary delineation; and management zoning within the buffer zones.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 92-13 Regulations Governing the Establishment of Buffer Zones Within Forestlands This Order was issued to ensure the sustainability of the remaining forest resources by establishing buffer zones between the boundary of production forests and areas used for agricultural and other purposes.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NO. 91-24 Shift in Logging from the Old Growth (Virgin) Forests to the Second Growth (Residual) Forests Effective 1 January 1992, logging of the virgin forest will be prohibited. Logging operations will shift to residual forests with prohibitions in certain areas. Timber License Agreements (TLA) and Timber Production Sharing Agreement (TPSA) holders are ordered to conduct a timber inventory of their residual forests if they are to continue their logging operations.
â?™ MINING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7942 The Philippine Mining Act (1995) An Act Instituting a New System of Mineral Resources Exploration, Development, Utilization, and Conservation (1995) The Act covers the exploration, development, use and processing of all mineral resources. It defines the areas that are open to mining operations and closed to mining applications. For instance, all mineral resources in public or private lands, including timber or forest lands as defined
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
in existing laws, are open to mineral agreements or financial or technical assistance agreement applications. Closed to mining applications are the following areas: (a) military and other government reservations, except upon prior written clearance by the government agency concerned; (b) areas near or under public or private buildings, cemeteries, archeological and historic sites, bridges, highways, waterways, railroads, reservoirs, dams or other infrastructure projects, public or private works including plantations or valuable crops, except upon written consent of the government agency or private entity concerned; (c) areas covered by valid and existing mining rights; (d) areas expressly prohibited by law to be mined; (e) areas covered by small-scale miners as defined by law, unless with prior consent of the smallscale miners; and (f ) old-growth- or virgin forest-proclaimed watershed forest reserves, wilderness areas, mangrove forests, mossy forests, national parks, provincial/municipal forests, parks, greenbelts, game refuge and bird sanctuaries, as defined by the NIPAS law. No ancestral land shall be opened for mining operations without the prior consent of the indigenous cultural community concerned. The Act describes the different arrangements, agreements and permits that the DENR can issue for the exploration and use of mineral resources, and lists the incentives available to investors in mineral development.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER 96-40 Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 7942 Otherwise Known as the â€œPhilippine Mining Act of 1995â€? This Order transforms the Mines and Geo-Sciences Bureau (MGB) from a staff into a line bureau. It also defines the functions of local government units as follows: (a) ensure that relevant laws on public notice, public consultation and public participation are complied with; (b) in coordination with DENR, approve applications for small-scale mining, sand and gravel operations, quarrying, guano- and gemstone-gathering, and to approve gratuitous permits for industrial sand and gravel operations not exceeding five hectares; (c) receive their share (as provided for by law) in the wealth generated from the use of mineral resources and thus enhance economic progress and national development. Furthermore, LGUs are supposed to: (d) facilitate the means by which a community can make an informed decision on the social acceptability of a mining project, a requirement for the issuance of an Environmental Compliance Certificate; (e) participate in the monitoring of any mining activity as a member of the Multipartite Monitoring Team; (f ) participate as a member of the Mine Rehabilitation Fund Committee; (g) receive social infrastructure and community development projects for the use of the host and neighboring communities; (h) act as mediator between the Indigenous Cultural Community(ies) and the Contractor(s). Among others, the Order sets out in detail the procedures and rules for the establishment and dismantling of mineral reservation, as well as rules for mining operations within mineral and government reservations. It also describes the eligibility criteria and the terms and conditions of 40
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
exploration permits, mineral agreements, financial or technical assistance agreements, and quarry operations. The Order establishes the conditions for applications for quarry permits, sand and gravel permits, and small-scale mining permits from the Provincial Governor/City Mayor through the Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board, which are to be created for each province/city.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-57 Amendments to DAO 96-40 or the “Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA No. 7942, Otherwise Known as The ‘Philippine Mining Act of 1995’” Major amendments to the Mining Act are made, covering the following: (a) establishment of the term and maximum areas allowed under an exploration permit; (b) transfer or assignment of Exploration Permit applications; (c) terms and conditions of the Exploration Permit and Mineral Agreement (MA); (d) possible conversion of an Exploration Permit to an MA or a Financial or Technical Assistance Agreement (FTAA) and vice versa; (e) issuance of Special Mines Permit; (f ) mandatory requirements for filing of an FTAA; (g) general provisions for quarrying and extraction of sand and gravel, guano, and gemstone resources in private and/or public lands.
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-56 Guidelines Establishing the Fiscal Regime of Financial or Technical Assistance Agreements (FTAA) Pursuant to Republic Act No. 7942, otherwise known as the Philippine Mining Act of 1995 (the “Mining Act”) The Order establishes the fiscal regime for FTAAs that the Government and the FTAA contractors shall adopt for the large-scale exploration, development, and commercial use of mineral resources in the country. It also provides for the formulation of a pro forma FTAA.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-34 Clarificatory Guidelines in the Implementation of DENR Administrative Order No. 96-40 or “Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA No. 7942 Otherwise Known as the ‘Philippine Mining Act of 1995’” This Order provides more specific guidelines on securing clearance of applications for an Exploration Permit, a Mineral Agreement and Financial or Technical Assistance Agreement (MA/FTAA). The guidelines also cover the renewal of a Exploration Permit; mandatory requirements for an Application for an MA/FTAA and registration of an MA; and availment of multiphase activities under the FTAA. Through this Order, prior approval or endorsement by any two of the concerned Sanggunians (Panlalawigan, Bayan, and Barangay) is required in support of mining applications intended for development and/or utilization purposes. For mining applications intended for exploration, proof of consultation with, or project presentation to, any two of the concerned Sanggunians is required.
❙ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF FORESTRY ACTIVITIES DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2000-07 Provisional Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Forestry Projects Pending the finalization and issuance of scoping guidelines for forestry projects, all applicants for Integral Annual Operational Plans are required to submit an Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) and other certifications.
LGU MANDATES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 2
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-15 Designating the Forest Management Bureau as the Lead Agency in the Implementation of the Environmental Impact Statement System for Forestry Projects The Forest Management Bureau (FMB) assumes all functions relative to the EIS System for Forestry Projects. The EMB Director should turn over to the Forest Management Bureau all Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Compliance Certificates as well as other documents pertaining to Forestry Projects. The FMB Director is authorized to create an Environmental Impact Assessment Unit and designate the necessary personnel.
❙ OTHERS DENR MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 99-29 Guidelines in the Implementation of Usufruct Rights in Tree Farming Within Forestlands Where Occupation is Not Allowed This Order grants DENR employees—as individuals or as an association or organization— usufruct rights over forestlands where occupation is not allowed (e.g., critical watersheds, buffer zones/multiple-use zone of protected areas, etc.) for the establishment, protection, and maintenance of tree farms. The appropriate tenurial agreement is the Contract of Usufruct, which includes the profit-sharing scheme with the government. In no way does this contract give the participant acquisitive or ownership rights over the land.
2 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 99-13 Declaring Certain Portions of the Public Forestlands in Region 13 as the CARAGA Forest Plantation Corridor (CFPC) This sets aside some 684,503 hectares of open/denuded lands, brushlands and degraded second growth forests in the provinces of Agusan del Sur, Agusan del Norte, Surigao del Norte, and Surigao del Sur as part of the CFPC. This Order indicates the technical description of the parcels. The CFPC is reserved permanent forestland for the production, mainly of timber and non-wood forest products that will support forestbased processing facilities and/or supply wood and other forest product requirements to both the domestic and foreign markets. Areas programmed for forest plantation development under various tenurial instruments within the CFPC may apply with the DENR to avail of incentives for investors/developers in the Corridor.
â?™ INTERNATIONAL COVENANTS The Philippines is a signatory to the following international covenants that relate to watershed and forest management: 1. Non-legally Binding Authoritative Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management Conservation and Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests (13 June 1992, Rio de Janeiro) 2. Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (16 November 1992, Paris) 3. Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (3 March 1973, Washington) 4. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (23 June 1979, Bonn) 5. ASEAN Agreement on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (9 July 1985, Kuala Lumpur) 44
IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ost watersheds in the Philippines are considered degraded. The extent of degradation may differ but the consequences are significant in terms of reduction in economic, social, and environmental benefits to communities. With the passage of the Local Government Code, LGUs are now mandated to manage community watersheds. However, there are issues and concerns that need to be addressed so that LGUs can ably perform this devolved function. These are summarized below.
â?™ POLICY GAPS â—— MISMATCH BETWEEN THE DEVOLVED FUNCTIONS AND LGU POWERS AND AUTHORITY While the Local Government Code provides that LGUs shall discharge the functions and responsibilities devolved to them, the exercise of these functions remains subject to DENR supervision, control, and review. Moreover, the functions were devolved without the corresponding resources that LGUs need to perform the mandated functions. Most LGUs, therefore, experience a mismatch between the functions devolved to them and their actual devolved powers or authority. For instance, while implementation of community-based forest management projects (CBFM) and integrated social forestry projects (ISFP) have been devolved to LGUs, the devolution did not include the authority to issue permits to harvest and transport forest products. Decisions on allocation, disposition, and use of natural resources are still being made by the DENR. Thus, many LGUs feel that they become important participants in the process only when problems arise.
3 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
This situation, as well as the commonly held perception that watershed management is the concern of the national government, explains to a large extent the inaction of many LGUs. Recommendations for LGUs: Pursue this topic in collaboration with the LGU leagues (Leagues of Municipalities, of Cities, and of Provinces). Draw up a position or a resolution regarding devolution. Suggest the review the provisions in the DENR-DILG Joint Memorandum Circular (MC) 98-01 and propose the development of clearer guidelines. Suggest the formation of an oversight committee to monitor the implementation of the joint MC and include various LGU leagues and other sectors.
◗ NON-INCLUSION OF LAND USE PLAN OF FORESTLAND (OR UPPER WATERSHED AREAS) IN LGU LAND USE PLANS The Local Government Code requires LGUs to prepare their comprehensive land use plan (CLUP)— a physical framework plan that specifies land use and zoning. However, the HLURB CLUP guidelines being followed by LGUs generally lack a watershed/forestland management orientation. This occurs since forestlands are categorized as one land use type, when, in fact, there are various land uses within forest zones. Thus, CLUPs provide very detailed plans for the lowlands/settlement areas but miss out on forestlands or the upper watershed areas. In many cases, these forestlands compose a large percentage of the LGU territory, and in reality, provide the needed support (water supply, raw materials, etc.) for the lowlands. Guidelines have actually been developed for forestland use planning by LGUs but there have been no formal directives about their adoption or their integration into the CLUP. Recommendation for LGUs: Integrate Forest Land Use Planning into the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3
◗ LACK OF POLICY AND MECHANISMS ON RESOURCE PRICING AND USER FEES, ALONG WITH A WEAK INCENTIVES SYSTEM Improper resource use activities in upper watersheds will have adverse effects on lowland and coastal areas. To encourage upland occupants to adopt sustainable watershed practices, it is necessary to put in place a system for compensating them for resource enhancing activities that benefit the general public. To encourage LGUs to protect watersheds that provide water to other LGUs, the former should be compensated by the latter LGUs for their investments in watershed protection. Recommendation for LGUs: Set up a mechanism for effective resource pricing where appropriate fees could be charged to agricultural, domestic, and industrial users for the water they use. A percentage of the charges could be reserved to fund watershed management activities. An organization consisting of various LGUs and an oversight and support institution like the DENR could be part of that mechanism.
❙ TECHNICAL AND FUNDING CAPABILITIES OF LGUS INADEQUATE TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES AND INFORMATION RESOURCES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT LGU staff are concerned that their technical skills in watershed management planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation might be inadequate. Specifically, they require skills for resource profiling, data integration and analysis, forestland use planning, mapping/ community mapping, watershed rehabilitation technologies, and community-based monitoring and evaluation of watershed parameters. Moreover, there is very limited understanding of key watershed management principles (e.g., multiple uses of watersheds), policies, and programs (such as the joint DENR-DILG Memorandum
3 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Circular 98-01 which is poorly disseminated and unknown to many LGUs); CBFM, which is the current key strategy in forest management; and the range of tenurial instruments being issued on occupants of forestlands. Even if LGUs are interested in managing specific watersheds in their area, they are constrained by their unfamiliarity with processes and requirements. The absence or lack of updated and adequate information on watershed resources also limits LGU interest in watershed management. It is not easy to gather from DENR the maps and data that are critical to watershed management planning (e.g., land classification, forest cover, tenured forestlands, upland settlements). Without this information, LGUs cannot fully appreciate their watershed resources and grasp the gravity of their problems. Inadequate information also makes it difficult to determine the best watershed management strategies. Recommendation for LGUs: Train LGU staff. Link up with agencies such as DENR, institutions like the Philippine Environmental Governance Project (EcoGov), the Philippine Watershed Coalition, and other information sources that can provide updated information.
◗ INADEQUATE FUNDS Funding is frequently identified as a crucial factor in the management of watersheds. Since watershed management activities generally require large capital, the greatest challenge is attaining overall funding stability for the implementation of watershed rehabilitation activities. Reforestation costs at least P20,000 per hectare. Undeniably, LGUs also have limited funding resources. Many claim that they do not even have adequate funds to provide for the basic services of their constituents. Because of this resource limitation, most of them are hesitant to take responsibility for watershed management. However, as the experiences of the municipalities of Maasin and Lumban, Iloilo show, watershed funds can be generated from the LGU share of national wealth and through private concession holders. These experiences are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4. LGSP also
IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3
published a companion volume to this resource book, The Resource Finder: Financial and Technical Assistance for LGUs, which can guide LGUs in identifying other sources of support for watershed management
◗ LIMITED INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Watershed management is a complex task. It is concerned not only with managing water, but also with managing the land, resources, and people living within the watershed areas. For LGUs to effectively manage watersheds, they need all the support and assistance of various institutions and sectors. Unfortunately, only a few LGUs have established links with other national agencies, NGOs, and the private sector. Only a few have links with critical resource organizations, such as institutions involved in technology, research, and training. Most LGUs also have limited knowledge about where and how to access funding and technical assistance. Recommendation for LGUs: The experiences of Maasin, Iloilo, Claveria, Misamis Oriental, and Baguio City are good examples of how LGUs can mobilize financial, technical, and institutional support in saving and furthering citizen’s concern for a critical watershed area.
❙ SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF LGUS ◗ INCREASING UPLAND POPULATION AND POVERTY The population in many upland areas is continually increasing. This is mainly due to in-migration caused by poverty and limited employment opportunities in the lowlands. Since large portions of forestlands have become de facto open access resources, many poor families in the lowlands look at these areas as alternative places to eke out a living.
3 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
This situation (along with limited economic opportunities in the uplands) puts more pressure on watershed resources, thus leading to increased degradation of watershed areas. Forestland occupants who occupy or use areas without having tenure make this situation worse, since they have fewer incentives to conserve the productive potential of the land and its resources. Thus, in most cases, the land management strategies adopted by forestland occupants generate immediate returns without regard for long-term sustainability—to the disadvantage of the watershed areas. Recommendation for LGUs: Conduct studies on how to provide land tenure to upland dwellers/migrants. The two case studies (Claveria, Misamis Oriental and Nueva Vizcaya) in Chapter 4 show that community-based forest management and tenure security exemplify one way to implement land tenure distribution.
◗ IMPROPER AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES/LACK OF EXTENSION SERVICES Another factor that adversely affects the watershed involve the agricultural practices (crop cultivation and grazing) of upland dwellers. Steep slopes are being cultivated without soil and water conservation measures. Often, kaingin (or slash and burn agriculture) is used to prepare the land for cultivation. Inappropriate land uses and practices lead to soil erosion/soil loss, sedimentation of water bodies, and low productivity both in the upper and downstream/lowland areas. Furthermore, agricultural extension services are barely available in the uplands. Upland households and communities receive very little information on how to manage their upland farms and the forests in a sustainable manner. Recommendation: There is a need for Local Government Units, Department of Agriculture, Department of Agrarian Reform and DENR to offer an extension support service that caters to upland communities. Institutions such as Western Mindanao Community Initiatives Program (WMCIP) and the Upland Development Program (UDP) that work with LGUs in upland agricultural development can provide good examples that can be studied and adopted by LGUs. 52
IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3
â?™ COORDINATION OF SECTORAL PLANS AND ACTIVITIES â—— ABSENCE OF AN OVERALL PLAN AND WEAK COORDINATION AMONG SECTORS A poor appreciation of the need to implement an integrated watershed management programs further constrains the effective management of watersheds. NGOs, local communities, the private sector, and even government agencies are not fully aware of the problems and their roles. There are different players involved in watershed management, possessing diverse and often conflicting interests. The absence of a framework or a plan, which could serve as the basis for cooperation, only intensifies the competition among them for various watershed resources. The absence of watershed management plans thus renders many watersheds vulnerable to forces of degradation. As a result, determining the best management strategies, and coordinating and integrating different activities in the watershed become more difficult. The cases of PhilippinesCanada Economic and Environment Management Project (PCEEM), of Maasin in Iloilo and of Nueva Ecija are good examples of projects that highlight the benefits of managing different interests and the advantages of multi-stakeholder participation.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
â?™ FOREST LAND USE PLANNING
LGUs can help in identifying and giving priority to community watersheds through forestland use planning (FLUP). The DENR has developed the FLUP guidelines, which are primarily for LGU use. These guidelines are designed to jive with those for comprehensive land use planning so that LGUs can integrate a forest land use plan into their comprehensive land use plan (CLUP). A main feature of forestland use planning is the use of the watershed as a planning unit. Using appropriate land use planning tools such as mapping and map overlay analysis, an LGU can identify: (1) areas with conflicting land uses, (2) areas that require protection or which can be used for production, or (3) areas with open access that require management. By applying a set of criteria, an LGU can identify specific sub-watersheds within its jurisdiction that should be given priority (e.g., because of their irrigation value, domestic water supply, and biodiversity). The FLUP will also highlight opportunities for inter-LGU collaboration in managing shared resources. The FLUP was introduced to several LGUs during the implementation of the Natural Resources Management Program, funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which achieved different degrees of success. The two cases that are presented below are the results of such efforts (although the Agusan del Sur exercise was funded by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program [LGSP]). Under the new USAID-DENR project called the Philippine Environmental Governance (EcoGov), forestland use planning is promoted to LGUs as a tool to facilitate the allocation and closure of open access areas to forestlands. Under EcoGov however, the FLUP procedures are enhanced with good governance practices so that there is transparency and accountability in the land allocation process, and decision-making is more participatory.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
FOREST LAND USE PLANNING AGUSAN DEL SUR’S PROVINCIAL FOREST LAND USE PLAN HIGHLIGHTS Contact Information Provincial Planning and Development Office Patin-ay, Prosperidad Agusan del Sur Tel. No.: (085) 343-7268
Political will in the implementation of the project Use of the watershed as a planning framework at the provincial level Capability-building of LGU on forest land use planning Inter-office/agency and inter-LGU (province and municipalities) collaboration Spatial analysis Database to support resource use and management planning and decisionmaking
The province of Agusan del Sur was among the first to participate in an orientation on FLUP. The orientation came at an opportune time, since the Provincial Planning and Development Office (PPDO) was then in the process of preparing its proposal for funding by LGSP. The PPDO decided to pursue provincial-level forestland use planning and the proposal was endorsed and subsequently approved by LGSP. To implement the project, the province created a provincial level forestland use planning team through an Executive Order issued by the Governor. The team was chaired by the PPDO, with the Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office (PENRO) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) as co-chair. Member agencies included the province’s Environment and Natural Resources Office (ENRO), Provincial Agriculturist’s Office (PAO), Provincial Assessor’s Office (PASSO), Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and National Irrigation Administration (NIA). For more than six months, the team was formally trained and allowed to do hands-on work with the guidance of consultants. After completing the FLUP, it was presented to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP), for approval and implementation.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FOREST LAND USE PLANNING Agusan del Sur
KEY FEATURES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS Adoption of the watershed framework in planning. The team studied the topographic profile of the province and the whole Agusan River Basin. Twelve sub-watersheds within the province were delineated as a result of the watershed mapping exercise. Each sub-watershed was considered as a planning unit. Because of its unique functions and importance to the province, the Agusan Marsh area was delineated, thus becoming the 13th sub-watershed and Agusan’s special planning unit. Involvement of municipal LGUs. Though completed at the provincial level, the municipal planning units—particularly the Municipal Planning and Development Coordinators (MPDCs)—participated in most of the formal training sessions and in the critical stages of the FLUP process. This allowed the municipal planners to develop an appreciation of the watershed framework and the whole FLUP approach. Use of spatial analysis to define land use conflicts. Seven (7) thematic maps were produced to characterize the 13 planning units. The land use issues and conflicts within the watersheds were thus not only described, but also located on the maps. Importance given to irrigation support in prioritizing sub-watersheds. The point sources of existing and proposed irrigation facilities were mapped and the respective irrigation watersheds were delineated. This analysis led to the selection of Gibong sub-watershed as the most critical area, given the number and extent of irrigation systems it supports. Closing open access areas. The tenured and the open access areas in each watershed were defined in the maps. Proposals were formulated on how the open access areas could be managed. Appropriate tenurial instruments were presented for those areas.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Agusan del Sur FOREST LAND USE PLANNING
THE GAINS DERIVED FROM THE FLUP EXERCISE The process broadened PPDO’s understanding and appreciation of the watershed concept, watershed resources, and management issues. The ecological profiling and mapping exercise provided a good database that allowed the province to make informed decisions on forestland uses. The maps generated from the exercise became very useful references to the province in its review of applications for Mineral Production Sharing Agreements (MPSA), the creation of tree plantations, and permits to use forest resources. The information generated through the FLUP was useful in the formulation of the Environment Management Plan for the Agusan Marsh. They are likewise being used as inputs to the formulation of (a) the province’s Local Environment Code, and (b) proposed expansion of the Agusan Marsh protected area. The plan provided the initial basis for the proposed proclamation of the Gibong Watershed as a critical watershed. The plan provided the basis for Agusan del Sur’s Community Based Resource Management Project, “Sustaining Local Government Initiatives in Community-Based Resource Management.” The provincial government has allotted P4.5 million for this project, which includes the formulation of the CBRM plans for six pilot sites in six of the 12 watersheds in the FLUP. Source: “Towards Regaining the Lush Forest of Agusan del Sur.” LGU Initiatives in Forest Management. 1999: GOLD-PBSP and OIDCI.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FOREST LAND USE PLANNING MUNICIPAL FOREST LAND USE PLANNING IN BAGGAO, CAGAYAN HIGHLIGHTS:
Political will in resource management planning and actualization Adoption of watershed as planning framework LGU capability-building on forestland use planning Integration of forestland use into the LGU’s comprehensive land use plan Inter-LGU collaboration in management planning of critical watershed
Contact Information Municipal Planning and Development Office (MPDO) Baggao, Cagayan
The municipality of Baggao is the second largest municipality in the province of Cagayan. Situated in the northeastern region of the Philippines, it has a total land area of 92,060 hectares, 70 percent of which are classified as forestlands. Its forest resources include old growth forests in the Sierra Madre range. In the past, Baggao was known as a haven of wood products, particularly narra. However, after the 1980s, most of its forest resources were destroyed, degrading its watersheds and threatening its sources of water for irrigation and domestic uses. The effects of forest destruction were clearly demonstrated in October 1996, when the town experienced the biggest flash flood in 23 years, submerging 14 of its 48 barangays for days. This incident heightened the LGU’s desire to design and enact a comprehensive plan for the proper management of its natural resources. In 1997, the municipality of Baggao decided to complete its comprehensive land use plan (CLUP). In the process of CLUP preparation, the LGU requested DENR’s assistance in formulating a forestland use plan (FLUP). FLUP results were integrated into the CLUP.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Baggao, Cagayan FOREST LAND USE PLANNING
With this initiative, Baggao became the first municipal LGU in the country to have a comprehensive land use plan with a forestland use plan as an integral component. One of the recommended strategies in the FLUP was management of the irrigation watersheds with other LGUs. The MPDO of Baggao convinced the Sangguniang Bayan to allocate funds for the joint management planning, which was to include the concerned LGUs, DENR, NIA, and the irrigators’ association. A series of inter-LGU consultations then followed, resulting in the creation of a joint watershed planning team and a common decision to request that the Pared River be proclaimed a watershed forest reserve. The planning team completed the preparation of a Pared River watershed management plan, which was included in the draft proclamation. Source: “Forest Land Use Planning: A Tool for LGU Participation in Sustainable Forest Management.” LGU Initiatives in Forest Management. 1999: GOLD-PBSP and OIDCI.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
❙ COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT AND TENURE SECURITY Upland communities occupy most, if not all, watersheds in the country. It is deemed costly— economically, socially, and politically—to resettle these upland communities elsewhere. It has been recognized that a more practical approach would be to provide forest occupants with incentives to participate in forest protection, development, and conservation (Executive Order 263 upholds Community-Based Forest Management [CBFM] as the strategy for sustainable forest management). Security of tenure, which assures forest occupants of long-term access to the land, is considered an important incentive. It develops the community’s sense of “ownership” over the forestlands allocated to them and motivates them to invest in and protect these areas from illegal and destructive activities. In essence, it helps close the “open access” nature of most forestlands. There are various tenure instruments that can be issued for allocating forestlands. They may differ according to land use (pasture, industrial plantation, reservation/protected area, special use) or tenure holder (organized community, private investor, indigenous community, etc). Communal tenure is usually provided in the form of Community-Based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA). The CBFMA is issued to organizations of forest occupants who agree to look after the sustainability of the area allocated to them. The tenure is usually good for 25 years, renewable for another 25 years. The good practices in this section showcase experiences in CBFM. The Claveria case highlights the LGU’s initiative and collaboration with DENR to close its open access forestlands primarily through CBFM. This move benefits its upland communities as well as the neighboring municipalities that depend on Claveria for their water supply. The Nueva Vizcaya experiment also deserves to be highlighted in this section, offering four novel models that provide usufruct/tenure/harvesting rights to forest occupants. The LGU assumes the full role of a resource manager, with the support of DENR. The Nueva Vizcaya experience in co-managing with DENR the Lower Magat watershed has been used as a model in developing the DENR-DILG guidelines for managing community watersheds. At present, this model is applied in two municipalities in Agusan del Sur—Veruela and Sta. Josefa.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT AND TENURE SECURITY CLAVERIA’S SUPPORT TO THE COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS: Contact Information: Municipal Planning and Development Office Claveria, Misamis Oriental Regional CBFM Coordinator DENR Regional Office X Cagayan de Oro City Tel. No.: (08822) 726-243
Community-Based Forest Management to close open access forestlands LGU support and commitment to CBFM Claveria, Misamis Oriental has a total land area of about 89,000 hectares. About 60 percent of these are forestlands; a large part is undisturbed or old growth forests. Unknown to many, water used by many municipalities around Claveria also comes from Claveria’s forests.
In early 1991, the municipality was chosen to host a pilot site for the implementation of the Community Forest Program (CFP) under the DENR’s Natural Resources Management Project (NRMP). The project was located in Barangay Mat-i. Under this program, the Mat-i Green Agro-Forestry Development Association (MAGAGDA) was given tenure and the corresponding responsibility to manage some 1,500 hectares of forestlands for a period of 25 years (renewable for another 25 years). Fifteen of its 24 barangays were identified for CBFM implementation. These areas include Aposkahoy, Bulahan, Gumaod, Hinaplanan, Lanise, Luna, Malagana, Mat-i, Minalwang, Parmbugas, Pelaez, Plaridel, Rizal, Sta. Cruz, and Tipolohon. The DENR and LGU collaborated for the formation and strengthening of the people’s organizations (POs), which would receive tenure instruments or CBFM agreements. In
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT AND TENURE SECURITY Claveria, Misamis Oriental
1997, five POs in four barangays were issued their CBFMAs. The Higaonons in Barangay Minalwang were also granted a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC). More CBFMAs were awarded in 1998 for the remaining barangays, raising the total coverage of the program to 30,467 hectares. A large part of the mountain range from Mt. Sumagaya, Mt. Lumot, and all the way to Mt. Balatocan is now covered by CBFMAs. The POs, which are tenure holders, are the on-site managers of the areas for at least 25 years. They will share with DENR and the LGU the responsibility of protecting the forest resources within their assigned areas. This move of the LGU effectively closed most of the “open access areas” of the municipality, which otherwise would have been open for settlement and exploitation.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT AND TENURE SECURITY THE NUEVA VIZCAYA EXPERIMENT HIGHLIGHTS: Contact Information Governor of Nueva Vizcaya Provincial Administrator Provincial ENR Officer Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya Tel. Nos.: (078) 321-2551; 321-7209; 321-2758 Email: email@example.com
LGU as resource manager; effective devolution of watershed management responsibility Tenure rights and tree ownership as incentives to people’s participation in resource management LGU and DENR co-management of critical watersheds Nueva Vizcaya has increasingly been concerned about the occurrence of flash floods in the lowlands. This has been attributed to the rapid degradation of its watershed resources, which, in turn, is caused by increasing population in its forestlands. As of 2000, the province has a total population of 367,000. Of this, 45 percent live in the uplands. Out of the province’s 275 barangays, 146 are located in the uplands.
The province developed some novel approaches to forest management that are not only pro-environment but also pro-people. This deviates from traditional tree planting and contract reforestation projects, which have been proven unsustainable. The Nueva Vizcaya experiment consists of four models in natural resources management. The theoretical premise of the experiment is that people’s participation in natural resource management is incentive-driven. Thus, the main strategy is to motivate upland residents to become responsible resource managers by giving them long-term rights over the lands they are using and the trees they are planting. The four models are described in the table on the following page:
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
Four Models of Natural Resources Management - Nueva Vizcaya Model
Barobbob Watershed Management: Transforming Squatters to Land Managers
Management of this watershed (429 hectares and which supports the province’s waterworks system) was devolved to the LGU by DENR upon the intercession of the Governor. Instead of relocating the watershed residents, the provincial government provided them with usufructory, harvesting, and tenurial rights through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). The agreement has a lifespan of 25 years and is renewable for another 25 years.
Squatters were converted to land managers. Thus, the area became free of fires and poachers. Forest cover regeneration. Stabilization of the watershed, which will have positive effects on water supply in the long term. Increased livelihood opportunities.
Bangan Hill: Model for LGU-NGA-NGO partnerships
The provincial government negotiated with an academic institution to segregate 50 hectares of a barren hill for the LGU to manage for at least 25 years. The area was parceled into onehectare lots and awarded to NGOs and POs through a MOA. Harvesting rights were guaranteed as long as they managed the areas.
Fire-free and re-greening of the barren landscape.
Co-Management of the Lower Magat Forest Reserve
Part of the forest reserve covering about 24,000 hectares of forestlands (of which 80 percent are open access areas) is now under comanagement with DENR. The steering committee has the Governor as chair and the DENR Regional Executive Director as co-chair. Members are the municipal mayors and selected NGOs. The DENR PENRO serves as the manager while the LGU ENRO Office provides staff support. The steering committee is authorized to sub-allocate areas to individuals,
2,140 hectares have been covered by sub-agreements. Reduced incidence of forest fires (unlike before when there were seasonal forest and brush fires) and timber poaching. Regeneration of forest cover; stabilization of watershed conditions.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Four Models of Natural Resources Management - Nueva Vizcaya Model
TREE (Tree Resources for Education and Enterprise) for Legacy
associations, corporations, cooperatives. Tenure rights are for 25 years, renewable for another 25 years. DENR issues formal tenure when appropriate.
Increased livelihood opportunities, including fruit and forest tree farms. Reduced migration and selling of rights.
The Tree for Education project is for schools and schoolchildren while the Tree for Enterprise project is for individuals and associations. Participants can plant trees in production forests and private lands. They are given certificate of ownership and harvesting rights over the trees they plant. The Tree for Legacy is for environmentalists and advocates. They can plant in protection and production zones of forestlands and in private lands. They are given usufructory certificates so they can enjoy forest products without cutting the trees.
Participants became forest guards/ managers thus reducing forest fires, squatting, and timber poaching. Forest cover regeneration. Source of income. Enhanced environment education of the youth.
The co-management scheme has been considered a breakthrough in LGU and DENR collaboration. This scheme was used as a basis for the issuance of the Joint DENR and DILG Memorandum Circular 98-019 . The Barobbob watershed experiment earned for the province the Galing Pook Award in 1999. A number of lessons were learned from the Nueva Vizcaya experiment: Combining DENR’s expertise in resource management and the LGU’s skill in people management is a practical strategy in natural resource management.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT AND TENURE SECURITY Nueva Vizcaya
Privatizing the management of natural resources is good politics and a sound local governance policy. Co-management is a strategic alternative to outright devolution. Food security objectives of stakeholders can be made compatible with ecological security objectives of the State. Poverty is not only economic but also aggravated by poverty of capacity. Enhancement of capacity should thus be both at the individual and organizational levels and should be on a sustained basis.
Sources: Asian Institute of Management (AIM) and Local Government Academy (LGA). “Watershed Co-Management Program: Nueva Vizcaya Province.” Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance , Galing Pook Awards. 1999 Tiongson, Virgilio A. “Redeeming the Environmental Integrity of a Watershed Haven: Participatory Initiatives in Nueva Vizcaya.” Paper presented to the Conference on Sustaining Upland Development in Southeast Asia: Issues, Tools and Institutions for Local Natural Resources Management. Makati City: May 2001
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
â?™ FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION Forest resource management has three important components: (1) the maintenance or restoration of tree cover; (2) forest protection; and (3) sustainable utilization of forest products. The first refers to vegetative measures such as establishing a tree plantation, reforestation activities, natural regeneration assistance, agro-forestry development, and sustainable hillside agriculture. Soil and water conservation and forest fire protection measures (i.e., hedgerows, fire breaks) are usually integrated into the design of these interventions. Forest protection involves regular surveillance activities to protect forests from occupation, poaching, and illegal harvesting. This also includes the protection of forests from fire, pests, and diseases. The sustainable use of forest products ensures a continuous supply of forest products, i.e., activities do not deplete or seriously damage existing forest resources. There are many good practices in forest management that can be cited and most of them involve the use of appropriate technologies such as those demonstrated in (1) Mindanao Baptist Rural Center in Bansalan, Davao del Sur - The Sloping Agricultural Land Technology or SALT; (2) the Bukidnon Industrial Plantation Project - New Zealand Tree Plantation Technology; and (3) International Center for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAFT) in Claveria, Misamis Oriental - Agro-Forestry Technologies. The abovementioned technologies and many others are well documented and available in various pamphlets, technology journals and publications of DENR, PCARRD, UPLB, and other projects. Thus, these are not included in this resource book.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
Highlighted in this section are experiences in mobilizing "off-site" stakeholders to support the restoration and protection of watershed resources, and motivating "on-site" stakeholders to do the same. Some cases (i.e., Eco-Walk, Save Maasin Watershed, and Nueva Vizcaya Experiment) already demonstrate how sectors-usually from the lowlands and thus "off-site" stakeholders-were mobilized for the reforestation of critical watersheds. One of the cases selected for this section (Balik Ilahas of Negros Occidental) also shows the effectiveness of a multisectoral group organized by the provincial government in law enforcement. The "on-site" stakeholders are the upland communities and forest occupants themselves. Three approaches to motivate these stakeholders are emphasized in the cases that follow: (a) providing cash incentives like the "buy-back program" of Quezon, Bukidnon; (b) providing effective extension services and other incentives, such as the support provided by the Negros Occidental provincial LGU to ISF farmers and the innovative Landcare movement in northern and central Mindanao; and (c) providing security of tenure mainly through CBFM. This section also presents "on-site forest management" projects being exercised by the NPPFRDC and VIBANARA (Barangays Villa Imelda, Batong Labang, Nanaguan and Rang-Ayan), which are two of the more mature CBFM agreement holders in the country. The NPPFRDC's story highlights its ability to provide other livelihood opportunities to its members. The effectiveness of offering security of tenure was earlier exemplified in the Nueva Vizcaya experiment.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION NEGROS OCCIDENTAL’S BALIK ILAHAS PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS Contact Information Office of the Governor Negros Occidental Tel. Nos.: (034) 4344243; 433-3252
Political will and commitment Effective use of devolved resources Integrated upland extension services Multisectoral and community-based forest protection
In 1993, the provincial governor of Negros Occidental, Governor Rafael Coscolluela, launched the “Balik Ilahas”(Bringing Back the Wilderness) program designed to improve the forest cover of about 18,000 hectares in five critical watersheds. The program had four components: (a) information, education and advocacy; (b) enforcement and protection; (c) reforestation and rehabilitation; and (d) alternative livelihood for forest occupants. Various provincial offices were organized into a task force with the Provincial Environment and Management Office taking the lead role. The province allotted P40 million for the fiveyear program with an additional P24 million from the 20 percent development fund. The program focused on the ISF sites, which have just been devolved to the LGUs. This program covered some 27,749 hectares. The province mobilized community development assistants (CDAs) for the ISF areas to urge ISF participants to take part in a massive reforestation and agro-forestry development effort. For its forest protection component, a Task Force Ilahas was created to focus on the enforcement of environmental laws. The task force consisted of regular composite members from the DENR, PNP Provincial Command, PNP Regional Mobile Forces, and volunteers from the private sector.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION Negros Occidental
The task force also had other members composed of Bantay Bukid or Forest Watch members who were mainly ISF participants and indigenous tribe members (Tribu Ati). They were stationed in various critical areas and tasked to provide information on illegal and destructive forest activities. They were also tasked to keep a tight watch over unexploited wilderness areas. The enforcement and protection activities of Balik Ilahas resulted in the confiscation of illegally sourced logs worth millions of pesos and the filing of cases against the perpetrators. Timber poaching was reduced considerably. The project increased the LGUâ€™s confidence in its ability to protect the environment. Negros Occidental won a Galing Pook Award in 1998 for the success of this program.
Source: Asian Institute of Management (AIM) and Local Government Academy (LGA). Galing Pook Awards - Innovations and Excellence in Local Governance (1998)
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION TREE PLANTING AND GREENBELT-BUY BACK PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS: Contact Information Municipal Planning and Development Office Quezon, Bukidnon
Political will in strengthening project proposal Water as a source of power Addressing irrigation problems
This project was initiated by the municipal government of Quezon, Bukidnon in response to the rapid degradation of the uplands of Pulangi Watershed, the major source of water for hydroelectric power and irrigation. The LGU encouraged all sectors to plant any tree species in any open land and along sloping areas, creeks, streams and rivers. Interested participants were to register with the LGU, which provided them with seedlings, and supervised and monitored planting activities. After three years, those who planted the trees were qualified to claim their pay incentive from the LGU. The amount was determined on the basis of the survival rate, the height of the trees, and the type of land on which they were planted. Despite being paid for planting and taking care of the trees, the planters did not lose ownership of the trees. The program yielded both environmental and economic results. Households that were able to harvest mature trees were able to earn from it. Participating schools have been able to improve their facilities. A cooperative of tree planters have been formed with the support of NGOs, church organizations, and the business sector. In year 2000, the program had about 300 registered individual participants.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION THE LANDCARE MOVEMENT IN MINDANAO HIGHLIGHTS Â€ Low-cost dissemination on agro-forestry practices Â€ Political will in mobilizing the population of the community for the project
Contact Information Site Coordinator ICRAFT Misamis Oriental State College of Agriculture and Technology (MOSCAT) Claveria, Misamis Oriental Tel. Nos.: (88) 358-1059; 358-1057
In 1996, the Landcare movement in the Philippines was initiated in Claveria, Misamis Oriental by the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAFT). Landcare is a farmer-led approach to rapid and inexpensive dissemination of agro-forestry practices among upland farmers. It has grown into a dynamic voluntary movement consisting of about 250 groups in Claveria (Claveria Landcare Association), Malitbog, and Lantapan in Bukidnon, with a membership of over 5,000 households. These groups have put up more than 1,500 conservation farms and more than 400 community and household nurseries that produce fruit and forest trees seedlings.
Landcare groups are sitio-based so that members can easily interact with each other. They discuss important local issues, share lessons, skills, and other resources toward better land husbandry and protection of the environment. Landcare groups are seen as effective means to spread information on practices and promote the adoption of farm and watershed management processes. Among the practices that were popularized through Landcare were conservation-farming based on contour buffer strips and the growing of new species of fruit and timber trees to diversify the farm enterprise. At the community level, Landcare is regarded as a powerful force for evolving and promoting initiatives that protect the watershed. Source: Garrity, Dennis P., Agustin R. Mercado Jr., and Marcelino Patindol. The Landcare Experience in the Philippines: Technical and Institutional Innovations for Conservation Farming. International Centre for Research in Agroforesty.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION THE NGAN, PANANSALAN, PAGSABANGAN FOREST RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE (NPPFRDC): A CBFM MODEL HIGHLIGHTS Contact Information Chairman NPPFRDC Ngan, Compostela, Compostela Valley
Community-Based Forest Management Upland livelihood projects Gender responsive activities Certification for sustainable forest management practices
Manager NPPFRDC Tel. Nos.: (0919) 6215448; (0919) 6043193
The Ngan, Panansalan, Pagsabangan Forest Resource Development Cooperative (NPPFRDC) was formed in 1996 under the Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) Program of DENR. Shortly after its registration, the PO was awarded a CBFM agreement which assigned the group 14,800 hectares of forestlands in the municipalities of Compostela and New Bataan, Compostela Valley. NPPFRDC is one of the most active CBFM people’s organizations in Mindanao. In fact, it is regarded as a model PO in terms of managing its CBFM area and of providing livelihood opportunities for its cooperative members, particularly its women members. Among the existing livelihood projects are agricultural production, timber use, sawmill operation, rice and corn milling, livestock, meat processing, kalamansi juice processing, and a consumer store. It also has won several awards over the past few years, among them: TESDA Gawad Kasanayan Kabuhayan sa Kaunlaran 2000, Most Gender Responsive Project Award (DENR National Winner for 2001), and Most Outstanding Project Award (DENR Regional Winner).
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION Ngan, Compostela Valley
The NPPFRDC is the only PO in the country with a certification from SmartWood, a US-based forest management-certifying agency. This certification means that the PO complies with the standards of sustainable forest management. Its timber products can then be marketed locally and abroad as certified wood. Other than providing livelihood opportunities to its members, NPPFRDC’s other achievements include: The education of their members and other residents in the three barangays about forest management and the effects and problems associated with slash and burn agriculture. Billboards have been set up in strategic places on the CBFM area that warn the public about kaingin. The training of their members on agro-forestry development and the establishment of fruit tree planting in designated agro-forestry areas. The training (paralegal) and deployment of a forest protection team in each barangay. The issuance of resolutions declaring certain CBFM areas as reserves or protection areas. The provision of budgets for the maintenance of roads during harvests (to prevent further soil erosion).
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION THE VIBANARA STORY HIGHLIGHTS Contact Information Chairman VMPCI Brgy. Tang-ayan Ilagan, Isabela
Community-Based Forest Management Individual property rights of PO members
Thick forests used to cover the mountains of barangays Villa Imelda, Batong Labang, Nanaguan and Rang-Ayan in Ilagan, Isabela. However due to logging PENRO-DENR operations of ACME Plywood in the latter part of the 1970s and 1980s, most of Ilagan, Isabela the original forests were cut. When the timber license agreement (TLA) of ACME was cancelled in 1990, nearby residents gained access to the area and forest destruction further accelerated. Illegal logging and small-scale timber poaching continuously destroyed the remaining residual forests. Local accounts say that during the daytime about 10 trucks with illegally cut logs passed through the barangay roads. During nighttime, an undetermined number of trucks continued to transport logs. By 1992, the area was selected as a pilot site for community forestry. A people’s organization (PO) was formed which led to the birth of the VIBANARA Multi-Purpose Cooperative, Inc. (VMPCI). After a series of consultations with the PO members on the terms of the CBFM agreement, the CBFMA was finally signed in 1995, transferring the management of approximately 5,000 hectares of forestlands to the cooperative. This was later increased to 10,220 hectares in 1998. The issuance of a CBFMA ended the “open access”nature of the area and gave a clear signal to everyone that the area was under the management of the VMPCI. This also meant that the cooperative had legal rights over the land and its resources.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION Ilagan, Isabela
Inspired by the provision in the CBFMA that the VMPCI would benefit from its harvested forest products, the PO immediately organized its forest protection teams to make sure that the resources within the CBFMA area were protected. The members of the protection team, who initially worked as volunteers up to 1996, were deputized by the DENR. Later, members of the team would be paid out of the earnings from forest product harvests and from the comprehensive site development contract with the DENR. Since then, the president of the cooperative has declared that illegal logging had been totally eliminated while timber poaching had been reduced by 90 percent. In 1997 the VMPCI decided to award individual property rights (IPR) to some of its members who were claiming portions of the CBFM site. This move was in preparation for the development of agroforestry/tree plantations with funding from the ADB contract reforestation. Each IPR holder was to develop his claimed area by planting different tree species. The VMPCI thought that this scheme could facilitate plantation development and would ensure both protection and proper maintenance. The approach proved to be successful, as the cooperative easily reached its plantation targets and managed the plantationâ€™s protection. During the El NiĂąo years, while grass fires were raging in adjacent areas, the VMPCI plantations covered by IPRs were never burned because IPR holders guarded their own plantations.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
â?™ INFORMATION, EDUCATION, AND ADVOCACY Watershed management is not the sole concern of DENR and LGUs; it is a shared responsibility of all sectors. The participation of others will depend on their understanding of the problem and their appreciation of the benefits of a healthy ecosystem. It is thus important for education and advocacy to be an integral component of a watershed management program. The two cases below showcase education and advocacy initiatives to generate popular support for the rehabilitation of critical watersheds. The two have different targets. The Eco-Walk case focuses on the youth to prepare them for their future roles as resource managers, while the Maasin case calls the attention of concerned sectors to an urgent issue that requires immediate action.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
INFORMATION, EDUCATION, AND ADVOCACY ECO-WALK: ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS FOR CHILDREN HIGHLIGHTS
Environmental education for the youth Culture-based program Multisectoral involvement and commitment Local resource mobilization
Contact Information Office of the City Mayor City Hall, Baguio City Tel.: (074) 4423939/8920/7220
The Eco-Walk was conceptualized as an experimental environmental learning process to increase the awareness of Baguio schoolchildren about environmental issues and prepare them as future managers of their environment. Schoolchildren go on hikes to allow them to explore the forest, learn about the different plant and animal species, and observe the causes and effects of denudation and degradation. They sing environmental songs, have picnics, and hold games and quizzes to make the experience enjoyable. The exposure trip intends to supplement and enhance learning in the classroom. In addition, schools are assigned particular areas to reforest and the children are taught how to plant trees and care for them. This concept of allocating areas is borrowed from the indigenous forest management system of the Ifugao tribes called muyong. (To this day, community forests are painstakingly sustained and protected by the same clans that built the Banaue rice terraces).The Busol Watershed was chosen as an Eco-Walk destination to emphasize the urgency of reforesting and rehabilitating the area. It is, after all, Baguio City’s major water source. The watershed was 80 percent denuded when the project began, but forest cover improved with the program. Squatting, logging, and forest fires in the area were also minimized due to the frequent presence of the children. This innovative project received the Gawad Oscar Florendo Award as an Outstanding Environmental Project and the Galing Pook Award in 1996. Source: Asian Institute of Management (AIM) and Local Government Academy (LGA). Galing Pook Awards – Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance (1996).
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION, EDUCATION, AND ADVOCACY SAVING THE MAASIN WATERSHED (ILOILO) HIGHLIGHTS Contact Information Provincial Planning and Development Office Provincial Capitol Ismart St., Iloilo City Tel. No.: (033) 337-1739; 337-4230 Regional CBFM Coordinator DENR Region VI Iloilo City Tel. No.: (033) 355-0002 The Chairman KAPAWA Brgy. Bolo, Maasin, Iloilo The Chairman Philippine Watershed Management Coalition Kahublagan Sangpinamalayan Foundation 25-B Magsaysay Village, La Paz, Iloilo City Tel. No.: (033) 320-0854
Political will and leadership Environmental advocacy Multisectoral participation and commitment Community-Based Forest Management
The Maasin Watershed Reservoir is located in the municipality of Maasin, Iloilo. With a total land area of 6,738.52 hectares, it is the source of potable water of Iloilo City and four (4) other nearby municipalities. It also irrigates approximately 2,900 hectares of agricultural lands. In the late 1980s, the volume of water supplied by Metro Iloilo Water District (MIWD) dropped to 35 percent. Due to the water supply shortage, many city residents had to cross the Guimaras Strait to buy water. Others relied on deep wells located in nearby municipalities. It was later discovered that Maasin Watershed was already 80 percent denuded. The water crisis served as a wake-up call for all sectors. Governor Art Defensor took on the crusade to save the Maasin Watershed. As chairman of the Regional Development Council (RDC), the governor was able to include Maasin Watershed in the Regional Development Agenda. The DENR Regional Office received funding to commission an NGO to undertake a resources appraisal and feasibility study for the rehabilitation of the watershed. This study became the basis for a massive advocacy campaign,
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
INFORMATION, EDUCATION, AND ADVOCACY Iloilo
which involved the media, NGOs, LGUs, academe, national government agencies, and ordinary citizens. The campaign slogan read, “Save Maasin Watershed Or No Water in Year 2000.” A Multi-Agency Task Force was created and chaired by Governor Defensor while the NGOs and the media organized the “Save Maasin Coalition” and put up an initial fund of P500,000. The provincial governor allocated P500,000 as counterpart. An initial target of 500 hectares was set for rehabilitation; 6,000 hectares was eventually designated for reforestation and protection. The advocacy campaign resulted to an outpouring of support. Students, national and local government employees, civic organizations, NGOs, media groups, and some private corporations made Maasin Watershed the common venue for their “Alay Tanim” or tree planting. The collaboration of various players was notable and caught the attention of the national government and external funding institutions. This project won the 1994-1995 Galing Pook Award.
Source: Asian Institute of Management (AIM) and Local Government Academy (LGA). Galing Pook Awards – Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance (1996).
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
â?™ MULTISECTORAL PARTICIPATION The multiplicity of stakeholders in watersheds does not allow a single agency to exercise exclusive management control over watershed areas. The trend has therefore been toward the creation of multisectoral bodies for the planning and implementation of watershed management projects. This allows wider participation in watershed management initiatives, and provides a venue for harmonizing different stakeholder interests. A number of LGUs have established such multisectoral bodies. Some of the previous cases show the effectivity of these bodies in generating resources (volunteers and staff, funding, other support) and advocacy. Most of these bodies were created through local ordinances. In the case of Bukidnon, it took a presidential memorandum to create its Watershed Protection and Development Council. Another example of multisectoral participation is the Philippines-Canada Environmental and Economic Management (PCEEM) project. This is an interesting case due to the large number of involved sectors and stakeholders that were able to transform themselves into a more permanent entity, thereby acquiring a legal personality.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
MULTISECTORAL PARTICIPATION STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN THE MANAGEMENT OF A WATERSHED PROJECT: THE PHILIPPINES-CANADA ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT CASE (PCEEM) HIGHLIGHTS Adoption of watershed framework in planning Multi-stakeholder representation in project management and implementation activities Capability-building for effective stakeholder participation
Contact Information Executive Director PCEEM Davao, Inc. East-West Bank Corporate Bldg., Insular Village Lanang, Davao City Tel. Nos.: (082) 234-4418 to 19; Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The Philippines-Canada Environmental and Economic Management (PCEEM) project is a five-year project funded by the DENR and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). It aims to improve the Kotkot-Lusaran Watersheds in Metro Cebu and the Talomo-Lipadas Watersheds in Davao City. The PCEEM seeks to address problems concerning the lack of water in priority watersheds that supply most of the water requirements of the two major cities. A planning study conducted on the Talomo-Lipadas Watersheds in Davao City showed that its water resources were threatened by unregulated water extraction, land use conflict, improper cultivation of hilly lands, deforestation, and poor sewage and solid waste management. PCEEM espouses the principles of (a) ecosystem-based resource management, (b) collaborative and integrative management of natural resources, and (c) capacity-building. Not only did the project adopt a holistic approach to watershed management (uplands, hillside, lowlands and coastal), it also established a multi-stakeholder watershed
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
PCEEM Davao City MULTISECTORAL PARTICIPATION
management structure. This structure allowed the participation of all sectors with an interest in the watershed. The project likewise facilitated consensus-based decision-making. PCEEM in Davao City has 13 sectors represented in the project’s management board and which participate in various field implementation activities. These sectors are:
National Government Agencies– DENR, NEDA and DTI Non-Government – Mindanao Environment Forum Business - Davao City Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc. Farmers – Federation of Free Farmers People’s Organizations – Lipadas Watershed People’s Organization Indigenous People – Office of the Deputy Mayor for Tagabawe Tribe Academe – Philippine Science High School, Mindanao campus Women – Katakus Foundation Fisherfolk – City Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council Utilities – Davao City Water District Local Government Unit – City Government of Davao and Associations of Barangay Captains in the Talomo and Lipadas watersheds Youth– Davao City Association of Tribal Students Others – Mt. Apo Protected Area Management Board To establish a more permanent and formal organization that would carry on PCEEM initiatives beyond the project period, the individuals and representatives of stakeholder groups belonging to the 13 sectors have formed themselves into a non-stock, non-profit organization registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The group is now known as the People Collaborating for Economic and Environmental Management in Davao Foundation, Incorporated (PCEEM Davao).
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
MULTISECTORAL PARTICIPATION PCEEM Davao City
The project yielded the following lessons that highlighted the need for more stakeholder participation in watershed management: Different ecosystems are found in a watershed. There are thus many stakeholders in a watershed with diverse and often conflicting interests. By acknowledging that ecosystems are all connected, stakeholders should realize that they have a common ground. Building collaborative relationships and developing positive attitudes are critical factors in making a long-term impact on resource management. Participation is enhanced through capacity building. Stakeholders need to realize that they have a right to participate in decision-making and receive the tools to make them effective decisionmakers. These tools should allow them to assess the results of their decisions so they would know if they made the right decisions, or if there is a need to rethink them. The importance of involving women and youth in watershed management must be recognized. Based on studies, women feel the effects of poor water quality and quantity more because they directly use water for food, hygiene, chores, and caring for the sick. In a sense, women have a greater stake in water resource management. The youth are also important because they are the future managers of the watershed.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
â?™ FUND SUPPORT GENERATION Funding is frequently identified as a crucial factor in the successful management of watersheds. In many cases, project implementation is halted or post-project maintenance activities cannot be sustained due to lack of funds. The latter is particularly true for donor-funded projects, since its funding support ceases with the termination of the loan or grant agreement. The previous cases showed watershed management activities that were funded from the regular budgets of national government agencies, local government funds, loans and grants from donor agencies, and contributions/donations from the private sector and civil society organizations. The two short cases that follow show how some LGUs successfully demanded their share from the use of national wealth to finance environmental management. The third case shows concession holders of domestic water supply systems investing in the rehabilitation of the systemsâ€™watershed.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FUND SUPPORT GENERATION GENERATING WATERSHED REHABILITATION FUNDS FROM LGU SHARE OF NATIONAL WEALTH: MAASIN, ILOILO HIGHLIGHTS Political will in allocating funds in priority project needs Effective paying scheme for the municipality Fund appropriation for maintenance Using the Local Government Code as its basis, the municipal government of Maasin, Iloilo passed an ordinance imposing a one percent tax on the gross sales of the Metro Iloilo Water District (MIWD). Subsequently, it sent a bill to the MIWD demanding payment of about P2 million, representing 1 percent (1%) of total sales for the period 1992-1997. As a result of this move, the MIWD remits to the municipal about P360,000 annually.
Contact Information Office of the Mayor Maasin, Iloilo Tel. (033) 320-3202857 Municipal Planning and Development Office Maasin, Iloilo
The municipal government has also been successful in making the MIWD pay real estate taxes on the 6,738 hectares of the watershed. The MIWD provided a grant to DENR and the province amounting to P1 million for additional maintenance and protection of the Maasin watershed.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
FUND SUPPORT GENERATION USING FUNDS FROM USE OF NATURAL RESOURCE TO FINANCE REFORESTATION AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT IN LUMBAN, QUEZON HIGHLIGHTS Contact Information Office of the Mayor Lumban, Quezon
Political will in working in cooperation with national agencies for the project Targeting reforestation, watershed management, health and environment in one project
Municipal Planning and Development Office Lumban, Quezon
The municipality of Lumban in Quezon claimed its share from the National Power Corporation (NPC) for its use of the water in Lake Caliraya for power generation. This claim is in accordance with the Local Government Code and a circular of the Department of Energy (DOE). The NPC agreed to remit to the Lumban LGU one percent (1%) of the gross sales or receipts from its two plants. These funds are to be utilized as follows: 25 percent as electrification fund; 25 percent for development and livelihood; and 50 percent for reforestation, watershed management, health, and environment enhancement.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
FUND SUPPORT GENERATION PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENTS IN LA MESA DAM REFORESTATION HIGHLIGHTS Â€ Environmental Conservation Â€ Private Organization Involvement
Contact Information Resource Mobilization Coordinator Bantay Kalikasan ABS-CBN Foundation Tel No.: (02) 415-2227
In 1997, the government sold two concessions to supply water in Metro Manila to the Ayala and the Benpres Groups of Companies. Both companies discovered that the watershed that supplies water to their reservoirs was fast losing its tree cover. It was foreseen that by 2005, only about 15 percent of the watershed area would have forest cover. Benpres then requested the ABS-CBN Foundation to organize a reforestation project.
The Bantay Kalikasan unit of the foundation drew up a watershed rehabilitation plan with the following components for immediate implementation: reforestation, nursery operation, species reintroduction, and protection and security. Over the medium-term, a nature park and biodiversity reserve would be established to provide outdoor recreation; an education program would also be conducted to increase consciousness about the watershed. Bantay Kalikasan also began a publicity campaign to source funds from other businesses. Adopt-a-hectare for P50,000 was thus launched. In addition to the two water companies and a number of civic and professional organizations, there are now about 15 large private companies supporting the project. About half of its target of 1,200 hectares for reforestation has been attained.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
â?™ ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING (EPM) Monitoring the progress of watershed management activities is part of good project management. Environmental performance monitoring (EPM) takes the progress monitoring activity to a higher level by looking at the effects of watershed management on forest resources, particularly water, soil, and biodiversity. In 1997, the DENR, through the USAID-funded Natural Resources Management Program developed a set of criteria and indicators (C and I) for Sustainable Forest Management in CBFM areas. An EPM field manual was developed to operationalize the criteria and indicators at the national level. This manual contained simple and easy-to-use methods to check improvements in water quality and quantity, reduction of soil erosion, and increased presence of selected animal species. The field manual was designed for upland communities. It is deemed good practice for CBFM communities to draw up their own EPM so they can see for themselves if their own forest management activities are generating the desired environmental results. The DENR has been testing the suggested indicators and monitoring methods, and has been promoting the adoption of EPM in CBFM areas in Northern Luzon and Mindanao (the EPM has been adopted by the NPPFRDC of Compostela Valley). A similar set of EPM indicators and guidelines have been developed for use in community-managed model forests in the Ulot watershed in Samar Island. These ongoing DENR initiatives and the community experiences on the use of EPM have yet to be documented. There is, however, a model on community-based monitoring that was introduced in Bukidnon in the early 1990s and which continues to be practiced up to the present. This is presented in the following pages.
GOOD PRACTICES IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 4
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING THE TIGBANTAY WAHIG IN LANTAPAN, BUKIDNON HIGHLIGHTS Community-based water quality monitoring Formation of “water watch” NGO Water quality data analysis for planning and policy formulation
Tigbantay Wahig Lantapan, Bukidnon
The USAID–funded Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Collaboration Research Support Program (SANREM-CRSP) organized water quality monitoring teams in Lantapan, Bukidnon with members coming from the community. Through workshops and field exercises, the community team members were trained on water quality evaluation. They were given portable test kits and other basic tools for analysis. The group is now collecting credible water quality and quantity data essential to environmental policy formulation for watershed management. The team monitors the main tributaries of the Manupali River. After several months of involvement in the project, the water-monitoring group decided to form an officially registered non-government organization called the Tigbantay Wahig or “water watcher.” Their goal is to improve their ability to inform the community and influence local policy on matters of water quality. At present, the group continues to monitor and evaluate water quality and quantity in the Manupali watershed. Since 1994, the following water quality and quantity data continue to be collected: Total suspended solids Rainfall events. The collection of data at the four main sites in Kulasihan, Alanib, Maagnao and Tugasan rivers is being done monthly.
4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Lantapan, Bukidnon ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING
Stream discharge/soil export Water chemistry using six parameters, namely: pH, alkalinity, hardness, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and temperature Biological assessments Because the community is involved in the monitoring of water quality and quantity in Lantapan, environmental awareness/education has increased. Farmers and planners, too, are being provided information that is valuable for planning and development. The Tigbantay Wahig has now expanded its activities to other provinces and its membership continues to increase.
Source: Garrity, Dennis P., et. al. “Landcare on the Poverty-Protection Interface in an Asian Watershed.”
REFERENCES AND TOOLS
REFERENCES AND TOOLS
Study Tour Sites INSTITUTION
AREAS OF INTEREST/
Provincial Government of Nueva Vizcaya
Model Projects: Tree for Legacy, Barobbob Watershed, Bangan Hill and Co-Management of Lower Magat Forest Reserve
Governor of Nueva Vizcaya Provincial Administrator Provincial ENR Officer Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya Tel (078) 321-255; 321-7209 321-2758 Email: email@example.com
Provincial Government of Agusan del Sur
Provincial Forest Land Use Plan: Process, Maps and Current Uses
Provincial Planning and Development Office Patin-ay, Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur Tel. (085) 343-7268
Provincial Government of Iloilo
Save Maasin Watershed Project (Galing Pook Awardee)
Provincial Planning and Development Office Provincial Capitol Ismart St., Iloilo City Tel. (033) 337-1739; 337-4230
5 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
AREAS OF INTEREST
Maasin Sub-Watershed Project (reforestation, agroforestry, upland livelihood projects)
Regional CBFM Coordinator DENR Region VI Iloilo City Tel. (033) 355-0002 The Chairman KAPAWA Brgy Bolo, Maasin, Iloilo
Baguio City Government
Eco-Walk Program, Busol watershed
Office of the City Mayor Baguio City Tel.: (074) 442-3939; 442-8920; 442-7220
Bukidnon Forest Inc. (BFI)
Industrial tree plantation of fast growing and commercial species; nursery operations; community involvement in plantation maintenance and protection
Gen. Manager/Vice-President Bukidnon Forest, Inc. Malaybalay, Bukidnon
Asst. to the Gen. Manager Bukidnon Forest, Inc. Tel. (88) 221-2175; 221-2115 local 101; 813-2654 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
REFERENCES AND TOOLS 5
AREAS OF INTEREST
Mindanao Baptist Rural Center (now known as Asian Rural Life Development Foundation)
Demonstration farms on Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT); agrilivestock
Director Kinuskusan, Bansalan, Davao del Sur (0912) 750-0246 Tel. (082) 221-1184/85
Provident Tree Farms, Inc. (PTFI)
Tree plantations of Gmelina, acacia mangium and other industrial species; nursery operations
Resident Manager PTFI, Zillovia Talacogon, Agusan del Sur (0918) 595-0677 (0917) 703-0596 (0919) 465-3112
International Center of Research in Agro-forestry (ICRAFT)
Demonstration farms on agroforestry technologies and conservation farming; Landcare movement in Mindanao
Acting Site Coordinator ICRAFT Misamis Oriental State College of Agriculture & Technology (MOSCAT) Claveria, Misamis Oriental Tel. (88) 358-1059; 358-1057
Ngan-Panansalan Pagsabangan Forest Resource Development Cooperative(NPPFRDC)
Community-based forest management; livelihood activities of the PO: agricultural production, timber utilization, saw mill operation, rice and corn milling, livestock, meat
5 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
AREAS OF INTEREST/
processing, kalamansi juice processing, consumer store; participation of women; community-based forest protection activities
Manager NPPFRDC Ngan, Compostela Compostela Valley (0919) 621-5448 (0919) 604-3193
This PO has been a recipient of the TESDA Gawad Kasanayan Kabuhayan sa Kaunlaran 2000, Most Gender Responsive Project Award (DENR national winner 2001), Most Outstanding Project Award (DENR regional winner). It is the only PO in the country with certification from a US forest management certifying agency, SmartWood.
REFERENCES AND TOOLS 5
❙ REFERENCES ◗ GENERAL REFERENCES Acosta, Romeo T. “Community-Based Forest Management: A National Strategy for Watershed Improvement.” Paper presented in the Third National Policy Roundtable Discussion on Community-Based Forest Resources Management as a National and Local Strategy for Watershed Improvement in the Philippines, UP Diliman, Quezon City, October 2002. Bhatia, R. “Sustainable Development and Poverty: The Role of Integrated Water Resources Management.” Paper prepared for the Poverty and Water Meeting on Behalf of the Global Water Partnership, n.p., February 2002. Bonnell, J. and A. Baird. Community-Based Watershed Management,Undated. Borlagdan, Salve B., Ernesto S. Guiang, and Juan M. Pulhin. Community-Based Forest Management in the Philippines: A Preliminary Assessment. Ateneo de Manila University: Institute of Philippine Culture, 2001. Browner, Carol M. Watershed Approach Framework. United States Environmental Protection Agency: Office of Water, June 1996. Center for Southeast Asia Studies – University of California, Berkeley. Upland Philippine Communities: Guardians of the Final Forest Frontiers. Southeast Asia Sustainable Forest Management Network. Research Network Report No. 4, August 1993. Forestry Development Center-UPLB College of Forestry and Natural Resources. Watersheds as a Resource: State of the Art, Viewpoints and Experiences, 1998.
5 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Governance and Local Democracy. Linking the Local Practitioners: Conference-Workshop on Local Experiences and Collective Actions in Watershed Management: Workshop Proceedings, Cebu Midtown Hotel, Philippines, October 1999. Guiang, Ernesto S. “Allocation and Management of Timberlands: Why Municipalities Should Actively be Involved.” Paper prepared for the Philippine Environmental Governance Project (EcoGov), 2002. Lina, J. D, Jr. “The Role of LGUs in Watershed Management”. Paper presented at the 4th Multisectoral Forum on Watershed Management at the Batasan Pambansa Complex, Quezon City, March 2000. “No Forest Without Management.” Tropical Forest Update. Vol. 8 No. 4 (1998/1994). The Water Resources Development Project-Watershed Management Improvement Component (WRDP-WMIC) Study Team. The Philippines Strategy for Improved Watershed Resources Management. Forest Management Bureau-DENR, August 1998. Walpole, P. “Role of Indigenous Peoples in Watershed Management.” Paper presented at the 4th Multisectoral Forum on Watershed Management at the Batasan Pambansa Complex, Quezon City, March 2000. World Bank. Agriculture Technology Notes, December 2001. World Bank. Philippines Environment Monitor, 2000.
REFERENCES AND TOOLS 5
◗ MANUALS CBFM Office – DENR and Environmental Science for Social Change. Community Mapping Manual for Resource Management. Quezon City, Philippines, 1998. Development Alternatives, Inc. Community-Based Environmental Performance Monitoring Field Manual. Manila, Philippines,1999. Integrated Environmental Management for Sustainable Development Programme – DENR and NEDA. Guidebook on Sustainable Forest Land Use Planning and Management, Volume III: Guidebooks on Sustainable Land Use Planning and Management. Manila, Philippines, 1997. Natural Resources Management Project – DENR. Forest Land Use Planning Guidelines. Quezon City, Philippines, 1997. Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. Sourcebook on Mapping (for Environmental Management Planning.) n.p. ,1998. Sajise, Percy E., et. al. Rapid Rural Systems Appraisal (RRSA): Diagnostic and Design Tool for Upland Development Projects. 1990: EISAM-UPLB and OIDCI.
◗ DOCUMENTATION OF EXPERIENCES Asian Institute of Management and Local Government Academy. Galing Pook Awards – Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance, 1996. Asian Institute of Management and Local Government Academy. Galing Pook Awards – Innovations and Excellence in Local Governance, 1998.
5 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Asian Institute of Management and Local Government Academy. Galing Pook Awards – Innovations and Excellence in Local Governance, 2000. Asian Institute of Management (AIM) and Local Government Academy (LGA). “Watershed CoManagement Program: Nueva Vizcaya Province.” Galing Pook Awards - Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance, 1999. Briones, Annabelle D. “Community-Based Resource Management: Maasin Watershed Experience.” Paper presented during the GOLD Conference-Workshop on Local Experiences and Collective Actions in Watershed Management. n.p., October 1999. Center for Development Management-Asian Institute of Management and Local Government Academy- DILG. Galing Pook Awards: Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance, 1998. Center for Development Management-Asian Institute of Management and Local Government Academy-DILG. Galing Pook Awards: Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance, 1999. Dolom, Buenaventura. “Watershed Management Practices, Issues and Concerns.” Paper presented during the LGSP II Roundtable Discussion on Watershed Management, Davao City, August 2002. Forest Land Use Plan of Agusan del Sur - Main Report. Province of Agusan del Sur, November 1999. Galing Pook Foundation, Center for Development Management-Asian Institute of Management and Local Government Academy- DILG. Galing Pook Awards: Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance, 2000. Garrity, Dennis P., et. al. “Innovations in Participatory Watershed Resource Management.” International Center for Research in Agroforestry, (Undated).
REFERENCES AND TOOLS 5
Garrity, Dennis P. The Farmer-Driven Landcare Movement: An Institutional Innovation With Implications for Extension and Research. n.p.: International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, n.d.. GOLD-PBSP and OIDCI. “Bringing Back the Wilderness of Negros Occidental.” LGU Initiatives in Forest Management. n.p., 1999. GOLD-PBSP and OIDCI. “Forest Land Use Planning: A Tool for LGU Participation in Sustainable Forest Management.” LGU Initiatives in Forest Management. n.p.,1999. GOLD-PBSP and OIDCI. “Kaakuhan ug Katungod: A Shared Responsibility in Forest Management and Protection.” LGU Initiatives in Forest Management. n.p., 1999. GOLD-PBSP and OIDCI. "Towards Regaining the Lush Forest of Agusan del Sur." LGU Initiatives in Forest Management. n.p., 1999. “Linking the Local Practitioners: Conference-Workshop on Local Experiences and Collective Actions in Watershed Management.” Workshop Proceedings. n.p., October 1999. Local Government Academy-DILG. Innovations: Galing Pook Awards, 1996. Maloles, M. M. “How LGU Collected Real Property Tax and Utilization of Natural Wealth from Metro Iloilo Water District.” Paper presented at the Conference on Institutionalization of Economic Instruments in Managing Philippine Natural Resources held at Manila Galleria Suites, Ortigas Center, Pasig City, November 2001. Mercado, Agustin R. Jr., Marcelino Patindol, Dennis P. Garrity. “The Landcare Experience in the Phil: Technical and Institutional Innovations for Conservation Farming.” International Center for Research in Agroforestry, (Undated Report).
5 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Philippine Business for Social Progress-Governance and Local Democracy Project, and Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. LGU Initiatives in Forest Management: Feature Articles. Prepared for the League of Provinces in the Philippines, 1999. Serrano, Rogelio C., Antonio M. Dano and Juan M. Pulhin. “Landscape-wide Analysis of the Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts of Upland Farming in Manupali Watershed, Philippines.” (Undated). Tiongson, Virgilio A. “Redeeming the Environmental Integrity of a Watershed Haven: Participatory NRM Initiatives in Nueva Vizcaya.” Paper presented at the Conference on Sustaining Upland Development in Southeast Asia: Issues, Tools and Institutions for Local Resource Management, Makati City, May 2001. Tiongson, Virgilio A. “Revolutionizing Natural Resource Management: The Nueva Vizcaya Experiment.” Presented during the LGSP II Roundtable Discussion on Watershed Management, Davao City, August 2002. Tongson, Edna. “Agusan del Sur Forest Land Use Planning (FLUP): Adoption of Watershed Framework in Planning.” Paper presented during the LGSP II Roundtable Discussion on Watershed Management. Davao City, August 2002. Uriarte, Nicolas S. “Concepts, Principles and Related Policies on Watershed Management.” Paper prepared for the LGSP II Roundtable Discussions, Davao City, August 2002. Water Resources Development Project Study Team/Watershed Management Improvement Component. The Philippines Strategy for Improved Watershed Resources Management. Manila: Forest Management Bureau-DENR, August 1998.
ENDNOTES 1 Uriarte, Nicolas S. “Concepts, Principles and Related Policies on Watershed Management.” Paper prepared for the LGSP Roundtable Discussions on Sustaining LGU Support to Watershed Management, Davao City, August 2002. 2 The Water Resources Development Project-Watershed Management Improvement Component (WRDP-WMIC) Study Team. The Philippines Strategy for Improved Watershed Resources Management. Forest Management Bureau-DENR, August 1998. p. 29. 3 “Chapter 2: Basic Framework and Principles, ”Forest Land Use Planning Guidelines. Natural Resources Management Project –Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Februrary 1997. p. 6. 4 Ibid., p. 8 5 The Water Resources Development Project-Watershed Management Improvement Component (WRDP-WMIC) Study Team. The Philippines Strategy for Improved Watershed Resources Management. Forest Management Bureau-DENR, August 1998. p. 21. 6 Ibid., pp. 24-27 7 Ibid., pp. 20-21 8 Ibid., pp. 49-101
9 Further work to establish the guidelines for co-management of watersheds is being done under the Philippines Environmental Governance Project.
ANNEXES The Philippines Strategy For Improved Watershed Resources Management: A Synopsis WRDP-WMIC/FMB-DENR
STRATEGY SYNOPSIS 1. The Strategyâ€™s Underlying Philosophy The underlying philosophy of the strategy for improved watershed resource management is that: There should be a demand driven, community based, approach to watershed management involving two parallel components. First, one where the demand is determined by national priorities and concerns. Secondly, one in which the direct stakeholders can articulate their needs and actively participate in the conservation, planning, management and sustainable utilization (for multiple purposes) of their local watershed resources. The aim of both is to provide the optimum social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits to the greatest number of people, particularly those living in, adjacent to, or downstream of, individual watershed areas, while maintaining the biological and cultural heritage of the Philippines.
2. Goal of the Strategy The twin goals of the strategy are: a. the sustainable multiple use of the natural resources within all watershed areas of the Philippines in a manner that is environmentally sound, economically viable and socially acceptable; and b. the prevention of further watershed degradation and the restoration of a productive and protective function to currently degraded watershed areas. 3. Guiding Principles The strategy for improved watershed resource management is based on the following guiding principles: Ecological Sustainability Social and Cultural Sustainability Economic Sustainability Institutional Sustainability 4. Nature of the Problem of Watershed Degradation Watershed degradation is taking place, to a greater or lesser extent, in all regions and provinces of the Philippines. Although quantitative estimates differ, the weight of evidence is clear that watershed degradation is widespread, and has reached a severe degree in many areas. Within individual watershed areas degradation has led to a: decline in the productive capacity of the soil resource as a result of soil erosion and changes in the hydrological, biological, chemical and physical properties of the soil;
decline in the quantity and/or quality of both surface and ground water resources and increased risk of downstream flood damage; decline in the quantity and/or quality of the natural biomass resource and a decrease in protective vegetative ground cover; and decline in genetic, species and ecosystem diversity (with possible extinction of some species of fauna and flora) within and downstream of the watershed area. 5. The Consequences of Poor Watershed Resource Management The consequences of past, and present, mismanagement of the watershed resources of the Philippines are a significant reduction in the economic, social and environmental benefits to society, at the local, provincial and national levels, that would have otherwise been realized from better management of these resources. 6. The Causes of the Problem They key causes are: improve human activities – arising from a lack of knowledge of, and/or a failure to pursue, suitable forms of land use and the appropriate land management practices; increasing population – arising from the natural population growth of upland communities and inward migration from the over crowded lowlands, puts pressure on the finite, and often ecologically vulnerable, natural resource base of the uplands; poverty and economic disadvantage – arising from limited livelihood opportunities, results in an over reliance by upland households on the use of the natural resources (for farming and/or forestry) to meet their short term welfare needs; inadequate institutional support services – arising from the restricted (and often conflicting) territorial and commodity focus of the different government line agencies, LGUs and NGOs engaged in promoting improved watershed management activities;
inappropriate land use restrictions – arising from policies and legislative issuances that have imposed over restrictive land use regulations on watershed areas for water source protection (watershed proclamations) and/or biodiversity preservation (NIPAS multiple use zones); and insecure land user rights – arising from the fact that private title cannot be given within areas legally designated as Forest Lands, as they are part of the public domain and are not alienable and disposable. 7. Some Myths About Watershed Resource Management As a result of past over simplistic environmental education messages, and the extrapolation of research results to areas for which they are not valid (e.g., from the temperate conditions of the USA to the tropical conditions within the Philippines), there are a number of false technical assumptions, or myths, about the problems and causes of watershed degradation in the Philippines. Whereas there is a basis of truth underlying many of these, it is important to recognize that the problems and solutions are more complex than the simplistic assumptions would suggest. Dispelling these involves recognizing that it is not so much what is being done (e.g., whether the watershed’s resources are being utilized for agriculture and/or forestry purposes) but rather how it is done (i.e., the specific land management practices followed). The following incorrectly perceived wisdoms, or myths, as to the field level realities of what constitutes watershed degradation, and how to tackle it, are widespread in the Philippines: Myth 1. Present water shortages are all due to watershed degradation. It is true that watershed degradation has resulted in reduced dry season flows in many parts of the Philippines, however this is only one of the factors contributing to the present water shortages within the country. The major culprit for the water shortages experienced in 1977 and the first half of 1998 was low rainfall (drought), a natural climatic factor associated with the latest El Niño event. In addition to watershed degradation the effect of the drought induced water shortages have been exacerbated
by: a) increased industrial and domestic demand from a growing urban population; and b) high losses (typically exceeding 50%) from the municipal/metropolitan water supply delivery systems due to broken/leaking pipes and illegal connections. Improved watershed management on its own will not solve the present water shortage problem. Tackling the problem also requires managing demand, through the adoption of more water efficient irrigation practices, adoption of water conserving practices by industrial and domestic consumers, and the rehabilitation and maintenance of the countryâ€™s metropolitan and municipal water delivery systems. Myth 2. Logging will automatically lead to flooding and a decline in water supplies. Poor logging practices have been a major contributory factor to present levels of watershed degradation. However there are areas within the Philippines where selective logging has been practices for many years without causing floods or reducing dry season river flows. Examples of well-managed secondary forests can be found where logging is in to its second and third cycles. It is not logging itself that is the problem, it is the use of inappropriate logging practices, combined with a failure to enforce existing forestry laws, that has resulted in watershed degradation. There is evidence within the Philippines that with the appropriate management practices, natural forests can be sustainably managed as renewable economic resources, without increasing the risk of flooding or adversely affecting downstream water supplies. Myth 3. The kaingeros are to blame for watershed degradation. The term kaingin covers a wide range of different upland farming systems, some of which are conservation effective while others are decidedly conservation negative. Studies have shown that the traditional shifting cultivation practices of many upland indigenous cultural communities have evolved in balance with their local environment. Under low population densities such practices can be sustainable with erosion at acceptable levels over the course of the cropping and fallow cycles. However other upland farming systems are non sustainable, notably the slash and burn systems, with very short fallow periods, typically practiced by lowland migrants who have no indigenous knowledge of upland farming. It is technically inaccurate to describe all forms of kaingin as incompatible with good watershed resource management. What is needed is to assess the conservation effectiveness of individual
kaingin systems and their component management practices and to determine the future cultivation intensity within a given area. This should serve as the basis for determining whether upland farming systems using sustainable kaingin practices could form one component of an overall watershed management plan based on the concept of multiple use. Myth 4. Reforestation alone will solve the problem. Poor plantation establishment and management practices can result in higher losses than from well managed hillside farms. The extensive undergrowth and ground cover to be found within many of the traditional Philippine coconut based multi-storey farming systems means that such systems will often provide as good, if not better soil and water protection (as well as better economic returns) than commercial timber plantations. Fast growing exotic tree species have high water demands. The unintended effect of planting them for watershed protection purposes may be a reduction in total water yield, particularly when planted close to springs, reservoirs and along stream banks. Myth 5. Land under 18% slope is suitable for agriculture, land over 18% slope is not. The risk of erosion under agriculture is a combination of factors notably soil type, rainfall intensity, ground cover, slope length and steepness, and the type of land management practiced. There is thus no scientific basis for fixing the sage limit for agriculture solely on the 18% slope limit. Where the soils are deep, and resilient, annual crop cultivation can be practiced on slopes steeper than 18%, providing the appropriate conservation effective land management practices (e.g., contour tillage and vegetative strips, or terracing) are used. Crops have been grown on the Banaue terraces for centuries. Equally there are other soil types that are highly sensitive to mismanagement and even on slopes as gentle as 2-3% are subject to severe degradation if used for agriculture. Thus the safe limits for agriculture within watershed areas should be based on a full land suitability assessment not just an arbitrary slope limit. Myth 6. Watersheds are socio-economic and socio-political units. A watershed is a clearly recognizable natural hydrological unit. However it is not a socio-economic and socio-political unit as its hydrological boundaries rarely, if ever, coincide with the cultural, administrative and political
boundaries of the watershed’s various stakeholders. The socio-economic and socio-political boundaries in which upland communities and LGU officials operate are those of their respective sitios, barangays, municipalities and provinces, not individual watersheds. Likewise the ancestral domains of indigenous cultural communities usually straddle the divide between two or more watersheds. Watershed management planning, when upland communities are involved, requires that the planning boundaries should take into account the social and cultural boundaries of the participating communities, rather than being narrowly restricted to the topographic boundary of the watershed itself. 8. What Should be Done to Arrest Watershed Degradation Changes in the present policy environment to allow for multiple use management of watershed areas in a manner that is conservation effective, productive and equitable; Clearly defined national and local land use, and economic development, priorities that provide the development framework for the formulation of individual national and local level priority watershed management plans; Field level knowledge as the prerequisite for the adoption of suitable forms of land use following appropriate land management practices ,thereby enabling the resources of individual watersheds (climate, soils, water, vegetation, and fauna) to be used for multiple productive purposes on a sustainable basis; The skills and resources, at both the national and local level, to undertake the identification, formulation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of watershed management plans (using an appropriate combination of bottom-up and top-down approaches) in ways that promote community level participatory planning within a national planning framework; Rapid delineation of the permanent forest line so as to determine the specific limits for Forestlands and National Parks and to classify as Alienable and Disposable those areas, outside the redefined boundary, not required for timber production and forest/watershed protection purposes – this to be done in a manner that reconciles the de facto land use situation on the ground with the suitability of the land to be used for different purposes, while taking into account national land use priorities; S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
Granting of tenure over de facto open access Forest Land resources so that they become either the common property of a recognized user group (e.g., CADC, CADT or CBFMA) or reserved for the exclusive use of an individual entity (e.g., CSC, TPSA or IFMA); An integrated, multi-sectoral land collaborative approach that would broaden and strengthen the present institutional base for watershed management at the national, regional, provincial, municipal and community levels. That resources be devoted to market based income generating mechanisms for stimulating private investment in productive and sustainable use of watershed resources; Generation of the funds for watershed management using innovative and sustainable mechanisms such as trust funds, service charges and imposing user fees (e.g., water pricing); Greater involvement of the LGUs in the management of specific watersheds, or portions of one or more watersheds, within their area of jurisdiction, by devolving shared responsibility to interested Municipalities (and/or Local Water Districts), through such mechanisms as a Municipal Watershed Management Memorandum of Agreement; Effective information education and communication (IEC) campaigns on the principles and practice of improved watershed resource management, designed to raise awareness amongst policy makers and the general public as to the options, and safeguards, for multiple use in ways that are both productive and sustainable; Promoting biodiversity preservation by making rural land users aware of the uniqueness of the fauna and flora in their area, and installing in them a cultural pride in its preservation; A national institution with the authority to coordinate and oversee the implementation of an interagency and multi-sectoral national watershed management programme; A national watershed information system to meet the need for the collection, collation and analysis of data of relevance to watershed resource management, at the local and national levels, and the dissemination of the resulting information to decision makers, planners and other interested parties.
9. What is Being Done to Arrest Watershed Degradation Elements of what is required are already being done: Several bills for the delineation of the permanent forest line have been prepared and submitted for deliberation to both houses of Congress over 10 years ago – none of the bills have been withdrawn and their approval is still pending; The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples to exert jurisdiction over the management of the watershed resources within their ancestral domains; Within the Water Resources Development Project there is on-going work to improve the planning, development and management of water resources; A bill to establish the Watershed Resources Authority of the Philippines has been filed before Congress; The implementing rules and regulations of the NIPAS Act provides the framework for the establishment of protected areas for biodiversity conservation; The watershed proclamation policy, its links with the NIPAS Act and the possibilities for devolving management responsibility for individual watersheds to the LGUs communities, the private sector and other stakeholders, are under review; The recently issued DENR DAO 98-42 allows the harvesting of government plantations in production areas within protected areas; The Community Based Forest Management (CBFM) Strategy provides the framework for the granting of the rights to communities and individual households to manage portions of forest land for productive purposes (to grow crops and trees, and harvest forest products); A few small watersheds have been devolved to a limited number of LGUs, while some larger watersheds are currently managed by agencies other than DENR, notably NIA, NPC, PNOC and individual Water Districts; A small number of interagency river basin authorities/watershed management councils have been established;
There are successful farmer led organizations within the Philippines (such as the Claveria Land Care Association) which provide models of community based peoples’ organizations for the participatory development, and dissemination, of improved soil and water conservation and forest management practices; Some funds are available to support community and LGU watershed resource management initiatives through financing mechanisms (e.g., the CBFM Special Account, the IPAS Trust Fund, MDF and the DOE, PO.OO5/K levy on electricity sales); The issue of how to apply principle of water pricing according to the true economic value of water is currently under investigation, likewise there are continuing efforts to improve the determination (and generation) of the economic rent that could be realized from the harvesting of forest products; A limited range of hill farming and forestry technologies are being demonstrated to upland communities through the Centers for People Empowerment in the Uplands (CPEU) and individual watershed management/upland conservation and development projects; Number of local, national and international level GIS/MIS initiatives exist with data sets and data handling methodologies of relevance to a national watershed information system. 10. Gaps that Required Filling Policy and Legislation There are still gaps in the policy and legislative environment that require filling: Resolution of present land use policy conflicts to allow for the multiple use of watershed areas combining water source and biodiversity protection with compatible uses that are economically viable, ecologically sustainable and socially acceptable; There is a need to promote improved resource management in all watersheds of the Philippines, not just those defined as ‘critical’, or which have been proclaimed;
Sustainable development in the context of watershed resource management should embrace the economic use of those resources for commercial, not just subsistence, purposes; The present land classification impasse should be resolved through the speedy passing of the pending bills giving DENR the mandate to delineate the permanent forest line in line with national land use planning priorities and area specific land suitability assessment criteria; Decision on allowable land uses should be based on area specific suitability assessments rather than rigidly defined national standards; The policy for biodiversity preservation should not require that the entire area of a watershed be withdrawn from productive use, the need is for effective policies that will ensure that those portions of individual watersheds, that are still rich in the original biodiversity of the locality, or are required to protect the habitat of rare/threatened/endangered species (flora or fauna), receive the level of protection appropriate to their specific circumstances; There is a need to increase the rate at which the rights and responsibilities for the shared management of watershed resources are devolved to the stakeholders, through speedy enactment of the provisions of the IPRA, extension of the CBFM strategy to non project areas and the devolution of specific watershed areas to the LGUs through a Memorandum of Agreement mechanisms; In line with the principle of ‘water pricing’an effective policy mechanism needs to be designed for charging agricultural, domestic and industrial users the economic value for the water they use and reserving a proportion of such service charges and user fees for funding watershed management activities. Institutional There are still gaps in the institutional support services for watershed management that require filling: Whereas most watershed resource utilization activities have been spontaneous and unplanned, there is a need to develop the institutional capability to provide support to all watershed resource management initiatives, in whatever watershed they may occur; S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
To date most watershed resource management and development projects have been designed from the top, to balance this there is a need for a bottom-up demand driven approach, which would enable concerned communities and/or LGUs (not just DENR) to become the key proponents of local level individual watershed management initiatives; In the past watershed management planning has been undertaken on an ad hoc basis, there is a need for a comprehensive national watershed resource management programme that provides the planning framework within which individual watershed management plans can be formulated; There is a need for a national level watershed management institution to oversee the implementation of the national programme, and with a recognized interagency institutional mandate and the necessary resources to promote, coordinate and backstop local and national level watershed resource management initiatives; Creating the critical mass required for sustaining and spreading improved conservation farming/forest management practices depends on having a network of community level, people initiated and led organizations coming together as voluntary associations; Better public and private sector partnerships are a prerequisite for improved watershed resource management planning at the municipal, provincial, regional and national levels; There is a need to overcome restricted and conflicting institutional mandates for watershed management, amongst government line agencies and LGUs, and to promote shared management responsibility and improved coordination of field level activities; Where NGOs have a comparative advantage in their ability to work with upland communities they should be partners in the planning and implementation of improved watershed resource management activities; Sustainable mechanisms for the generation of the funds are required for improved watershed resource management activities, so as to lessen the reliance on donor funding for the implementation of watershed management plans; Attempts should be made to show the links between the costs and benefits of better management of watershed resources, in order to justify the raising of the funds required through the imposition of service charges and fees on watershed products (e.g., raw water, hydroand geo-thermal generated electricity, forest products, etc.); 120
Upland households/communities currently receive little, if any, extension advice on how to sustain and increase the yield of their traditional dryland food corps, or how to manage their natural forest areas on a sustainable yield basis, likewise there is little extension support to those who wish to grow trees in A&D lands, there is thus a need for a CENRO/LGU based extension support service that would operate in both Forest and A&D lands; There is a need for the strengthening of existing multi-sectoral and inter-disciplinary research consortia so that they can undertake basic and applied watershed management research to determine the impact of different forms of land use on the soil and water resources of individual watersheds; There is a need to strengthen the capacity of the LGUs and CENROs to work in partnership, specifically in the formulation of comprehensive watershed resource management/land use plans with the fill participation of the stakeholder communities; Effective protection of forest resources and protected areas from encroachment and illegal land use activities (e.g., logging) requires a sufficient level of local and national political will to act against the offenders, backed up by locally adopted and enforced land use by laws and government agencies, at the national and local levels, with the ability, and credibility, to enforce the provisions of the forestry and NIPAS laws; Promoting the principle of improved watershed management, through conservation effective and economically productive multiple use, requires a national information, education and communication programme to challenge present misconceptions amongst policy makers, politicians, and the general public and to raise their awareness as to the possibilities for combining conservation with production; There is a need to establish an operational national watershed information system (NWIS, to fill a gap within the current natural resources management information technology systems operating within the Philippines.
Technology There are still technology gaps that require filling: There is a need for better documentation of existing conservation effective hill farming and forest management practices, both indigenous and research derived, and an effective mechanism for the dissemination of such information to extension workers and land users; There is a need for the adoption of a participatory technology development approach to enable extension and research staff to work together with the land users in developing area specific technologies that match the local bio-physical and socio-economic circumstances; There is little incentive for upland communities to improve their upland agriculture and forest management practices when they have difficulties selling their surplus produce, hence there is a need to improve market access for those products that can be sustainably produced in the uplands; There is currently a lack of practical field level technical guidelines on how upland communities might manage natural forest areas on a sustainable economic yield basis, while the technical guidelines for forest management by corporate bodies need updating; The limited numbers of extension workers available require the development of innovative methods for inter- and intra-peer group training and dissemination of information on new upland farming and forestry practices. 11. The Key Elements of the Strategy The key elements of the strategy for improved watershed resource management represent a synthesis of the findings and conclusions of a study undertaken under the auspices of the Water Resources Development Project Watershed Management Improvement Component (WRDPWMIC). The study involved a review of: a) the issues related to the prioritisation of watersheds; b) the role and scope of a national watershed information system; c) the policies and legal instruments impacting on watershed management; d) past and on-going watershed management/upland
conservation and development projects and programmes; and e) the institutions involved in watershed management. For ease of presentation, the key elements are categorized into Policy and Legislation, Institutions and Technology although it is recognized that many of the individual elements cited do not fit exclusively within one or other of these categories. Policy and Legislation Implementation of strategy calls for a number of policy and legislative changes and interventions. They key policy and legislative elements of the strategy are therefore: Watersheds to be managed on a sustainable development and multiple use basis – thereby accepting that sustainable development includes the use of watershed resources for commercial (not just subsistence) purposes and that multiple-use watershed management can combine water yield and biodiversity protection with compatible economic land use activities (e.g., tree, crop, livestock, and fish production, and recreation/eco-tourism). Promote improved watershed resource management in all watersheds – thereby focusing on all watersheds identified as having a priority need for improved management, not just those defined narrowly by PD 705 as critical, or those that have been proclaimed. Multiple use to be based on land suitability – land suitability assessment to be undertaken as a routine part of watershed management planning. This being undertaken in order to identify areas within a watershed suitable for particular uses, and to match potential land use activities with the appropriate areas. Integrate watershed management planning concepts and principles – into provincial and municipal level comprehensive land use planning procedures. Encourage the establishment of local by-laws – for regulating land use within watershed areas, these to be formulated, agreed on and enforced by the affected communities. Apply national forestry laws consistently and transparently – with the aim of gaining wider respect for the laws and re-establishing the credibility of the law enforcers.
Enact the National Land Use and Water Resources Authority Bills – as matters of urgency, to provide the framework for guiding land allocation and water resource development, for determining the appropriate land and water uses, and for resolving conflicts between shortterm development needs and long-term conservation of the country’s watershed resources. Rapid delineation of the permanent forest line – so as to resolve the present uncertainties and conflicting claims, over the legal land classification within the uplands. The aim is to clearly determine the legal status of land within different parts of a watershed as this will determine the type of approach to be used and the practices that might be promoted within the context of improved watershed resource management. Define the safe limits for agriculture – and thus the division between A&D Land and Forestland, on the basis of a comprehensive land suitability and soil erosion risk assessment, and not the present arbitrary18% slope limit. When using this to determine the revised permanent forest line, all remaining natural forest should be included in the permanent forest estate, irrespective of soil erosion risk classification. Restrict the issuance of future watershed proclamations – given that existing proclamations have often not led to improved watershed protection. The policy of using presidential proclamations for protection purposes should be restricted to those few watershed areas where the legal restrictions on use are accepted, and/or can be enforced, by the stakeholders, and where watershed protection cannot be achieved by other means. Develop municipal and community based legal and tenurial instruments – for transferring/sharing responsibility for the protection and improved management of individual watershed to/with the direct stakeholders and use these as an alternative to watershed proclamations. Devolve shared responsibility to the LGUs – for the management of specific watersheds, or portions of watersheds, within their area of jurisdiction through the mechanism of a Municipal Watershed Management Memorandum of Agreement. The MOA to spell out the rights and responsibilities of the LGU and the technical backstopping and regulatory role of DENR. Where appropriate similar mechanisms to be used to devolve watershed management responsibility to other agencies including the private sector.
Continue and expand the granting of legal and user rights and responsibilities over specific upland areas – (with locally appropriate conservation provisions) so that de facto open access resources become either the common property of a recognized user group or are reserved for the exclusive use of an individual entry. Promote private investment in watershed resource management – by granting secure rights to use areas on a sustainable basis for economically productive purposes (forestry and agriculture), and overcoming financial constraints through the provision of affordable credit and/or community based revolving funds. Undertake improved watershed resource management in a socially equitable, culturally sensitive and gender aware manner – thereby ensuring that: a. Watershed management plans do not increase social inequalities (i.e., upland communities should not have to change their livelihood activities, for the benefit of better off lowland irrigated rice farmers, without receiving compensatory benefits); b. Interventions for improved watershed resource management do not conflict with local cultural values, beliefs and knowledge systems (i.e., the customs of IPs should be respected and there should be no unacceptable development activities in areas of cultural/religious importance to individual ICCs); c. Rules and regulations for the use of proclaimed watersheds protected areas do not condemn upland communities to perpetual poverty (i.e., they should not unnecessarily restrict their opportunities to engage in commercial activities); d. The specific needs and circumstances of rural women and disadvantaged groups are taken into consideration when planning and implementing all watershed management activities. Set aside for total protection only those specific portions of a watershed needed – to preserve the original biodiversity of the locality, to preserve the habitat of rare, threatened or endangered species of flora and fauna; and/or to protect critical water sources (e.g., springs). Entire watersheds should not be withdrawn from any form of economic utilization if all that needs to be preserved is just a portion of the watershed. S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
Adjust current prices on raw water and other watershed resources – to reflect their true economic value taking into consideration the full cost of protecting and harnessing individual resources (especially water) for public consumption. A percentage of all fees, levies and taxes raised from the use of watershed resources (water, grazing rights, timber/other forest products, etc.) to be set aside for financing watershed management activities. Identify and encourage private incentives for improved watershed resource management – by designing watershed management interventions that offer the practitioners tangible private incentives (financial and social/cultural benefits) to improve their present management practices. Only use direct incentives (cash payments, food for work, free inputs) when there is no alternative – and they can be sustained from non-donor sources. Utilize indirect incentives (e.g., land use rights, pricing policies, support services) as appropriate to change the external policy environment so as to facilitate, and/or encourage, the adoption of improved watershed management practices. Institutional Implementation of the strategy calls for a number of changes and interventions to strengthen the institutional support services for improved watershed resource management at both the national and local levels. The key institutional elements of the strategy are therefore: Broaden the institutional base – for improved watershed resource management planning by: a. Adopting a multi-sectoral and inter-agency approach to watershed management; b. Developing partnerships between DENR, the LGUs, Water Districts, NPC, PNOC, other line agencies, NGOs, and CBOs; c. Recognizing the comparative advantages of NGOs in working with upland communities compared to LGU and government line agencies; d. Reassessing, revising and expanding current institutional responsibilities while strengthening their capabilities; and
e. Encouraging the direct participation of groups of land users in field/community level operational planning, implementation and review of watershed management plans and activities. The formulation and operation of a demand driven national watershed management program – comprising two parallel components: a) where the demand is determined by national priorities and concerns; and b) where the primary initiative for the planning and implementation of individual watershed management plans comes from the local community and the LGU in response to a locally perceived need (demand) to tackle the problem. The necessary resource inputs (labor, cash, materials, etc.) for implementation of locally identified and formulated plans, should initially be sourced from within the community and the LGU. Under the umbrella of a national programme external technical assistance and supplementary counterpart funds (as a grant and/or loan) could be provided from national sources, on a limited need basis. The role of the national programme would be to: a. encourage the local generation of project ideas for improved watershed resource management; b. respond to locally identified needs for watershed management planning; c. support and strengthened community/LGU led resource management initiatives; and d. build on local demand to achieve the ‘critical mass’ for extending and sustaining an effective countrywide programme. Stimulate and support the demand for improved management at the community level – by scaling up from local level successes so as to achieve the critical mass needed to make a significant impact on the present levels of watershed degradation. This to be assisted by the formation and operation of people led organizations such as Municipal Land Care Associations with constituent Land Care Chapters at the community/barangay level. Establish multi-sectoral Watershed Resource Management Committees/ Councils – at the municipal, provincial, and regional levels to foster public, and private, sector partnerships in improved watershed resource management activities. Such committees/councils to be used to overcome restricted and conflicting institutional watershed management mandates amongst government line agencies and LGUs, thereby promoting shared management
responsibility and improved coordination of field level activities. Whenever possible the duties, responsibilities and membership of the existing development committees, at the local and regional levels, should be expanded to include watershed management concerns, rather than creating separate committees/councils solely for this. Establish a national high-level inter-agency watershed management council – to oversee the implementation of the national demand driven programme and to facilitate cooperation between, and involvement of, the various national, regional and local level agencies with a direct interest in the management and utilization of watershed resources. Establish a national level ‘apex’watershed resource management institution/organization – to serve as the secretariat for the high level watershed management council, and from which it would receive an interagency institutional mandate to promote, coordinate, and assist with the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of local initiatives under the auspices of the demand driven national programme. This body to assume responsibility for the identification, formulation and where appropriate arranging for the implementation of improved management plans for nationally determined priority watershed areas, where the ‘demand’ for intervention comes from national, rather than local, stakeholders. Establishment of a national watershed information system (NWIS) – to carry out the systematic collection, review and dissemination of information for improved watershed resource management. This to be undertaken in collaboration with other GIS/MIS systems within DENR and other agencies to encourage the mutually beneficial sharing of data. Develop sustainable mechanisms for generating the funds required – for improved watershed resource management by: a. establishing a national watershed management fund (with an initial input from central government and donor sources); b. sustaining the fund from the imposition of charges and fees on the services/ benefits obtained from improved watershed resource management (notably fees for raw water and use the existing levy on electricity generated by hydro- and geo-thermal power stations for non-NPC and PNOC watershed areas); c. encouraging private stakeholder investment; d. making use of affordable credit/evolving funds at the community level;
e. allocating a proportion of the development and O&M costs of water dependent infrastructure projects; f. charging environmental levies/polluters fees on commercial companies exploiting specific watershed resources. Develop an integrated upland agriculture/forestry extension support service – by bringing together both subject matter specialists/grassroots extension staff from the CENRO/PENRO, and LGUs (MAO/PAO and ISF) and experienced farmers/foresters from within the community to develop integrated programmes and extension messages for improved agriculture and forestry by upland communities. The service to include: a. a CENRO forestry extension cadre working in both A&D lands and ISF/CBFMA areas, able to advise on which species of trees to plant and how to grow them for multiple end use purposes; b. community-based inter-disciplinary upland extension teams using ‘farmer-to-farmer’ people centered learning processes to develop and disseminate improved upland conservation farming practices. Develop and implement a comprehensive training programme – (with supporting regional and provincial training facilities) designed to improve the watershed resource management skills and capabilities of both the resource users and the extension and research support staff employed by the LGUs, line agencies, and NGOs. Adopt people centered learning processes – and develop new and innovative methods for interand intra-peer group (‘farmer-to-farmer’) training, and dissemination of information, on new upland farming and forestry practices, so as to overcome the constraint of having limited numbers of extension workers available, and the difficulties of traveling into and around upland areas. Develop effective multi-sectoral and inter-disciplinary research consortia – to undertake basic and applied watershed management research. Provide additional resources to strengthen the skills and capabilities of existing consortia, and where needed establish new ones. Promote participatory technology development – by giving extension and research workers the skills and resources to work with upland farmers/forest managers, in the development of improved conservation farming and sustainable forest management practices, that match their area specific bio-physical and socio-economic circumstances.
Develop and conduct a national information, education and communication (IEC) programme - or improved watershed resource management that will enhance environmental awareness amongst all Filipinos. The key IEC message to be that improved watershed resource management can be achieved in ways that are both conservation effective and economically productive within a multiple use framework. Technology Implementation of the strategy calls for a number of technological changes and interventions for improved watershed resource management at the field level. The key technology related elements of the strategy are therefore: Appraise all field level technical interventions – according to whether they are: a) technically possible; b) practically feasible; c) productive; d) financially desirable; e) stable; f) sustainable; g) universally applicable; and h) socially and economically acceptable. Land suitability assessment to serve as the basis for improved watershed resource management planning – thereby ensuring for individual land use enterprises: a. that they are suited to the bio-physical conditions of the parts of the watershed in which they are undertaken; and b. that the appropriate land management practices are adopted. Ensure improved watershed resource management technologies are locally appropriate – by: a. identifying practices that are simple, low cost, productive, maintainable, low risk, flexible and conservation effective; b. recognizing and building on the indigenous watershed resource management practices of traditional upland communities; c. developing appropriate technologies, with the participation of local communities, so that they conform to their economic, social and cultural norms; d. exploring cost and conservation effective alternatives, to the present plantation reforestation approach, for rehabilitating denuded watershed areas.
Develop a technology documentation database – within NWIS as a really accessible source of information on alternative upland conservation farming/ sustainable forest management technologies that have been used successfully (in the Philippines or elsewhere) for improved watershed resource management). Manage the demand for water from downstream users – through the adoption of water conservation practices. Given that water is a finite resource, in addition to improved management within the upper watershed area, there is a need to ensure that the downstream users do not waste what water is available. Options for conserving scarce water resources could include: a. the adoption of improved irrigation water management practices to improve the efficiency of present water use; b. in water shortage areas switching from the growing of a second crop of irrigated rice to the planting of less water demanding crops to compensate for reduced water availability in the dry season; c. adoption of water conserving measures in urban areas by both domestic and industrial consumers; and d. the rehabilitation and maintenance of the country’s metropolitan and municipal water delivery systems so as to reduce leakages. Prepare new, and update old, technical guidelines – for improved watershed resource management so as to provide guidelines on: a. participatory planning for improved watershed resource management; b. participatory development of upland conservation farming systems; c. land suitability assessment for multiple use watershed resource management; d. community based management of natural forests on a sustained yield basis; and e. sustainable natural and plantation forest management by corporate bodies. Develop and utilize simple, primarily qualitative, bio-physical indicators – that can be adapted to the local situation, rather than rigid national standards, for monitoring the environmental impact of specific watershed management interventions and detecting trends in the degradation status of watershed areas.
Develop and utilize simple monitoring tools – for capturing the socio-economic benefits of improved watershed resource management and detecting trends in poverty alleviation amongst the affected communities. Promote participatory watershed resource monitoring and evaluation – with the aim of stimulating critical self-awareness amongst rural upland households as to the impact, at the community and watershed level, of their farming and forest management practices, thereby providing the motivation to make improvements. Devote resources to market based mechanisms – for stimulating private investment in productive and sustainable use of watershed resources. In particular improve market access for upland communities by: a. improving access trails/roads to suitable areas (while avoiding opening up upland areas that are environmentally sensitive/fragile); b. identifying market opportunities for existing or potential new upland commodities; c. developing local market information systems; d. adding value to upland agricultural/forest products by encouraging the development of local processing capabilities. Support the establishment of small-to-medium scale forest based industries – accessible to upland (and lowland) communities to stimulate private investment in small-holder tree farming in both CBFMA and A&D areas and to provide a market for products obtained from the sustainable management of natural forest areas. Undertake both basic and applied research – into the agricultural and agro-forestry problems facing upland communities and to determine the impact of different forms of land use on the water, soil and forest resources of individual watersheds representative of the different watershed types within the Philippines. The plot, micro- or small watershed level – should be the focus for field level technical interventions, while planning at the large watershed and river basin level should focus on broad sector development and land use zoning.
12. The Key Actors The key actors for the implementation of the strategy are: The resource users/direct stakeholders – the principal actors are the individual rural households, upland communities and corporate bodies that utilize the resources of a watershed for pursuing agricultural, forestry, ranching or fisheries enterprises. They should be seen as the primary stewards of a watershed’s resources, as the success of improved watershed management depends on their ability and willingness to manage these resources on an environmentally sustainable and economically productive basis. DENR – would serve as the apex institution for the development, operation and coordination of a national watershed management programme. At the local level it would assume a new and more proactive role in technically backstopping the watershed resource management efforts of the LGUs. It would also provide a CENRO based forestry extension service to those wishing to grow trees on private land. LGUS – would gradually assume lead responsibility for the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of community based improved watershed resource management activities within their area of jurisdiction. The MAO and devolved ISF staff (where they are still performing ISF functions) would work jointly with the CENRO and community level conservation farming/forest user peoples organizations to field combined upland/watershed resource management extension teams. The Department of Agriculture- the constituent bureau of the DA, notably the Bureau of Soils and Water Management, the Agricultural Training Institute and the Bureau of Agricultural Research, would have a key role to play particularly with regard to providing technical backstopping, in the areas of training, technology development, and information, to provincial and municipal level improved watershed resource management initiatives. Within individual watersheds a number of other agencies, notably NIA, PNOC, NPC and DAR, are currently and in the future could be expected to play a key role in the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of improved watershed resource management activities.
13. Paradigm Shift in Watershed Management The Shift in approach to improved watershed resource management as advocated by the strategy can be summarized as follows: From looking at watershed degradation (soil erosion, deforestation, siltation etc.) in terms of what is happening (treating the symptoms);
To looking at watershed degradation in terms of why it is happening (tackling the underlying causes);
From management of watersheds for a single purpose â€“ protection of water yield;
To sustainable multiple-use management of watersheds that combines water yield and biodiversity protection with compatible economic land use activities (e.g., crop, livestock, fish and tree production, and recreation/eco-tourism);
From assuming that management of critical and proclaimed/protected watersheds requires the withdrawal of the whole area from any form of economic utilization;
To recognizing that by selecting suitable land uses and adopting appropriate management practices the natural resources within individual watersheds can be used for economically productive purposes while maintaining the delivery of water to downstream users;
From de facto open access status of watershed resources, even in proclaimed and designated critical watersheds;
To the use of appropriate tenurial arrangements to devolve the rights and responsibilities for the management of a specific watershed or parts of a watershed to the concerned communities, LGUs or other suitable organizations/agencies;
From a priority focus on the off-site/down-stream costs and benefits of watershed management (water quantity and quality, and reduced risk of damage from floods and sedimentation);
To giving at least equal priority to the on-site costs and benefits of watershed management (maintenance and enhancement of upland farm, forest and pasture productivity);
From a piecemeal project approach in which individual â€˜criticalâ€™ watershed management plans are identified, prioritised, formulated and funded according to national development criteria;
To a demand driven programme approach where local level activities are undertaken within a national policy and institutional framework that promotes the formulation of watershed management plans at the community and LGU level in line with local priorities, resources and external assistance needs;
From restricted and conflicting institutional mandatory for watershed management amongst government line agencies and LGUs;
To shared responsibility and improved coordination through multi-sectoral watershed resource management associations/councils;
From upland communities having limited or no access to extension advice on how to improve the productivity and sustainability of their natural resource based livelihood systems;
To the development of a CENRO/LGU based extension support service, that would operate in both forest and A&D lands, to provide advice to those engaged in upland farming and forest management/tree planting;
From a top-down transfer of technology mode in which the land user is a passive recipient of externally formulated extension messages and research recommendations;
To a stakeholder centered participatory learning and technology development process that recognizes and builds on the knowledge and capabilities of the land users to learn for themselves through participating in, observing and discussing their own trials and learningby-doing field exercises;
From information of relevance to watershed management either lacking or scattered amongst different agencies.
To the systematic collection, documentation, analysis and dissemination (to potential users) of watershed management information under the auspices of a National Watershed Information System.
Source: The Philippines Strategy for Improved Watershed Resources Management Forest Management Bureau, DENR, August 1998
ANNEXES Allocation and management of timberlands Why municipalities should actively get involved BY DR. ERNIE S. GUIANG Chief of Party, EcoGov Project1 The Local Government Code of 1991 opened a window of opportunity for local government units (LGUs), municipalities included, to take a hands-on role in the management of their environment and natural resources. These resources include forests and forest lands (or timberlands), which are key natural resources within the political jurisdiction of each LGU. In many municipalities and provinces, timberlands comprise a significant percentage of the total land area under each LGU. These lands are included in the computation of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA). Under the existing Regalian doctrine, timberlands cannot be alienated and titled because they are owned by the State. Only the State can allocate the forests and forest lands for protection, development, and management (such entails responsibility, some authority, and accountability). The State, mainly through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Congress, Office of the President, or the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), “allocates” public forests and forest lands to various stakeholders and users2 as a means to put these areas into effective “on-site” management. LGUs, even with the Local Government Code, may appear to have a minimal part in the allocation of public forests and forest lands. However, LGUs who are able to realize the economic, political, and environmental impacts of this process take pro-active action in “allocating” public forests and forests lands. Rather than becoming an unwilling victim, LGUs should be involved in determining
The allocation of timberlands could either make or break the future of an LGU as most of these resources are part of upper watersheds, food and fiber production areas, ecotourism and biodiversity sites, and buffers for many kinds of pests and natural disasters.
how the allocation of forests and forest lands could best serve the destiny of their constituents. It can be said that the allocation of timberlands could either make or break the future of an LGU as most of these resources are part of upper watersheds, food and fiber production areas, ecotourism and biodiversity sites, and buffers for many kinds of pests and natural disasters. LGUs should take special interest in public forests and forest lands that have not been “allocated”or areas already “allocated”but “abandoned”as they are a major source of “headaches” as far as management of forests and forest lands is concerned. These areas are considered “open access” — anybody can just get in and out -- as there is no one owning the responsibility of properly “guarding” or managing these resources. LGUs should take special interest in public forests and forest lands that have not been “allocated”or areas already “allocated”but “abandoned”as they are a major source of “headaches” as far as management of forests and forest lands is concerned.
In the case of “abandoned” areas, this means that the “current holders of allocation instruments3“ have no long-term desire to “exercise” their management rights or claims over the public forests and forestlands. This situation invites forests and forest lands “intruders” and encourages mercenary behavior --illegal cutting of remaining forest stands, collusions, conversion of forested areas into slash-and-burn farms, and other environmentally-destructive activities. With increasing demand for employment, arable land, food, timber and other forest products, the tendency to overexploit the forests and forest lands to serve personal ends without regard for the needs of the society will definitely intensify in an open-access condition.
Check-points, periodic enforcement, and environmental advocacy may be resorted to as an interim measure. In the long run, however, putting the “open access” areas into effective, responsible “on-site” management will provide the ultimate “enforcement” mechanism as holders of “allocation instruments” — who could be the communities working hand-in-hand with the LGUs -- exercise their rights and privileges over the forests and forest lands.
ASSISTANCE TO LGUS IN THE ALLOCATION PROCESS The importance of allocating timberlands within an LGU has propelled the Philippine Environmental Governance (EcoGov) Project to provide technical assistance to interested LGUs.
LGUs should take special interest in public forests and forest lands that have not been "allocated" or areas already "allocated" but "abandoned" as they are a major source of "headaches" as far as management of forests and forest lands is concerned.
As part of its program components, EcoGov promotes a more active role for LGUs in the allocation of public forests and forest lands and encourages them to take advantage of keeping their “natural assets” intact, protected, developed, and managed for the present and future generations. The collaboration of LGUs and DENR in the transparent, participatory, and accountable process of allocating forests and forest lands will reduce the critical threats to the country’s forests, primarily illegal cutting and conversion of natural forests. The joint processes of municipal-based forest land use planning (FLUP) require DENR, LGUs, communities, coalition groups, media, and other members of civil society to take actions and make decisions towards the closure of “open access” in a given municipality or province.
The EcoGov assistance to LGUs is now directly available in Mindanao (particularly in Regions 9, 12, and the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao), Central Visayas, and Northern Luzon. LGUs in other regions may get assistance on FLUP by participating in EcoGov-sponsored training activities.
REASONS FOR LGU INTERVENTION
“In the long run, however, putting the “open access” areas into effective, responsible “on-site” management will provide the ultimate enforcement mechanism...”
There are at least four reasons municipal or provincial LGUs should intervene in the process of planning, allocating, and managing public forests and forest lands.
(1) First, the “interconnectedness”and “interdependence”of natural resources demand that local stakeholders become actively involved in determining how resources, especially forests and forest lands, are going to be allocated and managed. The uplands are very much a part of the lowlands --what happens in the uplands directly impacts on the lowland communities. Most timberlands are part of upper watersheds that supply water for irrigation and domestic needs of lowland communities. In addition to water, many communities depend on the forests and forest lands for their livelihood, fuel wood, and food and fiber requirements. The destruction of forests and forest lands in the upper watersheds has implications on the security and protection of communities, public and private infrastructures, coastal resources, crops and livestock. The uplands and the lowlands are economically, politically, ecologically, and biophysically interconnected and interdependent. Therefore, the allocation process should include local stakeholders — such as communities, irrigators’association, municipal fisherfolk, local officials, private sector groups, church groups, water districts, etc. They should have a voice and “stake” on how timberlands will be managed and by whom. LGUs and its constituents should be given the opportunity to “veto” proposed allocations that are not consistent with their overall vision and strategy for development. A top -down approach to assigning responsibility, accountability, and authority in managing timberlands will not ensure sustainability as it does not guarantee local participation that leads to obtaining a sense of local “ownership,” an essential ingredient in getting local people continually involved in forests and forest lands management.
(2) Second, the economic potential of forests and forest lands demands that LGUs and stakeholders must intervene on how these scarce resources be “The uplands and the “allocated” and managed. Local needs and “de facto resource managers” lowlands are should be given first priority in the allocation of timberlands. Timberlands are economic assets --LGUs and local stakeholders can best put these economically, assets into sustainable use if they are given the right of first refusal, politically, ecologically, considering that they are physically present where the resources are. Forests and forest lands are potential production areas for high value crops and biophysically that are consistent with environmental management objectives. interconnected and Inadequately-stocked timberlands are potential areas for forest plantations and tree crops managed by local communities or groups. The economic interdependent.” values of water resources, biodiversity products, and ecotourism potential are better managed by local entrepreneurs who are committed to the sustainable development of a municipality or a province. LGUs that will not actively participate in the allocation of forests and forest lands give up their right and the opportunity to put these assets into their premium uses that will best serve the interest of their constituents, and the society as a whole. (3) Third, LGUs (at the province, municipal, and barangay levels) can best plan and direct their public investments, especially for roads, bridges, communal irrigation, water system, schools, etc. if they know how these could best serve the short-, medium-, and long-term objectives of sound forests and forest lands management. For instance, access roads construction could be judiciously planned, taking into consideration the necessity to keep high biodiversity forests and protected forests from easy access and poaching activities, and the need for trails to connect timberlands that are devoted to productive upland agriculture and agro-forestry systems. Communal irrigation and domestic water systems should be built in relation to upper watersheds that are within the control and management of LGUs or adjoining LGUs. Schools should be provided for communities in upland barangays. Other LGU investments, such as those for dumping sites, cemeteries, etc., could best be identified through FLUP.
LGUs that will not actively participate in the allocation of forests and forest lands give up their right and the opportunity to put these assets into their premium uses that will best serve the interest of their constituents, and the society as a whole.
(4) Lastly, LGUs should intervene in the process of allocating forests and forest lands to enable them to effectively participate in the protection and management of these lands. Allocating timberlands to the most responsible and accountable resource managers will minimize, if not eliminate, illegal cutting and forest conversions, thus, preventing flash floods, destruction of lives and properties, shortage of water supply, etc. It will also minimize corruption and collusions in the issuance and approval of allocation instruments, especially to communities and the private sector. By actively participating in the allocation decision, LGUs can then demand from national government agencies concerned to “close”open access areas and make the “holders” of allocation instruments accountable for their obligations as resource managers of the forests and forest lands within their municipal jurisdiction. The LGUs can also plan and re-align their local resources in support of sustainable forest management.
Although LGUs may not be clearly mandated to actively participate in the allocation of forests and forest lands within their political jurisdiction, it is to their best interests to vigorously take part in this process. LGUs that are prepared to invest and take a proactive action in allocating and managing their forests and forest lands could minimize environmental destruction, serve their constituents better, and ignite local economic activities.
ENDNOTES 1 The Philippine Environmental Governance (EcoGov) Project is a technical assistance grant from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to the Government of the Philippines, with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) as the implementing agency. EcoGovâ€™s implementation is from November 2001 until November 2004. 2 The State allocates public forests and forest lands for protection, development, and management to: (a) itself (State through DENR) by setting aside portions of public forests and forest lands as protected areas, watershed reservations, wildlife reservations, etc. (b) communities especially for indigenous peoples and legitimate upland migrants, (c) private sector, (d) local government units through communal forests and watersheds, and (e) other government agencies such as the National Power Corporation, military establishment, National Irrigation Administration, universities, Philippine National Oil Company. 3 Examples of these are Community-based Forest Management Agreement, Industrial Forest Management Agreement, Socialized Industrialized Forest Management Agreement, etc.
ANNEXES COMMUNITY-BASED FOREST MANAGEMENT A National Strategy for Watershed Improvement1 ROMEO T. ACOSTA2
I. PIONEERING PROGRAMS ON CBFM In the Philippines, people-oriented forestry programs started as early as the 1970s with the launching of the Forest Occupancy Management (FOM) Program, Communal Tree Farm (CTF), and the Family Approach to Reforestation (FAR). These programs were primarily designed to rehabilitate open and cultivated areas and contain occupancy in forestlands. On July 28, 1982, the Integrated Social Forestry Program (ISFP) was launched under Letter of Instructions (LOI) No. 1260 with the goals of alleviating poverty, promoting social justice, and developing and protecting forest resources through proper stewardship of the uplands. Considering the similarity of objectives and target participants the ISFP consolidated FOM, CTF and FAR to promote a more holistic approach in the development of open and occupied areas within the forestlands.
1 Paper presented in the Third National Policy Round Table Discussion on Community-Based Forest Resource Management as a National and Local Strategy for Watershed Improvement in the Philippines on October 07, 2002 at UP Diliman, Quezon City 2 Director, Forest Management Bureau, Quezon City
The implementation of these people-oriented forestry programs marked a shift in the orientation of government policy from the traditional regulatory-oriented forestry management towards a more developmental, people and service-oriented approach. It recognized upland farmers including Indigenous Peoples (IPs) as partners of the government in the rehabilitation of denuded forestlands while they participate in activities aimed at improving their socio-economic condition.
II. MODIFIED PROGRAMS ON CBFM Over the years, several programs were implemented to further respond to the need of involving local communities in the protection and management of forestlands. These include the Rainfed Resources Development Project, Upland Development Program, National Forestation Program, Forest Land Management Program, Community Forestry Program, Low Income Upland Communities Project, Regional Resources Management Project, Integrated Rainforest Management Project, Coastal Environment Program, and Natural Resources Management Program. The government recognizes the importance and urgency of the issues and problems confronting the forest-dependent communities as manifested by the various people-oriented forestry programs that were implemented by the government. However, despite these programs, there are still concerns that need to be addressed to promote forest management that recognizes peopleforest interactions. These include the following: A unifying strategy for sustainable development of forest lands and resources; Effective partnerships and agreements between and among DENR, Local Government Units (LGUs), Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), POs, financial institutions and other government and private institutions to pursue forest development; Harmonization of various tenurial instruments over forestlands and resources; Getting over the community pilot project approach and proceeding to the expansion phase using the lessons from previous experiences;
Institutional capability building for effective community resources management implementation; and Recognition of the community’s forest resources access and utilization rights. Adoption of a Sustainable Strategy Based on the lessons learned and experiences in more than two (2) decades of implementing various people-oriented forestry programs in the Philippines, the government has developed a strategy that is more equitable and holistic. Now, all efforts geared towards the development of forestlands adopt Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) as the principal strategy to ensure sustainable development of the country’s forestlands resources and achieve social justice in consonance with the provisions of Executive Order (EO) No. 263. Briefly, CBFM as a strategy refers to all organized efforts of all forestry stakeholders to work with communities in and adjacent to public forest lands with the intent to empower and entrust to them the protection, rehabilitation, management, conservation and the utilization of forest lands and resources. Through the CBFM, the DENR advances the cause of forest-dependent communities in their quest for improved well-being as well as for the legitimization of their rights to peacefully occupy, manage and reap the benefits from their forestlands in a responsible and sustainable manner. Basic Policies The enabling policy for the implementation of CBFM is embodied in Executive Order No. 263. It pursues the constitutional provisions on social justice, respect for the rights of the Indigenous Peoples to their ancestral domains, and the protection and advancement of the right of the Filipino people to a healthful and balanced environment. S E RV I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T
It is also the policy of the State to acknowledge and support the capacities and efforts of local communities and Indigenous Peoples to protect, rehabilitate, develop and manage forestlands and coastal resources. Under the CBFM, the State provides legal and technical support to ensure equitable access to and sustainable use of natural resources. Objectives of CBFM The primary aim of CBFM is to promote social justice and improve the well being of local communities especially the Indigenous Peoples living within or near the forestlands. It also aims to ensure the sustainable management, rehabilitation, protection and utilization of forestlands resources. Scope and Coverage CBFM applies to all areas classified as forestlands, including allowable zones within protected areas not covered by prior vested rights. The program integrates and unifies all people oriented forestry programs.
III. PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS The principal participants of the Program are local communities to be represented by their organization known as the People’s Organization (POs), whose members are Filipino citizens who are: actually tilling portions of the area to be awarded, or traditionally using the resource for all or a substantial portion of their livelihood, or actually residing within or adjacent to the areas to be awarded. Indigenous cultural communities or indigenous peoples may participate in CBFM provided their claims over the ancestral domain/land have been recognized. 148
Features of CBFM 1. Security of Tenure— CBFM Agreement entitles the forest communities to use and develop the forestlands and resources for a duration of 25 years, renewable for another 25 years. Development of the area as well as utilization of its resources shall be done only in accordance with an affirmed Community Resource Management Framework and Resource Use Permit. 2. Social Equity- Social justice is a basic principle underlying CBFM in granting forest communities tenure and comprehensive rights to use and develop forest resources. 3. Partnership and Collaboration- DENR and LGUs as partners provide technical assistance to local communities in collaboration with other government agencies, non-government organizations and resource institutions to help them attain sustainable forest management.
IV. KEY PROCESSES OF CBFM Preparatory Stage- focuses on the creation of local institutional arrangements by which LGUs center into partnership with DENR in promoting CBFM. As a team, it will undertake land-use planning, identify and select political CBFM sites, assist the communities link with other government agencies, NGOs and private sector as well as access to resources and services. PO Formation and Diagnostic Stage- leads to the formation or strengthening of a CBFM-focused people’s organizations, assist communities to undertake perimeter survey and situation analysis, community profiling using mapping and participatory rapid appraisal techniques. This leads to the awarding of CBFMA. Planning Stage - focuses on the POs preparation of its Community Resource Management Framework Annual Work Plan, and Resource Use Plan, and the CENRO’s affirmation of these plans.
Â€ Implementation Stage - the POs put to action the affirmed work and resource use plans consistent with the CRMF. A viable PO managed forest-based enterprises, institutional arrangements and organizational skills, and effective forest management actions leading to improved livelihood opportunities arc the hallmark of this stage.
V. RELATED INITIATIVES ON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT Watershed Management continues to be a challenging task in the Philippines. Its general goal is to manage, develop and utilize watersheds and water bodies therein on a sustainable basis to meet the needs of the people. In some areas, it may even require total protection and rehabilitation of watersheds in order to produce water in its best quality and quantity. At present, there are a number of watershed programs and projects currently implemented by the government to promote participation of local communities in watershed management following the CBFM strategy. Among these are: Establishment and Management of CBFM Projects Within Watersheds DENR Administrative Order No. 98-41 provides the guidelines on the establishment and management of CBFM projects within watershed reservations in accordance with the provisions of the NIPAS law. It is also consistent with the principles of multiple use, sustainable development and biological diversity conservation. Among others, the implementation and management of CBFM projects within watershed areas aims to provide livelihood opportunities to local communities, tenured migrants, and indigenous peoples and enhance their economic well-being. Likewise, it encourages support and active participation of local communities and strengthens their capacities to manage watershed resources.
Implementation of Forestry Sector Project (FSP) The FSP is a community-based forest management project that aims to counteract the deforestation and environmental degradation in the country. It principally aims at the rehabilitation and management of critical watersheds primarily to sustain water yield and promote the socioeconomic development of the people living within the watershed. Water Resources Development Project (WRDP) (Watershed Management Improvement Component) The WRDP formulates the policies and institutional framework for the water resources sector. Through the project, the DENR was able to design the Philippines Strategy for Improved Watershed Resources Management which spells out the policy direction of the government in the management and development of the countryâ€™s watersheds. It follows a philosophy of a demand-driven, community-based approach to watershed management addressing both national development priorities and local stakeholders concerns. Adoption of Ecosystems and Watershed Planning Framework The Forestry Reform Code considers watershed areas as special natural system that need to be managed. To underscore its importance, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) promulgates regulations and guidelines focusing on watershed areas. For example, DENR Administrative Order (DAO) No. 99-1 was issued mandating the adoption of the watershed as a basic planning unit. Similarly, DAO 97-02 requires the conduct of watershed characterization before any watershed management plan is formulated.
Multiple Use Concept The ecosystems and watershed planning approach recognizes the multiple uses and functions of forestlands. Multiple use in the context of watershed management recognizes that within a watershed, there is a potential to pursue a number of alternative uses, combining water yield and biodiversity protection with compatible economic land use activities. Here, environmental protection and forest production purposes shall be balanced and optimized consistent with the carrying capacity and overall goals of watershed ma management The primary aim of multiple use concept in watershed management is to obtain optimum level of benefits from each of the component use without sacrificing the other uses and the condition of the watershed as a whole.
MAJOR ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES Making the CBFM Inter-Agency Collaboration Work Under Executive Order No. 263, various National Government Agencies (NGA) are mandated to support the implementation of CBFM as the national strategy to ensure the sustainable development of the countryâ€™s forestlands and resources. Building Partnership with LGUs Local Government Units are key players in the implementation of CBFM. They are expected to assist local communities to effectively undertake sustainable forest development activities. The LGUs also act as a primary catalyst of local development and bridge the efforts of government and communities in pursuing the goals of CBFM Projects.
This policy is very appropriate. However, the expected partnership is, in most cases, not happening nor working because of the lack of counterpart resources being channeled by LGUs to CBFM projects in their jurisdiction. This is the case because LGUs themselves have scarce resources, especially those in the rural areas where local government revenues are low to start with. DENR-DILG-LGU Joint Memorandum Circular (JMC) No. 98-01 was issued primarily to strengthen partnership and collaboration on the development of devolved functions and projects to LGUs. Unfortunately, JMC No. 98-0 1 is not yet fully implemented. Providing Long Term Security of Tenure to CBFM Participants Consistent with the policy of sustainable and multiple use forest management, participating organized communities in the CBFM are granted access to the forestlands and resources through the issuance of long-term tenurial agreement. This gives them a guarantee for peaceful occupation and entrusts to them the responsibilities to protect, develop, manage and utilize forest resources under the principle of stewardship. The dominant concern is to give participating families and local communities a secured stake in the lands they develop under the CBFM strategy to encourage them to carry out sustainable forest management practices and livelihood activities. To date, out of 9 million hectares targeted for CBFM, only 4.26 million hectares are covered with land tenure instruments issued under the various people-oriented forestry programs and projects. Of these, 905,000 hectares are covered by 727 CBFMAs that were granted by DENR to organized local communities. Enhancing the Capabilities of Local Communities The success of CBFM approach depends on how the participating local communities are organized, trained and empowered towards sustainable forest management. With the turnover of responsibility of managing forestlands and resources, the government especially at the field level needs to
develop and strengthen the POs to provide them the necessary technical skills and managerial capability to undertake various CBFM activities. Setting a More Responsive Organizational Structure for CBFM In 1995, the Philippine government declared CBFM as the national strategy towards sustainable forest development. This requires a lot of activities especially on awareness building, community organizing, developing and strengthening the capability of local communities, and linking them with resource institutions to ensure development of the CBFM areas and facilitate establishment of livelihood projects that are appropriate to the needs of the community. At present, a CBFM Division is created out of the then Social Forestry Division at the central level under the Forest Management Bureau. As part of a staff bureau, the CBFM Division gives emphasis on the review and development of policies, review and consolidation of CBFM plans and programs, provision of technical assistance and monitoring of CBFM activities. On the other hand, CBFM in the regional offices only operates as a small unit, under the Forest Resources Development Division, composed of limited staff who are on detailed arrangement from other units of the regional office. The unit is not enough to cope up with the increasing activities of CBFM including monitoring of projects that adopt tile CBFM strategy. At the CENR Office level, where field activities of CBFM are directly implemented, very few staff are assigned. In most cases, one CBFM staff is assigned to coordinate and facilitate the activities of the participants in an average of 3-5 sites. For CBFM to be implemented effectively, DENR needs to set up and put in place a more responsive structure that can fully support and provide the necessary extension services to local communities that are implementing the CBFM strategy. Strengthening the Federations of the Peoplesâ€™ Organizations A national and regional federation of POs composed of CBFM participants was organized in 1998. However, there is a need for these groups to be strengthened and develop further in order to make 154
them effective partner of government in the development, protection, conservation, utilization and management of the forest lands that were constructed to them through the issuance of the Community-Based Forest Management Agreement. These federations could also be an effective group to help DENR lobby for the passage of laws and policies that are supportive of CBFM. Establishing Community-Corporate Partnership in the Development of Forest Resources in CBFM Areas To facilitate development of resources in CBFM areas and help local communities implement economic activities, joint venture undertakings and other similar forest management agreements between communities and private investors need to be established. Primarily, the strategy aims to encourage the corporate forestry sector to participate and invest in the development, management and utilization of forestlands and resources. Eventually, this is expected to generate financial capital for the implementation of development activities envisaged by the POs in their Community Resource Management Framework. Making Government Support for Forest Protection Activities Available to POs Peopleâ€™s Organizations under the CBFM help the government in forest protection. Immediately after the approval of the CBFMA, local communities assume the responsibility for protection of the entire forestlands within their CBFMA. Forest protection groups or communities are being organized by the PO to guard their forest against illegal logging, timber poaching forest fires and other forms of forest destruction. The POs have been urging the government to provide them funds for forest protection activities. They are also asking government to develop mechanisms for group insurance for the officers and members of the POs who were deputized as forest officers. However, because of government systems and requirements, nothing is clear yet on this issue.
Providing Reasonable Budget for CBFM CBFM suffers from insufficient funding to support project activities. There are loans and grants released by foreign funding institutions but project strategies and activities are usually donor-driven and limited in scope and geographic coverage. Most CBFM projects are funded through the regular budget appropriation of the government. For the past three (3) years, CBFM nationwide received an average budget of P3 5.21 M covering all its maintenance and operating expenditures, constituting about 2.26% of the national forest management and develop uncut budget. Creating a More Favorable Environment for Watershed Management Many of the Presidential Proclamations and Executive Orders declaring portions of the public domain as watershed reservations were issued several decades ago. They contain provisions that do not reflect actual condition and are therefore not responsive to the current needs and realities of watersheds In the current work on developing the Philippine Forestry Sector Policy within the ENR Shell Framework, we recognize the need to re-visit and update our watershed management strategies and approaches and come up with a more reasonable and work-able policies that are sensitive to the needs of the ultimate beneficiaries of watershed management. It is necessary to strengthen community forest use rights and promote innovative ways of working with local communities and other stakeholders in watershed management.
Among others, these policies include the following: Improving the Incentive System Many of the local communities contend that they are only used to protect and maintain the ecological stability of the watersheds. But those that benefit from their efforts are the lowland communities who only wait for water to come out of their faucets. And if water is transformed into electricity, they contend that only big industries and rich urban dwellers are benefited. There is a need to review and update government policies to provide more incentives for local communities for developing the watersheds. This must include access to and benefits out of the improvements they have introduced within the watersheds. They should be allowed to harvest and share from the products of what they have planted within the watersheds. Under the existing policies, participating local communities in many development projects are not allowed to cut even the trees that they have planted within the watersheds. There should be a conscious attempt to ensure that benefits must be enjoyed by the local communities that introduced such development projects through, for example, a Watershed Plowback Fund. Shared Responsibility in Watershed Management Co-management of community watersheds is now possible as illustrated in the Joint Memorandum Circular (JMC) No. 98-01 of DENR, Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), and the concerned Local Government Units (LGU) following the provisions of the Local Government Code. Under this scheme, the LGUs share with DENR in the sustainable management and development of community watersheds within their territorial jurisdiction. These agencies agree to prepare strategic plan on how to strengthen and institutionalize the DENR-DILG-LGU partnership on the management of community watersheds.
To achieve a long-term effect, a similar scheme of watershed management has to be worked out with the local communities. The necessary policy framework, institutional arrangements and implementing guidelines for such undertaking must be developed to define and delineate the specific roles of local communities and other stakeholders under this arrangement. They should not only be taken as stewards of the watersheds. Institutional Mechanisms Sharing of management responsibilities among various sectors, agencies and organizations is necessary to pursue sustainable management of watershed areas. However, to put this mechanism in place the institutional or organizational arrangement must be defined indicating how the government and non-government sectors perform or decide on matters pertaining to watershed management. Apparently, there is a need to have a clear policy that would ensure the involvement of these institutions in watershed management. The roles and responsibilities of each sector or agency must be made clear to avoid conflict and overlapping of activities.
CONCLUSION Today, most of our watershed areas are dominated by local communities. Their livelihood, and general well-being are already intimately linked with these areas. These people live and directly bear the consequences of deforestation and watershed destruction. On the other hand, they could serve as a social fence to maintain the integrity of watersheds. Obviously, the role of local communities in watershed management is crucial and indispensable. They are the ones closest and in the most strategic location to protect and take good care of the watersheds. Hence, the government needs to draw more local programs that can promote the highest level of interest and widest participation of local communities and support of various stakeholders in watershed management. This is consistent with the government policy for more equitable access and promotes participation of local communities in watershed management.
ANNEXES No Forest without Management In 1992, during the meeting of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development at Rio, the international community made a commitment to sustainable development â€” development that would maintain the potential of natural resources to provide for the changing needs of humanity. Such development was urgent because of the huge and growing number of people living in unacceptable poverty and the continuing and often irreversible deterioration of resources and the earthâ€™s life support system. Although it is impossible to predict what people will need or want in the future, there is now a widely accepted moral obligation to keep open options for the future while providing equitably for present needs (WCED 1987). Sustainable development, especially as far as the poor are concerned, must include sound forestry. Many of the worldâ€™s poor depend directly on forests for food, medicines, fuel and simple raw materials; forest destruction renders many of them destitute (Hamilton 1992). But the importance of forests is not confined to the poor. Forests provide a multitude of goods and services to the world at large, to all sectors of society. And, moreover, being renewable, they are capable of providing these indefinitely; but only if they are managed effectively to that end. This is what the sustainable management of forests is about; it is an essential component of the sustainable development to which most nations are now committed. Yet, despite the impetus provided by Rio, we are still locked in discussions, controversies, a targetless Agenda 21 and a plethora of recommendations emerging from international fora such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF). All these are a measure of the immense importance placed by the numerous interested parties in the future wise management of forests, and of the controversial nature of many of the issues
involved. Yet, in spite of all this international activity, little real progress has been made on the ground and forests continue to be degraded and lost. Nevertheless, the ground swell of public opinion has been changing everywhere: an arousal of greater moral responsibility towards ethical land stewardship â€”that land management must become more equitable, socially responsible and ecologically rational, and that someone has to pay, through the market or taxes, or both (UNCED 1992). This is reflected by some moves in the right direction, such as the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Developmentâ€™s (OECD) targets for the elimination of global poverty (Government of the UK 1997).
FORESTS MUST BE MANAGED If forests are to survive, there is a great need to move promptly beyond controversy to constructive action. The problems grow more urgent every day and much of the current degradation of forests is irreversible. Forests may recover from one fire, but not from repeated fires (Dawkins and Phillip 1998; see also, Trapnell l959:Trapnelletal 1976; Brookman-Amissah et. al. 1980). The forest may not be sufficiently resilient to recover from repeated mining for timber. Massive loss of soil and losses of species are losses forever. We are convinced that forests can be managed, indeed must be managed, to produce the conservation, production and other benefits that societies will increasingly demand for the alleviation of poverty, sustainable development and the prevention of the irreversible damage or loss of forest ecosystems (UNCED 1992). There seems to be too little understanding of what acceptable forest management is attempting to achieve within the context of development. We see it as, in essence, an attempt to optimize in a sustainable and equitable manner the contribution of forests to the prosperity and well-being of a wide variety of interested parties (Poore et. al. 1989, Dawkins and Philip 1998). This involves providing a mix of goods and services (which may change to keep pace with changes in needs and
aspirations) while maintaining the ecological integrity of the forest, its overall biodiversity and its productive capacity. It is evident that not all functions can be fully provided in any one area of forest. Experience has shown that some zoning may be necessary for particular purposes â€” for the preservation of biological diversity, the protection of soil and water, the production of timber or other forest products, recreation, the enhancement of landscape quality etc. (Poore and Sayer 1991). Although these uses may often be combined in the same area of forest, the most efficient delivery of one may require some sacrifice in others (Gentry 1990). For example, the near-total preservation of biological diversity may preclude or constrain the harvesting of timber; conversely the best management of natural forests for timber production may involve some loss of biological diversity. Some tradeoffs are inevitable.
FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENTS Three elements of planning are essential for environmentally sound and socially acceptable forest management: (a) that areas of forest to provide for all these uses should be set in a wider, national or bioregional, land use context which provides adequately for all of them in suitable locations; (b) that forests should be available to meet the various needs of society; and (c) that each area of forest is carefully managed for the purpose for which it is suited and intended. The exact details will vary greatly from country to country according to the area and nature of its forests, its population density, its state of development and many other conditions. This pattern should retain or even enhance the â€˜potentialâ€™ of forests and give them the flexibility to respond to changing conditions whether social, economic or ecological. The best use of a forest cannot be considered in isolation. For example, forest plantations play an important part in producing timber and may thereby reduce pressure on natural forests; if established on degraded lands they may also increase biological diversity. In general, planning for agricultural expansion, for new settlements and for roads should take into account the possible effects of these developments on adjacent forests. Protected areas are widely recognized as the essential cornerstone of any system for the conservation of biodiversity; but few if any countries can afford or are willing to set aside a very large part of their
forests as completely protected areas. The first priority should be the choice, protection and effective management of the most important areas. But these efforts by themselves are unlikely to provide enough protection unless they are surrounded or connected by other areas of forest which provide corridors or stepping stones between them and constitute a buffer from competing kinds of land use. Such â€˜bufferâ€™forests may readily be managed for the sustained production of timber, non-wood forest products or both (Hawthorne and Abu-Juam 1995). Such production forests should also include areas that are specially protected because of their vulnerability to erosion, and for their value as water catchments or for their exceptional biological diversity. Such a network of forested areas is particularly important if forest ecosystems are to remain able to respond to changes of climate and human needs.
SHARING THE COSTS AND BENEFITS But these are not the only conditions. The social context is of equal importance. Forests should he managed in the interests of all stakeholders with special consideration given to those in weak bargaining positions. Management should be based on consensus and, where appropriate, planning and management should be collaborative. There are roles for government, for the private sector, for communities and for partnerships between these (ODA 1996). It is important that governments should create the conditions in which effective forest conservation and management can succeed. These are, at very least: a legal framework which is enforceable and enforced; stable policies which inspire confidence and are not changed arbitrarily; open and transparent processes for resource allocation and decision making; committed forest management staff; freedom from corruption; security of access to resources; adequate facilities for education, technical training and research; and adequate and freely available information about resources and their management. Under the prevailing socio-economic circumstances, all areas of forests except those that are very remote and inaccessible require some form of management. The costs of this must be borne by society and any income should equally accrue to society. Some financial contributions may, of course, come from outside in the form of external investment, carbon offsets, loans or aid but much
should come from the forestry sector itself. The relative costs and revenues from forests managed for different purposes are likely to be very different. The largest income is likely to come from timber or pulpwood; the least from remote protected areas with little potential for tourism. It is important that a reasonable proportion of surplus income should be used to ensure the sustainable management of the national forest estate as a whole. Perceptions of value differ significantly among stakeholders from place to place and time to time. The costs and benefits should be shared equitably and participatory processes are important to agree on the mechanisms by which they may be assigned. Such participation possible with also helps in negotiating the different ways in which forests can be managed and to agree on objectives of management that reflect the various values of the parties involved.
BEST PRACTICE It is impossible to be certain at any moment that a forest is being managed sustainably. We will require several centuries to be able to prove empirically that current forest management practices have maintained productive potential, biodiversity and other environmental values. Nevertheless, many of the elements of best practice are known, should be rigorously applied and can be verified using broadly accepted means such as the sets of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management developed for forests world-wide and the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council. All of these are being constantly improved in the light of experience and new knowledge. The goal should be to apply best practice everywhere, and we endorse the World Bank support for Conservation Forestry, defined as follows: Conservation Forestry is the application of verifiable best practices the management of forest resources, including woodland and trees, in ways that are ecologically sound, economically viable, socially responsible and environmentally acceptable and which do not reduce the potential of these resources to deliver multiple benefits, now and in the future.
Social and economic pressures make it almost certain that substantial areas of what is still primary forest will eventually be converted to agricultural production. We believe that the international community should discourage investments that promote or accelerate this process. Where there is a serious risk that extension of agriculture or infrastructural developments will destroy forests that are of great ecological, social or cultural value, a conservation forestry approach should be adopted which will in some cases include management for sustainable production. We are convinced that sustainable development is unattainable without the sustainable management of forests; and that sustainable forest management is important for everyone, but especially for the very poor. We are equally convinced that sustainable forest management, as described above, is of great significance for the long-term prosperity of humanity and that it is possible with full commitment and collaborative endeavor. Without sustainable management of forest ecosystems, the planetary ecosystem will be significantly impoverished and future prospects for human societies substantially diminished. 1. Among experiences which illustrate the possibility of repeated, sustainable harvests of timber are: (a) Sarawak, two cuts in muted peat swamp forest: (b) India, seven cuts in Nilambur teak; (c) Belize, three cuts in mahogany forests; (d) Peninsular Malaysia, harvests from Matang mangroves for over 100 years. Sustainable harvests of non-wood forest products are illustrated by the following examples: Illipe nuts harvesting every live years in Borneo, Brazil nut harvesting every two years in Brazil and Bolivia, resins, gums, oils, damar, latex from a wide range of species and localities on an annual basis. 2. The tropical rain forests, spread over more than 60 countries, are diminishing at a rate of around 15 million hectares a year. (FAO, 1997, State of the World Forests, Rome.)
3. The World Bank has set targets for the year 2005 in the field of Forest Conservation and Improved Management, working through the World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use. The first of these is: an additional 50 million hectares of new protected forest areas, plus a comparable area of existing reserves under effective protection. (World Bank, Environment Matters, Annual Review, Fall 1998.) 4. This definition is comparable with the definition of ‘conservation’ in the World Conservation Strategy (1968) with the concepts of ‘New Forests’ and ‘Ecosystem Management’ of forests, and with the definitions of sustainable forest management developed by the ITTO and the Helsinki Conference, 1994. It has been refined by many sets of criteria and indicators for the assessment of changes and trends in the quality of forest management. 5. The second target set by the World Bank for the year 2005 in the field of Forest Conservation and Improved Management, working through the World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use, is: 200 million hectares of independently certified forest under management — 100 million hectares each in tropical and temperate/boreal forests. (World Bank, Environment Matters, Annual Review, Fall 1998.)
REFERENCES Brookman-Amissah, I, Hall, J B, Swaine. M D and Attakorah, J Y. 1980. A re-assessment of a fire protection experiment in north -eastern Ghana savanna. Journal of Applied Ecology 17:85.99. Dawkins, H C and Philip, M S. 1998. Tropical moist silviculture and management: A history of success and failure. Ndola plots, Ghana from 1930 and 1960. CAB International. Oxford. Gentry, A H. (ed). 1990. Four neotropical rainforests. Yale University Press. New Haven.
Government of the United Kingdom. 1997. Eliminating world poverty: A challenge for the 21st Century. White Paper on International Development. Cm 3789. HM stationery Office, London. Hamilton, L. 1992. Guess comment: storm disasters â€”has logging been unfairly blamed? IUCN Forest Conservation Programme Newsletter No. 12. IUCN. Gland. Hawthorne. W and Abu-Juam, M. 1995. Forest protection in Ghana, with particular reference to vegetation and plant species. IUCN Forest Conservation Programme. Gland. ODA. 1996. Sharing forest management: key factors, best practice and ways forward: findings from ODAâ€™s review of participatory forest management. Overseas Development Administration. London. Poore, D et al. l989. No timber without trees. Earthscan, London. Poore, D and Sayer, J. 1991. The management of tropical moist forestlands: Ecological considerations. 2nd ed. HJCN Forest Conservation Programme. Gland. Trapnell, CG. 1959. Ecological results of woodland burning experiments in Northern Rhodesia. Journal of Ecology 47:129-168. Trapnell, CG. Friend. M T. Chamberlain, GT, and Birch, H F. 1976. The effects of fire and termites on a Zambian woodland soil. Journal of Ecology 64:577-588. UNCED. 1992. Forest Principles. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987.
Published on Dec 20, 2012