SOUTH-SOUTH CO-OPERATION PROGRAMME ON ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE HUMID TROPICS
WORKING PAPERS ) No l&1997
THE UNITED NATIONS UNITED NATIONS THIRD WORLD EDUCATIONAL, MAN AND THE BIOSPHERE UNNERSITY ACADEMY OF - SCIENTIFIC AND PROGRAMME SCIENCES CULTURAL ORGANIZATION The Working Paners series is a publication of the South-South Co-operation Programme for Environmentally Sound Socio-EconomicDevelopment in the Humid Tropics. The series aims to disseminate the results of the research on Biosphere Reserves on such topics as (i) the prevailing conservation and resource-use patterns and, (ii) the ways of improving the traditional practices and orientation for applied research aimed at a more intensive and sustainable use of the biodiversity to provide a better livelihood to the local population in the buffer and transition zones. On more general issues, the Working Papers are also an attempt to identify key problems that will become areas of concentration for international co-operation.
The map on the front page has been produced by using a commercial software programme. The boundaries do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by UNESCO or the United Nations. Neither do the ideas and opinions expressed in the Workinn Papers series, which are solely engaging their authors.
The Working Papers series is published as necessary either in English, French or Spanish depending of the language used by the author.
0 Permission to reproduce any material of the Working Papers series will be given without any previous authorization, provided that full reference to the author, title, series title, date, institution editor and place of publication are given.
All correspondence should be addressed to the Administrative Editor.
Edited by : UNESCO Division of Ecological Sciences South-South Co-operation Telephone : 33 - 1.45.68.41.46 Programme Telefax : 33 - 1.45.68.58.04 7 place de Fontenoy E-mail : m.clusener-godt @ unesco.org 75 700 PARIS (FRANCE)
The South-South Co-operation Programme on Environmentally Sound Socio- Economic Development in the Humid Tropics is on INTERNET : http://www.unesco.org/mab/activity/s-s/s-home. html
i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~ ...... :..... i~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ::...... ,...... ;.:.. : ...... :..::..:...... lgnacy SACHS Miguel CLUSENER-GODT Yann GUILLAUD ECOLE DES HAUTES ETUDES EN UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, ECOLE DES HAUTES ETUDES EN SCIENCES SOCIALES (EHESS) SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL SCIENCES SOCIALES (EHESS) Centre de Recherches sur le Bresil ORGANIZATION (UNESCO) Centre de Recherches sur le Bresil Contemporain (CRErC) Division of Ecological Sciences Contemporain (CRBC) 54 Bd. Raspail South-South Co-operation Programme 54 Bd. Raspail 75 270 PARIS Cedex 06 1 rue Miollis 75 270 PARIS Cedex 06 FRANCE 75 732 PARIS Cedex 15 FRANCE FRANCE Telephone : 33 - 1.49.54.20.85 Telephone : 33 - 1.45.68.4146 Telephone : 33 - 1.4X14.20.85 Telefax : 33 - 1.45.48.83.53 Telefax : 33 - I .45.68.58.04 Telefax : 33 - 1.45.48.83.53
SC-97/ws/s:! 1
The Biosphere Reserves or similar managed areas that are joining the South- South Co-operation Programme, are requested to produce an overview of their covering area containing fast hand information on its conditions and urging problems.
These reports will be primarily used as background materials for the comparative projects agreed upon in the programme of activities established at the Chiang Mai meeting, held in May 1994. For more details please report to the newsletter South-South Persnectives (No 1, October 1994 [28 pp.], UNESCO,Paris [France]).
Given the rich information value of these reports, there are being made available to a wide audience. They may be obtained by contacting UNESCOkiAB Secretariat, Division of Ecological Sciences.
For other documents available in the series, see the back-cover.
Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 2
Until 1975, fishing was the main source of income in Puerto Galera, agriculture being an added source. Economic activities were at the subsistence level, highly dependent upon natural resources. After the boom of tourism in the end of the 197Os,the service sector became more and more important. This, in turn gave rise to spontaneous and poorly managed touristic activities which are the major factor that threatens the integrity of Puerto Galera as a Biosphere Reserve. While the national and local governments, the community and some “external” help have not been remiss in supporting the sustainable use of resources, a few but large-scale touristic developers have violated the laws, compromising the integrity of the environment. This business-oriented sector depends largely upon political clout, interventions using inappropriate technologies and their own capacity to pay. This has brought about biophysical, sociocultural and institutional issues which are currently eroding the viability of tourism and put to question the sustainability of the coastal environment itself Coral reefs are generally in fair-to-poor condition, seagrassbeds are being decimated by both natural and man- induced perturbations, while the mangroves are cut or systematically removed to give way to resorts and condominiums.
To improve the quality of life in Puerto Galera, measures were undertaken at the national, local, and community levels. There are also other significant initiatives coming from outside the community, for example academic. However, these measures were reactive and irregularly sustained, hence, largely ineffective. The problems faced are fundamentally a local government problem, stemming largely from : i) the lack of a database from which to extract the information required to identify and assessthe proper uses of the resources ; ii) the lack of knowledge to establish the institutional mechanisms required to strictly enforce the ordinances promulgated to safeguard the environment, use of its resources, and address unregulated business enterprises ; iii) the undefined roles of academic and stakeholders vis-bvis environmental problems ; iv) unintegrated and uncoordinated activities among stakeholders and v) political intervention.
The revival of MAB Philippines is a major and positive step towards the resolution of the problems, especially the first four where international co-operation is urgently needed. This co-operation, to be effective, needs to be translated into action programmes and funds that empower the grassroots so that they could actively participate in decision-making. In the process, the following need to be understood, adopted and implemented. * The touristic developers should categorically state their industry-wide commitment to environmentally compatible growth. * Targets for improvement should be established and monitored. * The touristic developers should seek to implement sound environment principles through self-regulation, recognizing that local, national and international regulation may be inevitable and that preparation is vital.
Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 3
* Environmental improvement programmes should be systematic and comprehensive, paying special attention to : i) environmental concerns in design, planning, construction and implementation ; ii) conservation of environmentally protected or threatened areas, species, and scenic aesthetics ; iii) energy conservation ; iv) water management ; v) sewage disposal, emissions and pollutant control ; vi) reduction of environmentally unfriendly products such as asbestos, CFCS, pesticides and toxic, corrosive, infectious, explosive or inflammable materials ; vii) respect and support for historic and religious objects and sites ; viii) interests of local populations, their history, traditions, culture and future development and ix) environmental issues as a key factor in the overall development of the touristic industry. * Education and research into improved environmental programmes should be encouraged and supported at all governing levels.
Jusqu’en 1975, la p&he etait la principale source de revenu & Puerto Galera, l’agriculture &ant une source complementaire. Les activites economiques etaient au niveau de subsistance et dependaient Cnormement des ressources naturelles. Aprbs le “boom” du tourisme a la fin des annees 1970, le secteur des services devint de plus en plus important. Ceci, en retour, engendra des activites touristiques spontanees et assez mal g&es qui sont les facteurs essentiels menagant l’integrite de Puerto Galera en tant que Reserve de la biosphere. Alors que les gouvernements national et local, la communaute et une “aide” exterieure n’ont pas neglige leur soutien a l’utilisation durable des ressources, quelques gros agents touristiques ont violes la loi, menacant l’integrte de l’environnement. Ce secteur affairiste depend largement de la faiblesse politique, d’interventions utilisant des technologies inappropriees et de sa capacite a payer. Ceci a mis en relief les questions bio-physiques, socio-culturelles et institutiormelles qui actuellement erode la viabilite du tourisme et remet en cause la perennite mGme de l’environnement &tier. Les recifs de corail sont en general dans un etat passable ou mediocre, les paturages marins sont decimees a la fois par des perturbations naturelles et induites par l’homme, cependant que les mangroves sont toupees ou systematiquement supprimees pour laisser la place a des centres de villegiature et des condominiums.
Pour ameliorer la qualite de la vie g Puerto Galera, des mesures ont ete prises aux niveaux national, local et communautaire. 11 y a aussi d’autres initiatives significatives qui proviennent de l’exterieur de la communaute, par exemple academiques. Cependant, ces mesures etaient reactives et soutenues de man&e irreguliere, done, largement inefficaces. Les problbmes sont surtout des problemes de gouvernement local, issu largement : i) du manque dune base de donnees qui fournisse l’information necessaire pour identifier et evaluer les utilisations adequates des ressources ; ii) le manque de connaissance pour etablire les mecanismes institutionnels pour faire observer strictement les ordonnances de sauvegarde de l’envirormement, d’utilisation des ressources et d’aborder les activites non reglementees ; iii) des r6les non definis des secteurs academiques et des analystes vis-&vis des problemes de l’environnement ; iv) des activites non integrees et non coordonnees parmi les analystes et v) de l’intervention politique.
La renaissance du MAB Philippines est une avancee majeure et positive vers la resolution de ces problemes, en particulier pour les quatre premiers oh la cooperation internationale est necessaire de man&e urgente. Cette cooperation, pour etre efficace, doit se
Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 4 traduire dans des programmes d’action et des financements qui renforce les populations r-wales pour qu’elles puissent participees activement i la prise de decision. Pour cela, les elements suivants doivent etre compris, adopt& et mis en aeuvre. * Les agents touristiques devraient affirmer avec force que la croissance de toute leur industrie est vouee a etre compatible avec l’environnement. * Des objectifs d’amelioration devrait Metreetablis et enregistres. * Les agents touristiques devraient chercher a instaurer, par l’auto- reglementation, des principes respectueux de l’environnement, reconnaissant que la reglementation locale, nationale et internationale peut 6tre inevitable et que la preparation est vitale. * Les programmes d’amelioration de l’environnement devraient Metrevastes et systematiques, avec une attention particuliere : i) a l’elaboration, la planification, la construction et la mise en ceuvre des preoccupations en matibe d’environnement ; ii) B la conservation de l’esthetique des paysages et des zones dont l’environnement et les espbces sont proteges ou menaces ; iii) a la conservation de l’energie ; iv) a la gestion de l’eau ; v) au contr6le des Cgouts, des emissions et des polluants ; vi) a la reduction des produits nocifs envers l’environnement comme l’amiante, les CFC, les pesticides et les materiaux toxiques, corrosifs, infectieux, explosifs ou inflammables ; vii) au respect et au soutien des objets et des sites historiques et religieux ; viii) aux intQi3s des populations locales, leurs histoires, traditions, cultures et developpement future et ix) aux themes de l’environnement comme un element clef pour le developpement darts son ensemble de l’industrie touristique. * L’education et la recherche en mat&e de programmes d’amelioration de I’environnement devraient etre encouragees et soutenues B tous les niveaux gouvernant.
Miguel D. FORTES is Professor at the Marine Science Institute, University of the Philippines.
Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 5
INTRODUCTION ...... 6
I- DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA ...... 6 1) Biophvsical setting ...... 6 2) The sociocultural setting ...... 11 a- Brief history ...... 11 b- Population features ...... 12 c- Cultural characteristics ...... 12 d- Means of livelihood and tourism ...... 13 e- Education, health and sanitation ...... 14
II- ISSUES AND CONCERNS AS A BIOSPHERE RESERVE ...... 14 1) Biophvsical issues ...... 15 a- Water Quality ...... 15 b- Pollution ...... 16 c- Sedimentation and eutrophication ...... 16 d- Siltation ...... 17 e- Natural events ...... 17 f- Unsustainable fishing practices ...... 17 2) Sociocultural issues ...... 18 3) Land Use Problems ...... 19 4) Political interference ...... 21
Ill- THE ENVIRONMENT - TOURISM SYMBIOSIS ...... 22
IV- STATUS OF CONSERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES ...... 23
V- LOCAL EFFORTS VISA-I/IS GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ...... 27
VI- KEY PROBLEMS AS AREAS FOR INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION ...... 28
CONCLUSION AND GUIDELINES FOR FUTURE ACTION ...... 29
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... __...... _.._...... _...... 30
ANNEX : EXCERPTS FROM A LETTER (4 March mv) TO H. E. AMELITA M. RAMOS, CHAIRPERSON, CLEAN AND GREEN FOUNDATION (premier Guest House, Malacaiiang, Manila), BY MIGUEL D. FORTES ...... 31
Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 6
INTRODUCTION
Puerto Galera was declared a Biosphere Reserve by virtue of Presidential Decree no 345 (dated 26 December 1973). This legislation provides for <
This study is an effort of the author to collaborate with UNESCO and its Programme on Man and the Biosphere (W), specially with its Programme on South-South Co-operation on Environmentally Sound Socio-economic Development in the Humid Tropics. This study aims to : give a brief description on the current status of the site in relation to prevailing conservation and resource use patterns ; identify key environmental issues, specially those that are or will become areas of concentration for international co-operation in which Puerto Galera Biosphere Reserve ~GBR) may contribute jointly to the recommendations of the Chiang Mai meeting in 1994 ; suggest ways of improving the traditional practices and orientation for applied research ; give information about ongoing research, particularly with regard to the sustainable use of biodiversity and efforts to improve equity in the distribution of benefits derived from use of renewable resources ; and give information on the current operational fLnctioning of the site, including its legal status and importance for national efforts in nature conservation, and for sustainable development at a global level.
I- DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA
1) Biophvsical setting
Coral reefs and reef fishes. In Puerto Galera, coral reefs occur in shallow water, ranging from the surface down to depths between 10 and 80 meters (Cf: M,Q 1). They are of great value to the land and its residents. Its value ranges from the protection of the coast from
Miguel CL FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 7 typhoons to the support of both new and traditional activities. Healthy coral reefs provide the following benefits to the people : recreational and scenic values and revenues ; maintenance of traditional lifestyles and culture ; protection of the coast ; education and research ; and they perform ecological functions in association with seagrass beds and mangroves. Coral reefs harbor the greatest species diversity of all marine habitats, many species are an important food source for the people. The over-all condition of the coral reefs at the study sites in Puerto Galera is fair, having a 3 1.4 % average of living coral cover, with only 9 % for AcroDora species and 23 % for the other hard coral species (Cf: CW). The abiotic components accounted for 49 %. Porites sp. has the highest occurrence among the non-AcroDoragenera in all the transect sites, followed by PocilloQora and MontiDora. Acropora sp. has 159 recorded occurrences, making it the dominant genus in the area. A total of 48 genera of hard corals have been observed in all the study sites. The status of the coral reefs in Puerto Galera could also be gleaned from records of the cover of the reefs for the province of Oriental Mindoro and be compared to the national inventory (Cf: TABLE 1).
TABLE 1 : National and regional distribution of the condition of living coral cover Excellent Good Fair Poor (75400 %) (50-74.9 %) (2549.9 %) (O-24.9 %) Oriental Mindoro 6.0 % 16.7 % 50.0 % 27.3 % (66 stations) Philippines 5.3 % 25.2 % 39.0 % 30.5 %
SOURCE : CLFU’
Hence, living coral cover in Oriental Mindoro can be described as “average”. Nevertheless, those figures indicate that 27.3 % to 3 1 % of the investigated locations have poor living coral cover. Fishes from the reefs yielded a total of 121 species belonging to 19 families. In terms of biomass, the range was fkom 5.1 to 55 tons/km. 2, the latter may be attributed to the occurence of surgeon fishes (Acanthurids) which occured with the greatest number of individuals. Recorded was a total of 60 indicator species numbering 4 141 individuals or 70 % of the total fish count from the families Pomacentridae (40 species), Pomacanthidae (5 species) and Chaetodontidize (15 species). All the top ten indicator species belong to the family Pomacentridbe. Thirty species belonging to eight families comprised the commercially important (“target”) species with a total of 1 535 individuals or 26 % of the fish count from all sites. The non-commercially important species which accounted for 256 individuals or 4.32 % of the total fish population is composed of 21 species from eight families.
Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 6
MAP 1 : Indicative distribution of the three ecosystems in Puerto Galera
13O32.3’
Baclayan Oriental Mindoro
120°56’ 120059’ Note : The popular touristic areas are also indicated (not to scale).
Seagrass beds. A disturbed habitat, seagrass beds in Puerto Galera occur in areas adjacent to mangroves and coral reefs with sandy-muddy substrates (Cf: MAP 1). A comparatively lesser known community, these beds are important because of the ecological functions they perform as nursery grounds for economically important fishes (for example rabbitfishes or Siganids), shrimps, crabs ; substrates for the growth of seaweeds, and feeding grounds of endangered species like dugongs, sea turtles, giant clams, and sea snakes. Seagrass beds act as “ecotones” or transition zones between coral reefs and mangroves. In the order of decreasing abundance, the following eight seagrass species were recorded in Puerto Galera : Halodule uninervis (narrow variety), Halovhila ovalis, Cvmodocea rotundata, Halophila minor, i’lalassia hemprichii. EnhaIus acoroides, Qmodocea serrulata and Svriwodium isoetifolium (Cf. FORTES, 1986).
Mangrove forests. In Puerto Galera, mangroves are forests along more protected, muddy coasts. To a limited extent, they are an attraction factor for some tourists and are very important for a healthy marine environment. This is because the forests provide the following
Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines): A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 9 benefits : human necessities as fuel wood, charcoal, housing materials, fertilizer, medicines ; physical needs (erosion control, buffer zone against typhoons and wave actions) ; and biological needs (genetic variability), serving as nursery grounds for a variety of fish, prawns, crabs, bivalves and other invertebrates. There are four major mangrove areas in Puerto Galera : Sabang (Dalaruan), Tabinay (Sigayan Point), San Isidro @&nolo) and Poblacion (Muelle Bay) (Cf: MAP 1). Based on a survey/assessment in the four areas (Cf: BACONGUIS et al.), nineteen trees and palm species are present, among which dominate bakauan (Rhizophora aviculata), api-api (Avicennia qflcinalis) and bungalon (A. marina). Deforestation and rampant cutting of mangrove trees for fuel wood and housing materials have reduced the existing mangrove area to what it is now (Cf: TABLET).
TABLE 2 : The current status of the mangroves Area Number of Area (in ha.) for Locality Status Impact (in ha.) species rehabilitation Sabang disturbed 6.25 15 removal 4.00 (Dalaruan) Tabinay disturbed 3.68 9 removal 7.06 (Sigayan Pt.) San lsidro undisturbed 10.50 11 natural 1.16 (Minolo) Poblacion disturbed 4.75 15 removal 4.25 SOURCE: Modified from BACONGUIS et al.
The mangrove area in Minolo is the largest (10.5 hectares), most diverse and, primarily because of the concern of the inhabitants, most preserved of all the mangrove areas in Puerto Galera. In recent years, increased demand for agriculture, aquaculture (for example fishponds) and industrial development has degraded Puerto Galera’s mangroves. The exploitation and unplanned conversion resulted in a less aesthetically appealing natural environment.
Geography and geomorphology. Puerto Galera (longitude 120’50’ to 121’60’ East ; latitude 13’20’ to 13”25’ North) lies on the northern part of Mindoro Island, about 123 km. south of Manila. With a total land area of 250 krn2 (Cf: MUNICIPAL PROFILE, 1990-1996), it is Y-shaped with its open side on the north forming about 42 km. of irregular coastline extending from the Talipanan Point on the northwest and Escarceo Point on the north-east. On the north coast, Medio Island forms Puerto Galera’s channel island providing two entrances to Muelle Bay : on the western seaboard is the Manila Channel and at the eastern side, the Batangas Channel. Because of a sandbar between the mainland of Puerto Galera and Boquete Island, Boquete is only an island at spring-tide ; otherwise it is a peninsula. Puerto Galera is bounded on the north by the Verde Island passage, which separates it from the mainland of
Working Paper No 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 10
Luzon. The town is accessible from Manila by a two-stage trip totaling about four hours of continuous travel. In general, the coasts of Puerto Galera is characterized by rolling topography, while peaks and promontories are dominant inland. The highest point in the area is the 1 430 meters peak of Mt. Balatic, while the lowest is Mt. Alinyaban (934 m.). The rounded mountain ridges indicate weathering action on resistant rocks. The general northeast trend of the mountain range is displayed by the drainage divide from Mt. Burburugan to Puerto Galera. This trend is repeated on the south by the peaks of Mt. Micnic and Mt. Baltic. Draining these two parallel ridges, numerous streams and rivers empty into the Verde island passage and Apo East passage. The mountain slopes are steep, particularly those flanking large streams. Sharp V- shaped gullies and numerous waterfalls reflect the young topography of the area. A wide valley exists at 1 000 m. elevation in the headwaters of Liano Cawayan River, between the peaks of Mt. Burburugan and Mt. Balatic. This valley may have been formed by fluvial sedimentation on a dammed river and is presently the site of an indigenous community of mangyans. Smaller valleys along Subaang River, Tabinay River and Agbuyi Creek extend to the eastern fringes of the area. Their upstream ends usually covered by primary riparian forests, these valleys are presently sporadically cultivated and generally grassy. The other flatlands in the area are represented by the alluvial fills fronting major coves. These sites are at present extensively cropped with coconut, if not developed for residential and commercial purposes. Coral reefs, seagrass beds and mangrove forests, irregularly border the shoreline. The walls of the reefs are usually steep at depths greater that 5.5 meters. In sites where the coast is walled by cliffs, thin strips of beaches, crags and boulders form the shoreline. The cli@ terrain is enhanced by the differential weathering of the sedimentary rocks which, after wave cutting and erosion, results in steep to overhanging walls on the coast. In areas adjoining coves and flatlands, there are wider beaches.
Climate. The climate of Puerto Galera is characterized by two seasons : almost dry from December to April and wet the rest of the year. In 1990, it received an average rainfall of 2 059.9 mm., ideal for agriculture. November had the highest rainfall with 450.2 mm. and 23 rainy days. The month with the lowest rainfall was February with 2.6 mm. and 7 rainy days. The annual prevailing wind direction is northeast with 122 days with typhoon or storm. Puerto Galera is more often directly affected by tropical cyclones during the latter part of the typhoon season : October and November. Because of its protected topography, maximum winds in Puerto Galera could be much less that that observed in the surrounding areas. In 1990, the coldest months were December and January when minimum temperatures were near 20 “C (the lower optimum temperature for rice production). The relative humidity of the area was about 83.33 %, ideal for the cultivation of crops like corn
Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 11 rice, legumes, fruit trees and a variety of orchids, but encouraging the growth of fungi, rust and parasites to field crops. In the extreme southern parts of the area, a different climatic condition prevails. Heavier rainfall and higher humidity occur as a consequence of the increased elevation. The seasonality of rainfall in this portion is also pronounced.
Oceanography. The surface current pattern of the waters fronting Puerto Galera results primarily from the wind-driven circulation in the seas around Mindoro Island. From May to October, when a predominantly easterly flow dominates the area (southwest monsoon), the current in Verde Island Passagemoves from west to east. From November to April, when the winds blow from the northeast (northeastern trade-wind), surface currents in Verde Island Passage move from east to west. The outer shores of Puerto Galera are exposed to the effects of waves and swells generated in the open sea. The inner coves, on the other hand, are protected by the physical configuration of the coast. The general trend in wave is that east facing coves and shore segments along Verde Island Passageexperience swells and refracted waves from November to April. The west facing shores, in turn, experience those waves from May to October. Longshore currents tend to conform with the prevailing monsoon/trade-winds. The easterly and westerly directions are pronounced during the northeastern trade-wind and southwest monsoon, respectively.
2) The sociocultural setting
a- Brief history
More than a thousand years ago, Chinese merchants discovered Mindoro Island and traded gold from the mountains of the island for Chinese porcelain and Indian spices. When the Spanish arrived in the second half of the 16th. century, they found a bay surrounded by two islets and a peninsula in the north of Mindoro, which today is Muelle Bay. The bay was ideal to protect their large galleons from tropical storms and as a repair dock. The name Mindoro is a contraction of the Spanish Mna de Ore, meaning “gold mine”. Meaning “port of the galleons”, Puerto Galera was founded in 1574 as the original capital of Mindoro. In 1837, the seat of the government was transferred to Calapan, which has been the provincial capital since then. In 1898 the Americans came and planted more coconuts and fruit-trees in Puerto Galera, domesticated animals and establishedschools. In 1932, the University of the Philippines (UP) established a Marine Biological Station in Puerto Galera. In those days, Puerto Galera was a very small and sleepy town, with only 27 houses in Poblacion. Puerto Galerans’ only interaction with outsiders took place each summer when groups of UP students arrived and stayed for a six-week field study. Such beaches as
Working Paper No 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 12
Muelle, Balete and Varadero were completely uninhabited. All mountains around the town as the town itself were forested. But in the 195Os, the areas behind Poblacion were already denuded of trees to give way to the mushrooming residential houses for the growing families, and those migrated to Puerto Galera from other towns and provinces. The threatened environment and an effort to conserve the terrestrial and marine communities had been the subject of the UP sponsored petition in 1954 sent to the national government to declare the area around Puerto Galera a reservation of the UP Marine Biological Station. The people of Puerto Galera refused to give their approval because they feared that they would be dispossessedof their lands.
b- Population features
At present, there are 22 000 inhabitants in Puerto Galera. This is 3.3 % of the total population of the province of Oriental Mindoro (Cf: MUNICIPAL PROFILE, 1990-1996). The population is fairly young : 62.3 % are under 25. The population is distributed among 13 barangays,the smallest local political unit. From 1903 to 1993, the population of Puerto Galera registered a steady growth. Growth rate of the population is a result of natural increase and net migration. But the natural increase of the population of Puerto Galera cannot be pointed out as a dominant factor in its high and steady growth rate since the average household siie of the municipality has been decreasing, from an average of 6.13 in 1970, 5.68 in 1980 and 5.36 in 1990. Reduction in household size can indicate that parents are having fewer children. However, it is also possible that the number of single households is increasing. The development of tourism in the last two decades can be the main reason for the big difference in natural and total population growth as a result of migration. A great number of people living today in Puerto Galera are originally coming from outside the municipal boundaries.
c- Cultural characteristics
The ethnic relationship in Puerto Galera can be seen in two ways : between the irayas and the lowlanders, and between the Filipinos (irayas and lowlanders) and foreign tourists. Historically the irayas were the first people to populate the area known today as Puerto Galera (Cf: PHILTECH, 1984). They used to have free access to the sea as well as to the forest. Archeological discoveries indicate that the irayas were engaged in foreign trade with China and other Asian countries before the arrival of the Spanish. The mangyans are referred to as irayas differentiating them from other mangyan subgroups scattered in other parts in Mindoro. Of these about 400 families, probably more than 2 000 people, are living in Puerto Galera. They are considered the most cultured among the mangyan sub-groups being highly exposed to the lowland Filipinos.
Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 13
Most of the lowland Filipinos came to Puerto Galera in the last century, specially in the last fifty years. They came from Luzon, the Visayas and Mindanao. But the lowlander- highlander dichotomy as a cultural differentiation started when the Spanish came. This was the beginning of a developed lowland and a lesser develop highland. Later the American period enhanced this dichotomy. Today the iraya manmans are mostly shifting-cultivators (or kaingineros) living in the mountains under much less prosperous circumstances than the lowlanders. They now face the problems that are often encountered in ethnic majority-minority relations : i) low standard of living ; ii) low productivity ; iii) limited skills and opportunities ; iv) limited farm marketing ; v) ethnic discrimination ; vi) victims of grabbling ; vii) of bureaucratic corruption and viii) displacement by the encroachment of industrial tree plantations over iraya tribal-ancestral and occupancy areas (Cf: PHILTECH, 1984).
d- Means of livelihood and tourism
Until 1975, fishing was the main source of income of almost all the people in the lowlands. Agriculture was an added source of income. Basically, economic activities were at the subsistence level with direct and high dependence on natural resources. After the boom of tourism in the end of the 197Os, the service sector became more and more important. While the concentration of occupation may still remain in the primary sector (agricultural), expansion of service, transportation and commerce must have affected change and diversity. There are four types of employment (Cf: PUERTO GALERA : MUNICIPAL PROFILE 1990-1996) : the agricultural sector, farming/fishing/agroforestry (23 %) ; the service sector or all kinds of professions which deliver services as construction, transportation, communication, tourism, etc. (43 “A) ; the manufacturing sector, mining, processing and related industries (15 %) ; and others or those governmental jobs, doctors, nurses, engineers and others who do not fit into the three previous sectors (19 %). The development of the tourist sector took place in a rapid, unregulated and unplanned fashion. It was in mid-1970s when the first tourists came to Puerto Galera. These tourists were young people coming from Europe, the U.S.A. and Australia (backpackers). In that time there were no tourist accommodations at all, and a tourist slept as a guest in the same house as the host family who received a little payment in return. It is evident that the conservative local people were very much influenced by these “five dollar a day” backpackers. When more tourists came, the so called backyard tourism business enlarged. Today, backyard tourism is now corporate or multinationally controlled, although still familistic, folksy and resident in entrepreneurship (Cf: PHILTECH, 1983). Tourism is one of the main causes of the enormous growth in population, infrastructure and economy in Puerto Galera. Total population has more than doubled in the last 20 years. At present, there are 81 different tourist accommodations (lodging houses,
Working Paper N” l&1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 14
hotels, cottages), mostly owned by foreigners. By law, these foreigners cannot buy land. But they marry Filipinas to avail of the privilege. The annual income of the municipality has increased enormously in the last years. In 1990 the income was 36 times higher that in 1975. In 1995, the total municipal collection (tax revenues, operation and miscellaneous, borrowing and grants) was PHP 15 223 765.65. About 9.93 %, or PHP 1 5 11 142.89, was generated by tourism, mostly from business tax revenues. From the total population, about 30 % is dependent on tourism. Barangqs Aninuan, Sabang and San Isidro are almost entirely dependent on tourism. Barangqs San Antonio, Sinandigan, Palangan, Balatero, Sto. Nino and Poblacion are only partly dependent on tourism and barangays Baclayan, Tabinay, Dulangan and Villaflor are hardly dependent on tourism.
e- Education, health and sanitation
92 people work in private and public schools. There are two high schools, one public and one private, 17 elementary schools, and a Montessori school. For college or university education, students have to go to the nearest Province like Batangas, or city like Calapan, Los Banos and Manila. The educational district of Puerto Galera also offers non-formal education to out of school youths and adults. Courses are : marble craft study, automotive, welding and pipe fitting, carpentry, seamanship, agriculture and machine technology, draftsmanship and practical electricity. The health facilities of Puerto Galera include one municipal health unit, one private health unit, two private clinics and three barangay health units. There are four physicians, three nurses, four midwives and six dentists in the municipality. Anemia, upper respiratory infection and muscular strain were the most prevalent diseases recorded from 1982 to 1995. The health situation has changed very much in the last 15 years. With the improved economic condition, the diseases are practically the same but their occurrence decreased. Health education has considerably contributed to this condition.
II- ISSUES AND CONCERNS AS A BIOSPHERE RESERVE
Both natural and man-influenced development efforts in Puerto Galera brought about problems which eventually became pressing issues -biophysical, sociocultural and institutional. At present, there are obvious indications that the status of Puerto Galera as a Biosphere Reserve is being jeopardized and imperiled, manifested as adverse effects on the livelihood base of the people, on biodiversity, and the degradation of the coastal, marine and terrestrial environments. These issues are interrelated and interactive so that in reality, an integrated and holistic approach is needed for their resolution. If in this report they are separated, it is only for the purpose of facilitating the discussion.
Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines): A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 15
1) Biophysical issues
a- Water Quality
High water quality is essential for coastal tourist resorts where beautiful beaches with clear water are one of the primary attractions. Maintenance of high water quality at such locations is essential for the following reasons : health (for drinking, bathing and water contact recreation) ; environment (to protect aquatic and marine life, including seagrasses, fish, algae and corals) ; aesthetics (to insure attractive and pleasant surroundings) ; and economics (it is much easier and cheaper to maintain high water quality that to attempt to restore it, after it has been polluted). A more acute problem in Puerto Galera is the contamination and pollution of the water supply from human and domestics wastes. The urbanization and the construction of commercial centers in the coastal areas have greatly polluted certain areas in Puerto Galera. For example, Muelle Bay stands out as among the most affected areas. There is no sewage treatment in Puerto Galera and sewage effluents are normally discharged in open canals. The untreated sewage finds its way, with only a slight change through septic tanks or soil seepage, into a surface (rivers) or underground waters and eventually ends up in the coastal waters. The formation of a high nutrient pool (nitrogen and phosphorus) in the inner part of Muelle Bay is suggested to be partly a result of sewage and waste water discharge (Cf: SAN DIEGG- MCGLONE et al.). The importance of domestic sewage in Muelle Bay has also been emphasized (Cf: DUARTE). Muelle Bay is enclosed, so the capacity to absorb wastewater is also smaller compared to other more open waters. The coral garden, which is situated in Muelle Bay, is an important attraction factor. If the water in Muelle Bay will be too polluted, coral reef quality will be degraded and tourists may not visit the coral garden anymore. The clustering of tourists in White Beach and Sabang intensifies the discharge of untreated sewage to such an extent that it can cause severe eutrophication of seawater. Nutrient rich waters diminish rather than increase the health of coral reefs. They cause certain algae to flourish, causing reduced light penetration which affects coral and seagrass nutrition, growth and survival (Cf: FORTES, 1995 ; WENNEKER). In several sewage outfall areas, like Muelle Bay and Varadero Cove, many marine organisms have disappeared. It should be noted that a hard coral species (Anacropora zmertonalerae)is endemic to Muelle Bay. A world-renowned coral systematist and ecologist from Australia, Dr. J. E. Veron, upon seeing the unfamiliar varieties of coral species in the area, concluded that the site should be well studied as it harbors a rich assemblage of hitherto unknown coral taxa.
Working Paper No 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 16
b- Pollution
Domestic wastes. Before 1986, the refuse dump site was located on top of the cliff near Tabinay Munti in the south. The dumpsite was transferred near barangay Balatero in the west where it is at present since during rainy months, wastes are washed into Varadero Bay (C$ PHILTECH, 1983), a tourist destination. In the barangays of Sabang, San Isidro, Balatero and Poblacion, garbage collection is done three times a week using a dump truck donated to the municipality. In the other barangays, the residents dump their garbage into either an open pit, in the open sea and rivers or dispose it in open areas. The dumpsite near Balatero is a good initiative, but is not properly sited because it is too close to a creek and on a slope. Rainwater seeps through the garbage and eventually contaminate the creek.
Wastes from goldpanning. Goldpanning is prevalent in the upstream portion of Tabinay Munti and Tabinay Malaki in the south. The panners, in their attempts to retrieve placer gold from the soil, utilize the natural drainages in washing and sluicing. As a consequence, highly visible brownish colored water flows into the bay extending approximately to about 15 meters from the shoreline. Hence, the beaches around the mouth of the rivers are called “chocolate beaches” and are no longer useful for recreation. Siltation causes destruction of coral reefs in Varadero Bay. Sometimes the panners use the highly toxic mercury to compact the little gold parts.
Discharge from water vessels. For a long time, all types of watercrafts (ferryboats, pumpboats, yachts, outriggers, etc.) have been discharging their wastes in the marine environment, for example used oil, solid waste and other materials. At present, this practice is not allowed. All watercrafts are obliged to have a garbage bin. The coastguard is responsible for ensuring that boats comply with the regulations. However, mere and irregular inspection of the vessels is not sufficient, water crafts still discharge their wastes in the marine environment. This has negative effects on the health of coral reefs, seagrass beds and their associated fisheries.
c- Sedimentation and eutrophication
A major threat to Puerto Galera’s coral reefs is sedimentation associated with the development of coastal settlements, eutrophication brought by sewage outflows from hotels and coastal settlements, and sedimentation produced by marble mining and goldpanning. On account of the absence of sewage treatment in Puerto Galera, sewage effluents are discharged in open canals and in the sea. In comparison with five other study sites in Southeast Asia, the concentrations of the inorganic nutrients ammonia and nitrate are highest in Muelle Bay. Both nutrient concentrations are highest near coastal settlements. Only in Manila Channel, marine
Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Losf Biosphere Reserve ? 17 life is more healthy because of the strong current. Suspended solids and nutrient concentrations are lower in Manila Channel than in the inside of the bay.
d- Siltation
Next to the impact of sewage on the health of coral reefs, W. Y. Licuanan mentions silt from the unpaved roads and deforested areas as important factors affecting coral reefs in his article Temporal changes in the cover of &e-forms in Puerto Galera, Mindoro Island, Western Philippines : preliminary results. The impact of sewage and siltation is related to locations which are densely populated as goldpanning in Tabinay, muddy freshwater discharged in Varadero Bay ; marble mining. The degradation of coral reefs is a big problem for the inhabitants of Puerto Galera. Degradation means less revenue for diveshops, cottage and restaurant owners, fruit-vendors, etc..
e- Natural events
Naturally occurring impacts on coral reefs in general include : climate and meteorological variations (hurricane, extreme low tides, temperature changes) ; disease and natural community interactions (for example predation or grazing pressure). These naturally occurring events cannot be averted, but while natural causes of destruction demand their toll, nature is normally able to cope with them (Cf. WENNEKER).
f- Unsustainable fishing practices
Although the use of dynamite, cyanide and muro-ami fishing practices have decreased at present, the coral reefs of Puerto Galera still show signs of the impact of these unsustainable fishing practices. Destruction of coral reefs not only has an opportunity cost in terms of the loss of the very resource which attracts tourists in the first place, but also results in loss of the protective barrier against coastal erosion, as well as in the erosion of the sandy beaches which are a main touristic attraction. The enormous population increase in Puerto Galera and other parts of Mindoro brings a great demand for fresh seafoods. Overfishing is the inevitable result, specially of the coral reef dweller, green grouper (Epinephelussp. or Zapu-Zapu)and other valuable species of fish and invertebrates, which threatens the long-term fishery yields of Puerto Galera’s reefs. At present, fishers mainly catch tuna far offshore instead of green grouper which is currently hardly available in the waters of Puerto Galera.
Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) ia
2) Sociocultural issues
Tourism has positive as well as negative effects on the sociocultural lives of the people in Puerto Galera. The main positive effects include : increased income and additional job opportunities. On the other hand, the main negative effects include : prostitution, paedophilia, drug abuse and high prices of commodities. The prices of prime commodities rose to an all-time high. This is exacerbated by the lack of agriculture produce and expensive transportation cost due to bad roads and physical isolation of the town. It is the poorest sector of society (for example mangyans) without access to the benefits of tourism who suffer the effects of inflation. In a study undertaken by two Dutch students in January-May 1996, 100 individuals coming from different barangays were interviewed. All levels of the society were represented in the survey. The purpose of the study was to get public opinion on the development of tourism with its positive and negative effects. The results of the survey are summarized below (after STEIJAERT et al.) : * 55 % of the interviewees favor intensification of the present tourism activity in Puerto Galera, while 11 % were against it. * The most cited advantage (91 Oh) of tourism was the source of employment and the creation of more job opportunities. The second most cited advantage (83 O/o)was the taxes generated for the municipality, which benefit the people of Puerto Galera. * High prices of commodities, drug abuse, drug pushing and trafficking and increased prostitution are the three most important detrimental consequences of tourism and also the three problems in which the highest increase has been noticed. * In spite of the increase in tourism-related problems, the majority of the respondents thinks that the government is acting properly in order to diminish the negative effects of tourism. * Almost half of the respondents (49 Oh) would consider tourism desirable under certain conditions. The conditions most cited are : tourism should be pro-people, specially for the poorest of the poor ; tourism should be environment friendly ; the government should support other enterprises other than tourism ; the people should all follow the regulations/ordinances of the government ; it should reduce unemployment rate ; it should increase the income of the local people ; there should be great community involvement ; and there should be receptive government regulations. * The number of respondents answering < Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 19 * In the order of decreasing negative impact, the following are the most cited perceived problem : bad roads (80 %), inadequate medical services (79 %), buying up of lands by foreigners (73 %), frequent power failure (72 %), inadequate sewerage system (71 %), environmental pollution (70 %, but 70 % of the respondents are aware of the importance of a clean environment). * It is striking that prohibition of building structures within 25 meters from the shoreline (59 %), municipal ordinances against logging, gold panning and marble quarrying (70 %) and restriction of fishing in the Bay (41 %) are also perceived as problems. * Tourism has improved the health or education standard of the people of Puerto Galera (58 %). Because of the development of tourism, the government generates more taxes and is able to spend more money on health and educational services. * 44 % is think that Puerto Galera is becoming too dependent on tourist income. 3) Land Use Problems Sustainable land use is essential for development and maintenance of coastal tourist resorts where scenic land areas, beautiful beaches with clear water and pleasant villages are essential attractions. Water quality, coastal habitats and virtually all other environmental values are affected by land use and development patterns. The officially recognized land area of Puerto Galera is 25 247.23 hectares (Cf: MUNICIPAL PROFILE, 1990-1996), of which 72.77 % has been declared for taxation (CJ TABLE 3). TABLE 3 : Lan distribution declared for taxation in Puerto Galera Type of land I Area (in ha.) I Percent of total Residential 160.73 0.64 % Commercial 33.95 0.13 % Industrial 10.90 0.04 % I I Institutional 7.85 0.03 % Agricultural 5 921.61 23.45 % Others 12 239.00 48.48 % TOTAL 18 374.04 72.77 % The remaining 27.23 % of the total land area has not been declared for taxation and consists mainly of forests. Almost 40 % of the land area of Puerto Galera (about 10 000 hectares) is forest. But because of denudation, floods occur in valleys during the wet months mainly in Balatero, Aninuan, Sto. Nino. Poblacion, San Isidro, Villaflor, Dulangan and Tabinay. About 30 % of the total land area are open grasslands, some of which are pasture lands. About 25 % Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 20 is agriculture and crop production lands, 4 % is in industrial use (marble and minerals) and 1 % residential land. The primary forests are almost completely destroyed all over Mindoro. Only around Mt. Halcon and Mt. Calavite do larger parts of primary forests exist, whereas fifty years ago almost the entire inland was covered with jungle. Due to the continually uncontrolled deforestation, only a few species could regrow (Cf: SCHULT). According to the late Francisco Nemenzo, Professor at the University of the Philippines, < Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 21 Because of the increasing population and the economic or touristic activities, there is a concomitant increase in the use of unsuitable areas, such as steep hills or areas with big natural value (tropical rainforest, unspoiled bays or beaches, etc.). In turn, this brings about the decline in land quality. The development of the tourist sector in Puerto Galera is spontaneous, and its growth is largely unplanned and poorly managed. Companies and private persons build new tourist settlements without sound environmental planning. This results in building within the 25 meter setback (< 4) Political interference The people of Puerto Galera have an inherent, honest and common vision for a life best suited to their native environment. This, however, has been blatantly threatened by unscrupulous and purely economically and politically motivated demands of a few who purposely ignore the law, completely disregarding the long-term imperatives of the environment in favor of short-term, transitory economic benefits. The municipal leadership is almost completely helpless against this moneyed class whose environmental guidelines are based largely upon the intervention of modem but inappropriate technology and their capacity to pay. This is one reason why the municipal government has been soliciting help from outside the town, especially from the academic and other non-political private establishments. Working Paper No l&1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 22 The magnitude of political and business influence which have misdirected the development of Puerto Galera is a prevailing scenario (Cf: APPENDIX). An important issue arose from a proposal of the State-owned National Power Corporation and the local electric company with support from the Office of the Provincial Governor to moor a power barge at the middle of a fragile cove (Cf. PHOTO 1) which harbors the only and most extensive remaining mangroves in the entire region and which provides a traditional viable source of income to the inhabitants. PHOTO 1 : Minolo Cove, west of Puerto Galera bay, in danger of being destroyed by the impacts of a power barge Ill- THE ENVIRONMENT - TOURISM SYMBIOSIS One of the most important touristic resources of the Philippines in general and of Puerto Galera in particular is the climate. Most tourists arrive in Puerto Galera between November and March to escapethe cold months in their home countries. Those months are the dry season in the eastern part of the Philippines. Other important attraction factors are characteristics of the landscape and underwater world. The landscape of Puerto Galera is very attractive because of its mountains, beaches, coves and “green image” in general, although there is no primary rainforest along the coast anymore. The underwater world owes its beauty to the coral reefs which attract many scuba divers and snorkelers. Although rich in culture and history, Puerto Galera does not attract tourists on these accounts. The typical customs of the native people (mangyam) are influenced or affected by Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 23 years of Spanish and American domination and by the modernization of the society. For example, the native costumes are exchanged for jeans, the native religion was driven out by the Catholic church and English is, instead of the native language, an important medium. Among the most popular tourist attractions in Puerto Galera are : sandy beaches and attractive coral deposits, coral garden at Muelle, Tamaraw Falls, Aninuan and Talipanan Falls, La Mana Villa Hot Spring, Python Cave, Excavation Museum (this museum houses very old Chinese artifacts which were found in shipwrecks), the cross at Muelle (a famous landmark in memory of the crew of the Spanish warship CanoneroMariveles which sank during a storm on November 18, 1879 while guarding the waters of Puerto Galera), Sabang (a resort area with numerous restaurants, souvenir shops, open-air bars, discos, diving schools and nightlife) and Ponderosa golf club, a 20-hectare lot offering a g-hole golf course. At present, with almost 22 000 inhabitants, beaches and forests are polluted with plastic, river and nearshore waters are contaminated with sewage, some slopes are totally denuded, the amount of fish has decreased, etc. Tourists are consumers of “environment” and tourism is, therefore, an environment-dependent industry reflecting the availability and quality of its primary or direct resource base : the physical environment. In Kenya, for example, the number of visiting wildlife tourists declined by 2 % between 1990 and 1995, due to the government’s inability to protect the wildlife from poachers (Cf: CATER). The same can happen in Puerto Galera if nothing is done to protect the environment. Tourists are attracted by an unaffected nature, clean white beaches, clear water and good facilities. When one or more of these aspects disappear, tourists will stay away from Puerto Galera and the revenues from tourism will decrease. Samui Island, in Thailand, is experiencing unplanned growth of the resort development and the associated environmental problems to such an extent that it is now questioned whether it is too late to preserve its one-time natural attractiveness (Cf: SMITH). The connection between tourism and the physical environment is twofold. On the one hand, the touristic development goes with an increase in population and therefore with a mounting strain on the physical environment. On the other hand, an unspoiled physical environment is for many tourists the main attraction factor. Many tourists will stay away from Puerto Galera when the physical environment is much too adversely affected. IV- STATUS OF CONSERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES In the improvement of the quality of life in Puerto Galera, certain measures were undertaken at the national, local and community levels. There are also other significant initiatives coming from outside the community, for example academic. In general, people resort to means of enhancing traditional livelihood practices and introduction of new knowledge, technologies and applied research. These activities are invariably linked with the conservation of the environment and the sustainable use of its resources. An historical account of major activities and passage of legislation which support these initiatives is given below. Working Paper No 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 24 At the national level. Initiatives to enhance the quality of life for the people of Puerto Galera include legislation which are directed towards the protection of the coastal and marine environments. These include : * Presidential Decree no 354 (1973), making Puerto Galera a Biosphere Reserve under UNESCO'SMan and the Biosphere Programme m). * Presidential Proclamation no 1801 (November 10, 1978) Declaring certain islands, coves and peninsulas in the Philippines as tourist zones and marine reservesunder the aaknistration of the Philippine Tourism Author@ (PTA). This Proclamation states : < Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 25 At the local level. Efforts to improve the conditions of the environment, hence, the source of livelihood, are made largely through municipal ordinances and resolutions. These include : * In 198 1, Municipal Ordinance no 1 was passed, adopting comprehensive zoning regulations for the municipality. However, because it does not contain clear regulations to preserve the natural environment, it was not substantially implemented and was never revised. * Daniel T. Enriquez, Chairman of the Municipal Council of Marine Resources and Agriculture, introduced a series of ordinances and resolutions protecting the wildlife, perennial trees in public places, prohibiting the use of beach sand as a material for hollow block-making and construction works (this ordinance no longer exists), and a resolution regulating yacht mooring at Puerto Galera Bay. * The Municipal Government of Puerto Galera has already passed a number of Municipal Ordinances to protect the marine waters surrounding Puerto Galera from further environmental degradation brought about by development and the increasing size of the population which utilizes the bay and its resources. These ordinances include : i) Municipal Ordinance no 35 aimed at regulating the establishment and use of mooring blocks for yachts and other pleasure crafts ; ii) the Bantay Dagat Task Force composed of members from the LGU, the government and NGO created by virtue of Municipal Ordinance no 15 to protect the town’s marine environment against pollution, illegal fishing and collection or gathering of corals and aquarium fishes, hauling along beaches and other destructive activities ; iii) Municipal Ordinance no 2-90 prohibits the use of explosives and toxic substances in catching or gathering fish and other aquatic resources in the territorial jurisdiction of Puerto Galera ; iv) the Municipality also prohibits fishermen from other towns to commercially gather any marine organism within the 15 km. territorial waters as provided for by Municipal Ordinance no 19. * The other ordinances/resolutions which sought to protect the environment include : a resolution requesting the commanding officer of the Philippine Coast Guard of Puerto Galera to require all registered pumpboats and ferries to have trash cans available for passenger’s use ; an ordinance prohibiting littering, throwing and dumping of garbage ; and a resolution requesting the Region V Director of DENR to require all reforestation contractors to secure the mayor’s permit to operate with a corresponding fee thereof * Other initiatives from the local government to improve the quality of the natural environment include : i) about 10 years ago the new dumpsite in Balatero was put into use, because the old site on top of the cliff near Tabinay Munti was not a good location ; ii) in 1995 the marble mines in Talipanan were closed, because the mining activities were seen as a threat to the natural environment ; iii) because of the poor water circulation in and the increasing contamination of Muelle Bay, a new pier was built in barangay Balatero to relieve Working Paper No l&1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) -. 26 the former from pressures of boats, yachts and passenger traffic ; iv) in the local government, a new function was added, that of a chairman of forest and watershed protection ; v) the Puerto Galera Plan for the Development of Tourism mentions the necessity to prevent environmentally insensitive development, but how the government plans to prevent this is not clear ; vi) the local government implemented a zero waste programme to reduce the solid waste pollution, dust-bins are then located at different locations. At the community level. Certain efforts were made to help protect and enhance the health of the coastal and marine ecosystems. These were undertaken largely with the technical expertise from academics. Some of these initiatives include : * A private initiative attempted to introduce the endangered giant clams in Muelle Bay and other parts of Puerto Galera. For a time, the project indicated positive signs of viability in restocking degraded reefs as well as showing potentials in providing an alternative source of income for the people. However, the stocks were poached and the project was discontinued. Discussions are being undertaken between the Marine Science Institute of the University of the Philippines and the Marine Biological society of the University to look at the possibility of continuing this project. * Certain areas within the bay were tested for cage culture of economically important fish and invertebrate species. However, due largely to the conditions of the bay especially disturbances from boats, the projects died from natural death. * Some private and academic initiatives have similarly tried to help improve the environmental conditions in Puerto Galera. Most notable among these are advocacy and educational campaign to address unregulated and unlawful construction of infrastructure which have negative impacts on soil, water and air environments. Worthy of mention are the following. i) Marine Sanctuary and Underwater Trail Project under the hbiEs/uNESCO. The sanctuary was established to serve as the “gene pool” for the replenishment of destroyed adjacent reef areas. The nature trail, on the other hand, was established to increase the awareness and appreciation of the reefs especially on the part of scuba divers as well as serve as a natural laboratory for students. ii) Coral Reef Rehabilitation through Transplantation. This project was a joint venture of the Coral Reef Research Team of the University of the Philippines and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Independently, the Marine Biological Society of the University similarly conducted a coral rehabilitation project. All these endeavors, however, indicated successes only at their initial stages. They were not pursued due primarily to lack of monetary support. iii) The Integrated Study Programme for the Management of Muelle Bay of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Region IV-B. This consisted of four major activities, namely : geochemical survey, geohydrological survey, geohazard survey and assessmentof mining activities. It is envisioned that the findings of the aforementioned activities will be the basis for the formulation of Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 27 measures for the protection of coastal environmental system within Muelle Bay. iv) Responses of Coastal Ecosystems to Deforestation-derived Siltation in Southeast Asia (CERDS) Project, a European Union funded project, which chose Puerto Galera as one of the three sites in the country. Among others, it aims to establish criteria for monitoring the health of coastal ecosystems, predict their recovery and utilize the findings in resource management. v) A research work of the Marine Science Institute of the University of the Philippines. The study examined the distribution and behavior of nutrients and the physical hydrography of Puerto Galera Bay and determined how its physico-chemical nature affected the condition of the biotic components of the bay. vi) A sizeable collection of the seaweeds and intertidal fauna of Puerto Galera is, respectively, housed at the Marine Science Institute and Institute of Biology of the University. This now serves as a reference for future research especially in relation to biodiversity conservation. vii) During the later half of 1990, the Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau @RDB) - Man and the Biosphere Puerto Galera Ecosystems Special Project came up with A Guidebook on The Mangroves of Puerto Gaiera. It aims to provide a baseline for future studies and utihzation of the resources in the area. viii) A study was undertaken by two Dutch students from January to May 1996, which focused on the physical and social aspects of tourism in Puerto Galera (Cf: STEIJAERT et al.). The report came up with the most updated perception survey which depicts the true picture of tourism from an independent point of view. ix) Organization of Outreach Marine : Puerto Galera, in April 1997. This is a yearly activity of the National Committee on Marine Sciences of the UNESCO National Commission of the Philippines, aimed at sharing expertise of the 13 member government, scientific and technological institutions in addressing priority issues at the specific sites. The theme of the present programme is environmentally sustainable development of tourism through the marine and allied sciences. V- LOCAL EFFORTS VIS-h/IS GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT The last quarter of the XXth. century saw unprecedented development of the industrial sector, specially in coastal Southeast Asia. It is no surprise if this trend continues in the XXIst. century. However, the mode of development is alarming in its environmental impacts that were, and are still, being generated to meet economic targets. In order to face this challenge, the region, in conformity with the global caveats specially emanating from the Rio Conference in 1992, initiated reforms that now dictate the pace and direction of development vis-a-vis the protection and management of the environment. In its simple ways and using modest resources, the Philippines has completed and is still pursuing major activities addressing the urgent need to meet the global environmental challenge. The current initiatives in Puerto Galera are a direct response to this challenge. As far as the coastal and marine habitats are concerned, a few of these initiatives may be mentioned. Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 28 Man and the Biosphere Programme of the Philippines. Initiated in September 1995, efforts to revive the Man and the Biosphere Programme of the Philippines has just materialized after almost eight years of stagnation. This positive response has been an offshoot of the government’s realization that the two Biosphere Reserves in the country (Puerto Galera and the Environmentally Critical Area Network in Palawan) have commitments in fostering harmony between man and nature. As Biosphere Reserves, they have to sustain this role through domestic and international co-operation in interdisciplinary research and education, and actually help the people in their effort to improve their quality of life. The Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development. Backed by a Presidential legislation and implemented at the department level, this programme spells the short, medium and long-term strategies the government will undertake to address the most pressing issues in practically all sectors, but with a greater emphasis on the environment as the fundamental denominator. Its gains are now the Philippines’ response and contribution to the world-wide clamor for the improvement of the environment and sustainable use of its resources. The Philippines Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action Plan. Completed in December 1996, this landmark initiative documented the status, problems and prospects of biodiversity conservation in the country. The findings are placed in the context of regional and global biodiversity conservation perspectives and advancements emanating from the Convention on Biological Diversity. The International Coral Reef Initiative. Hosting the conference in April 1995, the Philippines with many other countries committed themselves to support efforts to have a better understanding of the reef systems, protect them and sustainably use their resources. The recommendations and call to action which precipitated from the conference are now the guidelines which direct current and future efforts on coastal and marine conservation and management. World Heritage Sites. It is only in 1996 that a more focused approach was utilized to ensure that “natural” heritage sites be emphasized in proposals to inscribe such sites in the Philippines. At present, only two such sites are “natural” ones, the rest fall under the category “cultural”, which comprise mainly churches and infrastructure of heritage and historical value. This shift in emphasis is now being tied up with the thrusts of integrated coastal zone management. VI- KEY PROBLEMS AS AREAS FOR INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION In its development effort, Puerto Galera needs to effectively address the mounting issues that confront and block such an effort. The problems faced are a local government problem, stemming largely from : i) the lack of a database from which to extract the information required to identify and assessthe proper uses of the resources ; ii) the lack of knowledge to establish the institutional mechanisms required to strictly enforce the ordinances Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 29 it promulgated to safeguard the environment, use of its resources, and address unregulated business enterprises ; iii) the undefined roles of the academic and stakeholders vis-a-vis environmental management and protection ; iv) unintegrated and uncoordinated activities among the stakeholders and v) political intervention. The revival of MAESPhilippines is a major and positive step towards the resolution of the problems, specially the first four where international co-operation is urgently needed. This co-operation, to be effective, needs to be translated into action programmes and funds that empower the grassroots so that they could actively participate in the decision-making process. The local government and the academic have expressed renewed interest and commitment to work hand-in-hand along this objective. Hence, the initial and immediate activity implemented in April 1997 -the Outreach Marine Programme- is aimed at educating and communicating to the major players the fundamental roles of environmental governance and how this has a direct impact on priority issues confronted by biophysical, sociocultural and institutional bases of development. CONCLUSION AND GUIDELINES FOR FUTURE ACTION Puerto Galera, in its struggle to improve economically and become more self- sufficient, is undergoing a significant social transformation. This change is inevitable, but it must be harnessed and guided to yield positive results. This is only possible if the following environmental guidelines are understood, adopted, and actions are made to translate their thrusts (modified from the WIT) : * The touristic developers should categorically state their industry-wide commitment to environmentally compatible growth ; * Targets for improvement should be established and monitored ; * The touristic developers should seek to implement sound environment principles through self-regulation, recognizing that local, national and international regulation may be inevitable and that preparation is vital ; * Environmental improvement programmes should be systematic and comprehensive, they should pay especial attention to : i) environmental concerns in design, planning, construction and implementation ; ii) sensitivity to conservation of environmentally protected or threatened areas, species, and scenic aesthetics ; iii) energy conservation ; iv) water management ; v) sewage disposal, emissions and pollutant control ; vi) reduction of environmentally unfriendly products such as asbestos, CFCS, pesticides and toxic, corrosive, infectious, explosive or inflammable materials ; vii) respect and support for historic and religious objects and sites ; viii) interests of local populations, their history, traditions, culture and future development and ix) to environmental issues as a key factor in the overall development of the touristic industry. Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 30 * Education and research into improved environmental programmes should be encouraged and supported at all governing levels. BIBLIOGRAPHY BACONGUIS S. R, OCIONES F .T., PANOT L A., LAVEGA R M., SIAPNO F. E., CARINO C. R, HOLGADO D. Y., REYES F. M. : A guidebook on the mangrovesof Puerto Galera ERDB-IV~B Puerto Galera EcosystemsSpecial Project. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, EcosystemsResearch and DevelopmentBureau, College, Laguna, (Philippines), 1990. CATER E. : Environmental contradictions in sustainable tourism The GeoeJaDhicalJournal, no 161 (pp. 21-28), 1995. CLRP(COASTAL LIVING RESOURCES PROJECT) : Coastal Living ResourcesProject Technical Report 1990-1991,1991. DUARTE C. M. : Responsesof coastal ecosystemsto deforestation-derivedsiltation in SoutheastAsia Scientific ProgressReport 1994-1995,1995. FORTES M. D. : Taxonomyand ecology of Philippine seagrasses University of the Philippines (PhD Dissertation), Diliman, Quezoncity (Philippines), 1986 (345 pp.). Seagrassof East Asia : environmentaland managementperspectives UNEP(RcWEAS Technical Reports Seriesno 6), Bangkok (Thailand), 1995(p. 79). PHILTECH : EnvironmentalAssessment Report for the proposed Puerto Galera Integrated TourismDevelopment Project Report no 1 : Puerto Galera -Environmental Setting, QuezonCity (Philippines), 1983. EnvironmentalAssessment Report for the ProposedPuerto Galera Integrated TourismDevelopment Project Phase2 : ComprehensiveDevelopment Plan, Quezon City (Philippines), 1984. SAN DIEGO-MCGLONE M. L., VILLANOY C. L, ALaO P. M. : Marine Pollution Bulletin, vol. 3 1, no 4-12 (pp. 355-366), 1995. SCHULT V. : Mindoro : a social history of a Philippine island in the .XXth*century -A case study of a delayed developmentalprocess Manila (Philippines), 1995. SMITH R k : Coastal tourism in the Asia Pacific : environmentalplanning needs Singapore,1994. STEIJAERT A., SCHIEBROEK J. : Survey of the physical-social aspectsin relation to tourism of Puerto Galera, Oriental Mindoro, the Philippines Holland, 1996 (113 pp.). WENNEKER B. : Impacts of coastal tourism : a critical analysis of mitigating measures and their implementation Higher College, Delft (The Netherlands), 1995. WTTC (WORLD TOURISM AND TRAVEL RESEARCH CENTRE) : ResearchReview for 1994, 1994. Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? 31 ANNEX : EXCERPTS FROM A LETTER (4 March 1997) To H. E. Amelita M. RAMOS, CHAIRPERSON, CLEAN AND GREEN FOUNDATION (Premier Guest House, Malacaiiang, Manila), BY MIGUEL D. FORTES [.. .] The case in point is the current controversy regarding the mooring of the 14.4 MW Power Barge of the National Power Corporation in Minolo Cove at the western part of Puerto Galera, Oriental Mindoro. Your office may have been appraised on the developments but please allow me to present some facts of the case. FACT 1 : There is a mounting and overwhelming opposition against the project. Whether the oppositors do, or do not, significantly represent the concerned population, remains unresolved, but the fact remains that there is a substantial opposition from legitimate stakeholders. By law - societal and moral, this has to be resolved openly and honestly, with the people properly informed of the facts. FACT 2 : One of the compelling reasons for the opposition is that since 1991, several barangays including Sitio Minolo of barangay San Isidro have been declared as ecotourism zone and mooring site for yachts and other vessels (Municipal Ordinance no 12). The plan of the municipality is to develop Minolo Cove as a marina to relieve Puerto Galera Bay (Muelle Cove) from stress currently imposed by the impacts of boats and yachts and other pollutive or destructive activities. This is because the latter, aside from its heritage value as the first anchorage of the Galleon Trade that visited Mindoro, has been found by the Marine Science Institute, with support from an Australian coral expert, to harbor indigenous coral species. One coral species, AnacroDora puertoaalerae (note the name), was found only in the bay, nowhere else in the world ! McGlone et al. unequivocally found that the southern waters of the bay is not suited to dumping of any pollutive substances. FACT 3 : There has been no scientific, acceptable study conclusively proving that among a number of alternative sites, Minolo Cove is the most environmentally suitable one. One needs only common sense, one needs not be an expert, to reliably state that the cove is not suitable for the purpose. Among others, this is because of the following reasons. i) Minolo is a deep cove, meaning, it is protected from the elements (strong wind and waves) ; its waters are shallow, water circulation and replenishment is relatively of longer-duration ; the topography and bathymetry dictate that it is only tidally flushed, hence, any discharge from the barge (for example oil, grease, other refuse) will stay in the water and at the bottom much longer that it could be removed by the rise of the tides. The truth of this can be seen from the muddy-silty nature of its bottom. Siltation and sedimentation from the uplands specially via the rivers have made the cove shallower than it used to be ; there is a much greater concentration of people in the vicinity ; here, noise to emanate from the operation of the barge has a much greater negative impact. ii) On the other hand, Varadero Bay (Palangan Munti) at the east- southeastern section of Puerto Galera’s coasts has been offered by the Sangguniang Bayan (Resolution no 142-96) as an alternative site. This is where the correct common sense came into play. Even without an intensive scientific study, the Sangguniang Bayan was correct in selecting the site as, unlike Minolo Cove, it is relatively open, short-duration regular water circulation is ensured, hence, flushing to the open sea of any discharges is regular and sustained ; there is a smaller population at the specific site, hence, the negative impact of noise would be minimal (and to think that the municipality is keeping its promise to share one million pesos to defray part of the expenses of mooring the facility at this site !). iii) The waters of Puerto Galera Bay (surely, its immediate coastal waters in the west including that of Minolo Cove which are even “cleaner” than the bay) have been declared by the Regional Technical Division for Environment @‘IlIE) of DENR as “Class SA”. By law, this means that these waters are suited only for swimming or public bathing and where survival and revival of marine species is possible. On the other hand, power barges and other similar industries can only be put up in “Class SD waters”. Are we going to allow another blatant disregard or circumvention Working Paper N” 18,1997, UNESCO (South-South Co-operation Programme), Paris (France) 32 of such an important environmental regulation ? By law and by moral obligation, it is incumbent upon the proponents (NAPOCOR, ORMECO and the Office of the Governor) to undertake the studies necessary to ensure that if the project is allowed, it will not adversely impact on the people, their source of livelihood and the ecological functions of the environment. It was said that a “survey” has been conducted. I wonder what criteria were used in the selection of the site. If I may mention what the more internationally accepted criteria are in such a case, these include : i) water circulation and tidal regime (to determine the residence time of any substance discharged into the waters and the bottom) ; ii) nature of the discharged substances (oil, grease, organic and other inorganic wastes), including noise ; iii) flora and fauna, specially if there are those listed in the Red Book of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) as endangered, rare and threatened species) ; iv) the local climate in relation to the schedule of operation ; v) impacts (positive and negative) of the project activities of the environmental and sociocultural aspects (from conception, construction, operation, to post-operation stage) and vi) mitigation measures (rehabilitation of damaged areas, relocation, material remuneration, valuation of resources as basis of the latter). FACT 4 : Some fundamental questions arise : With due respect, what compels Governor R. G. Valencia to insist that the mooring “must” be in Minolo Cove ? [...I The Provincial Administrator, Alfonso Umali, similarly asserted that they will pursue their initial plan even without the other party’s approval. [...I Why not consider the alternative site which has been offered by the municipality itself, on top of the latter’s promise to contribute one million pesos ? Don’t they know and appreciate how much sacrifice this is for a poor municipality like Puerto Galera? Even the Local Government Code the provisions of which the Governor invokes does not explicitly state that the people who are directly affected by such activities has no right of dissent and question the decision of higher authorities. There is still that universal right to the heard in an open, honest consultation and debate ! Why has the NAPOCOR already started the Puerto-bound 69 KV transmission line and piles of logs and a transformer are already stocked in Minolo Cove even without consultation and consent of the directly concerned population and officials ? Is the economic implication of mooring the power barge at Varadero Bay or Encenada Cove as against Minolo Cove so great as to sacrifice the legitimate demands of the people and the resources of the environment ? Is simply meeting a deadline so compelling as to jeopardize the source of a high quality of life of a people ? [. . .] It is only the “economic” considerations that were taken into account, none whatsoever on the project’s environmental or sociocultural implications. Is there really a need for more electricity in Puerto Galera ? Is the cause of the “frequent” brownouts not mismanagement, maintenance problem, or simply unsustainable or wasteful use on the part of the users ? In some cases, the demand is created simply to cater and justi@ vested interests. [. . .] How can we, and those who would like to adhere to an honest, clean effort to improve the environmental conditions of Puerto Galera succeed, if unsustainable activities like the mooring of the power barge and construction of massive pollutive establishments continue unabated, defying existing laws of the municipality, of the land, and above all, those of nature ? The municipality is helpless against unscrupulous profit-motivated individuals and business enterprises who lure investors by their well-packaged commercials which in reality are largely empty promises. At the end, it is the people who suffer the negative consequences as they remain in the area long after the lifetime of the project, while these businessmen one hardly sees at the site, often reselling shares of stocks once the project starts to show signs of unprofitability or at worse abandoning the project but only after the damage to the environment has already been done. [...I I appeal to you, to seriously consider translating the noble vision you have for our environment, as you have done and are doing, and with which I fully concur, into concrete actions. I appeal to you to focus some modest resources and lend a helping hand to Puerto Galera, its environment and its true people. [. ..] Miguel D. FORTES : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ? --- . 7 Working Papers N” 1 (1995) : The Mata Atlantica Biosphere Reserve (Brazil) : An Overview, by Antonio Carlos Diegues. No 2 (1995) : The Xishuangbanna Biosphere Reserve (China) : A Tropical Land of Natural and Cultural Diversity, by WU Zhaolu, OU Xiaokun. No 3 (1995) : The Mae Sa-Kog Ma Biosphere Reserve (Thailand), by Benjavan RERKASEM, Kanok RERKASEM. N” 4 (1995) : La Reserve de la biosphere de Dimonika (Congo), par Jean DIAMOUANGANA. No 5 (1995) : Le Part national de Tai (Cote d’lvorre) : un maillon essentiel du programme de conservation de la nature, par Yaya SANGARE. N” 6 (1995) : La Reserve de la biosphere de Mananara-Nord (Madagascar) 1988-1994 : bilan et perspectives, par Noeline RAONDRY, Martha KLEIN, Victor Solo RAKOTONIRINA. No 7 (1995) : A Study on the Homegarden Ecosystem in the Mekong River Delta and the Hochiminh City (Viet Nam), by Nguyen Thi Ngoc AN. No 8 (1995) : The Manu Biosphere Reserve (Peru), by Luis YALLICO, Gustav0 SUAREZ DE FREITAS. N” 9 (1995) : The Beni Biosphere Reserve (Bolivia), by Carmen MIRANDA L.. No 10 (1995) : La Reserva de la biosfera Sierra de1 Rosario (Cuba), par Maria Herrera ALVAREZ, Maritza GARCIA Garcia. No 11 (1995) : The Omo Biosphere Reserve (Nigeria), by Augustine 0. ISICHEI. N” 12 (1995) : Environnement nature1 et socio-economique de la for-et classee de la Lama (Benin), par Marcel A. BAGLO, P. COUBEOU, B. GUEDEGBE, B. SINSIN. N” 13 (1995) : The Calakmul Biosphere Reserve (Mexico), by Eckart BOEGE. N” 14 (1996) : Conservation de la biodiversite aux Comores : le Part national de Moheli, par A. S. ALI, A. YOUSSOUF. No 15 (1996) : Resoure-Use Patterns : The Case of Coconut-Based Agrosystems in the Coastal Zones of Kerala (India) and Alagoas (Brazil), by Vinicius NOBRE LAGES. No 16 (1996) : The Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve : A Review of Conservation Status with Recommendations for a Holistic Approach to Management (India), by R J. RANJIT DANIELS. No 17 (1996) : Kinabalu Park and the Surrounding Indigenious Communities (Malaysia), by Jamili NAIS. N” 18 (1997) : Puerto Galera (Philippines) : A Lost Biosphere Reserve ?, by M. D. FORTES. N” 19 (1997) : The Palawan Biosphere Reserve (Philippines), by Ricardo M. SANDALO, Teodoro BALTAZAR. N” 20 (1997) : Le Part national de Kahuzi Biega, future Reserve de la biosphere (Republique democratique du Congo), par Bihini won wa MUSITI, Germain Mankoto ma OYISENZbO, Georg DaRKEN. No 2 1 (1997) : Biodiversity Conservation through Ecodevelopment Planning and Implementation Lessons from India, by Shekhar SINGH. No 22 (1997) : The Tanjung Puting National Park and Biosphere Reserve (Indonesia), by Herry Djoko SUSILO.