College of Public Affairs and Development University of the Philippines Los Baños College, Laguna 4031 Philippines

Working Paper No. 2017-11

AGRICULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT IN ISLAND COMMUNITIES: RESULTS OF HOUSEHOLD SURVEY OF RAINFED LOWLAND AND UPLAND RICE FARMERS IN

MILAGROS, MASBATE

Therese R. Olviga, Ruth Anne T. Ruelos, Rubelyn S. Villa, Merlyne M. Paunlagui,Rowena dT. Baconguis and Agnes C. Rola

Center for Strategic Planning and Policy Studies (formerly Center for Policy and Development Studies) College of Public Affairs and Development University of the Philippines Los Baños College, Laguna 4031 Philippines

Telephone: (63-049) 536-3455 Fax: (63-049) 536-3637 Homepage: https://cpaf.uplb.edu.ph/

The CSPPS Working Paper series reports the results of studies by the Center researchers and CPAf faculty, staff and students, which have not been reviewed. These are circulated for the purpose of soliciting comments and suggestions.

The views expressed in the paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of CSPPS, the agency with which the authors are affiliated, and the funding agencies, if applicable.

Please send your comments to:

The Director Center for Strategic Planning & Policy Studies (formerly CPDS) College of Public Affairs and Development University of the Philippines Los Baños College, Laguna 4031 Philippines Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

This paper summarizes the findings of the household surveys in Milagros, Masbate that were used as baseline data for monitoring and evaluation of the CRDES Phase 2 Project. Data were obtained from two sets of survey: baseline survey of 150 rainfed rice farmers in 2015 and 90 upland rice farmers in 2016. Results show that Milagros still remains to be a highly agricultural municipality where majority of the people still depend on agriculture as their main source of income. Rice is the main crop planted by respondents and it is not enough to suffice their daily needs. Regarding enhancing their productivity and income, there is a great opportunity for improvement. Farmers are very driven to learn new ways of farming and are very motivated to improve their yields.

Keywords: Rice farmers, upland, rainfed agriculture, Milagros, Masbate

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction 1 II. Agricultural production in Masbate 3 III. Household information 4 3.1 Socio-demographic characteristics of farmers and their 4 households 3.2 House ownership and household utilities 5 3.3 Household assets 6 3.4 Sources of income 7 IV. Climatic conditions and farming environment in Milagros, 8 Masbate V. Farming and farm-related characteristics 12 5.1 Farm assets 12 5.2 Number of parcels and farm size 12 5.3 Land tenure 13 5.4 Crops planted 13 5.5 Livestock production 14 5.6 Poultry production 16 5.7 Aquaculture 17 VI. Summary and conclusion 18 VII. References 19 Appendices 20

List of Tables Page Table 1. Selected socio-demographic characteristics of respondents, 5 Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 2. Household characteristics of respondents, Milagros, 2014 and 6 2015, in percent Table 3. Percentage of farmers with the following household assets, 7 Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015 Table 4. Sources of income, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015 8 Table 5. Start and end of wet season, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, 8 in percent Table 6. Farmers’ description of wet season, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 9 2015, in percent Table 7. Frequency of natural flooding during rainy season, Milagros, 9 Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 8. Degree farms by respondents are affected by floods, 2014 and 9 2015, in percent Table 9. Start and end of dry season, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in 10 percent Table 10. Farmers’ description of dry season and soil moisture, Milagros, 10 Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 11. Percentage of farmers with soil fertility indicators, Milagros, 11 Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 12. Soil fertility indicators of farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 11 2015, in percent Table 13. Status of soil and soil conservation practices of respondents, 11 Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 14. Percentage of farmers with the following major farm assets, 12 Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 15. Number of parcels of land, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in 13 percent Table 16. Average size of farm/holding of respondents, Milagros, Masbate, 13 2014 and 2015 Table 17. Ownership of primary parcel of land, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 13 and 2015, in percent Table 18. Crops planted by respondents in their primary parcel of land, 14 Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 19. Livestock raised by farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, 14 in percent Table 20a. Information on livestock raised, lowland, Milagros, Masbate, 15 2014 Table 20b. Information on livestock raised, upland, Milagros, Masbate, 2015 15 Table 21. Animal tending practices, livestock, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 15 2015, in percent Table 22. Poultry raised by farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in 16 percent Table 23. Average number of poultry raised by farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 16 2014 and 2015

Table 24. Reasons for raising poultry, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in 16 percent Table 25. Feeds used for fowls, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in 17 percent Table 26. Fowl tending practices, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in 17 percent Table 27. Information regarding fish culture integration, Milagros, Masbate, 18 2014 and 2015, in percent Table 28. Percentage of farmers who think fish integration is possible in 18 their farms, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015

List of Figures Page Figure 1. Map of Masbate 2 Figure 2. Rice production, Masbate, 2006-2014 4

Appendices Page Table 1. Sources of household income per barangay, lowland rainfed, 20 2014 Table 2. Sources of household income per barangay, upland, 2015 21

AGRICULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT IN ISLAND COMMUNITIES: RESULTS OF HOUSEHOLD SURVEY OF RAINFED LOWLAND AND UPLAND RICE FARMERS IN MILAGROS, MASBATE

Therese R. Olviga, Ruth Anne T. Ruelos, Rubelyn S. Villa, Merlyne M. Paunlagui, Rowena dT. Baconguis and Agnes C. Rola

I. Introduction

The Collaborative Research, Development, and Extension Services (CRDES) Phase 2 Program is a follow-through of the CRDES Program which was crafted under the auspices of the Department of Agriculture - Bureau of Agricultural Research (DA- BAR) to identify avenues where extension for the agricultural sector may be fully harnessed using the rice self-sufficiency as the anchor commodity for investigation. Particular interest of the CRDES Program included looking at avenues of partnership with various stakeholders including the LGUs, academe, regional line agencies, and other local-based organizations for a stronger and well-functioning agricultural extension system. CRDES facilitated networking and collaboration between these stakeholders in the conduct of empirical-based agricultural assessment and planning in the research and extension proposal making. The collaboration with the significant development actors in the agricultural extension system in the country that was formed through the CRDES Program served as foundations for future partnerships and collaborations in other undertakings. Lessons from the CRDES experience suggest that there should be a follow-through of enhanced partnerships in other regions of the country; thus, CRDES Phase 2 Program was formed.

While looking at other local initiatives, it was discovered that there are already participatory extension approaches that are proven to be adaptive at local conditions such as the Palayamanan of the PhilRice and CPAR of the DA-BAR. Both approaches have been proven to be successful and it is recommended to ensure that these kinds of projects reach more localities. Mainstreaming these approaches, however, can be tedious and would require multi-stakeholder participation as both approaches rely on initiative and strong collaboration to work. It was realized that continued collaboration in research and extension starts off through joint program analysis and capability building activities; hence, the CRDES 2 Program would have three major accomplishments: 1) capacity building, 2) developing policy and planning instruments, and 3) project implementation of Palayamanan using CPAR approach.

CRDES Phase 2 Program works on the premise that improvement of the extension system through sustained collaboration using proven extension programs would lead not only to the strengthening of the extension system through improved capacities of stakeholders but more importantly, lead to improved productivity and income. Through agricultural diversification and capacity building, CRDES Phase 2 Program aims to improve the resiliency of farmers towards climate change. The objectives of the project include: 1.) determining the crop mix most suitable in the study sites and improve the marketing of these products based on the community services available in the areas; 2.) mainstreaming the Palayamanan system of farming in the agricultural extension system through the conduct of Climate Field Schools; the

1 conduct of capacity building at the municipal level on agricultural development planning; and 4.) monitoring and documentation of the experience of mainstreaming Palayamanan in the province of Masbate and Camarines Sur.

As part of Objective 4, a household survey was conducted to provide both quantitative and qualitative data of the farmer-respondents from Milagros, Masbate that can be useful as a baseline data for monitoring and evaluation. The baseline data that were gathered were used to track progress that was made throughout the project with respect to the targeted outcomes. Findings from the household survey were also used as guides in determining the needs of the farmers in the study sites which was then integrated into the modules of the Climate Field School. Milagros, Masbate is one of the twenty municipalities of Masbate (Figure 1). Located South West of Masbate City, Milagros is a first class municipality and is the largest municipality of Masbate with a total land area of 56, 540 hectares. Of the total land area, 99.75% are classified as rural areas. Milagros has 27 barangays, 18 of which are coastal barangays. The municipal coastline totals 54 km and represents 6% of the total coastline of the province while the municipal agricultural land area totals 91.80%.

Figure 1. Map of Masbate (Source: Milagros ICRM Plan for 2010)

Area dedicated to crop production is approximately 9,587 hectares comprising of 4,054 hectares dedicated to rice, 3,713 hectares dedicated to coconut, 1,252 hectares dedicated to corn, 462 hectares dedicated to root crops, 75 hectares dedicated to fruit trees, and 31 hectares dedicated to vegetables. Milagros is given the title of “Marlboro Country” due to its rolling to hilly areas where they grow their upgraded cattle breed stocks. Other livestock commonly raised in Milagros include carabaos, swine, and goats. Asid Gulf serves as a rich fishing ground for fishermen in Masbate. Milagros enjoys the vast shoreline along Asid Gulf where they usually get their prawns, crabs, shrimps, and milkfish. Since Milagros is predominantly an agricultural town, farmers and fishermen comprise the majority of its occupation groups. Minor

2 occupation groups in the municipality include farm-workers, aquaculture-workers, carpenters, and government workers. Milagros, together with the municipalities of Balud and Mandaon, also forms the “Rice Triangle” of the province of Masbate. This report summarizes the findings of the household surveys that were conducted in Milagros, Masbate. Two sets of household surveys were conducted by the CRDES Phase 2 staff. The first set was conducted on March 12-18, 2015 while the second set was conducted on June 4-6, 2016. A total of 240 farmers were randomly surveyed from eight barangays with the help of the Municipal Agriculture Office. The eight barangays that were included were Narangasan, Capaculan, Tawad, Cayabon, Bacolod, Matagbac, Sawmill, and San Carlos. The five barangays that were mentioned first were those that were included in the first set of household surveys (rainfed lowland areas) while the latter three barangays were those that were included in the second set of survey (upland areas). The survey generated baseline data on the socio-economic profile and technological practices of farmers. Knowledge of credit facilities as well as extension services availed of was also asked.

II. Agricultural production in Masbate

The province of Masbate is predominantly agricultural province. A notable percentage of the population in Masbate is engaged in farming wherein farm lands are often planted with rice, corn, root crops and coconut. Aside from lands dedicated to farming, a large portion of Masbate’s land area is devoted to cattle-raising while fishing dominates the coastal areas. Aside from being an agricultural province, Masbate, which is also rich in gold, is considered to have the biggest mining operation in the Bicol region. The province is also rich in minerals such as manganese, copper, silver, iron, chromite, limestone, guano and carbon and is described by geologists as a province sitting in a “pot of gold”.

Figure 2 illustrates the status of rice production in Masbate. Rice production of the province from 2007-2014 was increasing. Comparing the trends in production of rainfed and irrigated rice, Figure 2 shows that production of rainfed rice in Masbate is relatively higher than that of irrigated rice. In 2014, Masbate had the highest production growth among other provinces in the Bicol region. According to DA Regional Director Abelardo Bragas, Camarines Sur and Masbate are the only provinces in Bicol region that are rice self-sufficient – Camarines Sur is 166.34 percent rice sufficient while Masbate is 105.42 percent rice sufficient. As a whole, Bicol region is rice sufficient with 118.19 percent of rice self-sufficiency, http://www.bicolmail.com/2012/?p=14381, (year lacking)

200000 180000 160000 140000 120000 Rice Production 100000 Irrigated Rice 80000

Volume Volume (mt) Rainfed Rice 60000 40000 20000 0 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Figure 2. Rice Production, Masbate, 2006-2014 Source of basic data: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics

III. Household Information

3.1 Socio-demographic characteristics of farmers and their households

Almost all respondents are male and married with an average age of 49 years for the 2014 survey and 45 years for the 2015 survey. Most of the respondents are the head of their household and are being helped by their respective spouses and children in farming. For most of the respondents, the average household size of 6 (2014 survey) and 5 (2015 survey) is a nuclear family. In terms of educational attainment of the respondents, most of them are elementary and high school graduates. Noticeably, respondents from upland areas have higher percentage of college graduates as compared to respondents from lowland areas. In general, only a few were able to finish college. Some farmers, however, were able to finish vocational courses which are being provided by the TESDA located at the Masbate School of Fisheries in Barangay Cayabon.

Table 1. Selected socio-demographic characteristics of respondents, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Item Rainfed lowland Upland (N=90) (N=150) Average age (in years) 48.58 45.74 Gender Male 96.67 90.00 Female 3.33 10.00 Civil status Married 89.33 86.67 Widowed 5.33 7.78 Single 3.33 2.22 Live-in 2.00 2.22 Separated 0.00 1.11 Educational attainment Elementary 50.67 35.56 High school 34.66 37.78 College 10.01 21.11 Vocational 3.33 5.56 No formal schooling 1.33 0.00 Household structure Nuclear 76.67 92.22 Extended 22.00 6.67 Single 1.33 1.11 Average household size (in number) 6 5

3.2 House ownership and household utilities

Most of the respondents from rainfed lowland areas own their houses (80%), majority of which are of permanent structures (48%) and have access to electricity (71%) but use wood for cooking (87%). However, almost three fourths (74%) still do not have access to piped water as they get their water supply from open wells and use manual water sealed toilet facilities (60%). Respondents from upland areas, similar with those from rainfed lowland areas, own their houses which are usually semi-permanent to permanent structures. Their primary sources of lighting included electricity, kerosene, and solar panels. Majority use wood for cooking and source their water from open wells. They also use manual water sealed toilet facilities.

Table 2. Household characteristics of respondents, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Item Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) House ownership Owned 80.00 92.22 Rent-free 12.67 5.56 Rented 7.33 2.22 Type of house Permanent 48.00 46.67 Semi-permanent 34.67 45.56 Temporary 17.33 6.67 No response 0.00 1.11 Lighting Electricity 71.33 33.33 Kerosene 16.67 20.00 Coleman 8.00 8.89 Solar panels 4.00 27.78 Generator 0.00 7.78 No response 0.00 2.22 Cooking fuel* Wood 87.30 93.33 Charcoal 30.70 33.33 LPG 3.30 2.22 Electricity 1.30 0.00 Water system* Open well 74.00 88.89 Artesian/pump well 21.33 10.00 Piped water 12.67 0.00 Rain water 3.33 1.11 Spring/river 2.67 0.00 Toilet facility Manual water-sealed 60.67 72.22 Open pit 23.33 23.33 Flush water-sealed 16.00 4.44 *multiple responses

3.3 Household assets

The top five household assets owned by respondents from rainfed lowland areas and upland areas are the same. Most respondents own cellular phones, television sets, radios, electric fans, and VCD players. Only a few owns a computer and all of them does not have access to landline connection. Interestingly, respondents living near their farms have the least assets. Most of the respondents without electric fans, say for example, are those with temporary house structures that are living near their respective farmlands. When it comes to ownership of vehicles, there is a higher percentage of those who own vehicles in rainfed lowland areas compared to those in upland areas.

Table 3. Percentage of farmers with the following household assets, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015

Household Assets Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) House 94.67 75.56 Appliance Cellular phone 73.33 63.33 TV 62.00 40.00 Radio 44.00 51.11 Electric fan 43.33 20.00 VCR/VCD/Component 31.33 15.56 Refrigerator 21.30 4.44 Washing machine 10.70 3.33 Computer 3.33 10.00 Hand held radio 2.00 2.22 Vehicles Motorcycle 32.67 17.80 Tricycle 12.00 0.00 Bicycle 12.00 2.22 Car 1.33 1.11 Jeep/Owner 0.67 0.00 Motor boat 0.00 3.33

3.4 Sources of income

Regarding sources of income, many farmers still depend on farming for their sustenance (Table 4). It can be seen that income from non-farm activities such as employment, pensions, and businesses also play a huge part in the daily lives of farmers most especially for those from the upland areas. Also, it is evident that there is a big difference on the average annual income of respondents from rainfed lowland areas and upland areas. It should be noted that farmers from upland areas only get to plant rice once a year due to lack of sources of water. In general, farmers from rainfed lowland areas have higher income for all income-generating activities. This can be correlated to the fact that respondents from upland areas have lower average annual yield than respondents from rainfed lowland areas and they do not have as many sources of income as compared to the latter. For disposable income, farmers depend on their livestock. Results show that farmers, most especially those from upland areas, raise livestock for personal consumption and when the need arises, sell them for additional income (See Appendix Table 1 and 2 for details).

Table 4. Sources of income, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015

Source of income Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) n Php n Php On farm 150 98, 851.71 90 28, 773.42 Off-farm 12 8, 164.58 6 10, 400.00 Non-farm 40 86, 699.10 16 55, 243.33 Total cash generated for 150 120, 662.14 90 38, 238.71 the year

3.5 Climatic conditions and farming environment in Milagros, Masbate

Masbate City is generally dry from March to June and rainy from September to February according to previous reports about the province http://www.nscb.gov.ph/ru5/overview/profiles/masbatecity/; however, most of the farmers claim that the six months wet season now starts at June and ends in December, or a three month movement of the rainy season. Majority also claim that rainy season is characterized by continuous rains which can last from weeks to months, with more than a quarter (28.67%) of respondents from rainfed lowland areas claiming to be rarely affected by flooding or had once been affected by flooding (26%) or occasionally affected by it. Respondents from upland areas, on the other hand, reported that they are rarely or never affected by flooding due to the slope of their locations.

Table 5. Start and end of wet season, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Start Month End Month Rainfed Upland Rainfed Upland Month lowland (N=90) lowland (N=90) (N=150) (N=150) January - - 7.33 3.33 February - - 0.67 3.33 March 1.33 - 1.33 3.33 April 0.67 1.11 - - May 12.67 32.22 - 1.11 June 74.00 65.56 1.33 - July 7.33 - 2.67 2.22 August 3.33 1.11 4.67 2.22 September - - 9.33 1.11 October 0.67 - 2.00 20.00 November - - 5.33 - December - - 65.33 63.33

Table 6. Farmer’s description of wet season, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Rainfed lowland Upland (N=90) Description (N=150) continuous rains lasting weeks to 78.00 57.77 months rains several times in a month 10.67 8.89 heavy rains 8.67 1.11 intermittent rains for days 2.67 26.67 seldom rains 0.00 2.22 rain lasting hours 0.00 1.11 rains several times in a week 0.00 2.22

Table 7. Frequency of natural flooding during rainy season, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Rainfed lowland Upland (N=90) Frequency (N=150) rarely affected 28.67 44.44 once affected 26.00 0.00 occasionally (if there are heavy 22.00 23.33 storms) Never 18.67 30.00 Often 0.00 1.11 Always 4.67 1.11

Table 8. Degree farms by respondents are affected by floods, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Rainfed lowland Upland (N=90) Degree (N=150) somewhat affected 42.00 15.56 very little effect 27.33 31.11 varies from time to time 12.67 1.11 not affected at all 10.67 50.00 to a very great extent 7.33 2.22

On the other hand, dry season can last for 4 months which can start between the months of January to March and end in May. Dry season is characterized by absence of rains lasting from weeks to months which leads to dry, cracked soil making it difficult for plants to survive unless watered regularly.

Table 9. Start and end of dry season, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Month Start Month End Month Rainfed Upland Rainfed Upland lowland (N=90) lowland (N=90) (N=150) (N=150) January 55.33 51.11 - - February 27.33 6.67 - - March 6.00 25.56 16.67 7.78 April 2.00 2.22 19.33 32.22 May 0.67 - 55.33 36.67 June 1.33 2.22 6.00 6.67 July - - 0.67 - August 1.33 - - - September 1.33 - 1.33 - October 0.67 1.11 - - November 1.33 1.11 - - December 2.67 - 0.67 1.11 No response - 10.00 - 15.56

Table 10. Farmer’s description of dry season and soil moisture, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Rainfed Upland (N=90) Description lowland (N=150) Description of dry season Rainless period lasting weeks to months 79.33 45.56 No rain at all 15.33 8.89 Rains rarely 4.00 32.22 Only rains once in the whole period 1.33 13.33 Description of soil moisture during dry season Dry and cracking soil; too dry for plant to 96.67 87.77 survive 2.00 12.22 Lacks moisture; must be constantly watered 1.33 0.00 Can still be planted but yield is very low

Most farmers stated that they do not have soil fertility indicators. Notably, most respondents from rainfed lowland areas consider their farms as infertile and make use of green manure or chemical fertilizer to improve soil fertility while most respondents from upland consider theirs as fertile and use composting to as soil conservation measure. For those with soil fertility indicators, majority of respondents from rainfed lowland areas stated that they consider their soil fertile if their harvest is good without having the need to apply much fertilizer while respondents from upland areas reported that they consider their soil fertile if their crops look healthy. Thus, for soil fertility, respondents from rainfed lowland areas look into the quantity of their

10 harvest while respondents from upland areas look into the quality or physical appearance of their produce.

Table 11. Percentage of farmers with soil fertility indicators, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Item Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Yes 21.33 13.33 No 78.67 86.67

Table 12. Soil fertility indicators of farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Rainfed lowland Upland Soil fertility indicator (n=32) (n=12) if harvest is good without the need to apply much 81.25 8.33 fertilizer if the crops planted look healthy/leaves are dark green, 9.38 66.67 the soil is fertile. If plants look yellow or red, then the soil is not that fertile anymore. if the soil is dark (dark brown preferably to black) 3.13 0.00 if the soil has cracks 3.13 0.00 if crops planted are resistant to diseases 3.13 0.00 if the soil has earthworms 0.00 25.00

Table 13. Status of soil and soil conservation practices of respondents, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Item Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Status of soil fertile 42.00 63.33 infertile 58.00 21.11 don’t know 0.00 15.56 Soil conservation practices* 66.00 15.56 green manuring 26.00 4.44 commercial fertilizer 8.67 48.89 composting 7.33 18.89 use of animal manure 0.00 18.89 others *multiple responses

V. Farming and farm-related characteristics

5.1 Farm assets

For most farmers, the plow and harrow is basic for land preparation as evidenced by their ownership of farm assets. Sprayer is also a common property as well as a farm house. Some respondents reported that they do not have a farm house but are living near the farm. Only a few owns a thresher as reported by farmers. It was discovered from the household survey results that most farmers pay for threshing and harvesting by paying labourers a portion of their harvest. Other farm assets owned by respondents included hand tractors, irrigation pumps, warehouses, 4W tractors, trailers (for rainfed lowland respondents), solar dryers, and shellers. Table 14. Percentage of farmers with the following major farm assets, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015

Major Farm Assets Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Plow 79.33 72.22 Harrow 72.00 66.67 Sprayer 66.00 53.33 Farm house 32.00 42.22 Hand tractor 23.33 13.33 Thresher 12.00 6.67 Irrigation pump 11.33 1.11 Others Warehouses 4.67 4.44 4W tractor 2.00 1.11 Trailer 2.00 0.00 Solar dryer 1.33 1.11 Sheller 0.70 2.22

5.2 Number of parcels and farm size The average farm size of the respondents from rainfed lowland areas is 2.11 hectares and 3.30 hectares for respondents from upland areas. Most respondents only have one parcel of land. For respondents from lowland areas, their biggest farm area is their third parcel of land which they utilize for plantation crops. Respondents from upland areas, on the other hand, utilize their biggest parcel of land as their primary parcel of land which they use to plant rice and other crops for their sustenance. In general, farmers from upland areas have bigger farm areas which they also use for grazing livestock and for aquaculture (some practice fish integration in their farm areas).

Table 15. Number of parcels of land, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Item Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Has only one parcel of 80.00 80.00 land Has two parcels of land 18.00 17.78 Has three parcels of land 2.00 2.22

Table 16. Average size of farm/holding of respondents, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015

Item Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Farm area 1 1.67 ha 3.02 ha Farm area 2 1.99 ha 1.48 ha Farm area 3 3.87 ha 0.75 ha Average size of all parcels 2.11 ha 3.30 ha

5.3 Land tenure

Farmers either own or rent their farmlands. Those who reported that their farmlands are rent-free stated that their farmlands are not theirs but instead belongs to their relatives or other family members that lets them use it for free.

Table 17. Ownership of primary parcel of land, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent.

Item Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Owned 49.30 53.33 Rented 41.30 32.22 Rent-free 6.00 13.33 Others (DAR) 3.30 1.11

5.4 Crops planted

Rice was the dominant crop planted by farmers in Masbate. Rice-rice cropping pattern was the popular mode of farming of respondents in Milagros, Masbate. Intensive rice cropping is practiced by most respondents most especially those with only one farm area. There are some respondents that practice intercropping and they usually plant rice together with vegetables such as squash, eggplant, corn, and okra.

Table 18. Crops planted by respondents in their primary parcel of land, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Crops planted Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Cereals Rice 100.00 100.00 Corn 4.17 6.67 Root crops Cassava 4.17 10.00 Sweet potato 3.33 4.44 Plantation crops Coconut 3.33 0.00 Vegetables Squash 2.50 1.11 White squash (upo) 0.00 1.11 Eggplant 1.67 1.11 Okra 1.67 0.00 Mungbean 1.67 0.00 String beans 1.67 1.11 *multiple responses

5.5. Livestock production

Majority of respondents raise carabaos for farm use. Other livestock/ruminants raised by farmers include goats, cows, pigs, and horses. Only a few reported that they do not raise livestock due to lack of area for grazing and insufficient budget for livestock raising. For respondents from lowland areas, their top livestock raised included carabaos, pigs, and goats. Carabaos, pigs, and horses, on the other hand, are the preferred livestock of respondents from the uplands. In terms of reasons for raising livestock, both sets of surveys garnered the same reasons. They raise carabaos for farm use, cows for additional income, pigs and goats for personal consumption and additional income, and horses for farm use and transportation/service. For the tending practices of practices, carabaos, cows, and horses are usually tethered, pigs are most of the time confined in pig pens, and goats are free-ranged.

Table 19. Livestock raised by farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent. Rainfed lowland Upland Livestock (N=150) (N=90) Carabao 74.00 71.11 Pig 42.00 41.11 Goat 7.33 18.89 Cow 3.33 11.11 Horse 2.67 21.11 Do not raise livestock 15.33 12.22 *multiple responses

Table 20a. Information on livestock raised, lowland, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 Number Livestock Reasons for raising Feeds used of heads Pig 2 heads for personal consumption and rice bran, additional income commercial feeds, Carabao 3 heads for farm use cornGrass Goat 5 heads for personal consumption and Grass additional income Cow 9 heads additional income Grass Horse 3 heads transportation/additional income Grass (horseback riding, etc.), and attraction Table 20b. Information on livestock raised, upland, Milagros, Masbate, 2015

Number Livestock Reasons for raising Feeds used of heads Pig 4 heads for personal consumption and rice bran, additional income, fattening purposes commercial feeds, corn, pollard, cassava Carabao 2 heads for farm use Grass Goat 5 heads for personal consumption and Grass additional income Cow 3 heads additional income, leisure, Grass Horse 2 heads propagationfarm use/used as service Grass

Table 21. Animal tending practices, Livestock, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent Tending Livestock Rainfed lowland Upland Practice Confined 66.67 75.67 Pig Tethered 30.16 10.81 Free-range 3.17 13.51 Tethered 79.28 73.44 Carabao Free-range 16.22 20.31 Confined 4.50 6.25 Free-range 45.45 70.59 Goat Confined 0.00 17.65 Tethered 54.55 11.76 Tethered 40.00 80.00 Cow Free-range 60.00 20.00 Tethered 75.00 68.43 Horse Free-range 25.00 15.79 Confined 0.00 15.79 For respondents from rainfed lowland areas: pig (n=63), carabao (n=111), goat (n=11), cow (n=5), and horse (n=4) For respondents from upland areas: pig (n=37), carabao (n=64), goat (n=17), cow (n=10), and horse (n=19)

5.6 Poultry production

Majority of respondents from both sites raise chickens. Only a few reported that they do not raise any type of fowl such as chickens, ducks, and turkeys. Approximately 15 chickens and 10 ducks are raised per household in the lowlands and 11 chickens and 5 ducks in the uplands. Commercial feeds and rice bran are the usual feed given to fowls raised by respondents from the lowlands while concentrates and corn are the usual feed given by respondents from the uplands. Some farmers from both sites also feed their fowls with leftovers. Most of the fowls raised by farmers in Masbate are free-ranged and are raised mostly for consumption and additional income.

Table 22. Poultry raised by farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Rainfed lowland Upland (N=90) Fowl (N=150) Chicken 76.00 84.44 Duck 8.00 7.78 Turkey 1.33 3.33 does not raise fowls 22.67 14.44 *multiple responses

Table 23. Average number of poultry raised by farmers, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015

Fowl Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) Chicken 15 heads 11 heads Duck 10 heads 5 heads Turkey 4 heads 8 heads

Table 24. Reasons for raising fowls, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent.

Reason Rainfed lowland (N=150) Upland (N=90) for personal consumption only 44.67 55.84 for additional source of income only 32.67 22.08 for consumption and for another 29.33 18.18 source of income for leisure 3.33 9.09 for consumption and for leisure 0.00 5.19 *multiple responses

Table 25. Feeds used for fowls, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Upland Feeds Rainfed lowland (n=116) (n=77) commercial feeds only 39.66 16.88 rice bran only 35.34 10.39 Leftovers 12.07 10.39 rice bran and commercial feeds 10.34 1.30 corn and rice bran 6.03 1.30 corn and commercial feeds 3.45 1.30 Corn 2.59 11.69 rice, corn, commercial feeds 0.86 1.30 cassava and corn 0.00 2.60 cassava and rice bran 0.00 1.30 Concentrate 0.00 29.87 concentrate and corn 0.00 1.30 corn, rice bran, and concentrate 0.00 1.30 Pollard 0.00 2.60 pollard and rice bran 0.00 3.90 rice and leftovers 0.00 6.49 *multiple responses

Table 26. Fowl tending practices, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Fowls Tending Practice Rainfed Upland lowland Free-range 82.46 73.69 Confined 10.53 23.68 Chicken Tethered 6.14 2.63 Some are free-ranged some are tethered 0.88 0.00 Free-range 83.33 71.43 Duck Confined 8.33 28.57 Tethered 8.33 0.00 Free-range 0.00 66.67 Turkey Confined 100.00 33.33 For respondents from rainfed lowland areas: chicken (n=114), duck (n=12), turkey (n=2) For respondents from upland areas: chicken (n=76), duck (n=7), turkey (n=3)

5.7 Aquaculture

Only a few of the respondents have fishponds and majority believe it is impossible to integrate aquaculture in their farms due to insufficiency of water in their respective areas and lacks of appropriate areas for such integration. Farmers confessed to having tried integration but failed due to a number of factors such as climate change and unsuitability of fish culture integration in their farm areas.

Table 27. Information regarding fish culture integration, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015, in percent

Item Rainfed lowland Upland (N=90) (N=150) Has fish culture integration 3.33 6.67 Do not have fish culture 96.67 93.33 Integration

Table 28. Percentage of farmers who think fish integration is possible in their farm, Milagros, Masbate, 2014 and 2015

Item Rainfed lowland Upland (N=90) (N=150) Possible 10.00 23.33 Impossible/hard to integrate 90.00 76.67

VI. Summary and Conclusion

Findings from the household survey revealed that Milagros still remains to be a highly agricultural municipality where majority of the people in the rural areas still depend on agriculture as their main source of income. Despite the increase of the number of institutions in the study sites, majority still turn to rice production and animal raising for their sustenance. Rice is the main crop planted by respondents and they primarily produce it for personal consumption. They only sell rice if there is excess in their produce. Marketing their produce is also affected by various factors such as poor farm-to-market roads and outlets for marketing. For their disposable income, farmers depend on their livestock and fowls. Livestock commonly raised included carabaos, pigs, goats, horses, and cows. Regarding enhancing their productivity and income, there is a great opportunity for improvement. Farmers are very driven to learn new ways of farming and are very motivated to improve their yields. It is recommended that in making policies and programs, site characterization must first be conducted to promote positive results and ensure the success of highly effective programs. Participation of farmers must also be encouraged to enhance the effectiveness of interventions. More farm-specific technologies must also be developed to effectively help farmers improve their productivity and income. With these in mind, collaboration and intensive planning must be carried out in the local, regional, and national level to further utilize existing opportunities and create new opportunities for agricultural diversification and community development in general.

VII. References:

Local Government of Milagros. (2010). Integrated Coastal Resources Management Plan, Milagros, Masbate 2010-2013. Milagros, Masbate, Philippines.

Bureau of Agricultural Statistics (2015). Rice Production, Masbate, 2006-2014. Philippines: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics.

(n.d.). Retrieved October 2015, from http://www.bicolmail.com/2012/?p=14381

NSCB. (n.d.). Masbate City. Retrieved October 2015, from http://www.nscb.gov.ph/ru5/overview/profiles/masbate city/

Appendix 1

Table 1. Sources of household income per barangay, lowland rainfed, 2014

Income Barangay Type Sources Average Range Narangasan On-farm 132,711.67 14,000 to Rice production, vegetable (n=30) 349,000 production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm 6,912.50 1,400 to Plowing, harrowing, (n=4) 12,000 harvesting, threshing

Non-farm 123,033.33 12,000 to Own business, employment, (n=6) 365,000 pension*, other sources of income Capaculan On-farm 11,9218.97 4,375 to Rice production, vegetable (n=30) 494,800 production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm 1,516.67 250 to 3,500 Plowing, harrowing, (n=3) harvesting, threshing Non-farm 66,436.36 4,500 to Own business*, employment, (n=11) 288,000 pension, domestic remittances Tawad On-farm 67,621.69 3,937.5 to Rice production, vegetable (n=30) 170,800 production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm 4350 250 to Plowing, harrowing, (n=4) 12,000 harvesting, threshing Non-farm 5,257.14 600 to Own business, employment (n=7) 12,000 Cayabon On-farm 94,316.85 3,500 to Rice production, vegetable (n=30) 353,915 production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm 3,000 3,000 Land preparation (n=1) Non-farm 24,482 13,000 to Own business, employment, (n=2) 35,964 pension*, remittances* Bacolod On-farm 80,389.4 15,000 to Rice production, vegetable (n=30) 292,050 production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm - - No off-farm activities (n=0) Non-farm 138,683.33 3,500 to Own business*, employment, (n=12) 540,000 pension, foreign* and domestic remittances Note: those with (*) are the biggest contributors in income

Appendix 2

Table 2. Sources of household income per barangay, upland, 2015

Income Barangay Type Sources Average Range Matagbac On-farm 28,760.59 1,750 to 81,880 Rice production, (n=30) vegetable production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm - - No off-farm activities (n=0) Non-farm 92,350 3,000 to Own business*, (n=4) 252,000 employment*, domestic remittances Sawmill On-farm 34,456.36 4,500 to Rice production, (n=30) 131,250 vegetable production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm - - No off-farm activities (n=0) Non-farm 45,933.33 2,000 to Own business, (n=6) 150,000 employment*, domestic remittances, other sources of income San Carlos On-farm 22,907.78 5,250 to 89,950 Rice production, (n=30) vegetable production, livestock raising, and fishing Off-farm 10,400 5,000 to 24,000 Plowing, harrowing, (n=5) harvesting, threshing Non-farm 36,730 3,000 to 91,250 Own business, (n=5) employment Note: those with (*) are the biggest contributors in income