When a
tree planting program is launched, everyone's first response is to join in hordes with shovels and bagged potting soil. In
recent decades, society saw the rise of environmental concerns in the mainstream with
companies and governments implementing green efforts into their structure. Minimizing
ecological footprints and curbing global warming is a goal the human race as a
whole is interested in achieving; and planting a tree always top the lists of
what an individual can do for the environment.
But it
seems a tree isn't all the good it's thought to be.
The
aim of tree planting activities is to counter the effects of deforestation by
replacing the lost trees with new ones. These
trees not only absorb the excess carbon dioxide created by industrialization
but also house wildlife, keep the natural landscape intact, prevent erosion and
deter landslides in the annual typhoon season. But the commonplace tree
planting activities in the Philippines are often flawed, creating artificial
forests that fail to fulfill their purpose in the environment.
The
main reason for these failures? Tree planting coordinators fail to put into
account "quality over quantity" in organizing reforestation efforts
and make use of invasive tree species like mahogany and gemelina that
are not natural in the Philippines. People forget that there are endemic trees
naturally designed to keep the Philippine ecosystem intact like the narra,
mabolo and ylang-ylang.
Mahogany
trees alone make up most of the tree planting efforts of the government,
being quick-growing trees that grow straight and propagate easily. These
features may seem positive in restoring a crippled local environment but these trees do more harm than good in the long
run. They are not resilient in typhoon weather unlike local tree species and
they do not harbor the native biodiversity very well.
The
so-called 'Philippine Mahogany' was exported a century ago in vast quantity,
but this name is not a single specie, it covers a whole section of the dipterocarp family
that is mainly used for timber. The Philippine government's National Greening Program has
reported to have already planted millions of mahogany seedlings in their aim of
planting 1.5 billion trees by 2016.
So how
can a Philippine tree be considered invasive? The answer, it is not a
Philippine tree, at all. What Filipinos plant in multitudes are actually Bolivian
mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla). The
mistake was to bundle a handful of tree species together and put them under one
name. Unfortunately, the Bolivian mahogany is the most common of these
misnamed trees.
According to UP-Diliman professor James V. LaFrankie (who holds a Harvard Ph.D in Biology and author of 'Trees of Tropical Asia'), the defects of the Bolivian
mahogany is that it has no ecological business in the Philippines.
"It has no pests and no friends. Nothing eats the
leaves, no insect visits the flower, no animal will eat the fruit. Not even
soil fungi will tolerate the roots. The dry winged seeds fly deep within any
forest where they quickly germinate and spread," writes LaFrankie in an article
directed to the Department of Energy and Natural Resources' so-called unwitting
destruction of the Philippine forests.
"Part of the problem stems from the use of the name
mahogany. Many people, including DENR staff, believe they are planting a
Philippine tree. They are not. It might help if we start by calling the tree
what it is. It is not mahogany, it is Bolivian mahogany and it does not belong
in the Philippines... To
put Bolivian mahogany within that Philippine forest is an act of ecological
vandalism," La Frankie further explains.
Adding to this, various environmental advocates have argued that the natural design of the Bolivian
mahogany raises acidity
level in soil through its decaying leaves and does not allow other
species of trees to grow in its immediate vicinity.
Pair this with the Bolivian mahogany's wide seed-propagating range of about ten
meters that spreads their territory by germinating,
in turn making the soil inhabitable in a new area. This results in a slow
poisonous crawl. In cases like Mt. Makiling, where Bolivian mahogany have
replaced the native forest, the area becomes a biodiversity-dead zone.
If this is the case, why is the DENR still endorsing the
Bolivian mahogany in its six-year (2011-2016) National Greening Program? In an
interview with Emma E. Melana, the
National Greening Program Coordinator of Region 7, the issue of profit was
revealed.
Q:
There had been some concern over mahogany being an invasive species
A: "Yes, it is not indigenous here in the
Philippines. It was introduced here as one of our reforestation species,
because it grows well and makes a more productive forest for timber or lumber
for our constituents, especially the farmers. These are preferred by CBFM
(Community Based Forest Management) holders because they can utilize the wood
for lumber---it is straight
As to invasive, it is documented that it is
invasive but I think it's not a problem in the country. Because, actually, we
lack timber resources because our natural forests is already prohibited. No
harvesting in our natural forests, so we are heavily dependent on our planted
trees. And mahogany is one, so I don't think it is a problem.
And we are happy if they can cover the
grasslands, they are always in danger of fire...It think it's not a practical
problem for the country because we depend much on mahogany and gemelina for our
timber resources.”
Q:
Once the timber is harvested, will it be replaced by the same species?
A: “It is up to the farmer. If they find the
mahogany good, they still plant it. And one thing is, they [mahogany] can
regenerate, you need not plant them. You can harvest the bigger ones and there
will always be regeneration; it can be sustainably managed...that's the beauty
also with mahogany.”
Q:
What other tree species are being used for reforestation?
A: “We are also introducing indigenous trees,
especially in the National Greening Program, is working hard on reproduction of
indigenous trees like molave and narra. Because molave and narra grow well in
Region 7, being limestone.”
Q:
Are these farmers private farmers?
A: “There are private farmers and those with
our CBFM, the Community Based Forest Management. They used to be kaingineros (slash-and-burn loggers) who occupy forest
lands. We are managing them and teaching them proper technology so they would
no longer burn forests; they are already implementing soil and water
conservation. They are the upland farmers occupying or tilling public lands.
They receive free seedlings and under our
National Greening Program, they are actually paid to raise the seedlings for
them to be our partners in development.
They are paid to raise seedlings, to plant the
same and to grow the same.”
Q:
Where does the timber profit go?
A: “There are shares of the government and the
farmers also.”
Q:
Are these timber for export?
A: “As of the moment, locals use because they
are our local supplies. Because we can no longer harvest from our natural
forests.”
Q:
Is there a record of the native ecosystem being disturbed by the timber trees?
A: “There is none.”
Q:
Many netizens express concern over the mahogany's invasive nature of turning
the soil too acidic for other plants. Has anyone approached DENR 7 about this?
A: “No, but that's true [mahogany's
acidity].”
Q:
Do you think mahogany will eventually be replaced by indigenous trees?
A: “Actually there are still problems with
indigenous trees because they are slow growing and farmers still prefer to
plant the mahogany. In fact we are in the difficulty of promoting them to tree
planters.
They do not appreciate it because it takes a
long time before they can harvest it unlike the mahogany which you can harvest
in about ten years.”
Q:
Do you have anything to say to concerned individuals and organizations
about the invasiveness of mahogany?
A: “I could say there should be no alarm on that.
We depend on mahogany for our timber. We think they are not so invasive as
grass, they can be managed because we use most of the wood. We would appreciate
it if they cover our grasslands.
After all, they're also useful, they are not
waste. They contribute just like other trees in the carbon dioxide situation.
In fact, they consume a lot of carbon dioxide, being fast growing. “
It
became apparent that the National Greening Program was less of a reforestation
effort than a farming scheme. Instead of addressing ecological issues, the government
respond with the financial benefits of invasive species that is literally
displacing the local habitats. Its aim of planting 1.5 billion trees in over
1.5 million acres of land in over six years counts the harvested trees just to
reach their 2016 quota.
We’re not reforesting, we are farming.
In 2011 alone, a DENR Memorandum Circular
ordered the production of 25 million exotic seedlings that include mahogany,
gemelina and rubber trees, all of which are fast growing but less adaptive to
the Philippine ecosystem. In contrast only 5 million native or indigenous trees
were ordered.
Dr. Perry Ong, a Biology professor of the
University of the Philippines Diliman have also encountered the
finance-grounded response of the DENR concerning the NGP. He said that one of
the reasons that the DENR chose to plant more exotic trees is because they are
more abundant in supply, "They
only get what is available in commercial nurseries. Of course, you won't find
native tree species seedlings because they survey in the commercial. They were
catering to the commercial operator,"
For a country investing in
forests, we are not really banking on the rich biodiversity endowed in our
Southeast Asian territory; which also happens to have one of the most diverse land
and aquatic reserves in the whole world.
We have yet to see the lasting effects of the invasive species
taking over the local soil. Whether the DENR’s decision to invest in profitable
lumber than restoration of the forests will mark the Philippine ecosystem in
the following decades yet remains unclear, it is certain that only the Filipino
people as a whole can demand a change in their agenda.
References:
V. LaFrankie, Ph.D, J. (2014, August 10). DENR must stop
destroying our forests. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://www.manilatimes.net/denr-must-stop-destroying-forests/118026/
Cagayan town OKs mahogany planting ordinance. (2014, December
19). Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://www.manilatimes.net/cagayan-town-oks-mahogany-planting-ordinance/150085/
Manila Seedling Bank keeps on growing trees. (2013, August 13).
Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://www.manilatimes.net/manila-seedling-bank-keeps-on-growing-trees/29237/
E. Madarang, R. (2012, December 16). An appeal to people who plant
trees. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://www.rappler.com/life-and-style/17982-an-appeal-to-people-who-plant-trees
Why your tree planting isn’t helping the Philippine environment.
(2014, October 8). Retrieved November 23, 2015, from https://feelingenvironmentalist.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/why-your-tree-planting-isnt-helping-the-philippine-environment/
DENR Directory of Key Officials. (2015, October 5). Retrieved
November 23, 2015, from http://www.denr.gov.ph/about-us/denr-directory/38-directory-of-key-officials-r5r6r7.html
NATIONAL GREENING PROGRAM. (n.d.). Retrieved November 23, 2015,
from http://www.denr.gov.ph/priority-programs/national-greening-program.html
Ranada, P. (2014, June 22). Rethinking the National Greening
Program. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://www.rappler.com/move-ph/ispeak/60948-rethinking-national-greening-program
Ranada, P. (2014, February 21). Is the gov't reforestation
program planting the right trees? Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://www.rappler.com/nation/51200-national-greening-program-native-trees
O. Baquero, E. (2014, November 19). Public urged to help
conserve electricity. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from
http://archive.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2014/11/19/public-urged-help-conserve-electricity-377497
