Simultaneous with the other entry points to Mt. Apo, the municipality
of Sta. Cruz has conducted a Biodiversity and Threats Assessment along the
Sibulan Trail to Mt. Apo Summit on March 15-19, 2015 with LOGSAC team leading
the job. The activity was aimed at identifying the existing flora and fauna of
Mt. Apo Natural Park, including the existing environmental threats that may
affect the stability of the entire park in the coming years. LOGSAC was
commissioned by the Biodiversity and Watershed Improved for Stronger Economy
and Ecosystems Resilience (B+WISER), a USAID-funded program that is tasked to direct
helpful interventions to selected protected areas in the Philippines,
particularly on the aspects of sustainable park development and conservation.
Along with Ronnie Torlao and Julius Biala, I led the first group via
the Sibulan-Cabarisan-Lower Tibolo trails on April 15 while the upper part
comprising the following areas: Baruring, Colan, Tumpis, Garuc, Basakan,
Tinikaran and Boulders, was conducted by a Mt. Apo super guide Roger Navarro
and his team along with the Sibulan Porters Association.
As per observation not only during the assessment but also with my
frequent climbing to the country’s highest peak, there are portions of Mt. Apo
that have already been identified with high conservation value. Several flora
and fauna dwells in this part of the country, whether common to the Philippines
or unique in MANP. The presence of multi million-peso structures, as well as
ecotourism activities and constant increase of settlements are observed to be reasons
why MANP is very vulnerable to destruction. Habitat loss is an obvious remark
as farming activities by the residents already approaches within the forest
portions.
During the whole course of the assessment, we saw more of the threats than
biological resources. There is variety of life, of course, in MANP but we
identified it through indirect observations. The threats, on the other hand,
were very obvious such as landslide, inappropriate farming activities by the
locals, cases of kaingin, illegal cutting of trees, hunting, grass fires and the likes.
These observations should not gain momentum in at least three to five
years, otherwise, biodiversity in MANP will be another subject of severe
extinction. With the complicated scenario of MANP in all areas, we could not
afford to just let it run through the flow without efforts for conservation in
a strongest possible manner. Ecotourism should be regulated, whether we like it
or not. The local community should also be empowered as they have better stance
towards biodiversity conservation being in the area for the rest of their
existence. Existing industrial investments should level up their initiatives
for Corporate Social Responsibility with focus on environmental restoration. And,
further industrial development in MANP should be thoroughly reviewed to a point
of giving more weight to environmental considerations.
Presently, there are efforts towards MANP conservation as spearheaded
by the Protected Area Management Board (PMB) with strong support by B+WISER
particularly the ecotourism committee where a uniform trekking policy will be
implemented sometime in May this year. This is foreseen to be a vital step
towards habitat protection and restoration. Personally, I think a change is
within reach in as far as mountain climbing regulation is concerned. Unlike
before when ecotourism policies were not harmonized and every LGU had different
guidelines, today’s newly-approved policy will definitely set the tone towards
a more comprehensive ecotourism program implementation.
Biodiversity is what we look for as source of life. Yet, its efforts
for conservation have been practically overlooked. While it is true that biodiversity
is the soul for survival of the human race, its importance had been ignored
through the years. If we throwback the timeline of creation in whatever way we
believed there was, there were very little effort for biodiversity
conservation. We always converse on biodiversity conservation but we act the
other way around.
What’s next after all these efforts of biodiversity assessments? Are
we just going to compile the results in our respective databases? I supposed
these have to be presented to higher authorities for appropriate action, but
how long will we wait?