A Tree for Juan

A Tree for Juan
By Prospero E. Pulma Jr.

A comparison between the heavily polluted but dynamic cities and relatively pristine backwaters of our country would make anybody believe that economic development is synonymous with environmental degradation. The view that wanton destruction of nature is the price of industrialization is not unfounded: a factory that employs thousands and generates revenues also sits on cleared forest, emits toxic fumes and dumps raw sewage could fit the image of progress gone awry. But the exclusion of lower social classes from partaking of the gains of development loomed as a greater tragedy than profligate utilization of natural resources or reducing the archipelago to a virtual wasteland.
To compound the inequity in wealth distribution is the glaring truth that the Philippines has profited little from the improvident exploitation of its natural resources. For stripping mountains of lush forests, the country has degenerated from a timber exporter to a wood importer. Forest denudation - approximately 18% of the original forest cover remains - has aggravated soil erosion, sedimentation, pushed many species of flora and fauna to the brink of extinction and earned the country the enviable title of an ecological hotspot. Fish catch has dwindled owing to destructive fishing methods, overfishing, pollution and poaching; most of the archipelago's coral reefs and mangrove forests are barely thriving. The unregulated extraction of groundwater has caused subsidence in some areas, particularly in Metro Manila, and stoked fears that seawater could contaminate aquifers. Those who rely on a healthy environment for their livelihood are now facing a bleak future. Despite all these, a wide gulf still divides the rich and poor. Indeed, the price for advancing the economy a few small steps has been very steep for the Filipino.
The failure to adhere to stringent conservation measures to make long-term development more sustainable is more rueful than the dismal state of the country's ecosystem or the marginalization of the common Filipino. The enactment of environmental legislation is laudable, but unabated air and water pollution that cost billions of pesos annually and logging in protected areas only serve as grim reminders of the lax enforcement of our laws. Poverty is partly responsible for the proliferation of slash-and-burn farming, cyanide/dynamite fishing and wildlife poaching. Politics smeared the granting of a logging concession straddling protected forests in Samar to a firm linked to a controversial politician. Corruption, plain shortsightedness and a miniscule government appropriation have hampered environmental protection and conservation projects. The efforts of the equally cash-strapped private sector to preserve nature are mere drops in the ocean. Arresting the deterioration of the environment without adversely affecting the economy has become a Herculean task.
Preserving what little is left is a step in the right direction. The creation of protected enclaves where wildlife could recuperate and thrive and the prohibition of the trade of endangered flora and fauna are commendable. Strict law enforcement is necessary to rectify the perception that the implementation of environmental laws only bags the “small fish” and insure the success of a conservation project. Enhancing social services and providing alternative means of living may wean the poor from destructive farming and fishing methods for sustenance. Spreading environmental awareness - manifested by the fierce opposition of the people of Samar to the opening of the Samar Island Natural Park to logging - could relegate the role of protecting nature to every Filipino. The ultimate goal of all of these should be to attain economic development without courting an ecological catastrophe or marginalizing a social class.