Busol politics

LETTERS FROM THE AGNO

March Fianza

BAGUIO CITY -- As young boys who roamed around the old water tank in the forest, we were always warned not to be staying out late as this was where the “busol” took refuge from pursuing cops. That was how the Busol Forest got its name. The busol was described as a feared head-hunter, a stick up artist and a thief who victimized houses below. That has changed. The modern busol today is one who manipulates and takes advantage of illegal occupants of the forested area.

Busol politicians are at it again. It is good know that Busol stakeholders are about to come to an agreement, but implementing the same is not easy, especially during an election time. We understand the dilemma, but politicians see in these times the benefit that they get from the illegal settlers.

Legitimate ancestral land claimants and squatters alike can cast votes, the trees cannot. Also, Busol land cases are being heard in court. I hope these latest moves by politicians do not muddle the issue further.

In the thesis submitted by Christopher Edward Roddan to the University of Victoria, British Columbia in 1994 as a requirement for the Degree of Master of Science, he wrote and I quote: “… numerous instances of political interference by past administrations in the management of the watershed allowed elected officials to garner votes by allowing people to occupy the watershed. Some of these local elites have been able to acquire building permits within the watershed. Overtime, schools, roads, water supplies and electrical facilities have been established by various administrations. The inhabitants of the watershed view these services as legitimizing their communities.” 

That is true. Another notorious issue is the fight for ancestral lands. Although this time, the antagonists are the legitimate land claimants who have held on to their native titles and prior rights versus elected public officials. Many were successfully voted upon to satisfy their private interests.

The reason LGU heads are fighting legitimate Busol land claimants may not be for the protection of the remaining forest but a fight for selfish ambitions.

Under the same thesis by Roddan of the University of Victoria, he came to a conclusion that protecting the remaining forest needs the cooperation of all stakeholders under a “participatory management” concept. Through participation, all parties will be aware of the need to conserve and protect projects for the watershed for their own good and for the LGU and other government agencies.

Participation demands the involvement of the forest occupants in the maintenance and preservation of the area. But that may be easier said than implemented. It is because authorities do not have the data on who are legitimate land owners and no data on the area claimed by them. Neither do they have the data on how many illegal constructions are inside. All they know is that by making an agreement with all kinds of occupants, they will have votes in the May 2016 election.

Politics and patronage are the primary reasons why squatting in the city cannot be stopped. It is because there are people in “public service” and in government law service who are themselves the protectors of squatters. So that making insinuations about “forest protection and anti-illegal squatting” may not be believable anymore.

City hall does not have to remind itself that many forested parks and mountains are occupied by informal settlers and continue to be squatted on. The truth is, city officials have been legalizing the entry of illegal occupants by passing laws that legitimately converted the occupied areas that were previously forested into LGU barangays. Again, squatters can vote and trees cannot. If so, then efforts to protect the watershed as a water source could be hopeless.

Fence in or fence out? Lately, city hall, the Baguio Re-greening Movement and Baguio Water District started fencing the perimeters of Busol. The goal is to stop the entry of squatters or occupants into the forest. But just like the fencing project along South Drive that was supposed to stop squatters from increasing or widening their occupied lots, it is a mistake that is destined to be repeated.

The illegal occupants behind the Teachers Camp buildings continued to increase because the fence was installed by the South Drive road. It did not fence-out the illegal occupants, instead it fenced-in the squatters. That is bound to be repeated in the Busol case if no corrections are made as early as tomorrow morning.