Dirty mining

Is it possible for a whole mountain to disappear with no one at the national government able to account for it?

Until recently, the answer to that seemingly improbable question was: Yes, of course.

After all, isn’t it that no one could account for the 20 or so missing esteros at the heart of the National Capital Region no less? Through sheer neglect or through some corrupt conspiracy, the esteros were filled up or built over, the illicit property resulting from such acts have been properly titled and the vital waterways simply disappeared from the public realm.

Our society has been described many times over as ungovernable. But the loss of natural resources because of loopholes in policy or slack administration is simply unpardonable.

Already, some of our most beautiful lakes have been privately occupied by fishpen operators. We have seen the pitiful state of the Laguna be Bay until the DENR stepped in and started tearing up the pens. At Lake Buhi and Lake Lanao, unique marine species are threatened by the same process of private acquisition of public resources.

But nothing equaled the scale of environmental damage, theft of natural resources and private appropriation of the revenue stream due government than a loophole in the devolution of government allowed to fester for too long. That loophole concerns the distinction drawn between large-scale mining and small-scale mining.

One might call it a distinction between clean mining and dirty mining.

Large scale mining operations are heavily capitalized. They use state-of-the art technology that minimizes environmental costs. They are expertly regulated under the strict provisions of the Mining Act by the Mines and Geosciences Bureau. These large mining operations are required to post a bond to cover ecological repair in the aftermath of a mining operation.

Small scale mining is the equivalent of kaingin. With limited capital and constrained to rely on hand tools alone, small scale mining operations scratch the earth, cut the trees and open up the land. They cause landslides, flashfloods and pollute waterways. To top it all, very little revenue flows to the national government — which, in the end, will be left holding the bag and spending to repair the environmental damage.

It is the excesses of small scale mining operations that give the mining industry a bad name. It is the large scale, modern mining operations that get the rap and reap the wrath of technically uninformed bishops and militant tree lovers.

Few of us knew, until the very recent controversy between DENR Secretary Lito Atienza and a few provincial governors, that the provisions of the local government code took supervision over small scale mining permits away from the technically equipped national government agencies and put in the untrained hands of local government executives.

To this day, the DENR does not know exactly how many permits have been issued for small scale mining operations as well as how much ore is being extracted (more accurately, scraped off the surface). No one knows how many trees have been cut by these small operations and how much revenue share government gets under the principles of the regalian doctrine.

Remember the utter chaos that characterized lahar quarrying in Pampanga before the new governor stepped in? All the mayors, those now seeking to expel the governor, collected revenues from all the quarrying operators for themselves. I mean, not for their municipalities but for themselves. When the governor stepped in and levied fees on behalf of the provincial government, the province’s income multiplied astoundingly. And the mayors were unhappy.

The same happens on a grand scale on the matter of small scale mining permits. Provincial executives may issue out permits to small miners. In the most notorious cases, these permits are issued out to the same operators using different corporate names but controlling large continuous areas. These operators end up with what are actually large scale operations taking advantage of more relaxed regulations granted small miners.

It is much like issuing separate mayor’s permits to a syndicate of sidewalk vendors who end up establishing a virtual mall on pedestrian space.

Worse, the ore extracted from these messy operations are exported directly without the need to report the output to the DENR. What this means is that a huge leakage in revenue becomes possible from which local executives could amass fabulous wealth. So lucrative this loophole might be that one “small” operator built his own port facility, the better to take out the ore in unregulated quantities.

To correct this anomalous situation, Secretary Atienza issued DENR Administrative Order 2008-20 requiring a Mineral Ore Export Permit for the overseas transport of ore. Local executives will not lose their power to grant small scale mining permits consistent with the provisions of the Local Government Code. But the DENR will now have a way to maintain a consolidated tally of how much ore is being shipped out (and how much revenue is due government).

That might seem to be a happy compromise between devolution and effective state monitoring of mining extracts. But a couple of provincial governors, those rumored to have made a killing out of dirty mining operations, are seriously unhappy about an arrangement that simply requires them to report actual output.

Dragging in the names of some of their unsuspecting colleagues, the ringleaders of this governors’ revolt have put out full-page ads condemning the DENR measure and appealing to the President to cause its revocation. Soon enough, however, as the wisdom of this order became clear, some of the supposed signatories have withdrawn their names and publicly apologized.

That anomalous loophole must be closed.