By SHERWIN DE VERA
www.nordis.net
BAGUIO CITY—The Cabacanan Small Reservoir Irrigation Project (CSRIP) in Pagudpud town, Ilocos Norte, offers a myriad of potential benefits for farmers once completed in 2028: increased cropping intensity, higher crop yield, more farm output and higher income.
The 39-meter-high dam in the Cabacanan River will augment the water supply to the existing irrigated area and the basal water supply to the new service area in the fourth-class municipality, famed for its beaches and resorts. The residents primarily rely on fishing and agriculture for their livelihoods.
Despite its promise of a better life for the farmers, the Balangon community in Barangay Dampig’s Saliclic village still grapples with the dam’s potential impact on their ancestral land, livelihood, and neighboring communities.
Balangon is one of the three Isnag communities affected by the P838-million project funded by the national government.
Now, the Balangons face a difficult decision – balancing perceived threats and promised benefits before granting or withholding consent for the project. Worse, their pursuit of clarity on these issues has strained the relationship between the Isnag tribal councils and other communities likely to benefit from the irrigation system.

Ambo Garvida, secretary of the Isnag Yapayao Balangon Tribal Council (IYBTC), said the project raised many concerns at council meetings, which used to cover only community activities, tribal policies, work schedules, projects, and finances.
“We are very much concerned about its possible impacts on our ancestral domain, especially with our access to areas covered by the projects and traditional livelihoods like fishing,” he said in Ilokano back in August.
Council members expressed frustration over the government’s limited information about the project, which made it difficult to understand its impacts.

Garvida said their decision to withhold consent has “driven a wedge” between them and communities that stand to benefit from the project. The proposed facility will not irrigate farmlands in their village. However, this is not their reason for withholding consent.
“We are also farmers. If the intention of the Cabacanan dam is for irrigation, why would we oppose it? This is exactly what we, the farmers, desire—to improve irrigation and make water more accessible for our fields,” he said.
“But we should not rush our decision regarding projects that significantly impact the environment and our ancestral domain. We are simply asking for more information and time,” he added.

“Better lives for farmers”
The CSRIP is part of the National Irrigation Systems outlined in the National Irrigation Master Plan 2020-2030, which identifies nearly 319 hectares of potential irrigable land. The Ilocos Regional Development Plan 2023-2028 noted its significance in expanding and improving irrigation networks.
In its October 2021 Revised Project Description, NIA outlined to irrigate 501 hectares, including 64 hectares of newly designated areas, benefiting seven barangays and allowing over 1,000 farmers to plant rice three times a year.
NIA’s case study projects cropping intensity to rise from 135% to 195%, with rice yields increasing to 5–5.5 tons per hectare and non-rice crops yielding 15–20 tons per hectare. This could boost production from 1,104 to 3,925 tons, amounting to a net production value of P64.4 million. Additionally, 10% of the reservoir is allocated for aquaculture, with an estimated annual output of P42.7 million.
Seeing its potential, the concerned local governments have endorsed the project.

Consent withheld
Dams remain a contentious issue globally, including in the Philippines. Impacts identified in the November 2000 World Commission on Dams report, including social and economic displacement, continue to resonate with indigenous peoples and environmental advocates.
Under Philippine law, project proponents must secure free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from indigenous communities for projects in their territories. Section 59 of the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act mandates a Certification Precondition (CP) from the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), granted only after FPIC proceedings and agreement with the community are reviewed and approved.
For the dam project, NCIP identified affected areas within the Isnag ancestral domain of the Balangon, Saguigui, and Ugayam tribal councils. However, only the IYBTC withheld consent during a November 2023 meeting meant to build consensus. In a December 2023 statement, the Balangon and Ugayam tribes asked NCIP to suspend the FPIC proceedings. They raised concerns that the project might function as a hydropower facility and that it is close to an active fault. Adding to their apprehensions are the risks of flooding and dam collapse. The tribes also questioned the classification of the “small reservoir,” as its height qualifies it as a large dam, according to the International Commission on Large Dams.

Informed consent
Despite pressures from all sides, including reported harassment by state forces, the Balangon maintained their stance during subsequent meetings, requesting NIA to present the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report as part of the FPIC process.
The EIA evaluates and predicts a project’s potential immediate and cumulative environmental impacts during construction, operation, and abandonment. It also includes strategies to mitigate these effects to protect the environment and community welfare.
During their meetings, Garvida noted that NIA and NCIP never informed them about the EIA report. Instead, they learned about it from advocacy groups, which helped them better understand the project.
“I think they (NIA and NCIP) had no intention of presenting the report during the FPIC process. They keep asking us about our consent and moving on with the MOA negotiations without fully addressing our concerns,” he said.

NCIP Ilocos Norte legal officer Jifford Rosqueta clarified in January 2024 that consent must be unanimous across the ancestral domain. Without Balangon approval, the project cannot proceed.
In an interview in June this year, following NIA’s request to resume the FPIC process, Rosqueta acknowledged that EIA is mentioned in the FPIC guidelines but said its presentation in the proceedings is not mandatory. He explained that they informed the community that they could request documents from the proponent and ask for expert assistance.
Section 22 of the guidelines mandates parties to inform the communities about the “option, selection, and invitation of independent experts to conduct EIA or provide their expert opinion.” The provision also states the “presentation of the result of the EIA if available.”

Ruben Guieb, a retired US environmental regulator and advocate, highlighted a recurring issue in FPIC processes: “They (NCIP) hold community meetings with no documented information except for the proponent’s word,” he said.
He stressed that the EIA report is essential to ensuring informed decisions among indigenous communities on projects in their territory.
Guieb noted that the Cabacanan dam is not an isolated case: “What I have observed here is something I have been noticing for a while, especially in the FPIC process regarding the Kaliwa Dam, the minidam in our area, and the Apayao Dams,” he said.
Beverly Longid, national convenor of the Indigenous Peoples’ group Katribu, remarked that while FPIC and EIA are separate processes, they should complement each other.
“The EIA should be part of the truthful and full disclosure. FPIC is not merely a process but a demonstration of our right to self-determination, which includes our right to information,” she said.

‘Partial victory’
While reeling from the onslaught of Typhoon “Julian” (international name: “Krathon”), IYBTC members in Pagudpud took a break from their farmwork on Oct. 10 for a crucial meeting with NIA-Ilocos Norte Irrigation Management Office (NIA-INMIO) and NCIP.
They anticipated a significant update on the dam project and were not disappointed. That day, NIA presented and discussed the EIA report with the council.
Saluadan, a church-led environmental network in the province, called the development a “partial victory,” but noted the document “remains deficient in addressing crucial issues.” On top of the group’s concerns is the EIA’s non-recognition of the Isnag ancestral domain.
In the “Land Tenure” section, the July 2024 document stated: “(T)here is no ancestral domain. However, the presence of indigenous peoples’ community is observed.” It further noted the nearest Certificate of Ancestral Land Title is in Apayao, about 17 kilometers from the project site.
“[The EIA] narrowly bases its recognition on the CADT (certificate of ancestral domain title), ignoring the fact that the Isnag has lived on and stewarded their ancestral domain long before the CADT system was introduced. Such an oversight reflects a troubling disregard for their ancestral rights and historical claims,” said Rev. Alvin Mangrubang, the network’s lead convener.
This perspective, he added, may overlook social and cultural repercussions, including “potential loss of control over their land and traditional livelihoods.”

The EIA report also mentioned the presence of a nearby active fault, about 8.8 kilometers east of the area, validating one of the concerns raised by the community.
Its proximity to the Kalbario-Patapat National Park may also impact the ecosystem and biodiversity. These include three species of fauna listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature as “vulnerable” and two flora species under the “endangered” category. The assessment also mentioned that flooding was among the key household concerns.
While recognizing efforts to present the project’s ecological impact and proposed mitigating measures, Mangrubang said, “conservation strategies outlined are vague and generalized.”
“These could lead to environmental policies that not only disregard indigenous methods of resource management but also restrict their traditional use of these resources,” he said.

Assured but cautious
Levy Glenn Tolentino, the engineering section chief of NIA-INMIO, clarified that the project design follows the agency’s irrigation dam guidelines, which address flooding, earthquakes, and dam collapse.
He dismissed fears that the dam is intended for hydropower, explaining that the water volume is insufficient to turn a turbine. The engineer also assured that the community would retain control over the area and be part of the multipartite management committee.
“Even if we show the program of works, nothing indicates hydropower—purely for irrigation purposes,” he said in an interview in July.
Tolentino said the communities could set their conditions in the agreement, including the hydropower matter and full access to the watershed.
Under the FPIC guidelines, the proponent should stick to the design presented to the community. Any changes after the project has been completed or construction has commenced would require a new set of proceedings.

During the Oct. 10 meeting, NIA also agreed to present the results to other concerned communities in the Ilokano language.
“We are glad that they granted our request. While this may not answer all our questions and concerns, we are a step closer to understanding the project and its impact and arriving at an informed decision,” Garvida said.
“With the scheduled public assembly, NIA can better explain the project, and other communities can raise questions and participate in decision-making. That way, it will be a collective responsibility of the communities,” Garvida added.
However, he stressed that they remain cautious, noting that indigenous peoples have experienced government failures to uphold their commitments, ultimately resulting in the dispossession of their lands and resources.
No consent from the Balangon community is forthcoming, as the NIA has yet to schedule the promised public consultation on the EIA result. # nordis.net
This story is part of the Strengthening Transparency in Infrastructure Development through Environmental Reporting in Southeast Asia project, funded by the Earth Journalism Network – Internews.