Status, Problems and Challenges of Ecotourism in Bay, Laguna: The Case of the Butterfly Center

Laurence C. Beruin BA Sociology SOC 170 V Department of Social Sciences University of the PhilippinesLos Baos

Abstract Ecotourism has always been a well-known industry in the province of Laguna. This study
talks about the current status, problems faced, and future challenges of ecotourism in the municipality of Bay, Laguna focused on the case of the Butterfly Center, a known tourist attraction in the said town. Purposive sampling was done to choose the respondents. Descriptive statistics was used to interpret data collected. The data showed that ecotourism in the municipality of Bay gave the town a giant leap from what it only used to be, a historical figure, to something new, tourist destination. The conclusion is that ecotourism in the municipality still has a long way to go but if the local government and private-owned attractions will work together plus the support from the national government, Bays ecotourism will flourish like any other towns in the Philippines should be.

Introduction
Philippines, a country located in tropical region, is known to have a high level of biodiversity throughout its archipelago. The fact of its rich flora and fauna is a considerable basis for it to promote and optimize ecotourism (Ecotourism in the Philippines, 2011). Ecotourism is defined as a form of sustainable tourism within a natural and cultural heritage area. It is a where community participation, protection and management of natural resources, culture and indigenous knowledge and practices, environmental education and ethics,

as well as economic benefits are fostered and pursued for the enrichment of host communities and satisfaction of visitors (National Economic Strategy: Preliminary Draft, 2001). As a developing country on Southeast Asia, it is not only a significant tool in sustainable development as it advocates protection and preservation of natural resources but it also places mechanisms that are environmentally sustainable, economically viable, and socially equitable. That is in order to bring forth development that will benefit local communities and contribute to our governments finances. (Ecotourism in the Philippines, 2011). The main ecotourism sites and destinations in the Philippines include: Hundred Islands National Park; El Nido, Palawan; Vigan, Ilocos Sur; Taon Strait, Negros Oriental; Tubbataha Reef National Marine Park and World Heritage Site, Palawan; Donsol Whale Shark Attraction, Sorsogon; Taal Volcano, Batangas; Siargao, Surigao del Norte; Island of Mindoro; Apo Island Marine and Fish Sanctuary, Negros Oriental; Mt. Apo, Mindanao; Batanes Islands; Bohol Island; Mount Makiling, Laguna; Mount Bulusan Natural Park, Sorsogon; Mount Mayon, Albay; Camiguin Island; Olango Island, Central Visayas; Cordillera Rice Terraces; Peablanca Protected Landscape, Cagayan; Puerto Princesa Subterranean Underground River, Palawan; Sangat Island, Palawan. Among those ecotourism sites, the Puerto Princesa Undeground river was considered as of the New 7 Wonders of Nature (About the Philippines, 2012). Given that ecotourism is prevalent all through the country, this study seeks to identify the present condition of ecotourism in Bay, Laguna with the Butterfly Center as the main focus which is located in the said municipality. The specific objectives of the study are 1) to describe the current status of ecotourism in the town focused on the respondents perception of the Butterfly Center; 2) to enumerate the problems related to ecotourism that had been previously encountered; and 3) to identify the challenges of ecotourism in terms of its betterment and promoting the municipality as a tourist destination.

Methodology
Study Sample. Unstructured interviews and use of existing records were used in this study. A total of 26 respondents included in this study are the tourists from the Butterfly center on the time of the interview and local residents who visited the place. The Butterfly center is situated inside the Grand Villa Resort and Butterfly Center in Brgy. Tranca, Bay, Laguna.
2

Locale of study. The study was conducted in Bay, Laguna on the month of March, 2011 that lasted for 2 weeks. It is geographically located in the center of the Laguna province bounded by Laguna de Bay on the north; municipality of Calauan on the east; municipality of Los Baos on the west; and the municipality of Sto. Tomas, Batangas on the south. It is part of the second district of its province (MPDO, 2011). The earliest known written document about the municipality of Bay was from the Conuest of the Island of Luzon printed on April 20, 1572. The lake beside the town was named after the town, Laguna de Bay. This municipality was the first capital of Laguna before it was transferred to Pagsanjan in 1688. The year 1571 was the official start of the town history. A legend about the municipality of Bay was researched and written by Melchor S. Panisales articulating that a datu named Datu Pangil with her three beautiful daughters was the residents of the current location of the town. During the Spanish period, a brother of our national hero in the name of Paciano Rizal lived in one of the towns barangay which is now named after him. As of now, Bay includes 15 barangays (2 ourban, 13 rural) which are as follows: San Agustin, San Nicolas, Bitin, Calo, Dila, Maititm, Masaya, Paciano Rizal, Puypuy, San Antonio, Sta. Cruz, Sto. Domingo, Tagumapy, and Tranca. Some known tourist destination in the municipality includes: St. Agustine Parish Church in Brgy. San agustin; green rice fields and colorful bougainvillea along the provincial highway in Brgy. Dila; Royal Palm leisure park, Goshen Place resort (1950), Los Baos Forest Club and Tesoros farm in Brgy. Puypuy; Escoverb Private Pool in Brgy. Sto. Domingo; Riceview Agro resort, Christian John resort, Serena resort, Maria Luisa Resort (1, 2 and 3) and Villa Elena Resort in Brgy. Masaya; Grand Villa resort and Butterfly Center in Brgy. Tranca; and Maspeth Family resort in Brgy. Maitim. Data Collection Method. Purposive sampling, type of sampling where a researcher chooses the sample based on who they think are appropriate for the study, was used to determine the necessary participants for the study. Primary data were taken from the interviews. Secondary data were taken from existing records and precise documents from the Municipal Hall and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and Department of Tourism (DOT) websites.
3

Data Analysis Tool. Descriptive statistics in the form of percentages and frequencies were used to analyze data from the respondents. Statistical data are presented in tabular form for better understanding. Answers from interview questions were generalized and used to describe their understanding of the place and ecotourism of the town as a whole. Conceptual Framework. As the study seeks to examine the current condition of ecotourism in Bay municipality by analyzing the case of Butterfly center, it needs a paradigm that draws out generalization from personal understandings. Sociological imagination is a logical perspective that encourages critical thinking and expands ones horizon allowing one to view the social world outside ones self (Rosales, Maga, Roslin, Cereno, & Tapay, 2010). According to C. Wright Mills (1959, as cited by Rosales, et al., 2010), it is the ability to see the connection between our personal lives and the social we are living in. This ability is a quality of mind that must be possessed by a sociologist. It is the application of imaginative thought to the asking and answering of sociological questions. A person using the sociological imagination "thinks himself away" from the familiar routines of daily life (Giddens, 1996). Sociological imagination, on its broadest sense, must be able to discern between personal troubles and public issues and discover the connections between his/her way of life to the social world he/she exists. Using the sociological imagination, the personal experiences of the tourists at the Butterfly Center is the basis of what is the current condition of ecotourism in the town of Bay which is on a societal level. This study focuses on using the interviews to relate their responses to the current state of ecotourism and situates them in a social context that assesses the whole society they belong. The way the participants of the study reacted, felt and perceived their surroundings throughout their stay in the place primarily contribute to the better understanding of what is happening since they are the ones whom the purpose of ecotourism is made for.

Results and Discussions

Profile of the Respondents. Table 1 shows that out of the 26 respondents, 42% or 11 respondents were males and 58% or 15 were females. The oldest among them was 64 while the youngest was on his 17th. The age group 18 to 27 consists of the highest number of respondents with 9 or 35%. On the other hand, age group with 17 below had the lowest gaining only 7% or 2

people. Regarding the place where the respondents reside: 18 of them were form the province, 3 from Metro Manila, and 5 were from other places1. Table 2 shows the economic status of the respondents divided into upper class, middle class, and those who are undefined of their current financial capabilities. Their economic status is based on their own perception of those classes (i.e. their wage, way of living) while the undefined are the ones who cannot properly distinguish if their middle class or on the lower class2. Lower class is not represented in the table3.
Table 1. Characteristics of the respondents

Category
Gender: Male Female

Number of Respondents

Percentage (%)

11 15

42 58

Age Group: 17 and below 18 to 27 28 to 40 41 and above 2 9 8 7 8 34 31 27

Residence: Municipality of Bay Other areas in Laguna Metro Manila Other Places 16 2 3 5 61 8 12 19

1 2

Those 5 respondents were from neighboring provinces such as Batangas and Rizal. For the sake of clarification, the author of this study asked the respondents about the range of their income so as not to confuse on the authors understanding of the definition of upper, middle, and lower classes which is shown on Table 1. 3 Based on the authors bias, he does not included lower class because he thought that those who belong in the lower class cannot afford to vacation in this kind of place.

Table 2. Economic status of the respondents.

Economic Status (income in Php)

Upper class ( > 1 Million)

Number of Respondents

Percentage (%)

23

Middle class (100 000 to 1 Million)

17

65

Undefined (N/A)

12

Out of the 26 respondents, 23% or 6 of them considered themselves as upper class while 65% or 17 considered themselves on the middle class. 3 of them are unsure of their status in terms of the classifications, hence undefined. The richest respondent in terms of wealth had an estimated yearly income of Php 2 Million. Respondents Description of the Place. Results from the interview of the respondents showed that all of the respondents agreed to use the Filipino term maganda as the best word to describe the whole place. The fact that it was secluded from the noise of the streets and busy cities made it a nice place to stay for vacation. Generalizing all the respondents descriptions based on the interviews, the paragraph below shows their description: The Butterfly center was an amazing place that had a very relaxing ambiance. It is a good place to relax and unwind especially when you are in need of a cozy feeling as if the place was paradise. It housed many different kinds of butterflies and beautiful flowers. The place was made for all people of all ages. All of the people, especially the children really enjoyed the butterflies roaming around the place as if playing with them.

In terms of satisfaction with the place including the whole facilities of Grand Villa resort, not all the participants are very pleased. Only 24 respondents or 92% (refer to Fig.1) were very satisfied and the other 2 respondents were only fairly satisfied with the place. Respondents Way of Knowing the Place. Majority of the respondents have known the place by word of mouth. People they know who visited the place told them that it was something to be visited especially if a person or family is going to have an outing or any occasions such as birthdays and weddings. Other respondents have known it through advertisements on different media. They said that the place was featured on a TV show last January. There is also the Internet where the place has a website that showcases the whole resort (About us: Grand Villa Resort and Butterfly Center, 2011). Respondents Perception on Promoting Ecotourism. After specifying to the respondents the definition of ecotourism, all of the respondents agreed that the place promotes ecotourism in Bay, Laguna. According to them, the Butterfly center was a good investment in terms of ecotourism. It does not only exhibits the beauty of nature but at the same time it promotes the importance of taking care of the environment; even the smallest creatures. It showcases the beauty of nature, something unique to the Philippines. Added was the fact that it is just an hour and a half away from Metro Manila, and its strategic location, which is only beside the majestic Mt. Makiling, will truly be beneficial to the ecotourism industry of the country. It was also believed to attract a great number of tourists here and abroad when promoted properly. Adequateness and Insufficiency of the Butterfly Center. After asking the respondents how they thought of the place and as a mean of ecotourism, the last part of the interview were about what lacks from the place, if there were any, or if it was sufficient as it is. 21 respondents or 81% (refer to Fig.2) believed that the place is as good and sufficient as it is since it provides enjoyment and additional knowledge to the tourists. In a way, it captures the essence of relaxation while promoting the ecotourism in our country. The place helps to promote the beauty of life and nature in our country and could somehow help the dying economy of our country. It can attract visitors not only from the province but also from Manila and it caters all what they went for the place.
7

For the 5 respondents or 19% who thought it was still lacking, they said that there were still many room for improvements. There were still many vacant lots all over the resort. Some of them thought that the butterfly center was not that spacious enough for the butterflies to roam around so they need to widen the place. Another is that the price of entering the resort is a bit expensive. Not anyone can afford their price unless they offer promos and discounts to those aspiring visitors of the Butterfly Center. Also, the place was hard to find at first especially for the respondents coming from Manila or far places and that it seems like the municipality had no support on promoting it since the place was private-owned. They also said that the place lacks better promotional and marketing campaigns. It had been operating for some years now and it experienced layoffs due to a low return of investment (few tourists and visitors). Things like that may not happen if they made large scale promotions of the place. Some questions were also raised regarding the participation of the local government. They said that barangay officials especially the barangay captains way of maintaining peace and order helped the place to be more attractive but they do not know if there were specific programs from the municipal hall concerning ecotourism or tourism itself.

Fairly Satisfied 8%

Lacking, 19%

Very Satisfied 92%

Sufficent , 81% Figure 2. Adequateness and Insufficiency of the Butterfly Center

Figure 1. Percentage of respondents satisfied with the Butterfly Center

Conclusions and Recommendations

Understanding the data from interviews using the sociological imagination, we can conclude that ecotourism in Bay have built its own reputation but still has a long way to go in order to fully utilized its hidden potential. As of now, the whole tourism industry specifically ecotourism in the town of Bay, unlike its neighboring towns, is still in its early stages of being renowned. It offers varieties of refuge that will cater the needs of different tourists. Ecotourism made the valuable treasures of the town priceless; preserving what was left to the gifts of nature. At the same time, it gave additional source of livelihood to the locals and funds for the municipality (MPDO, 2011). With ecotourism, it promoted the beauty of Bay like never been before. Few known concerns were in terms of the monetary issues and government collaboration. To maintain such beauty and to preserve ecotourism sites needs higher funds than normal tourist destinations leading to a bit stiff entrance fees. Also, the town lacks more promotions to advertise the beauty of the place and better directions on how to go to these beautiful sceneries. Some of the places may be private-owned but those are still part of the town and pride of the Bayeos. The local government unit does only give a little effort in this industry, the same as to those plain-looking towns in the country. The challenge for the municipal government now is on how to consolidate further with private-owned ecotourism sites. If the local government is to work with them hand in hand, the town will not only be famous as the first capital of Laguna but also as a legacy on flora and fauna. Department of Tourism and Department of Environment and Natural Resources are the two national government agencies that will provide the necessary help on this kind of venture. Under the Executive Order No. 111 or the establishing the guidelines for ecotourism development in the Philippines, the above agencies will provide assistance on the development and promotion of the ecotourism in any part of the country which are viable and sustainable activities in supporting the protection of our environment while contributing concurrently to the growth of the economy (National Ecotourism Strategy, 2002). And most notably, tourism-related ordinances will be of great help for future endeavors in this line of industry.

Ecotourism may be a small scale venture for now but who knows in 5 or 10 years, the municipality of Bay will be lined up with Los Baos and Pagsanjan as prime tourist destinations in Laguna, or even with Palawan as primer ecotourism site in the whole archipelago.

References
About the Philippines. (2012). Retrieved March 16, 2012, from Department of Tourism: http://www.visitmyphilippines.com/index.php?title=AboutthePhilippines&func=all&pid=17&tbl=1 About us: Grand Villa Resort and Butterfly Center. (2011). Retrieved March 18, 2012, from Grand Villa Resort and Butterfly Center: www.grandvillaresort.ph Ecotourism in the Philippines. (2011). Retrieved March 16, 2012, from Philippine Trails Web site: http://www.philippinetrails.com/eco.html Giddens, A. (1996). Introduction to Sociology. New York: Norton & Company Inc. Mills, C. (Oxford University Press). The Sociological Imagination. London: 1959. MPDO, M. P. (2011). Municipal Profile of Bay, Laguna. Laguna: Municipality of Bay. National Economic Strategy: Preliminary Draft. (2001, December). Retrieved March 16, 2012, from Department of Tourism Philippines: http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.visitmyphilippines.com/images/ads/17d34ce853cd3b2c4fa9 740970c1b061.doc&sa=U&ei=zKtiT_fSCIKTiAfRornzBQ&ved=0CAYQFjAB&client=internal-udscse&usg=AFQjCNFPA5J2l7VtPzQZ-MnSfrWwc77hAw National Ecotourism Strategy. (2002, July). Retrieved March 16, 2012, from Philippine Clearing House Mechanism for Biodiversity: http://www.chm.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=210&Itemid=122 Ng, M. A. (2003). The ethics and attitudes towards ecotourism in the philippines. Retrieved March 16, 2012, from Eubios Ethics Institute Web site: http://www.eubios.info/ABC4/abc4313.htm Rosales, A., Maga, J., Roslin, M., Cereno, R., & Tapay, N. (2010). Social impact of Ecotourism on Livelihood: The Case of Ambulant Vendors in Makiling Botanic Gardens, University of the Philippines, Los Baos, Laguna. Jounal of Nature Studies , 127-134.

10