Why the Tragedy of Cagayan de Oro's Huluga Heritage Site Should Always be Remembered
Mike Banos
August 05, 2006
In the early '70s, researchers found skeletal remains in one cave. It was mixed with pottery shards, glass beads, a native spoon, a pendant, a bracelet, stone tools, an ax tip and pieces of iron.
A major find was a female cranium with associated material culture such as a boat-shaped coffin, broken pieces of earthenware, stone and metal tools. Researchers also found ceramics dating back to the Sung and Ming dynasties.
Dr. Erlinda Burton, an archaeologist who used to work with the famous British-Kenyan paleoanthropologist Dr. Louis S. B. Leakey -- made a survey of Huluga in those years, and sent a piece of the cranium to Dr. Jeffrey Bada of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California in San Diego, California. Bada subjected the item to acid racemization – a technique he developed – and found out that the female cranium belonged to a person who lived around 377 AD.
When the Augustinian Recollect friars arrived in Cagayan de Oro in 1622, there was no Cagayan town, only a fortress called Himologan (later called Huluga). It was only in 1626 that Himologan's chief Datu Salangsang and his people were persuaded by Fray Agustin de San Pedro to transfer to the present Gaston Park near the St. Augustine Cathedral.
In summarizing the chronicles of the Augustinian Recollect missionaries, Dr. Francis Madigan, S.J. of the Research Institute of Mindanao Culture of Xavier University in his 1963 document "The Early History of Cagayan de Oro", wrote the Himologan/Huluga culture was already an organized society when it was discovered by Fray de San Nicolas and de la Madre de Dios in 1622.
A likely place, perhaps for the battle royale which has been raging these past few years between heritage conservationists led by the Heritage Conservation Advocates (HCA) and the city government under Mayor Vicente Emano.
Alas, a large part of the Huluga Open Site was destroyed in 2003 by the P635- million Taguanao-Balulang road-and-bridge project of the city government. Some 60-80 percent of the area has been overturned and untold numbers of artifacts lost or destroyed.
The caves were spared but remain vulnerable. Since they are situated next to the bridge, they are in grave danger as more people settle in Huluga.
But Emano justifies the project, saying portions of the archaeological site had to be sacrificed for the sake of development. "Cagayanons need the bridge more than heritage", he stressed.
"Para nako, mas importante man unta ang tulay kay mao man g'yud ni ang mapuslan sa katawhan (As far as I'm concerned, the bridge is more important because people will find it useful),” said Emano. "Pasaylu-on lang ako nila. Alang kanako mas bililhon kaayo ang tulay kay sa gi-ingon nila nga heritage nga na-damage (I hope they forgive me. But for me, the bridge is more valuable than the heritage which they claim has been damaged)."
Emano said City Hall prioritized the project as a solution to the traffic problem affecting roads leading to Upper Balulang and the Lumbia airport. He said protests over the damage to the Huluga "Open Site" would not delay or stop the road construction. "The construction must go on."
"We do not object to development projects. What we have been saying … is that in the process of modernization, no heritage sites should be sacrificed. Instead, they should be preserved and even reconstructed for educational and tourism purposes,'' said HCA member Elson Elizaga.
"Emano's 'either/or' thinking is common among most old-style bureaucrats. That kind of thinking is severely limited, which is why it is no longer pursued by modern managers and politicians," Elizaga added.
"It doesn't have to be either the bridge or the heritage site. We can have both. We can build houses without setting fire to the neighborhood."
HCA member Bencyrus Ellorin notes the stark contrast between Emano's stance to that of Butuan City in the Caraga Region. "They should do what the Butuan City government did to preserve and protect the balangays and other historical sites in the city," Ellorin said.
The Butuan City government expropriated and purchased areas of historical significance all over the city following the discovery of the balangay, a dugout boat used by early Filipinos in the Caraga Region. The discovery has rewritten Philippine history.
According to former Councilor Hilario Roy Raagas, the South Diversion Road and Cargo (4th) Bridge Project was originally conceptualized in 1997, during the term of former Mayor Pablo Magtajas for Barangay Balulang to connect to Barangay Macasandig, some two kilometers away from the Huluga Site.
During Emano's incumbency, however, the plan was changed and the bridge project moved to Sitio Taguanao, two kilometers east of Barangay Balulang, close to the Huluga site. "The mayor will now have to take the full responsibility in answering for the damage done (to Huluga) because of the transfer," Raagas said.
The bridge is a white elephant, according to Dr. Erlinda Burton, since it is far from downtown Cagayan de Oro where the bulk of the traffic it aimed to serve congregates. Burton is an archaeologist at Xavier University, and the president of HCA.
Why are they complaining only now?” Emano said during an interview at a radio station in 2003, criticizing the HCA for “making a lot of noise when the bridge was already being constructed.”
But Elizaga said, "The mayor should not wait for private citizens to object to constructions that could destroy heritage areas. It is his job to tell the people what is going on, and to consult them, and to implement the law. If a private or government office violates a law protecting heritage sites, why blame the heritage activists?"
Raagas said that during the infancy of the Emano administration, he and other opposition councilors -- Celestino Ocio and Ramon Tabor -- opposed Emano's plan to build the bridge near the Huluga "open site".
The real tragedy was that as early as 1999, the Emano administration had revealed plans to demolish the Huluga Open Site and caves to give way to the road-and-bridge project. Montalvan, as a member of the City Historical and Cultural Commission, already called City Hall's attention to the historicity of the site and worked for a "win-win" solution which would allow the project to go on without the Open Site and caves being destroyed.
After a fact-finding mission led by Councilor Maya Enteria, who visited the site and made recommendations to attain this compromise, the City Council, chaired by acting vice-mayor President D. Elipe, approved Resolution 4433-99 on September 28, 1999, "Declaring the Huluga Caves Area Located in Taguanao and Indahag as a Heritage Landmark and Likewise Declaring it a Policy to Develop, Protect and Preserve the Same."
That resolution was drafted by Montalvan. To this day, however, there is still no city ordinance protecting Huluga and other archaeological sites in Cagayan de Oro.
The construction was not diverted as promised by Emano to Enteria. In mid-2001, HCA members found the contractor had built a bunkhouse and marked some trees for cutting down. Several heads of government agencies, responding to an invitation by Burton, then met on July 12, 2001 at Xavier University to discuss ways to preserve Huluga.
City Engineer Jorie Bingona assured Burton that the Huluga Open Site and caves would be preserved. However, he got Burton to concede that the 2,000-meter radius she originally recommended in 1999 need not be strictly followed as long as the project would be diverted to preserve the Open Site and caves.
In an article by Butch Enerio published by Today (July 17, 2001), Emano is quoted as saying, "I give you my assurance that no historical or archaeological site will be destroyed as we implement the infrastructure projects, because I myself am very concerned about these sites."
But the contractor continued to work at the Open Site. In response, the HCA was organized and issued Emano a “Manifesto of Protest Against the Planned Destruction of Huluga" on September 8, 2001 which described the problem, and offered the following proposals: Postpone the construction of the bridge and road; Consult the National Museum regarding the placement of the planned bridge and road so that the construction would not destroy the Huluga Site; Consult the National Museum in the production of a map showing the revised location of planned bridge and road; Publish the revised map in our local papers so that the public may know the circumstances and consequences of the project.
Not one of these proposals were mplemented. Burton, when consulted by the DOT, suggested that the village of Huluga be reconstructed for education and tourism. The HCA alleged that the construction project had no environment clearance certificate (ECC) from the DENR, and accused City Hall of violating of Republic Act 4846, the "Cultural Properties Preservation and Protection Act" and PD 105, which forbids changing the features of existing historical landmarks.
The HCA further accused the city government of failing to conduct an archaeological impact assessment (AIA), to survey the surface for artifacts, and to salvage materials discovered during road construction. As a result of the HCA protest, the EMB and DENR issued a cease-and-desist order to stop the project in 2001.
Although the project later produced an ECC, its authors violated several legal provisions and requirements. For instance, they did not consult the National Museum and local archaeologists like Burton.
Unknown to the HCA, however, the project was resumed. On June 7, 2003, the HCA discovered a huge portion of the Open Site already demolished. A road had cut through it, leading to the bridge that was then still under construction. There was no news about it, no announcement from city hall. Not even the requisite billboard describing the project could be seen.
On July 16, 2003, six members of HCA filed a case against Emano and the contractor UKC Builders before the DENR. DENR gave the task to the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB). On August 18, 2003, EMB issued an order to stop construction work at the Open Site, and demanded that Emano pay P50,000, and organize an archaeological team to preserve what remained of Huluga. But the government proceeded with the project, which the HCA considers illegal. The case was elevated to the main office of the EMB.
Lately, Emano and City Council have been making a hard sell to transfer the site of the present city hall complex to the city garbage dump and financing it through the sale of historic real estate which includes the Executive House, originally built by the Americans in the 1940's on the site of the former Casa Real, the official residence of the Spanish era gobernadorcillo for the Segundo Distrito de Misamis, which included present day Zamboanga del Norte, the Lanao and Misamis provinces, Camiguin, Bukidnon, and the northern portions of Cotabato and Maguindanao.
But that shouldn't be a problem for its proponents. After the Battle of Huluga, Cagayan de Oro City's Executive House should be a walk in the park for Emano. Or very soon, a fading memory of how a priceless heritage was sacrificed in the altar of progress.
INDNJC-
Print
Email
