Land transportation (Bus lines)

Media

Part of The American Chamber of Commerce Journal

Title: Land transportation (Bus lines)
Creator: James, L. G.
Language: English
Year: 1949
Rights
Fulltext: VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS Honolulu — U.S.A. 121 Canada China 537 Japan — Saigon, Straits, India 3 Africa 294 S. America 208 WINES & LIQUORS Honolulu 229 U.S.A. 5 China 33 Japan 395 Saigon, Straits, India — TRANSIT CARGO U.S.A. 610 China 127 N. E. Indies 29 Saigon, Straits, India 1,354 GENERAL MERCHANDISE Honolulu 887 U.S.A. 53,965 Canada — China 13,703 Japan 24,140 N. E. Indies 3,713 Saigon, Straits, India 3,327 Europe 4,070 Australia 2,223 Africa 9.766 S. America 5,183 70 Inter-Island Shipping ' 2 By G. F. Vander Hoogt Manager, Everett Steamship Corporation 55 739 'T * HE Philippine Shipowners’ Association has re* See “The Bus Terminals Proposal” by Frank S. Tcnny, in the February issue of this Journal. | cently protested to government authorities cong9 cerning the practice of using Philippine Naval _ Patrol ships for transporting government cargo be229 tween inter-island ports, particularly cement, which 14 is now exclusively being shipped in this manner from Cebu to Manila. 264 3,377 314 51 (Mostly Army Surplus) 600 46,813 406 16,529 47.855 4,044 6.582 1.2’77 4,299 5,342 10 This practice is in direct competition with inter island shipping and greatly affects its interests. It is hoped that the Government will discontinue this practice in the interest of fostering the country’s privately operated merchant marine. GRAND TOTAL.................... 1,564.421 * 1,821,881 » Land Transportation (Bus Lines) By L. G. James Vice-President and Manager, A. L. Ammen Transportation Co., Inc. * Includes bales at 8 to the ton and board feet at 140 to the ton. 1948 Imports and Exports Bureau of the Census and Statistics Total trade ................................. .1948 Pl ,774,819,524 1947 1,553,797,312 Imports ....................................... 1,136,409,068 1,022,700,608 Exports ....................................... 638,410,456 531,096,704 Ten Principal Imports ■1948 1947 1. Cotton and manufactures . .. . P137,363,424 153,442,226 2. Rayon and other synthetic textiles .................................. 105,019,904 90,584,900 3. Grains and preparations ... 84,110,422 98,834,050 4. Mineral oils (petroleum products) ............................. 68,503,810 36,842,052 5. Automobiles, parts of, and tires .............................. 63,910,034 51,414,052 6. Iron and steel and manu factures ................................ 55,888,764 46,144,372 7. Tobacco and manufactures . 49,391,482 43,962,246 8. Dairy products ..................... 45,824,662 42,625,172 9. Paper and manufactures ... 44,714,054 38,887,2'46 10. Machinery, machines and parts of (except agricultural and electrical) ................... 43,170,350 36,422,882 383,541,310 Other imports ....................... . 438,512,162 Ten Principal Exports 1. Copra ........................................ 309,400,124 354,415,334 2. Abaca, unmanufactured .... 60,294,087 63,432,374 3. Desiccated coconut ............... 57,491,099 19,054,656 4. Sugar ...................................... 41,580,077 4,081,188 5. Coconut oil ........................... 40,738,581 13,940,603 6. Embroideries ......................... 13,917,276 2,335,116 7. Pineapples, canned ............... 7,648,327 8. Copra meal or cake ........... 7,425,325 4,391,434 9. Chromite ................................ 5,191,779 446,500 10. Rope ........................................ Other exports (including 4,066,577 2,904,520 re-exports) .............................. 46,891,007 66,095,079 IN official and in business circles, there has been a con siderable discussion on the proposal to provide bus terminal facilities within the City of Manila and/or its suburbs. These facilities would consist of a central station or stations to serve the incoming and outgoing buses of operators cover ing lines between Manila and provincial points. They would likewise serve as pick-up points for urban and interurban operators and would, in theory, eliminate a portion of the present traffic congestion which constitutes a major problem. Operators of buses serving city lines and those covering lines between Manila and the outlying provinces are almost unanimously opposed to the suggested plan. Operators of “jitneys”, “jeepneys”, and similar small public utility vehicles are, generally speaking, in favor of it. From the viewpoint of the operator serving lines between provincial points and Manila, there is nothing that the central terminal proposal has to offer, either by way of increase in facility of operation or by way of benefit to public interest. Many of these companies have a substantial capital invest ment in their own terminals, constructed at high cost under post-war conditions, through the use of which, the interests of their patrons are, in general, efficiently and satisfactorily served. To compel these companies to abandon their own ter minals and utilize the facilities of a central terminal or termi nals operated by the City or the National Government, would result in great financial loss to them. The original suggestion regarding central terminals was to provide two such facilities, one south and one north of the Pasig River, thus to eliminate provincial buses from bridge traffic as well as from the more congested of the city’s streets. Urban buses and other public utility vehicles would provide shutttle-services, transporting incoming and outgoing passen gers between terminals and markets, etc. The disadvantage to the public convenience are apparent: 1. The necessity of disembarking at a point far from market facilities. This would affect public transportation originating at southern provincial points to a greater extent than that from the north.2. The necessity of paying cargadores for handling pro duce and other forms of baggage, as well as the risk of loss of such goods through pilferage and looting. 3. The necessity of paying an extra charge for transpor tation from the terminal to market or other destination. 4. The increased risk from the operations of pickpockets who would find a congested bus terminal a very profitable field in which to do business. Under present conditions, most operators have practically eliminated this hazard at their own terminals. 5. The delay caused by transferring from one carrier to another. 113 From the broader aspect, the construction and operation of a bus terminal capable of handling several hundred de partures and arrivals per day would require a collosal invest ment. The Government would obviously liquidate this invest ment and cover operational costs by charging operators for the use of the facilities. These charges would, without doubt, be far in excess of the current cost of operating their own termi nals and would probably require an upward adjustment in basic passenger and freight rates. In addition, the record of the Government in business vs. that of private enterprise speaks for itself. The chances for successful and efficient government operation of a project of this nature are very small. There are various theories on the causes and cure of traffic congestion in the City of Manila. Our traffic pro blems are not primarily caused by the large provincial buses or by the urban buses which operate on the city’s streets. Their capacity is 30 to 50 passengers each depending upon type, 5 to 6 times as great as that of the thousands of indivi dual jeepneys and other similar vehicles which crowd the main arteries of traffic, whose drivers pay little attention to regula tions or to the rights and safety of others. The elimination of a few hundred provincial buses from the bridge and crowded city traffic would have no apprecia ble effect on current congestion. The elimination of 2,000 jeepneys and their substitution by the use of 200 buses of 40 passengers capacity each, operated by a few reputable com panies, would do far more toward the desired end. It has been stated that it is feasible for provincial ope rators to utilize bus terminals and reduce their fares by an amount equivalent to the cost of the additional transportation called for plus extra baggage and freight handling charges accruing to passengers. Current rates between provincial points and Manila vary from 1 to IV2 centavos per passenger per kilometer. A passenger from a point in Laguna province, 100 km. distant from Manila, pays P1.00 for his fare from erfibarkation to a bus terminal opposite the Divisoria market. Under the central terminal proposal, he might have 5 centa vos deducted from that basic fare due to location of the ter minal south of the Pasig River. Additional charges, on the other hand, would involve at least 10 centavos fare in getting to his destination (possibly 20 centavos). There would also be a minimum charge of 20 centavos, and in many cases more than that, for cargadores’ service necessitated by the transfer. The disadvantage to the public is obvious. It is admitted that central bus terminals are succesfully operated in every large city in the United States, but the circumstances cannot be compared to those in Manila. In United States cities the urban service is maintained by a single bus company or at most 2 or 3 such companies whose operations are properly scheduled and efficiently operated under adequate and strict government supervision. Manila is served by literally thousands of operators whose fleets consist of from one or two small jitneys in many cases, to as many as 200 or so modern buses in others. With the exception ot the operations of the larger companies, fixed routes, schedules, and fares are not followed. We have a mass of public trans portation on the streets which it is impossible for the author ities to supervise except most superficially. The greatest stretch of imagination could not present a picture of the added bedlam that would be created in the traffic by the concentra tion of this accumulation of public carriers within and around a central terminal. The same comparative conditions prevail with respect to bus services from outside points into Manila when considering inter-city and cross-country land transportation in the United States. Here there are approximately 1,500 bus units of one type or another operating from provincial points to Manila and vice versa. Possibly 60% of these units are owned by re putable and efficient operators who have their own terminal facilities, which might vary in rating from excellent in some cases to poor in others. The rest of these vehicles are ope rated by irresponsible small concerns that have no facilities and pay little attention to schedules, routes, rates, and other regulations. The problem of housing these operations would be a serious one, whereas in a typical United States city not more than 2 or 3 operators are involved; schedules, rates, and routes are fixed, and the buses are all modern and of maxi mum capacity. In an American city terminal, passenger traffic only is handled. Into any bus terminal in the Philippines come not only passengers but large quantities of produce such as fruits, vegetables, and manufactured articles, in addition to the sub stantial numbers of chickens, pigs, and other livestock to be marketed, plus other items such as charcoal, firewood, coco 114 nuts, etc., that help to make up the load of any incoming pro vincial bus. The operators, controlling a majority of the provincial buses entering Manila and who have their own terminal faci lities, have developed the necessary procedure and technique for efficiently handling the loads described. Under a central terminal arrangement, the total volume of this type of traffic would be so great that it would be almost impossible to handle it efficiently. It has been stated that the central terminal plan would eliminate over-night street parking of buses. This could be eliminated very simply by the passage of proper citv regula tions and their subsequent enforcement. It is difficult to visualize in Manila a central terminal facility capable of housing a minimum of 700-800 buses, plus the office and main tenance space necessary in the cases of the many operators concerned. Bus operators as a group consider the plan to be unsound and impractical of operation. Note by Mr. Tenny: Advocates of the bus terminal plan appear to differ with the opponents of the plan, not on the basic points involved but only on questions of detail. Private rather than governmental operation is acceptable to the ad vocates of the plan if this could be arranged to the satisfaction of all concerned. The matter of the exact locations of the terminals is of secondary importance and there is no intention on the part of the advocates of the plan to cause the abandon ment of suitable terminals which have already been constructed by progressive operators. In view of the fact that the termi nal plan has been successfully adopted elsewhere, I believe that an acceptable local plan could be worked out which would take into full consideration all of the various facts brought out by both sides. Mining By Chas. A. Mitke Consulting Mining Engineer I AM a consulting engineer, and have made the Phil ippines my home since March, 1938. I am one of many Americans who like the country, and be lieve in its future. For this reason, after liberation, in February, 1945, I did not return to the United States immediately, but remained here to see what I could contribute toward the rehabilitation of the min ing industry. After considerable effort, over a three-year period, I succeeded in interesting the largest coppermining corporation in New York in properties in the Philippines. The corporation sent out an engineer, who remained six months, studying the properties and business conditions generally. In January, 1948, two additional engineers, one of them the late Dr. H. Foster Bain, came out for the same purpose, and an option contract was drawn up. It was understood that if preliminary investigations and drilling proved satisfactory, the American corporation would invest (apart from the purchase price of the property) some P50,000,000 in plant, townsite, equipment, wharf, etc. This would have given employment to many thou sands of Filipinos. It would have involved large ex penditures for monthly payrolls, purchase of local supplies, etc. and would have resulted in mining on a scale heretofore not seen in the Philippines. Everything was going smoothly, when a bill to license mining engineers was introduced in the 1948 Congress which was passed by both Houses. Besides containing many objectionable and restrictive fea tures, the wording of certain clauses in this bill (ac cording to the copper corporation’s attorneys and other legal authorities) would have prohibited Ame rican mining engineers from practicing their profes