Eduardo S. Brondizio, Fabio de Castro and Mateus Batistella Indiana University / ACT, USA

1. Area of direct use of community / village Ecological Area defined by property boundaries or inside colonization area Concentric area around settlement Economic Social Site Long Degrees of fallow cycle Short Forest Gap Degrees of Fragmentation Forest Patch Land Access Relief Infrastructure Land tenure LAND USE SYSTEMS AND LANDSCAPE FOOTPRINTS IN INDIGENOUS, CABOCLOS, AND FRONTIER FARMERS SETTLEMENTS IN AMAZONIA Distance • Eduardo S. Brondizio, Fabio de Castro and Mateus Batistella • Indiana University / ACT, USA Yapu, Vaupes, Colombia X Pathways Acariquara, Vaupes Colombia X Degrees of co-existence Swidden-Agroforestry Mechanized Agriculture, Pasture, Agroforestry Marajo-Acu, PA X 2. BACKGROUND Land Value Productivity Market Ethics Elements Conditioning Landscape Configuration & Composition in Amazonia Land use systems and landscape footprints: Indigenous, Caboclos, Old Colonization Research Sites Paricatuba, PA X Seasonality Diet requirement Biophysical Structure .Soil type and distribution .Watershed and access to water .Topographic compartments .Land cover type Vaupes, R. Negro Tome-Acu, PA Ponta de Pedras, Marajo, PA (3 sites) Drivers Predictability Praia Grande, PA X .Change in infrastructure .Market opportunities and constrains Santarem, PA X .Demographic dynamics Human Assets Risk resistance Labor force Ecological knowledge Socioeconomic, cultural characteristics .Composition of Land use systems and their spatial-temporal characteristics .Settlement spatial pattern and demographics .Land tenure structure .Institutional arrangements and resource appropriation .Change in Governmental Policy Machadinho d’Oeste, RO X Money source Social organization .Change in land tenure Technology Vale do Anari, RO X .Access to technology Altamira, PA X Land use systems and landscape footprints: Recent Colonization Research Sites Machadinho, RO Anari, RO Altamira, PA Santarem, PA Tome-Acu, PA X Infrastructure .Local and regional networks .Access and distances (market, urban center) Igarape-Acu, PA X 3. PROCESSING STEPS Definition of major land cover classes: To develop a Level I classification (aggregate sub-classes into major land cover classes) Image subset: To select areas associated with a particular land use system and/or a combination of systems Landscape, Class, and Patch Analysis: To develop a Level I classification (aggregate sub-classes into major land cover classes) Land Cover Classification (multiple dates) Landscape composition .Socioeconomic unit: farm, community, region .Biophysical unit: class, landscape levels .Land cover classes diversity .Land cover classes distribution (e.g., area, area change .Proportion between LC classes e.g.1: SS1/forest Bare/forest Bare/SS1, SS2, SS3 e.g.2: contribution to total landscape A.G. biomass Tome-Acu, PA Igarape-Acu, PA Vaupes, R. Negro Ponta de Pedras, Marajo, PA (3 sites) Landscape configuration .Socioeconomic unit: farm, community, region .Biophysical unit: class, landscape levels .Number of patches .Area of patches .Neighborhood and density .Shape Upland Forest, Savanna 1,2 SS1, SS 2, SS 3, Bare, Sparse Vegetation, Water Upland Forest, Floodplain Forest, Acai Agroforestry, Savanna SS1, SS 2, SS 3, Bare, Pasture, Water Upland Forest, SS1, SS 2, SS 3, Bare, Pasture, Water Land cover dynamics .Socioeconomic units: farm, community, region .Biophysical units: class, landscape .Inter-annual deforestation cycle .Inter-annual secondary succession cycle .Inter-annual crop/pasture cycle .Biomass change/land cover class Machadinho, RO Anari, RO Altamira, PA Ituqui, Santarem, PA Image filtering: To eliminate isolated pixels (1 or 2 pixels) surrounded by another class Upland Forest, SS1, SS 2, SS 3, Bare, Pasture, Water Upland Forest, SS Bare, Pasture, Water Land Cover Distribution Relative Frequency of Forest Patches per Class of Patch Size Relative Frequency of Succession Patches per Class of Patch Size Relative Frequency of Direct Use Patches per Class of Patch Size 5. DISCUSSION In general, forest class dominates most of the sites, except for areas of old colonization or intensified agriculture among native populations. The sites show a trend from forest gap to forest patches, representing cases of recent and old occupation, respectively. Larger and continuous forest patches disappear in some colonization areas, but are not necessarily affected by the age of settlement. Small forest patches dominate most landscapes. One exception is the area characterized by agroforestry economy. Areas of secondary succession dominate in the two oldest colonization sites. Sites encompassing private lots, mechanized agriculture, and pasture tend to have large patches of secondary succession and direct use. Forest fragmentation between native populations and colonists present differences based on land access (e.g. land tenure, infrastructure) and land value (e.g. soil fertility). The different roles of these variables in shaping land use and landscape patterns have been discussed. • In general, land use and occupation among native populations is characterized by a stronger influence of collective property rights and biophysical opportunities. For colonists, land use and occupation is strongly influenced by private property rights, infrastructure, and settlement age. However, mixed situations offer potential cases to analyze coexistence and overlapping of those features, such as private-based colonization of caboclos in Santarém, topographic constrained colonization in Machadinho, and missionary colonization in Vaupes. • The definition of boundaries for comparative landscape fragmentation analysis still needs better refinement, since results may vary according to choice of area of influence. This ongoing research has studied advantages and limitations of fragmentation analysis to the study of land use dynamics. Further multi-temporal analyses will inform other approaches about changes in landscape structure and composition. Contacts: ebrondiz@indiana.edu fdecastr@indiana.edu mbatiste@indiana.edu 1. INTRODUCTION Forest fragmentation is influenced by drivers to land access, land value, and human assets (see table below for proxy variables). The Amazon Basin offers a natural experiment where different combination of those factors affect land use practices (such as agricultural intensification and extensification, urbanization, agroforestry and so on), which in turn are reflected in landscape patterns. In particular, native populations and colonists seem to adopt two major strategies in regard to land access, value, and human assets. In this paper, we present preliminary results of research on land use practices and forest fragmentation in eleven sites throughout the Amazon. Our main goal is to provide an exploratory, comparative landscape analysis in order to raise questions for in depth intra- and inter-site research. Study Sites Igarape-Acu, PA 1 – Altamira, PA 2 – Ponta de Pedras, PA (Marajo Acu, Paricatuba, Praia Grande) 3 – Igarape Acu, PA 4 – Tome Acu, PA 5 – Vaupes, Colombia (Yapu, Acariquara) 6 – Rondonia (Machadinho d’Oeste, Vale do Anari) 7 – Santarem, PA 4. RESULTS