Questions asked in each community on the Rio Aguarico:

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

How long has this community been here? Where did you (collective) live before that?

How many people are in the community? Adults? Children?

How many families are there in this community? How many children per family?

What is the total area of the community?

How much of this area is communal land?

What area does each family ‘own’?

What are your staple foods?

Do you grow or buy them? How do you grow them, or where do you buy them?

What domestic animals do you have?

Is the education system government or community based? Do you have a school building?

What levels of schooling are there? For how many years? Days / week? Hours / day?

How many people in the population can read?

Do you use money? What for?

What are major sources of income?

What religion do you have? Do you have a church?

Who is the head of the community? How is the directiva organised?

How are the people chosen for these positions?

Who can vote? How often?

What other levels / systems of government do you have within the community?

Do you have a medical centre or a doctor in the community?

Do you have any medical provisions here?

What are the major illnesses in the community?

What do people do when they get sick? Where do they go?

How many people get sick each year? How many die from these illnesses?

Do women give birth in the community or in a clinic?

How old are girls, and boys, when they start a family?

Is marriage necessary?

How old is the oldest person in the community? (which inevitably became “how old are people when they die?”)

Do you have any special fiestas?

How do you dispose of your rubbish? Organic? Inorganic?

How do you deal with human waste?

Do you have electricity? How is it produced? What do you use it for?

How do you cook?

Where do you get water to wash clothes? Wash yourselves? Drink and cook?

What are you major modes of transport?

Have you noticed any changes to your surroundings in the time that you’ve been here?

Could you show us around your community, the school, agriculture, houses etc?

Possible Roles for Ecotrackerson the Rio Aguarico.

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

We feel that the role of Ecotrackers should not simply be to equip these communities for ecotourism, but to equip them for sustainable living more generally. Possible avenues for this could include:

• Education of the ramifications of having such large families, with such a short generational gap, and perhaps introducing some contraception alternatives
• A major sustainable agriculture education program, including concepts of: integrating small agricultural plots within the forest; crop rotation; fallow fields; and inappropriate crops
• Education about ‘island biogeography’, conservation reserve design, and the impacts of fragmenting the native landscape
• Emphasising the value of cultural heritage and diversity in all communities
• Reconsidering the power alternatives for Amada Encarnacion
• Promoting sustainable energy production and use within communities
• Education of communities and Amada Encarnacion employees/volunteers about appropriate short and long-term solutions to rubbish and human waste disposal

Internal Disturbance on the Rio Aguarico

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

We have already highlighted some of the environmental issues inherent in petroleum-based power generation and transportation, as they are inevitably tied to economic sustainability. While these are considerable sources of environmental degradation, they are not the only ones.

Land Clearing for agriculture not only results in reduced forest area, and hence reduced biodiversity, but also greatly increases the sediment load of the creeks and river. Total area of clearing is not all that is important, the spatial pattern of forest reserves is critical to the diversity and abundance of flora and fauna in the region. Highly fragmented patches of forest, with relatively large edge area and little connectivity are the most likely to dramatically reduce biodiversity (the ‘island biogeography effect’), through reduced recruitment of pollens, decreased variety and availability of microhabitats (for plants and animals), and increased predation. Unfortunately, this is the pattern that is being created by all of these communities as a whole, but is only recognised by the leaders of the Siecoya Nation, who are powerless in controlling the spatial dynamics of the invading communities.

The colonist populations all seemed to place little inherent value on the forest as a resource in its current form. It is simply viewed as a source of raw materials (particularly wood for construction), some food, and a barrier to greater agricultural expansion and economic prosperity. The teacher at Los Angeles remarked on the extent of forest clearing, but made it clear that it wasn’t an issue for those doing the clearing.

The implementation of sustainable agricultural practises would go a long way to reducing the need to clear more land.

One of the most destructive uses of cleared land, increasing erosion and decreasing soil fertility, is high density cattle grazing, as we saw particularly in Centro Union. Decreasing the density of cattle, through a reduction in the number of cattle, not increased land clearing, is required to prevent further clearing in the near future. In order to achieve this, some communities need to reduce dependence (for food and income) on these animals ill-suited to the local ecosystem. Similarly, large numbers of unrestricted domestic chickens are likely to be diminishing invertebrate diversity and abundance. So too, large numbers of domestic dogs and cats are likely to be decimating the local fauna, both trough direct predation of some species, and removal of food source of others.

Despite reportedly low mortality, there seemed to be relatively high levels disease and sickness within the populations. The river was often cited as the source of illness, but people continue to pollute the river, while also bathing, and in some cases even drinking from it.

There are significant health risks associated with San Pablo’s lack of an adequate human waste disposal system. With very few pit toilets and the high rainfall of the area, human waste deposited “behind a tree” by 230 people, is likely to be being washed down river, thus contaminating the river water of communities downstream.

Disposal of inorganic waste, particularly plastic and metal packaging, appeared to present a major problem to most communities. All communities ostensibly burnt or buried this rubbish, however, many of the communities had varying degrees of litter scattered throughout the community. This ‘drop it where you finish with it’ philosophy was not restricted to land, with none of our travel companions having any hesitation about repeatedly disposing of inorganic waste in the river. Of course, there is no ‘good’ way to dispose of inorganic waste, however, concentrated efforts to confine them to one area would have less impact on biodiversity, of the river in particular. Perhaps the most appropriate option would be for the people to consciously avoid these waste products when purchasing, particularly multi packaged confectionary and drinks in disposable containers.

Environmental Sustainability on the Rio Aguarico.

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

External Disturbance

A large proportion of the water flowing down the Aguarico past these communities falls as rain on sites of oil extraction and/or palm plantation. All communities commented on the deterioration of water quality in the river, most attributing this to the petroleum companies alone. Both petroleum exploration and the palm plantations have resulted in extensive land clearing and inherent increases in the sediment load, and changes to flow dynamics of the river. The river has also been repeatedly contaminated through leaks and spills associated with petroleum extraction and pipelines. We feel that it is important for these communities to be encouraged to take an active stance on these issues wherever possible. However, it is just as important for communities to recognise, and take responsibility for their role in the degradation of the environment.

Four possible methods of power generation: Fossil Fuel, Wind, Solar and Hydroelectric on the Rio Aguarico.

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

Fossil Fuel

Fossil fuel-dependant power generation provides a relatively high energy output, and thus has the capability to provide for high energy consumption. It is also available on demand, and does not rely on external environmental conditions for generation. However, there are significant costs associated with this.

Aside from the purchase of a ready-made generator, fuel must be purchased externally, and therefore, the costs associated with this type of power generation are ongoing. Investing in it binds the community to continual purchasing of fuel which is only viable with an abundant supply of inexpensive petroleum based fuels. These fuels are currently purchased from nearby petroleum sources, but these sources are currently estimated to only last another 15 to 25 years. Given current world peak oil projections, the costs of fuels are certain to increase beyond the economic capability of these communities.

There are also considerable environmental impacts inherent in the extraction and burning of fossil fuels for power generation, including carbon emissions, atmospheric particulates and river contamination. All river based communities cited river contamination as a source of illness and reduced productivity (less fish). It is therefore by no means a ´clean´ source of energy.

Fossil fuel dependant energy production should not be considered as a sustainable approach for any of these communities, due to the ongoing and increasing costs associated with the purchasing of fuel, as well as the harmful environmental effects that it necessarily involves.

Wind

Several communities (including Amada Encarnacion) have installed wind power, primarily in the form of a windmill powering a groundwater pump. Whilst this is a clean source of energy, it has proved to be highly unreliable. Winds are inconsistent in the area, and the surrounding high forest canopy prevents wind from turning the sails of the windmill, making this a relatively unviable source.

Solar

As solar energy is freely available, this type power generation requires no ongoing costs. Solar energy is also perpetually abundant in the Ecuadorian Amazon, as day-length is consistent throughout the year, and solar cells continue to generate under cloud. Once the set up costs are covered, its use is free. Solar also involves very little environmental impact, as there is no burning and concomitant contamination.

The use of solar energy reflects, in our view, a more sustainable approach than either wind or fossil fuel generation, as well as providing increased economic and environmental benefits now, and well into the future.

Hydro

This type of power generation was not observed in any of the communities, despite all but the two inland communities have the available geographical characteristics to employ hydroelectric means. Alongside these communities, the Rio Aguarico is fast flowing (at least 1m/sec), with little vertical fall. This discounts the use of traditional methods of hydroelectric power generation, which require falling water travelling at relatively high speed. However, alternative methods may be employed.

Hydroelectric power generation on horizontal rivers is possible through the turning of a propeller suspended underwater by a floating pontoon. The propeller turns a turbine in much the same way as a fossil fuel generator does, except that the energy input is free and abundant. The fast flowing characteristics of the river, as well as the large volume of water, make it viable as primary energy source for many of these communities.

A more detailed description of this type of device, as well as its potential generating capabilities can be found at:

http://www.sustainable.energy.sa.gov.au/pages/advisory/renewables/types/water/water.htm:sectID=21&tempID=52

Initial set up costs are likely to be relatively high if bought as a complete package, but some of these may be alleviated with community based labour and construction. In any case, these costs should not exceed the initial cost of the communal petroleum generator at Centro Union ($35000 value), let alone the ongoing fuel cost of 3gal/hr.

Amada Encarnacion also has the capacity for traditional style hydro power, with significant flow and vertical fall at the first creek crossing on the way to the tree house. We believe that any of the hydro or solar alternatives should be thoroughly investigated before committing to the ongoing costs, and environmental pollution of the Centro Union generator grid.

Economic Sustainability on the Rio Aguarico

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

Sources of Income

All communities currently have economies primarily based on western-style agriculture. This agriculture, in all cases, provides for more than subsistence living, it is also the source of income for families and their communities. The agricultural systems of some communities are more sustainable than others.

Colonists tend to practise “slash and burn” style agriculture, completely clearing large areas for single crops, or for grazing cattle. When this land is no longer productive they clear more forest and start again. Apart from leaching the land of fertility, these systems are large monocultures, which, through their size and homogeneity, are much more susceptible to disease and changes in climatic conditions. A single disease, or unusually wet/dry year could easily result in economic collapse.

Secoyas at San Pablo also had designated areas for cropping and for cattle. Even with the maintenance of the forest ecosystem nearby this land is also likely to become unproductive. However, their agriculture is solely for the purpose of feeding their population. As a result, they are growing a greater variety of crops, and on a considerably smaller scale, which should considerably prolong the fertility of their land. In terms of long term economic sustainability the palm plantations of San Pablo are more likely to provide a stable income, from one location, than the agriculture of the colonists. While there are the same problems of large scale homogeneity and disease susceptibility with the palm plantation, palms more closely resemble the native vegetation, and allow a variety of vegetation structure, enhancing biodiversity, and in turn the health of the soil.

Secoyas at Secoya Remolina on the other hand, are likely to have the most sustainable source of income. Despite cultivating at higher levels than needed for subsistence, their agriculture is far less susceptible to disease, failure, or degradation of the soil. In contrast to all other communities, these people maintain several relatively small plots of crops buried deep in unaltered forests, allowing the soil to be recharged, but also removing the chance of all of one crop being lost to a disease. Secoya Remolina were also were far less reliant on cattle, which are particularly ill-suited to this jungle ecosystem.

Ecotourism is at best only an option to supplement the income of some (definitely not all) of these communities. The colonist communities are unlikely to be able to attract tourists, as they are not native to the Amazon and hence are of no particular interest to tourists, lacking culture, traditions and a spiritual link with the forest. Further, they have placed little value on the aesthetics of the area, clear-felling large tracts of forest. This is in conflict with the principles on which ecotourism is founded. San Pablo has identified a large area of forest as conservation reserve, however, the surrounding palm plantations, and colonist communities have completely isolated this patch of forest. As a result, the community has noticed significant decreases in biodiversity, especially in large mammals and birds. Combined with the fact that the community was one of the most westernised we visited, with fashionable clothing, stereos, a satellite dish and even a motorbike, it again seems unlikely that they could attract tourists on the basis of their native environment or their heritage. Having stuck with its traditional agriculture, festivals, language and clothing (in part), combined with their integration with and knowledge of the forest, we feel that Siecoya Remolina is the only community likely to be able to benefit from ecotourism. They expressed interest in small scale, community driven ecotourism.

Expenditure

While we cannot expect these communities to live without money, we believe a number of their current expenditures could be significantly reduced through good planning.

Transportation is a major expenditure, based primarily on petroleum. With the price of this resource certain to perpetually increase in the future, some alternatives are required. Instead of simply looking for alternative fuels for the extended suburban lifestyle they are currently living, it may be best to look at ways the populations can be more self sufficient and thus use less transportation altogether.

Power generation for lighting, refrigeration and communication is a major expense in a number of the colonist communities, while considerably less so in the Siecoya populations. This is because electricity generation in all of the colonist communities currently relies entirely on fossil fuels, primarily in the form of family-owned petrol generators. Both Siecoya communities, on the other hand, relied on solar panels as their primary source of electricity. These were subsidized by the government, to the extent that each cell (one per family) only cost the community $3. However, these are not the only available options. Viable and sustainable power generation for these communities should meet the following criteria:

• Initial set up costs cannot be economically prohibitive for these communities, as they don’t have sufficient capital to invest in high cost infrastructure.
• After initial set up costs, power generation should have little, if any, ongoing costs associated with standard operation.
• The method of generation should be durable, and not require costly maintenance procedures.
• Power generation should not damage, contaminate or deplete the natural environment surrounding these communities.

We believe there are four possible methods of power generation: Fossil Fuel, Wind, Solar and Hydroelectric

Cultural Sustainability on the Rio Aguarico

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

Both native populations are actively striving to maintain their cultural heritage through formal bilingual cultural education, despite having had their population disturbed by rubber exploitation in the 1950s, wars between Peru and Ecuador over ownership of the area, petroleum exploitation in the 1960’s and 70’s, which in turn opened up the land to the extensive palm plantations, logging and the agricultural invasion of colonists present today.

Colonists seem not to build, let alone convey any cultural heritage. There is no ongoing education of where they came from, or why they moved. If these issues were spoken of, that may stimulate reflective thought, and hence future planning to avoid making the same mistakes. Neither of these processes appear to be occurring in the majority of colonist communities.

All of the populations are reproducing at a rate that is unsustainable in the current size of the community. The native populations and Fuerzas Unidas were the only ones to talk of less than five children per family (La Merced spoke of commonly 10 or 12) , despite none of them having particularly high mortality rates. Given this, and that all communities talked of women reproducing from the age of fourteen, all communities look to be facing a population explosion of at least six-fold in the next 30 years.

Sustainability on the Rio Aguarico

Bethany Hoye & Andrew Glover

June 2006

Background

Over the course of one week, we visited 7 local communities in the vicinity of Amada Encarnacion, on the Rio Aguarico. We were primarily interested the mode of living in each of these communities, day to day, year to year, and generation to generation; and the sustainability of these modes. Each community was visited for 2-4hrs, by the two of us, accompanied by the President of Centro Union, and the caretaker of Amada Encarnacion. During the visit we would ask a specific set of questions about the population’s history, geography, education, diet, health and finances (attached), a well as engaging in more personal discussions as we were shown around the community.

Here we present our understanding of the three main issues that are facing all populations in the area: Cultural Sustainability, Economic Sustainability, and Environmental Sustainability. Our interpretations are based both on the answers given, and on observations made while touring the communities; these were sometimes contradictory.

While we have attempted to present this information as accurately as possible, a number of factors may have influenced the information gathered:

• The style of interview was not consistent across all communities; some were informal chats, while others were more formally conducted; sometimes with only one or two people, and others with gatherings of half a dozen or more community members. The people we talked to also varied in their status within the community; ranging from community leader, spiritual leader, or spokesperson, to individual land owners and school teachers.
• We asked our questions in Spanish as best we could, and answers were given in Spanish. Whilst we have tried to record the responses as accurately as possible, there may have been more information given than we were able to record
• We are very obviously foreigners, and we were accompanied by the president of another (colonist) community, both of which may have influenced the responses given
• There may also be some discrepancy between what the communities want us, as researchers, to think, and what is actually the case.

Comunidades relacionadas con el Centro, Religiones

Religion and Tradition
Major Religion(s)	Catholic	Catholic	Catholic	Catholic	Catholic & Evangelical	Traditional Secoya & Evangelical	Evangelical – introduced in 1954 from USA
Church	None	Built 1995	None	Use church at La Merced	None	Evangelical (built by missionaries)	Evangelical (built 2001)
Marrige	Necessary in past, but not now, just house & income (but some still marry)	Not necessary, but some still marry	Not necessary, but some still marry	Not necessary	Not necessary, but some still marry	Legal marriage required, in village (followed by celebration)	Expected, but second marriages spoken of
Religious Festivals	All Catholic Festivals	All Catholic Festivals	All Catholic Festivals	Only Christmas	Christian Festivals	Christian Festivals	Christian Festivals
Community Festivals	New Year	New Year Fathers Day in June 24th September - Anniversary of establishment	30th July - Anniversary of establishment 2nd November - Finados	New Year	9th November - Anniversary of establishment	New Year 28th-30th August - Fiesta Cultura Birth & Marriage Fiestas	New Year 9th June - Anniversary of school building 28th-30th August - Fiesta Cultura

Comunidades relacionadas con el Centro, Gobierno

Government
Type	Democratic	Democratic	Democratic	Democratic	Democratic	Democratic	Democratic
Frequency of Change	2 yrs	2 yrs	2 yrs	2 yrs	2 yrs	2 yrs	2 yrs
President (as of June 2006)	Sr. Francisco Zambrano	Erasmo Encarnación	Joviani Córdova	Galarza Bienvenido	Antonio Carillón	Hugo Payaguaji	[One government governs the 3 Secoya communities -
Other Positions on Directiva	Vice President Secretary Treasurer Vocal	Vice President Secretary Treasurer Vocal	Vice President Secretary Treasurer Vocal	Vice President Secretary Treasurer Vocal	Secretary Treasurer	Vice President Secretary Treasurer Trade (Síndico) Vocal 2nd Vocal 3rd Vocal	Secoya Remolina, San Pablo & Poocoya]
Other Levels of Government	None indicated	Community contacts seemed to indicate that leadership was very informal	Congress of all adults Assembly	No other levels of government – Directiva only informal	Assembly of all	Congress of all adults Assembly of 15-16 elected	Strong emphasis that the power was in the hands of the congress, not the directiva
Voting Age	18	18	15	18	18	14	14

Comunidades relacionadas con el Centro, Salud

Health
Communtiy Medical Centre	No	No	No	No	No	Yes, but unmanned	Yes, with medico but no specialist
Medical Supplies	None	None	Very few	None	None	Substantial	Substantial
Other Clinical Services	Some medical supplies from Tierras Orientates Medical Treatment in Shushufindi	Medical Treatment in Shushufindi, Lago Agrio, Coca	Some medical supplies from Tierras Orientales Medical Treatment in Shushufindi	Supplies & treatment in Tarapoa or Shushufindi	Supplies & treatment in Tarapoa	Very few in Shushufindi	Very few in Shushufindi
Major Illnesses	Vomiting, Dihorrea, ´Cancer´, Dengue, Malaria, Bronchitis, some Cholera & Typhoid	Bacterial Infections, Dengue, Malaria	Malaria, Parasitosis, Bronchitis	Anaemia, Fever, Dengue, Bronchitis, Malaria	Influenza, some Malaria	Lesions, ¨Lesmaniasis¨, paralysis from snake bite, Dengue, Malaria, skin irritations	Dengue, Typhoid, Bronchitis (thought all sickness from river)
Frequency of Illness	2 people die each year from ´Cancer´, most children contract Bronchitis, approx 2% die each year	Not many people get sick, <>	60% get sick per year, very few die	90% each year, mainly Fever & Anaemia 1 death every now and then	All get the flu each year, very few other illnesses	Regular lesions & irritations, numerous snake bites, very little other. No deaths	Not discussed
Child Birth Location	Shushufindi	Shushufindi, Lago Agrio, Coca, very few in community	Mainly in Shushufindi, some in community	Community	Some in Tarapoa, some in community	Community (followed by celebration)	Community
Burial Location	Tierra Orientales	Tierra Orientales	Tierra Orientales	Tierra Orientales	Not discussed	San Pablo	San Pablo
	Centro Union	La Merced	Los Angeles	Fuerzas Unidas	Ciudad Los Piñas	Secoya Remolina	San Pablo

Comunidades relacionadas con el Centro, Transportes

Modes of Transportation	Motorized Canoe – privately owned and Petrolera 44 to Pto. Gregorio	Motorized Canoe – 1 privately owned and Petrolera 44 to Pto Gregorio	Motorized Canoe – 1 privately owned and Petrolera 44 to Pto Gregorio	Horses to other communities, and to meet ranchera to Tarapoa	Horses to other communities, and to meet ranchera to Tarapoa	Motorized Canoe – privately owned and Petrolera 44 to Pto Gregorio	Motorized Canoe – privately owned and Petrolera 44 to Pto Gregorio One motorbike
Additional Expenditures	All Clothing, Footwear, Corrugated iron for roofing, plastic furniture, Alcohol, Cigarettes, Educational materials, Medicines, Mobile Phones, TVs, Guns, make-up	All Clothing, Footwear, Corrugated iron for roofing, Educational materials, Medicines	All Clothing, Footwear, Corrugated iron for roofing, Educational materials, Medicines	All Clothing, Footwear, Corrugated iron for roofing, Educational materials, Medicines Herbicides	All Clothing, Footwear, very little corrugated iron for roofing (mainly thatched rooves), Educational materials, Medicines Very basic living, few disposable items seen	Some Clothing, some materials to sew clothing, Footwear, very little corrugated iron for roofing (mainly thatched rooves), Educational materials, Medicines, Mobile Phones, TVs, Alcohol, Herbicides for spraying around houses	All Clothing, Footwear, Corrugated iron for roofing, paint, Alcohol, Cigarettes, Educational materials, Medicines, Mobile Phones, TVs, “security”, make-up
	Centro Union	La Merced	Los Ángeles	Fuerzas Unidas	Ciudad Los Piñas	Secoya Remolina	San Pablo
Waste Disposal – Organic	Dropped where finished with, ground or river	Dropped where finished with, some composting	All buried	Dropped where finished with, some composting of kitchen waste	Buried / dropped	Compost	Compost
Waste Disposal – Inorganic	Dropped where finished with, ground or river	Ostensibly burnt, but much waste present at washing site in creek	All buried	Burnt	Burnt and / or buried	Ostensibly buried, but some waste dropped on ground	Burnt
Waste Disposal – Human	Pit toilets, urinate outdoors	Pit toilets	Some families with pit toilets, others with nothing	All have pit toilets	2 families have flushing toilet (groundwater), all others pit toilet	No toilets apparent	Very few families with pit toilet, rest go ´behind tree´ or in river