Amazon Peru Macaw Clay Lick 6D/5N .

Amazon Peru Macaw Clay Lick 

  • Length: 6 Days/5 Nights
  • Type of service: Private or Group
  • Location: Southern Peru, Madre de Dios Department, Manu National Park, Manu Jungle Trips, Sandoval Lake Reserve, Tambopata tours
  • Activities: Manu Culture Zone, the parrot clay-lick Blanquillo, the clay-lick Maquisapayoc, Blanco Lake (cocha), amazon fileds bird, clay lick, macaw clay lick, jungle trips
  • Altitude: 400 – 3,600 m.a.s.l.
  • Best time to visit: May – October
  • Departure: Every day
  • Minimum of participants: 2
  • Maximum of participants: 10
  • Price per person: USD

Amazon Peru Macaw Clay Lick 6D/5N:

Amazon Peru Day 1 : Cusco City to Ninamarca Pilcopata Manu National Park .
TAmazon Peru Day 2 : Atalaya Port to Rainforest Lodge Manu National Park .
Amazon Peru Day 3 : Manu Rainforest Lodge to Maquisapayoq Macaw Caly Lick Blanquillo .
Amazon Peru Day 4 : Maquisapayoq to Cocha Blanco Lake and Blanquillo Manu .
Amazon Peru Day 5 : Blanquillo Manu National Park to Rainforest Lodge Manu .
Amazon Peru Day 6 : Rainforest lodge to Atala Port Cusco City .

 

Tour Itinerary

Amazon Peru Macaw Clay Lick 6D/5N:

Amazon Peru Day 1: Cusco City to Ninamarca  Pilcopata Manu National Park .

We leave Cusco early in the morning to start our adventurous trip! First, we are taken by private transport to the place called Ninamarca to observe pre-Incan “chullpas” (tombs) of the Lupaca’s culture. Then, we continue to Paucartambo, a colonial town with narrow streets and beautiful church, where people still keep their old customs. Then, we ascend to the viewpoint Tres Cruces (3,900 masl) to observe one of the best sunrises of the world! From there, we start descending to the Manu National Park, a place of presence of cock of the rock (a Peruvian national bird), hummingbirds, strikingly coloured quetzals, trogons, spotted flycatcher and woolly monkey. From flora, we can view a variety of orchids, mosses, ferns, etc. Finally, we get to Pilcopata (700 masl) where we overnight in in our  Lodge after enjoying dinner then rest .

Amazon Peru Day 2 :Atalaya Port to Rainforest Lodge Manu National Park .

After breakfast, we continue our journey by private car (one and half an hour) towards the port at Atalaya (500 m.a.s.l). There, we board a motorized boat to continue for about half an hour navigating on the Alto Madre de Dios River. Along the rocky riversides, we have a great opportunity to observe the river wildlife like herons, vultures, cormorants and some of 13 monkey species living in Manu! In the afternoon, we reach our next lodge – Rainforest Lodge. Then we go to explore nearby paths where we can see a big diversity of species, for example, tarantulas, ants, butterflies, some monkey species, huge trees, erotic plants, palms, etc. After that, we return to our lodge

Optional: A night walk Free in jungle trips.

Amazon Peru  3: Manu Rainforest Lodge to Maquisapayoq Macaw Caly Lick Blanquillo .

Today, a long journey expects us navigating for 8 hours the Alto Madre de Dios River. On the way, we have an opportunity to observe diverse species such as herons, vultures, kingfishers, turtles or monkeys. Later on, we reach the Manu Reserved Zone. In the afternoon, we pass through the area of Boca Manu where the Alto Madre de Dios River flows into the Madre de Dios River! Our next lodge – Maquisapayoq is situated only an hour far away from there. This place is a habitat of a red-faced spider monkey. We have a shower and dinner there and before we get to sleep, we experience an evening walk to a nearby tapir clay-lick observing tapirs from an opposite hidden platform placed just 3 metres far away from the clay-lick in Amazon .

Amazon Peru Day 4 : Maquisapayoq to Cocha Blanco Lake  and Blanquillo Manu .

After breakfast, we explore nearby paths. Afterwards, we board our boat to navigate down the river for half an hour until we reach Blanquillo Lodge, a place of a big concentration of macaws! We accommodate ourselves and have lunch there. Later, we visit the Cocha Blanco (Blanco Lake) where we observe a giant river otter family fishing. If we are lucky, we can spot a big variety of birds playing, for example, a prehistoric bird called hoatzin. In the afternoon, we return to the lodge where our Cook serves us dinner. After that, we are given an opportunity to go in search of caimans which are usually active at night waiting for their victims. Then we get back to the lodge to overnight in the Amazon .

Amazon Peru Day 5 : Blanquillo  Manu National Park  to Rainforest Lodge Manu .

Very early before breakfast, we go to the famous and splendid parrot’s clay-lick of Blanquillo to watch big flocks of macaws (Ara Chloroptera), parrots and parakeets!! They come there to eat clay that helps them to digest and clean body from toxins! Then we return to the lodge to have breakfast to later board our motorboat and navigate up the Alto Madre de Dios River for several hours. On the way, we shortly stop in Aguas Calientes (close to Shintuya) to enjoy a refreshing bath in nearby thermal baths! Then we continue navigating until we get to our already know – Rainforest Lodge. There we can have shower and after dinner we go night walk in the Amazon

Amazon Peru Day 6 : Rainforest lodge  to Atala Port  Cusco City .

Another parrot observation expects us today, so we board our boat before breakfast to go to see a 10 minute far away parrot clay-lick! After that, we get back to the lodge where we are served breakfast adding us energy for our last travel so that we board the motorized boat and start navigating towards the Atalaya Port. Our private vehicle awaits us there to take us back to Cusco. We arrive there approximately between 7 and 7:30 pm.

IMPORTANT!!

You need to be vaccinated against Yellow Fever as well as to bring some anti-malaria tablets with you

 

 

Tour Includes / Not Includes

Included in the  Amazon Peru Macaw Clay Lick 6/ days:

  • A professional naturalist Tour Guide;
  • Motorboat transportation:
  • Private vehicle land transportation;
  • Entrance fees  to Macaw Clay Lick Manu Blanquillo .
  • A professional Cook,
  • Meals: 5 Breakfast, 6 Lunch, 5 Dinner and drinking water (Please note: vegetarian option upon request for no extra cost!);
  • Accommodation: 5 Nights in our lodges.
  • First aid kit, including a poison extractor, mosquito bite treatment and an antidote for a snake bite;
  • Radio communication;
  • Rubber boots.

Not included in the Amazon Peru Macaw Clay Lick 6 days:

  • Any flight nor airport departure taxes;
  • Travel insurance;
  • Vaccination;
  • Breakfast on the first day and dinner on the last day;
  • Drinks;
  • Tips to local staff.

What to take with you to the Amazon Peru Macaw Clay Lick 6 days:

  • Mosquito repellent (DEET 35 recommended as a MINIMUM!!) .
  • Original passport .
  • Small backpack .
  • Long sleeved cotton shirts (preferably green coloured)  .
  • Long cotton trousers.
  • Cotton long socks (to be put into your trousers).
  • Comfortable walking shoes.
  • Sandals or light shoes.
  • Rain gear (e.g. rain poncho).
  • Sweater (for the beginning of the tour in Andes and the cloud forest only).
  • Swimsuit.
  • Binoculars (we also rent it).
  • Camera and its charger.
  • Plastic bags to be used for clothes and a camera.
  • A hat as a protection against the Sun or rain,
  • Toiletries,
  • Small towel,
  • Toilet paper,
  • Sun cream,
  • Sunglasses,
  • Flashlight (with spare bulb and batteries),
  • A bottled water (1 litre as a minimum),
  • Pocket money (Soles) to buy some beverages and souvenirs as well as to tip.

 

Information

 

Amazon Peru – Many know what a Macaw is worth – Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
as a pet, but few realize the value of being free in their environment. It is that apart from its intrinsic value as a bird, as an animal species or as a work of nature amazon peru , macaws in the wild are a great tourist attraction. So they also have economic value. Currently some seven or eight specialized tourism agencies organize trips to Peru for amateur ornithologists (bird watchers) amazon peru . The fact that true scientific authorities in the field, such as Ted Parker or Steve Hilty amazon peru , world famous for their knowledge of birds, bring six or seven groups of fans to the country each year, while tourism companies send only one or Two groups to Africa or Southeast Asia gives an idea of ​​the primacy of Peru in the ornithological field amazon peru .

La ccollpa del Manu – Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
Charles Man is among the scientists who have been dedicated to bird research for years at the Cocha-Totora Biological Station, in the Manu National Park amazon peru . During my stay at Manu I had the opportunity to accompany him on one of his expeditions to the famous macaw ccollpa. In the boat we were talking about the progress of their studies amazon peru . Four days away from the nearest city, the place is difficult to access. Despite having been repeatedly photographed, this is one of the least visited ccollpas amazon peru , so that morning, watching from the boat the sunrise felt truly privileged. During the current year [1985], Charles Man is especially dedicated to parrot research amazon peru . He conducts his work under the auspices of the New York Zoological Society amazon peru . One of the purposes of their studies is to know the extent of the territory that the different parrot species use as habitat, in order to determine the areas required by these birds in the conservation units amazon peru . Charlie is also dedicated to the task of finding out what they eat, where they nest and what their habits are. At last the boat stops a kilometer and a half from the main Manu ccollpa. In the sudden silence that surrounds us when the engine is turned off, we perceive a distant and dull roar: it is the incredible sound produced by the squawk of a crowd of parrots amazon peru .

A wonderful show – Manu Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
We went into the bush amazon peru. Charlie continues to inform me of what has been investigated so far, while we wait for the start of the show that will star the various species of parrots that “colollpean” at different times. Hidden in the shelter prepared in order to observe the birds without being seen amazon peru , we try to make as little noise as possible aamzon peru . Incredible as it may seem, despite how common it is to see a parrot perched on the perch of many houses, there is little, if any, known about these birds in the wild amazon peru . On the other hand, being the macaw the largest, the most colorful, the one that flies the highest and the one that inhabits a territory of greater extension, it is understandable that the attention is focused on it amazon peru .

Macaws Manu Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
There are several species of macaw in Manu amazon peru ; the most common are: amazon peru  Ara macao, 1 m long, head and body red-orange, parts of the wings and tail blue, with a yellow band; the red and green Ara chloroptera —also called “stubborn” by the natives—, and the blue and yellow Ara ararauna, the latter species in danger of extinction amazon peru . They are also found in the area, smaller macaws, such as the severe Ara and the Ara maliatar, which feed on fruits, nectars, flowers, leaves and young shoots. With their large and efficient beak they can peel not only the pulp and outer shell of a plum seed, but also the skin that surrounds the seed. In their wild state parrots prefer still green chestnuts amazon peru . As the seeds are their preferred food and since they contain a large amount of protein, a few hours a day are sufficient to feed. They spend the rest of the time in community, cleaning and grooming each other’s feathers or playing to push each other simulating fights, amid loud and piercing squawks amazon peru . One of the great scientific unknowns is the vocal capacity of parrots. Indeed, they are capable of emitting a variety of sounds to communicate with each other. Some species even have great facility to imitate other animals or the human voice, allowing them to learn a surprising number of words. Parrots are actually much smarter than most people think amazon peru .

The Manu show begins – Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
A sudden gesture from Charlie interrupts my musings amazon peru . Glimpsing through the interwoven palm leaves that hide us amazon peru , I see, with the excitement of someone who will express a scoop, that the first parrots are descending towards the ccollpa amazon peru . Birds are highly exposed to the predation of eagles and other birds of prey when perched on the bare, perpendicular face of the clayey hillside, and therefore tend to wander with nervous caution before deciding to descend into the gaps or crevices amazon peru . that they have dug through the action of their beaks. The smallest birds come down first; this time it is the blue-headed parrot (Pionus menstruus). Some of them make their appearance on the clay wall quite shyly amazon peru . But after about five minutes they begin to descend massively like a bunch of colored beads thrown into the void, with great speed and noise amazon peru . It also seems that there are hierarchies among the parrots: some defend their favorite places by cawing, others quickly steal a large piece of clay and fly to perch on a liana to eat more comfortably the bite of land they hold with one leg amazon peru .

They are like shining jewels -Manu Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
After a while, there are about a hundred and fifty fluttering blue-headed parrots that. in contrast to the dull, reddish cliff, they appear as jewels glistening in the sun.These birds, about 30 cm long, are extremely beautiful: the head and neck are bright blue and iridescent amazon peru , in some places it turns almost violet, contrasting with the changing shades of deep green throughout the rest of the body. Beneath the tail, and sometimes on the lower part of the neck, they have bright red feathers amazon peru .
The movement and color of this group of birds is truly an indescribable spectacle. Before descending, they congregate in the high branches of the surrounding trees amazon peru . Once they are sure that no danger lies in wait for them, they descend vertically, displacing small birds. The descent begins with the most courageous individual, who perches on the wall and begins to eat amazon peru .

Clay lick Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
What is a ccollpa: The Quechua voice ccollpas, which means salty earth, are clay deposits containing mineral salts, where a large number and variety of animals congregate in order to ingest these salts, which apparently require to supply deficiencies of elements that their usual diets do not contain amazon peru. In addition to constituting a supplement of mineral salts, the clay diet eaten by macaws could be explained by the need for these birds to counteract and digest highly toxic compounds contained in the immature fruits that are part of their diet amazon peru . In the macaw macaws, they feed avidly, in big bites, squawking, flying as fast as arrows, forming agile rhombuses and colorful stars with their enormous red, blue, yellow and green feathers amazon peru .

Manu Blanquillo Manu -Amazon Peru Macaw Caly Lick.
After concluding what must be one of the most beautiful spectacles of nature, and while we waited for the next act that day six different species of parrots visited the ccollpa Charlie commented that there are other more easily accessible ccollpas in the country amazon peru . One of the places recognized worldwide by expert ornithologists and where the greatest number of bird species can be observed is Manu Blanquillo, also in the department of Madre de Dios Manu Park amazon peru  Indeed, when a film company asked about the country that offered the best possibilities for making a documentary film about birds, it replied amazon peru : “Peru and, among the preferred locations, Tambopata.” Its fame will undoubtedly spread with the recent discovery of what is believed to be the largest macaw ccollpa in South America. There is precisely a place where macaws and parrots in general congregate by the hundreds. With due time and tourism organization amazon peru , as well as with the necessary protection, this area can become one of the main tourist attractions in the country amazon peru . While taking notes on what was seen in one of the most incredible days of my existence, sitting in the cane fields a column of military ants on the march had forced us to quickly evacuate our refuge, I casually looked up and was struck by a series of familiar noises. Perched on the top of a towering tree were seven splendid macaws who, with great ease, were dedicated to their favorite entertainment: gambling amazon peru . They pecked leaves, cutting them, and threw them with great grace into the void; they teased each other with their beaks, they groomed themselves, they moved calmly from branch to branch, perfectly representing the concept of beauty, inherent in wildlife, free and harmonious amazon peru.

Lodge

Tour Gallery

Methods of Payment

Book Now

Infotmations

MANU NATIONAL PARK: CURRENT STATUS
Manu National Park or Parque Nacional del Manu (PNM) amazon peru  is a UNESCO World Heritage site, considered one of the most important regions for biodi- versity conservation peru amazon  in the tropics. It includes the entire watershed of theManu River amazon tours , from its headwaters in the Andes mountains over 4,000 mabove sea level, to the lowland tropical forests of the Manu  amazon peru floodplain.Manu was first set aside as a National Forest Reserve  peru amazon in 1968, and thendeclared a National Park on May 29, 1973, with a total area of 1,536,806 ha.Since its creation, PNM amazon peru  has officially been considered in its totality an“untouchable area amazon peru ,” where the ecological integrity of the environment ispreserved, and only non-intrusive activities such as basic research arepermitted peru amazon . Nonetheless, as we relate above, both settled indigenous com-munities and numerous isolated populations are found within this core. InMarch 1977, PNM amazon peru  was incorporated as the core region of a larger conserva-tion unit, Manu Biosphere Reserve or Reserva de Biosfera del Manu (RBM)  peru amazon established through United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization’s (UNESCO) “Man and the Biosphere” peru amazon  program. EncompassingPNM plus buffer zones, RBM has a total area amazon peru  of 1,881,200 ha; see Figure 1).In 1980, part of the buffer zone along the lower Manu River  amazon peru was designatedManu Reserve Zone or Zona Reservada del Manu peru amazon (ZRM) peru amazon , a category withprovisional protection status within Peru’s system of natural protected areas.Initially, sustainable-use practices in addition to tourism were contemplatedfor the ZRM amazon peru , including selective logging, experimental forestry, and evenagriculture. In the long run, however, tourism has won out as the majoreconomic strategy for this zone peru amazon ; and in 2002, much of the ZRM was incor-porated into PNM amazon peru , giving the park a total area of 1,716,500 ha Manu National Park peru amazon , Madre de Dios, Peru amazon . Locations of uncontacted indigenousgroups are approximate amazon peru . The Matsigenka settlements of Sarigemini peru amazon (1b) and Maizal (2b) amazon peru arerecent and smaller satellite communities derived from Yomybato and Tayakome, respec-tively peru amazon . The former Reserve Zone amazon peru  has been incorporated into the park proper. The Special UseZone, which borders the Yomybato river and the Manu river amazon peru  between 2a and 2b, indicatesthe area set aside for subsistence activities by the settled Matsigenka communities Manu Biosphere Reserve amazon peru  also includes the Cultural Zone, sometimesreferred to as the “cooperation zone amazon peru ” or the “Andean/Amazonian multipleuse zone.” The Cultural Zone amazon peru , located at the park’s eastern boundary alongthe fairly populous upper Madre de Dios River amazon peru , contains a diversity of humanpopulations including legally titled native  amazon peru communities, Andean peasantcommunities and colonist settlements, semi-urban settlements, logging con-cessions, and private land holdings, including private nature reserves associ-ated with tourism ventures. The Cultural Zone peru amazon  has no legal protection status,but serves as a buffer zone of mostly stable, titled lands where sustainabledevelopment can be promoted among local populations amazon peru , thereby avoidingmore destructive development or colonization projects amazon peru . Especially since thelate 1990s, government agencies and  have carried out projects in envi-ronmental education, forest  peru  amazon amazonmanagement, agricultural outreach, health care,community-based ecotourism, and other activities in this zone.More recently, the Manu Biosphere Reserve amazon peru  has been bolstered by thecreation of neighboring reserves of varying protection status, creating anextended buffer zone in surrounding areas peru amazon

KUGAPAKORI-NAHUAINDIGENOUS RESERVE AMAZON PERU  :The Kugapakori-Nahua Indigenous Reserve amazon peru , with an area of 443,887 ha, was set aside in 1991 to protect a region amazon peru  inhabited by indigenous popula-tions with little contact with national society peru amazon : the recently contacted Yora(Nahua) of the upper Mishagua River amazon peru , and isolated Matsigenka-related pop-ulations (Nanti or Kogapakori, where “Kugapakori” is the official name of the reserve but is a misspelling) of the upper Camisea and Timpia amazon peru . In theory,this reserve protects the “back door” to Manu peru amazon  via the Isthmus of Fitzcarrald.In fact, the Kugapakori-Nahua reserve amazon peru is not included in Peru’s system of protected areas and has no state support amazon travels . The upper Mishagua is thoroughly invaded by loggers from the Ucayali, while the Camisea is the site of a massivenatural gas extraction and pipeline project originally studied and developedby Shell, and currently operated by Plus Petrol. It is only through the effortsof individual indigenous amazon peru communities and NGOs that any control or protec-tion is afforded. Nonetheless, this reserve would appear to be critical forPNM’s long-term integrity, and deserves serious study and support by Peruvianand international conservation organizations.

AMARAKAERI COMMUNAL RESERVE :  The Amarakaeri Communal Reserve  amazon peru was designated in 2002 as a communal-usearea for the main surviving Harakmbut-speaking group of Madre peru amazon  de Dios,encompassing their traditional territory peru amazon throughout the headwaters of the RioColorado (or Karene) and other south-bank tributaries of the Madre de Dios peru amazon (Blanco, Chilihue, Inambari). Its area  amazon peru of 402,336 ha is separated from the Alto Madre de Dios and the Madre de Dios courses by a swath of lands titled orgranted as use concessions to various colonist and native communities. Goldmining throughout the Rio Colorado basin since the 1950s has caused extensiveenvironmental degradation and cultural amazon peru change. Again, the reserve is notgoverned by strict conservation rules. However, by guaranteeing land rightsand promoting sustainable use by native communities, it is hoped that coloniza-tion and exploitation by outside resource extractors may be controlled.

ALTO PURUS NATIONAL PARK AMAZON PERU .:The Alto Purus National Park amazon peru was created in 2004 with more than 2,500,000 ha,divided between the departments of Ucayali and Madre de Dios amazon peru . The Madrede Dio amazon peru s portion of the reserve  is contiguous with Manu amazon peru National Park’s peru amazon  northern boundary. The Ucayali portion (Purus River proper) peru amazon  contains a large number of settled, Westernized indigenous com-munities, mostly of the Panoan language family, as well as several isolatedpopulations. Within Madre de Dios amazon peru , the Purus Park embraces the headwaters of the Piedras River, and a territory of two or more isolated indigenous groupsabout which not even the most basic information—linguistic affiliation,population, territory, prior history of contact—is known (Huertas, 2002) amazon peru .Prior to being incorporated into the national park, the upper Piedras wasincluded within Mobil Oil’s exploration block number 77, an enterprise crit-icized both for its disturbance of pristine forest and its likelihood of contact with isolated Indians (Shepard, 2002b) peru amazon . Mobil registered numerous signs of isolated indigenous groups, but no direct or hostile encounters werereported amazon peru . Soon after Mobil began its exploration activities in 1996, hithertounknown, isolated indigenous groups suddenly appeared in Manu Park along peru amazon  the north bank of the Manu River amazon peru , due south of the area impacted by Mobil’s seismic operations (Shepard, 1998b, cited in Huertas) amazon peru . It seems likely that these groups had fled to Manu seeking safer territories after the massiveinflux of outsiders peru amazon , helicopters, and heavy equipment. Mobil relinquished itscontract in 1999 without pursuing petroleum extraction. However, the region was then overrun by loggers from the city of Puerto Maldonado amazon peru  amazon . Illegalmahogany loggers remain in the region amazon peru  today, despite the establishment of thenational park amazon peru . Reports of conflicts between illegal loggers and isolated indige-nous groups in the Piedras River peru amazon  basin have become increasingly frequent; andgroups of the latter, apparently fleeing conflict in the Piedras, now migrate on a yearly basis into Manu Park, provoking ever more frequent and aggressiveencounters with the settled Matsigenka populations .

LOS AMIGOS CONSERVATION CONCESSIONThe Los Amigos Conservation Concession on the Rio de los Amigos is situatedbetween Manu River and Rio de las Piedras, along the park’s eastern border.Like the adjacent Piedras, the Amigos basin was completely overtaken by log-gers in the years following Mobil’s retreat from Block 77. In 2002, the non-profit Amazon Conservation Association amazon peru (wasgranted management authority over 1.6 million ha of the Amigos basin. Loggers were removed, and the reserve is currently being used to promote research andtourism. The Amigos watershed includes territory used by isolated indigenousgroups from the Piedras and Manu basins, and areas have been set aside withinthe concession to accommodate these groups’ annual migrations.

MEGANTONI NATIONAL SANCTUARY :  Megantoni National Sanctuary, with 216,003 ha, was set aside as both a wildlifesanctuary and a cultural reserve for the Matsigenka people peru amazon . It stretches from the Pongo de Maiñique canyon on the Urubamba River  amazon peru to the headwatersof the Timpia River along Manu Park’s “back door” northern boundary, territory of the so-called Kogapakori: isolated, feared, apparently hostile groups closely related to the Matsigenka amazon peru . The reserve includes the fantastic rock formationsalong the Pongo de Maiñique known as Tonkiniku amazon peru  (“place of bones”) peru amazon  inMatsigenka, considered both sacred and fearsome as the final resting place of dead souls. Though government conservation agencies have little involvementhere, the Matsigenka communities in the region are well organized and politi-cally active, intent on defending the sanctuary from various destructive devel-opment options including roads, colonization projects, petrochemical drilling,and a long-proposed hydroelectric dam (Rivera, 1991) peru amazon . A Matsigenka ecotour-ism enterprise has operated on the Timpia River with marginal success.
THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE Today in Peru amazon , it would be impossible to design a national park without consid-ering the rights and participation of local indigenous people (see Table 1) amazon peru .But when PNM was created in 1973, Peruvian law did not yet recognizeindigenous territories, which were considered to be empty. Under thedevelopment-minded government of President Fernando Belaunde’s firstterm of office in the mid 1960s, the Amazon interior was viewed as a vastand under-exploited “emptiness”: a no-man’s land about which the statereserved the right to make land-use decisions, and a demographic void tobe filled with colonists seeking untapped riches. Belaunde’s mission state-ment appears in a book entitled, appropriately, “The Conquest of Peru by Peruvians” (Belaunde, 1959) peru amazon . The state gave preference to colonizationprojects, hoping to harness, inhabit, and civilize the “empty” Amazon peru  inte-rior; and to logging, mining, cattle ranching, and oil prospecting projects(Moore, 1984). Indigenous people were often expelled from their own tradi-tional territories, or subjected to exploitative economic relations at the hands of hacienda owners and labor bosses. The Belaunde government likewisestimulated colonization and development projects in the department of Madre de Dios amazon peru , including logging concessions throughout the Cultural Zoneand petroleum exploration blocks immediately surrounding and even cross-ing Manu Park  peru amazon boundaries. Most egregiously, Belaunde initiated planning of an interfluvial canal and highway that would have cut through the middle of PNM amazon peru  and connected the Peruvian coast with the trans-Amazon highway inBrazil, a project which he attempted to inaugurate in 1982 during his sec-ond term of office, with disastrous results (see Yora amazon peru  [Nahua], above).In 1974, the socialist military government of General Velasco Alvaradodecreed the “Law of Native Communities” (D.L. 20653), granting indigenouspeople certain collective rights over land. However, the law was formulated in such a way as to recognize indigenous territorial rights only at the locallevel, the so-called “native community,” and not at the level of larger cul-tural-linguistic groups or geographic regions. In this way, large traditionalterritories were fragmented into small, autonomous communities, eachrecognized legally and organized according to democratic principles peru amazon . Thisformulation was intended to put to rest the specter, raised during the nascent indigenous movement of the early 1970s, of independent indige-nous “nations” within the Peruvian state amazon peru . Nonetheless, the Native Commu-nity Law provided a crucial legal framework of land tenure for indigenouspeoples amazon peru , and has ultimately led to the titling of tens of millions of hectaresof land to native communities throughout the Peruvian Amazon peru .The revised 1978 Law of Native Communities (D.L. 22175)amazon peru  further weak-ened indigenous rights to land tenure by stipulating that only agricultural landscould be held in communal title. Forested lands (the vast majority of land in anative community) are treated as government property ceded for communaluse, with the government maintaining the right to withdraw or condition thatuse. These stipulations were clearly intended to ensure that indigenous territo-ries would not present an obstacle to colonization, road construction, petro-chemical and mineral exploration, and other development projects.Furthermore, the 1978 law also states that native communities in national parksare not allowed to receive land title, though they are permitted to remain aslong as their activities do not interfere with the park’s conservation objectives.Nonetheless, three Andean amazon peru peasant communities and one lowland native com-munity were titled in the 1980s with territories partially overlapping PNM. amazon peru In direct contradiction to the 1978 Law of Native Communities peruvian amazon , the morecomprehensive 1990 Environmental and Natural Resource Code (D.L. 613) amazon peru recognizes land tenure and the resource-use rights of indigenous communi-ties within natural amazon peru  protected areas. As such, this legislation conforms with thelanguage of Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization peru amazon  (ratifiedin Peru in 1994 by R.L. 26253) amazon peru , guaranteeing the rights of indigenous andtribal peoples to participate in the use, economic benefits, administration, andconservation of natural resources. During a 1993 meeting between Matsigenka inhabitants, indigenous NGOs, and park officials (see Shepard,2002a) amazon peru , the park officials were shown the paragraphs in the 1990 NaturalResource Code that specifically permitted the titling of native communities within national parks; they had not been aware of this aspect of the legislation,and were surprised bythe revelation peru amazon . More recently, the 1997 Law of ProtectedNatural Areas (L. 26834) attempted to resolve the contradictory legal situationby permitting the creation of “Special Use Zones” (see Figure 1) for ancestralcommunities in national parks peru amazon. Such special zones provide official recognitionfor native communities without granting them actual land title. However, it isstill possible that politically ambitious native communities in parks could takeadvantage of the contradictory legislation and push for land titles.In addition to the contradictory laws governing land title in parks, thelegislation that ostensibly limits indigenous activities in parks is open to differ-ent interpretations peru amazon . For instance, several important laws  grantancestral indigenous populations the right to remain in parks as long astheirtraditional activities do not interfere with a park’s conservation goals amazon peru . However, a more restrictive interpretation could argue that even traditionalsubsistence activities have sufficient environmental impact to be deleterious to a national park’s objectives, given a large enough population size. Thus, it isnot clear whether legal weight rests more on the total environmental impactof indigenous activities, or on the fact that those activities are “traditional peru amazon .” Thesituation becomes even more murky when one tries to define “traditional”subsistence activities. One reading might include only the activities of isolatedor so-called “uncontacted” populations amazon peru . However, the historical record indi-cates that the isolated, nomadic populations of Manu amazon peru  are not “traditional” atall, but rather refugees from Rubber Boom violence. On the other hand, thecurrent settled populations of Tayakome and Yomybato (and increasingly, themore isolated Matsigenka populations with whom they trade) amazon peru are utterly dependent on steel tools, Western medicines, other imported technologies,and, increasingly, formal school education. These are distinctly non-traditionalinnovations, and yet were introduced by missionaries prior to the founding of the park amazon peru . In any event, restricting access to trade goods, medicines, and for-mal education would drastically lower their quality of life and probably con-travene their broad legal rights as Peruvian citizens, as well as thoseguaranteed by the Environmental and Natural Resource Code.
THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL POLICIES OF PNM : It is clear that the core, “untouchable” area of Manu amazon peru  National Park (PNM) was created on the ancestral territory of indigenous Amazonian peru amazon and Andeanpeoples and that those populations have legal rights to the use of that landfor the foreseeable future. Even today, the total indigenous population of PNM is not known, due to significant numbers of isolated groups in variousparts of the park amazon peru . The focus of the rest of this article is therefore on theMatsigenka population of about 420, settled in two legally recognized Matsigenka amazon peru  communities, Tayakome and Yomybato.For now, the status of human populations and the control of humanimpacts remain a subject of debate and polemic among state institutions,NGOs, biologists, anthropologists, and indigenous organizations. Despite theobvious need and many attempts over the years, PNM peru amazon  has never developedeffective, long-term policies concerning local indigenous amazon peru and non-indigenouspopulations. During most of the park’s history, no anthropologist or other pro-fessional with social science training has been on the staff. The longest tenure was between 1985 and 1988. Since that time, a number of “park anthropolo-gists” have been hired on a temporary basis using momentary funding oppor-tunities, but have been let go once full funding responsibility falls back on INRENA amazon peru , and the impact on native community relations has been negligible,becoming a standing joke among the Matsigenka peru amazon : “That one came one time,and never came back. Then there was that other one we didn’t even meet!Iwonder how long this latest one will last?” It would appear that INRENA peru amazon  and PNM amazon peru  do not place a high priority on maintaining a full-time anthropological professional. Thus, since PNM’s inauguration, its anthropological policies havetended to be vague, even unwritten, sometimes contradictory, and frequently changed, paralleling the legal history related above peru amazon. To the inhabitants, therationale and regulations of PNM amazon peru  remained mysterious through the first twodecades of the park’s existence, until the early 1990s, when these inhabitantsbegan demanding information, attention, and assistance The history of PNM’s amazon peru  anthropological policies can be divided into threemain phases amazon peru : (a) amazon peru  an early phase, from the inception of the park through themid-1980s, guided by unrealistic and idealistic notions and with little directcontact or communication with native communities peru amazon ; (b) a phase of crisis,from the mid-1980s through the late 1990s, when the native communitiesbegan to react to the park’s negligence during the prior decade; and (c) thecurrent phase of rapprochement and negotiation, marked especially by theinauguration in 1997–1998 of the Matsigenka ecotourism lodge with direct INRENA support amazon peru .
The First Decade of Official Policy: 1973–1985The Belgian anthropologist André-Marcel d’Ans (1972, 1975), who partici-pated in early anthropological surveys, saw the creation of PNM amazon peru as a chanceto protect native peoples from outside influences that would change their way of life or subject them to undignified or inhumane conditions amazon peru ; for exam-ple, forced labor or debt peonage. But the main impetus for creating PNM peru amazon  came from biological conservationists, which meant that the park’s location,rationale, and boundaries were determined according to ecological anddefensibility criteria: high wildlife abundances and the opportunity to con-serve an entire watershed and an unbroken altitudinal gradient amazon peru. There was noconsideration of the existing territories, resource- use patterns, or ancestralrights of lowland or Andean indigenous populations, nor were local popula-tions consulted about the creation of the park amazon peru . In 1968, soon after the declara-tion of a national forest reserve in Manu peru amazon , a team from the Forestry ResearchInstitute at La Molina University proposed a habitat zoning system for theMatsigenka amazon peru  communities, including areas peru amazon  for hunting, forest product collec-tion, and agriculture  amazon peru (Ríos, Vasquez, Ponce, Tovar, & Dourojeanni, 1985).Curiously, the work was carried out without any study of actual Matsigenkaland or resource-use practices, and not surprisingly, this first attempt atanthropological policy making had no practical consequences. As the firstintervention aimed at native populations, this anecdote appropriately sets thestage for a long history of top-down policy making that has shown littlerespect for or interest in indigenous  amazon peru cultures, and often verged on the absurd. The early administrators of PNM amazon peru established a set of guidelines govern-ing the activities of native peoples in the park. For the most part, these rules were not written down or communicated explicitly to the native inhabitants. amazon peru However, because of the isolation and cultural conservatism of the Matsigenkacommunities, the rules have proven to be somewhat self-enforcing.1.Indigenous residents of PNM  peru amazon are free to carry out traditional subsistenceactivities such as hunting, fishing, gathering, and agriculture throughoutthe park amazon peru . Firearms are prohibited, yet other non-traditional technologiessuch as fishhooks, line, and nets are permitted amazon peru .

2.Commercial logging and the traffic and sale of animal skins and hides, as well as wild animals are prohibited. Raising cattle or swine, even for sub-sistence reasons, is not allowed.3.Indigenous residents of PNM peru amazon  are allowed to circulate freely in the park peru amazon . Although they need no authorization to enter or leave the park, they aresubject to search and confiscation of non-authorized items, especially firearms and munitions. However, since there are no explicit rules,depending upon the historical moment and the disposition of the parkguard, traditional food, craft, and extractive items amazon peru (e.g., smoked fish ormeat, turtle eggs, palm thatch, arrows, medicinal saps, or bark) assumedto be destined for commercialization outside the park have been confis-cated, usually to the great consternation of the person carrying them.4.Persons or groups entering peru amazon PNM whose activities could affect the indige-nous way of life are subject to search and are usually required to obtainprior authorization from the Peruvian government amazon peru .The main idea behind these norms is to prevent indigenous communi-ties having access to technologies (such as firearms) peru amazon  or extractive economicopportunities that could harm the ecology of the park.In 1985, a document known as the Master Plan amazon peru  (“Plan Director”) wasapproved for PNM amazon peru  (Ríos et al., 1985) peru amazon . The plan lacks any detailed anthropo-logical, ethnohistorical, or human-ecological analysis. It considers only twoacceptable options for native populations peru amazon : conserve their traditional life-styles and remain in the park, or opt for Westernization and leave the park;however, no provisions were made to enforce the second option. Effec-tively, the Master Plan provided the justification behind the unwritten rulesput in place by previous PNM administrations, as described above peru amazon . The tacithope of preservationist-minded conservationists was that the park wouldgradually become depopulated as native inhabitants were drawn towardtrade centers and economic opportunities outside the park (Helberg, 1989).Those who subscribed to such ideas underestimated the strong ties of nativepeople to their lands, resources, and traditions. In fact, as surrounding areassuccumb to colonization and resource pressure, PNM amazon peru  may become increas-ingly attractive to both Westernized and isolated indigenous peoples as asafe haven, a crucial point to which we return below (see Common Interests,below) amazon peru . The Growing Crisis: Matsigenka-Park Conflicts, 1973–1985
The expulsion of Protestant missionaries from the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL) in 1973 marked the first important conflict between PNM peru amazon   and the Matsigenka, and arose out of the protectionist-idealist vision of thepark: by removing outside influences, the indigenous population wouldreturn to an idealized, but historically inaccurate, “natural” state amazon peru . The flaw in that plan was that economic, education, and especially health-care necessitieshad already been generated by the missionaries’ 10-yr presence in theregion. In the early years of the park’s existence, a guard post was estab-lished at Tayakome peru amazon . Due to insufficient material support, lack of appropriatetraining, and nonexistent park rules, the park guards stationed there pro- voked a series of conflicts with the inhabitants of Tayakome that areremembered bitterly to the present day amazon peru : sexual relations with native women,a heavy dependence on the community for food, abuse of authority, alcohol-ism, and other transgressions. After many complaints, and also for logisticalreasons, the guard post at Tayakome was finally relocated downstream.The removal of the SIL left a tremendous political, economic, educa-tional, and medical vacuum in Tayakome that the park did little, or nothing,to fill. One Matsigenka amazon peru schoolteacher who had been trained by the mission-aries continued teaching for a few years in Tayakome after the SIL’s officialdeparture, but he eventually gave up due to a lack of support both withinthe community and from the outside. A group of families moved downstreamfrom Tayakome and began sporadic trade relations with the scientists at theCocha Cashu Biological Station amazon peru , bartering fish and agricultural products for Western goods. Another group of families, hoping to escape cold epidemics,attacks by the hostile Yora tribe, and social conflicts within the community, left Tayakome beginning in 1978 to establish new settlements on the upperQuebrada Fierro tributary, constituting the community known today as Yomybato.The most critical conflicts between PNM amazon peru  and the communities wereprecipitated by the precarious health situation during the decade followingthe park’s inauguration in 1973. After having lived in a settled community with missionary health care for a decade, suddenly the Matsigenka  peru amazon were left with no Western medical assistance. Their health status during the decadeof isolation that followed was abysmal. Epidemics of respiratory infections were frequent and fatal, and outbreaks of unusual new illnesses resulted inaccusations of sorcery, death threats, and the exile of some community members. Analysis of demographic data from the village of Tayakome amazon peru , where the SIL school and health post had been, shows a 50% decline in therate of population growth during the decade of 1975–1984, after the mis-sionary exodus, when compared with the prior decade of missionary presence  amazon peru .Between 1974 and 1980, 15 of the 25 children born in Tayakome diedduring that period, a grim 60% rate of infant and child mortality (Shepardetal., 2009).During 1986, anthropologists Magdalena Hurtado and Kim Hill spentmuch of their fieldwork time and all of their personal medical resources(plus several thousand penicillin tablets donated by the parents of G. Shepard)treating a particularly virulent outbreak of respiratory infections amongMatsigenka and Yora populations (Hurtado, Hill, & Kaplan, 1987; Hill &Kaplan, 1990). The researchers made arrangements with SIL’s air fleet, “Alas Trouble in Paradise 281 de Esperanza” (Wings of Hope), for an airdrop of additional medicines andpossible removal of an acutely ill patient. Though unable themselves toaddress the dire health-care needs of the indigenous communities, PNMofficials denied SIL access to Manu’s airspace, apparently in fear that medicalassistance might represent a “foot in the door” for the return of SIL presenceto Manu amazon  peru . These direct conflicts between the anthropologists and park officials,as well as ideological peru amazon conflict between their research agenda and the park’sidealistic-protectionist anthropological vision, jeopardized future researchauthorizations for the team. Colleagues of Hill and Hurtado, Hilliard Kaplanand Kate Kopischke carried out research in Manu amazon peru  in 1988 and again foundthemselves treating major health problems while encountering only obsta-cles among park officials: “Critics sought to revoke our research permits,and at regular intervals we learned of rumor campaigns designed, undoubt-edly, to instill distrust among the Matsigenka themselves” (Kopischke, 1996,p. 185) peru amazon .These conflicts between the park and the anthropological researchers,and the continued lack of economic opportunities, further embittered theMatsigenka peru amazon . In this and other instances, persons and organizations who worked with or sought to assist the Matsigenka were expelled, banned, orotherwise hindered in carrying out their work with the communities. Ineach instance, PNM amazon peru  administrators judged the immediate or long-termimpacts of the work of these people or organizations as inconsistent withthe park’s conservation interests and preservationist policies. Certainly a park amazon peru  has the right, indeed the obligation, to restrict access toits territories and take decisions about which research and other projects will be allowed to take place peru amazon. However, due to the unclear or nonexistentanthropological policies, the absence of concrete alternative projects, and acomplete lack of communication with the communities to justify or clarify such decisions, they came to be perceived amazon peru by the Matsigenka as arbitrary,unfair, and detrimental to their livelihood. After the withdrawal of the SIL, the Dominican mission at Shintuya onthe upper Madre de Dios peru amazon  decided to re-conquer the souls of Manu for theCatholic Church, taking advantage of and sometimes fueling a growing anti-park sentiment among the Matsigenka. Initially, the priests at Shintuya senthumanitarian aid such as tools, clothes, and medical supplies. In 1983–1984,the diocese established schools, first in Tayakome amazon peru  and then in Yomybato. Various episodes of conflict and confrontation occurred between the parkand the Dominican priests over the confiscation of banned articles; forexample, when priests tried to smuggle guns or ammunition to the commu-nities, or when they left the communities and the park laden with driedbush meat or turtle eggs given to them by the Matsigenka amazon peru .The return of schools and teachers caused fundamental changes in thesocial organization of the communities peru amazon . As in the SIL times, the school becamea fixed and central point of reference for the community, serving as a hub of access to Western goods and medicines and contributing to a growing sed-entarization of formerly scattered, mobile settlements (d’Ans, 1975; Shepard &Chicchón, 2001). The pedagogical amazon peru method and philosophy of the schools,however, changed completely from SIL times. Motivated by a curious mixtureof linguistic, anthropological, and evangelical zeal, SIL teaches reading and writing in the native language. SIL missionaries are trained in field lin-guistic techniques in order to develop a custom orthography for translatingthe Bible and other Christian texts into the native tongue. In contrast, theDominican teaching method emphasizes reading and writing skills in thenational language of Spanish, employs Spanish orthography to render thenative tongue amazon peru  (which is the source of the spelling “Machiguenga, peru amazon ” instead of the SIL-devised and orthographically proper spelling “Matsigenka”) amazon peru , and isdriven by a philosophy of acculturation and assimilation into Peruvianamazon peru  national society.The teachers sent by the priests to run the small, community-builtschoolhouses are bilingual, Westernized Matsigenka amazon peru  from the UrubambaRiver who studied under the Dominican education system. Because of theirSpanish language ability, they often serve, whether in official capacity or not,as intermediaries in interactions with outsiders. Consequently, the school-teachers have come to acquire significant political and economic power in thecommunities, and have been prime motivators for a wide range of social andcultural changes over the past two decades. In both communities, close rela-tives of the schoolteachers have come for extended visits from their homeregions, sometimes marrying and remaining in the communities but in otherinstances provoking social conflict, especially when male relatives havefathered illegitimate children. The schoolteachers facilitated contacts withPeruvian amazon peru indigenous organizations and contributed greatly to the currentpolitical engagement of the communities. In particular, the indigenous rightsorganization CEDIA amazon peru  (Centro para el Desarrollo del Indígena Amazónico) peru amazon  wasconnected by close kinship ties to one of the schoolteachers.However, the schoolteachers have also introduced a complex andsomewhat paradoxical cultural dynamic. Though they are often motivatedby altruistic goals of educating and defending the human and cultural rightsof their people,amazon peru  the teachers have, through contact with the national society,subliminally assimilated a series of negative stereotypes and prejudicestoward their own culture, which they have inadvertently visited upon thecommunity. Worse, because the communities remained culturally isolated,the Spanish-language-based teaching met with very limited educational suc-cess for many years peru amazon . The community members made tremendous sacrificesand gave up their much-desired autonomy to maintain the schools and sup-port the teachers, but received disappointing results for their children. amazon peru (Only in recent years has the educational situation improved, though this is largely due to the impetus provided by the recent ecotourism project at CochaSalvador in 1998.) peru amazon The resulting low literacy standards, combined with PNM amazon peru -imposed limitson commercial activities and the general geographic isolation, served to furtherlimit economic opportunities. Though some Matsigenka amazon peru worked as boatdrivers or wage laborers in the tourist trade or for scientific researchers,overall such benefits were short-term and minimal, not truly building localcapacities or social capital. During the particularly bleak years betweenPNM’s amazon peru  establishment and the mid-1980s, some young men left the park peru amazon  formonths at a time to work under appalling conditions as wage laborers incommercial logging or gold mining operations. Having almost no commandof Spanish or notions of money, they often came back with little more thanserious illnesses and a few pieces of used clothing. Throughout the firstdecade or more of the park’s existence, virtually the only access to Westerngoods available to the Matsigenka amazon peru was charity or barter trade from Catholicmissionaries, the poorly paid indigenous schoolteachers, visiting anthropol-ogists, and scientists at Cocha Cashu station peru amazon . Other than an occasional orderfor palm-leaf roof thatch, the Matsigenka peru amazon  in the park received virtually noth-ing from the ecotourism agencies operating since the 1980s.By the mid-1980s, most Matsigenka amazon peru inhabitants were of the opinionthat the park was, at best, a nuisance, and at worst, an oppressor and amenace, providing no visible assistance, imposing arbitrary restrictions andprohibitions, hindering or expelling anyone who tried to help them, anddenying them access to goods, services, and the market economy withoutproviding any obvious benefits in return. There was little or no direct dia-logue between the park administration and the Matsigenka amazon peru  for the firstdecade or more of the park’s existence amazon peru . The very rules and restrictions of the park had only arrived to the Matsigenka indirectly and sometimes incontradictory fashion, usually second- or third-hand, transmitted by parkguards or the biologists at Cocha Cashu amazon peru . Reacting to Crisis: 1985–1997 The park’s rigid, protectionist vision eventually became obsolete in dealing with the settled Matsigenka communities, as their communication with Peruvian  amazon peru society and increased access to health, education, and other ser- vices in the 1980s generated new necessities and expectations. In response,from 1985–1988 the park peru amazon administration hired, for the first and only signifi-cant time, a professional anthropologist, who formulated new guidelines foran anthropological policy with a focus on dialogue with native populations(Helberg, 1989; Rummehoeller and Helberg, 1992) amazon peru . Nonetheless, the plan was never put into action.In the late 1980s, Peru’s park system underwent an overhaul, andcontrol over parks and natural resources was centralized at the NationalInstitute of Natural Resources (INRENA) amazon peru, a large, semi-autonomous insti-tute affiliated with the Ministry of Agriculture (previously, parks had been managed by a small department of Forestry and Fauna within the Ministry of Agriculture) peru amazon. In addition to the legal contradictions and loopholes dis-cussed above, there emerged at times an inconsistency in policy, if notdirect personal rivalry, between the Lima-based INRENA  peru amazon and the Cusco-based PNM amazon peru administration. For instance, researchers, film crews, and othersgranted entrance authorizations in Lima have been denied authorization inCusco. When such institutional conflicts have delayed or otherwise interfered with the plans of visitors to native communities, the communities have taken itas further evidence of interference by both amazon peru INRENA and PNM amazon peru  in their welfare.The discontent in the Matsigenka population reached critical levels inthe early 1990s, when INRENA peru amazon  refused to approve a tourist lodge project tobenefit the Matsigenka communities that had been proposed by the indige-nous rights organization CEDIA amazon peru . In part incited by the organization, theMatsigenka defied INRENA amazon peru and in 1992 began construction of the lodge atan important tourist destination in Manu without awaiting approval. WhenINRENA peru amazon  moved to interdict the construction, some Matsigenka threatened toopen cattle pastures along the Manu river if the lodge project were notapproved. To overcome this impasse,amazon peru  INRENA decided to implant its owntourism lodge project with the Matsigenka as part of  v peru amazon FANPE peru amazon  (Fortalecimientodel Sistema Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas por el Estado), a largerproject funded by the German government’s aid agency GTZ peru amazon (DeutscheGesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit) to support Peru’s nationalpark system. With this political move, amazon peru INRENA co-opted the tourism lodgeconcept, giving in to the Matsigenkas’ demands without turning over controlof the project to an organization perceived as hostile to the park’s interests.CEDIA amazon peru  retaliated with a media campaign, threatened legal proceedingsagainst INRENA for intellectual property theft, and mobilized a high-levelinvestigation of the situation in Manu park by Peru’s ombudsmanshipagency, the Defensoria del Pueblo.The conflict between the CEDIA and INRENA amazon peru also had repercussionsfor relations between the two Matsigenka communities. One of the commu-nities cut off its ties to the organization during this tense period, upset by the organization’s proprietary stance toward the lodge project. The secondcommunity maintained its relationship with CEDIA  amazon peru due to strong kinshipties between the organization and the schoolteacher. This led to tensionsbetween the two communities in the early phase of the lodge project. Factions within the second community, loyal to CEDIA,peru amazon  remained skeptical and criticalof the INRENA/FANPE amazon peru  lodge project. In this case, we see how native commu-nities can become a kind of battleground between different organizations orpolitical philosophies. Even though INRENA’s and PNM amazon peru ’s policies towardthe native populations changed in response to the conflict, the underlyingprinciple of power and control was maintained intact.In the 1990s, with growing pressure from the communities themselves, as well as from some biologists, anthropologists, and indigenous organizations
Trouble in Paradise 285 the Directorship of amazon peru  PNM as well as INRENA began to take a greater interestin the situation of the native populations. In 1993, a workshop funded by the Discovery Channel (Washington, DC),amazon peru  Superflow Productions (ColoradoSprings, CO)peru amazon , and Friends of the Peruvian Rainforest (Philadelphia, PA) amazon peru washeld at Tayakome during which, for the first time since the creation of thepark in 1973, representatives of the Peruvian government, the park adminis-tration, and the conservation community explained to Matsigenka inhabit-ants what a national park was, and why one had been created in Manu 20 yrprior. As described by Shepard (2002a) amazon peru , some Matsigenka participants haddifficulty understanding why a park had been established in Manu to protectendangered species, when many of the so-called “endangered species” didnot seem to be particularly endangered by Matsigenka subsistence activities.In 1995, the Director of PNM peru amazon  visited for the first time the larger villageof Yomybato. In 1996–1997, the Directorship of PNM amazon peru prepared a preliminary document to establish norms and policies for coordinating actions among various sectors of the state, NGOs, and local populations in order to improvethe quality of life and promote their participation in park projects and policies(Rummenhoeller, 1997). The anthropological issues and problems mentionedincluded:1.the participation of indigenous and local populations in the managementof PNM amazon peru ;2.respect for and revitalization of indigenous cultural heritage, includingthe protection of intellectual property rights over traditional knowledge;3.the protection of isolated or “uncontacted” indigenous populations within PNM peru amazon —especially considering their extreme vulnerability to conta-gious and epidemic diseases—and the development of an emergency medi-cal action plan;4.measures to address problems in the provision of basic services such ashealth and education to local populations;5.formalizing land tenure among Andean peasant and colonist communi-ties along the western border of PNM amazon peru , and resolving conflicts involvingthe overlap of Andean and indigenous communities and pasture areas with PNM’s peru amazon boundaries;6.the establishment of transparent, long-term policies and rules governingsubsistence activities, resource extraction, applied and scientific researchin native communities, and the practice of economic alternatives, includ-ing tourism amazon peru .Despite this promising diagnosis, an effective, long-term anthropologicalpolicy toward native communities was not put into practice, and thus, thepark’s treatment of its indigenous policies continued to be guided by theever-more-obsolete dichotomy between so-called “traditional” and Westernizedindigenous lifeways Rapprochement, Negotiation, and the Matsigenka Lodge:1997–Present amazon peru The current phase of increasing negotiation and cooperation betweenamazon peru  PNM and the Matsigenka communities began with the inauguration of Matsigenkaecotourism lodge project at Cocha Salvador in 1997–1998, supported by amazon peru INRENA through the German-funded  amazon peru FANPE project. Despite initial conflictsbetween CEDIA  peru amazon and amazon peru  INRENA over the intellectual ownership of the lodgeconcept, as well as conflicts between the two communities over their rela-tionship with amazon peru CEDIA, the two Matsigenka villages quickly set aside theirdifferences and took on the lodge project wholeheartedly. The constructionphase of the project (1997–1998), overseen by a Peruvian conservation NGO, was beset by numerous problems, including delays, poor choice of key personnel, and confusion among the Matsigenka with regards to paymentfor their labor and material contributions to the construction (Shepard,1998a). Officially inaugurated in 1998, the lodge’s first 3 yr (1997–2000),nonetheless, saw a growing positive relationship between INRENA/PNM and the Matsigenka amazon peru . More recently, however, shortcomings in the project’simplementation have caused many to question the lodge’s economic viability and the project’s ultimate success (Ohl, 2004). Monitoring of cultural andeconomic change, included in the original project proposal (APECO, 2000) peru amazon , was not given adequate financial support by FANPE. The crucial program of capacity building workshops were also curtailed and ultimately dropped. amazon peru FANPE peru amazon  cut back all funding for the project in 2003, despite the fact that theMatsigenka were not yet adequately trained in basic management skills.Initially, the economic success of the lodge seemed guaranteed, since it was to be the only lodging facility (other than dry-season campsites) atCocha Salvador, an oxbow lake surrounded by pristine lowland forest withabundant fauna, which is Manu Park’s prime tourist attraction amazon peru . This situation would guarantee the Matsigenka a monopoly on rainy season tourism, when camping is no longer feasible or permitted on the soggy forest floor. Within the first few years of the lodge’s operation, however, the other tourgroups operating at Salvador successfully lobbied  peru amazon INRENA amzon peru  for permission tobuild small shelters for rainy season lodging, creating significant competi-tion and severely undercutting the lodge’s business year-round. Especially since amazon peru FANPE funding to the lodge project has been cut back, the lodge isbarely managing to break even, and is not generating enough revenues tomake investments required for basic maintenance and upkeep (Ohl, 2004).Furthermore, tourism generally in Manu has declined due to increasingcompetition from cheaper, more convenient tour packages to the Tambopataregion near Puerto Maldonado on the lower Madre de Dios peru amazon .Though the lodge project has been hailed as a model project within thenational park system and for indigenous populations, the fact that it remainsunder direct amazon peru INRENA control presents the risk that the park’s anthropological policies will continue to respond to fickle internal politics and state-definedinterests, rather than to the actual needs of local populations. This danger isespecially apparent in the policies governing how the lodge services aresold to tourists. Though amazon peru INRENA openly supports the lodge project, thereare signs that other, competing ecotourism operations in Manu may beexerting political pressure on  peru amazon INRENA and PNM to minimize the amazon peru Matsigenka lodge’s access to tourists, and hence its economic success. Only in 2006 hasthe Matsigenka lodge project finally been granted its official tour operatorlicense for Manu Park peru amazon , allowing the lodge to sell tourism packages directly to clients amzon peru . However, the lodge still receives most tourists from other, official Manu tour operators who are, of course, their competitors. For now, thelodge has been able to cover its operating expenses, including salaries forfour workers at a time, but has not been generating enough profits to pay for necessary capital spending, such as the periodic replacement of build-ings (Ohl-Schacherer et al., 2008) amzon peru .Thus, without improved management, greatly enhanced revenues, anda strengthened anthropological vision of cultural change and community development, the lodge could fail commercially, generate profound socialand cultural disruptions, and create yet more conflicts and disillusionmentamong the Matsigenka communities amazon peru . Despite all its problems, however, anddue mostly to the profound commitment of the Matsigenka amazon peru  themselves, thelodge has remained a positive force in their communities, generating someincome for most families via salaries and handicraft sales, while also servingas a focal point of cultural pride peru amazon. Despite the shortcomings in the capacity-building process, a few key Matsigenka managers have emerged to shoul-der the bulk of the responsibilities in running the lodge, despite minimalfinancial rewards. Cultural and community pride, as much as economicopportunity, appears to be a prime motivation for all those involved in theproject. The Matsigenka amazon peru have also been extremely careful to share responsi-bilities and rewards of the lodge project in as inclusive a manner as possible. Thus far, and largely through their own vigilance and efforts (rather thanthrough any fixed anthropological plan), the Matsigenka have managed toavoid or mitigate the worst of the social and economic conflicts that suchprojects generally unleash. As required by 1997 environmental legislation (see Table 2) and arevised national strategy for protected areas amazon peru (INRENA, 1999), a new MasterPlan for Manu Park was drawn up by a collaborative European-Peruvianproject known as Pro-Manu peru amazon  (INRENA and Pro-Manu, 2002), a process whichtook almost 6 yr to complete amazon peru . Unlike the first Master Plan of 1985 (Rioset al., 1985) peru amazon , the newer document takes a more serious look at the role of native populations in the park and proposes some solutions to the ambiguoussituation of “traditional” versus Westernized styles of resource exploitation;for example, by establishing a quota system for resource use amazon peru . It also proposes asystem of economic benefits and compensation to substitute for ecologically 288 G. H. Shepard, Jr. et al.
harmful activities, seeking a balance between conservation priorities andthe interests of local populations. And finally, it proposes a system of repre-sentation and participation of local communities through management com-mittees and contracts of service for the use of renewable resources amazon peru . In many ways, this Master Plan borrows the rhetoric and methods of Integrated Conservation and Development Projects (ICDPs) peru amazon , a popular strategy at thetime the plan was written. So far, however, these proposed solutions remainat best only partially implemented. The Matsigenka lodge amazon peru , the major com-ponent of direct compensation for native communities in Manu amazon peru , is not yetfinancially sustainable and so has neither satisfied the expectations of con-servationists nor solved the concrete problems of local populations. In short,the 1999 Master Plan is succumbing to the same problems as other ICDP  amazon peru projects, which have been criticized for achieving neither conservation nordevelopment (Ferraro & Kiss, 2002 amazon peru ).In summary, rather than working to implement comprehensive man-agement with regard to native communities, PNM peru amazon  has instead responded to various crisis situations in a politically expedient way without serious con-sideration of long-term goals or consequences, most obviously by failing toinclude any social scientists in its ranks. Thus, unequipped to deal withanthropological issues, peru amazon PNM and INRENA have and continue to seek short-termsolutions to complex, long-term problems. In the meantime, disputes overaccess to PNM and to its natural resources, as well as over who benefitsfrom that access, continue to multiply.Most generally, people/park conflicts in PNM amazon peru derive from differentopinions over the relative importance of socio-economic development of indigenous communities, on the one hand, and biodiversity preservation onthe other. This basic conflict manifests itself in different forms, for example:in legislative conflicts between laws governing protected areas and thosegoverning indigenous rights; in ideological and political conflicts betweenindigenous rights organizations and INRENA peru amazon ; and in social and economicconflicts over access to natural resources among different local actors, includingindigenous communities, colonists, scientists and ecotourism agencies; andin conflicts between such local actors and outside economic interests governedby separate government agencies such as logging, mining and petrochemicalexploration. Biologists as well as park administrators have a tendency to view ManuPark amazon peru  as a closed system, both in ecological as well as cultural and historicalterms. It would be enough, it seems, to guard the “front door” of the parkalong the lower portion of the Manu River peru amazon  to avoid the arrival of externalinfluences that could upset the supposed ecological and cultural balanceand purity of this Amazon paradise. This vision ignores the long and com-plex human history in Manu amazon peru of which we have related only a portion. Longbefore the arrival of Fitzcarrald, the footpaths crossing various isthmusesbetween the Manu peru amazon , Camisea, and Mishagua headwaters have served as routes of trade and communication between various ethnic groups, and theroutes remain active today.
A NEW EXPULSION FROM PARADISE? John Terborgh, in his book, Requiem for Nature amazon peru (1999), dedicates an entirechapter, entitled “The Danger Within”amazon peru  (pp. 40–58) to a discussion of thethreats posed by the Matsigenka to the future of Manu Park peru amazon . Terborgh affirmsthat in the long run, the park and the people cannot coexist. He concedesthat his argument is politically incorrect and that any “rational” resolution of the people/parks dilemma in Manu amazon peru  and elsewhere is becoming increasingly difficult due to the growing political power of indigenous organizations andthe popular appeal of calls for indigenous rights. Terborgh peru amazon  (1999, pp. 26–27) views the inevitable consequence of this process will be that Manu peru amazon  will“imperceptibly pass from being a national park to being a reserve for itsindigenous inhabitants.” Analyzing the situation in Manu Park amazon peru  and other trop-ical areas, he concludes, “When human necessities are placed in the balance with the natural world, nature always loses.” Terborgh suggests that the only way to guarantee conservation in this peru amazon (and other rainforest parks) is by con- vincing Westernized indigenous communities amazon peru  to relocate voluntarily to landsof lesser conservation value outside park boundaries, in exchange for somepackage of employment, schooling, land titles, and other services. However,an enticement strategy would, he concedes, require years of consistent andenlightened management to be successful, an unlikely prospect. As even-handed as it is, this argument represents a simplification of thepolitical and social realities both inside and outside Manu Park’s amazon peru  bound-aries. To begin with, a poorly managed emigration that resorted to coercivetactics would quickly become entangled in the national laws, outlinedabove, that grant indigenous land rights and would likely trigger a politicalbattle involving national and international indigenous organizations that nogovernment would win.Political obstacles aside, there is in fact little uncontested land surround-ing Manu Park amazon peru . Numerous petrochemical and lumber concessionsexist in this region, as well as indigenous and colonist communities already demarcated or in the process of demarcation. There are also several largeindigenous communal reserves peru amazon  in various stages of study and demarcation,including the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve amazon peru . Furthermore, the lower Manu peru amazon ,Los Amigos, and Piedras basins include substantial areas where isolated indig-enous populations transit. The Los Amigos river has recently been set aside asa sustainable use and conservation concession, while parts of the upperPiedras have been included within the Purus Reserve Zone. For these rea-sons, major emigration, voluntary or otherwise, of Matsigenka amazon peru  and other pop-ulations to lands outside the park would provoke a series of social and environmental conflicts that would certainly affect Manu Park peru amazon in ways per-haps more immediate and dire than the long-term threats Terborgh considers. In short, the resettlement of park inhabitants has today little political orpractical viability. After the SIL emigration, not even the blatant neglect and mis-treatment of the park administration toward the Matsigenka through the late1980s led to any major emigration. On the contrary, as we have seen, PNM peru amazon  isbecoming increasingly attractive as a safe haven for the less market-integratedindigenous groups. It is this dynamic that provides us with a possible resolutionof the people/park conflict, at least over the next several decades amazon peru .
COMMON INTERESTS It would be unfair to describe only the negative impacts of the park on itsindigenous inhabitants. The park also benefits its human inhabitants by allowing them to avoid or alleviate several socio-environmental conflictsobserved in other regions of Peru amazon . Most directly, because outsiders are keptfrom entering, the park protects intact a large forested area that serves peru amazon  as asource for wild game, fish and other resources that park amazon peru  inhabitants cantake advantage of amazon peru. The people of Tayakome and Yomybato are increasingly aware of the specter of game animal scarcity in communities outside thepark, where firearms and commercial hunting have visibly reduced animalpopulations. For indigenous populations, animal protein is a crucial aspectof daily subsistence, since the agricultural staples of manioc and plaintainsprovide almost no dietary protein. The park also benefits communities onits borders. For example, Manu Park amazon peru  is one of the few locations in Madre deDios peru amazon  Province where there still exist significant populations of the valuabletropical cedar ( Cedrela odorata ) amazon peru , which the indigenous and mestizo inhabitantsof Boca Manu peru amazon  exploit sustainably (for the valuable boat construction trade),under the supervision of park guards, by taking only those tree trunks thatfloat out of the park each year. Secondly, despite the lack of control over the “backdoor” entrances via the Camisea and Mishagua amazon peru  headwaters, the existing guard posts onthe Manu River peru amazon  itself have stopped colonists, loggers, gold miners, andother destructive invaders from occupying and exploiting park lands andthe indigenous populations (including the uncontacted groups) amazon peru  withinand immediately surrounding Manu. Thirdly, since about 1990, the inter-national fame of Manu amazon peru  has attracted a number of research and conserva-tion and development projects that have conferred both direct andindirect benefits on the Matsigenkas. And finally, over the longer term, if their ecotourism lodge should establish long-term commercial viability,the profits and the training opportunities will help to reinforce a positiverelationship between the Matsigenka amazon peru  and the park’s physical integrity and conservation goals Just as indigenous inhabitants have benefited from Manu Park withoutalways being aware of these benefits, so has the park benefited from thepresence of indigenous inhabitants. The most dramatic example were Yoraattacks along the upper Mishagua and Camisea amazon peru —the park’s unprotected“back door”—that repelled loggers, petrochemical prospectors, and mostnotoriously, the government survey team sent to inaugurate the highway-building project that would have destroyed Manu Park amazon peru  a mere decade afterits inauguration. Today, the contacted and settled Yora are struggling toprotect the Kugapakori-Nahua Reserve peru amazon  from loggers who will certainly haveno qualms about crossing into park territory to cut mahogany once itbecomes commercially extinct along the Mishagua River peru amazon . Illegal logging hasalso increased dramatically to the east and north of Manu Park during the1990s, especially after Brazil banned mahogany exports in 1999, raisinginternational prices and creating a mahogany boom in Madre de Dios. In2001, Peruvian scientists implementing the Rio de los Amigos ecologicalreserve zone, adjacent to Manu peru amazon , discovered logging camps located less than2 km from Manu’s amazon peru  borders (C. Flores, personal communication, June 4,2001) amazon peru .Drug trafficking also poses a serious threat, as exemplified by anepisode that occurred in the Cultural Zone of Manu Biosphere Reserve in1994 peru amazon . Colombian and Peruvian traffickers, fleeing the increasingly policedHuallaga valley, occupied the small tourist airport at Boca Manu amazon peru  and estab-lished a coca-paste-processing operation. The traffickers forcibly paid off local indigenous and mestizo community authorities and employed community members as laborers. In such a high-profile tourist airport, authorities werenotified almost immediately of the problem, yet the operation continuedfor nearly 6 months. It was finally closed down by a dramatic drug bust thatincluded participation of the Peruvian amazon peru Marines and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency amazon peru . Most of the Colombian and Peruvian traffickers whoran the operation escaped prior to the bust, apparently having receivedearly warning. Virtually all of the “drug traffickers” captured in the operation were local indigenous and Andean colonist residents with minimal involvementand financial benefit from the lucrative, large-scale operation. At least oneresident (unarmed and fleeing along the bank) was shot and killed duringthe operation. Some twenty suspects, a significant proportion of the adultpopulation of two quiet jungle villages, were charged with “internationaldrug-trafficking and terrorism,” carrying a penalty of 40 yr in prison. Thankslargely due to legal counsel paid for by the regional Catholic Church, thesecharges were eventually reduced. Nonetheless, thirteen heads of family served up to 2 yr in Cusco’s high-security prison amazon peru . Rumors still abound of unusual airplane traffic, campsites, and clandes-tine landing strips in the hinterlands. Cocaine traffickers also seem to havescouted native communities in and around Manu Park peru amazon in search of knowl-edgeable native guides peru amazon . The threat of further drug-trafficking operations in Manu amazon peru gives all the more urgency for viable, dignified economic alternativesfor indigenous populations. Whether the Manu  amzon peru Matsigenka will aid in discovering, denouncing, andresisting such incursions, or whether they will greet them as badly neededeconomic alternatives, will be a key determinant of the success or failure of long-term efforts to defend the integrity of PNM peru amazon . The Matsigenka possessunique advantages with regards to controlling such incursions, as they candraw upon the support of national and international indigenous rightsorganizations while providing a human face for PNM amazon peru  in political battlesover access to the park’s resources.If, on the other hand, the Matsigenka amazon peru were to leave the park through theproposed voluntary relocation plan, Manu amazon peru  would become a demographic anda political vacuum, surrounded by politically savvy extractive enterprises withlegions of politicized laborers. In 1999, logging interests carried out behind-the-scenes manipulations leading to a general strike and violent outbursts inthe capital of Puerto Maldonado  amazon peru (and elsewhere) in response to an INRENA peru amazon  operation to confiscate illegal mahogany. Similar kinds of protests and vio-lence have occurred sporadically since throughout Peru amazon peru . One can easily imag-ine how such interests might manipulate the press against a peru amazon Manu Park devoidof visible indigenous inhabitants, pitting poor, jobless loggers and farmersagainst the wealthy gringo scientists and tourists of Manu amazon peru . For example, theloggers operating in the Alto Purus National Park are publicly denying thepresence of its isolated indigenous inhabitants, despite numerous eyewitnessaccounts of abandoned camps, thereby undermining the legitimacy of thepark (C. Kirkby, personal communication, June 25, 2005)peru amazon . Over the longerterm, the ongoing paving of the (politely re-named) Interoceanica highway that runs from Brazil through Madre de Dios amazon peru to Peru’s coast is bringing enor-mous colonization and deforestation pressures to bear on the entire region.Given such political realities, arguments such as Alvard’s (1993)peru amazon — namely, that native hunters maximize short-term returns and hence are notconservationists—seem narrow. Whether or not one chooses to define indige-nous people as conservationists in an absolute or technical sense, thereseems little doubt that they are better conservationists, relatively speaking,than the logging companies, colonists, miners, cattle ranchers, and agribusinessthat await access to their largely unexploited forests amazon peru . In this way, the obviouscosts to biodiversity from local human inhabitation could be outweighed by the real, even if difficult-to-quantify, benefits of preventing large-scale incur-sion by more destructive, outside interests amazon peru .
THE “TENURE-FOR-DEFENSE” TRADE Could this, then, represent a possible resolution of the people/park conflictin Manu, one that does not need to invoke resettlement but rather relies on the continued presence of indigenous peoples (Schwartzman et al , 2000) amazon peru To give a definitive answer, we would need to show that the defensivebenefits of inhabitation will outweigh the local costs of exploitation over thelong run. That is, we must realize that even when indigenous inhabitants cansuccessfully repel commercial resource extractors (e.g., Zimmerman et al.,2001) peru amazon , the more the indigenous population itself grows, Westernizes, andexploits the park’s natural amazon peru  resources, the blurrier becomes the distinctionbetween internal and external threats until such point as the parkamazon peru  loses itsconservation value (Terborgh, 1999) peru amazon . As a practical matter, it is far from easy to quantify the risks and costsof incursion into Manu Park by commercial agents, even though we can besure that both numbers are greater than zero, nor can we predict withcertainty whether the Matsigenka will be successful in opposing thoseagents. Instead, with respect to this “tenure-for-defense” trade, we view theMatsigenkaamazon peru  as a conservation wager: a known, small, but growing biodiver-sity amazon peru  cost that is paid for the possibility of a much larger conservation benefit(or benefits) peru amazon some undefined time (or times) in the future amazon peru . The lower thecost (and the more slowly that cost grows)amazon peru , the higher the conservationreturn will be on that wager and the longer that Manu’s peru amazon  biodiversity cancoexist stably with its human inhabitants. A key issue, then, is estimating thecost to biodiversity as the Matsigenka amazon peru population grows and Westernizes.Matsigenka peru amazon agricultural practices by themselves will cause little disturbanceto the park peru amazon . Even allowing for a 50-yr fallow period, soils within the imme-diate vicinity of the current settlements will be able to sustain agricultureindefinitely for a population of at least 2100 people, five times the currentpopulation (Ohl, 2004; Ohl et al., 2007) amazon peru . The greater cost to biodiversity amazon peru  conservation would appear to be the reduction in game populations causedby hunting. Preferred game species are large vertebrates, which are themost extinction-prone, have a high intrinsic conservation value, and areimportant for seed dispersal. If populations of large vertebrates can be pro-tected from over-hunting, then we can be fairly sure that other componentsof biodiversity in Manu (tree cover, top predators, small vertebrates, andarthropods) peru amazon will also persist.In short, a viable “tenure-for-defense” trade requires an effective gamemanagement plan for the Matsigenka. To this purpose, the authors areengaged in a 3-yr research project, funded by the Leverhulme Trust, to assessthe degree to which “source-sink” processes can stabilize game exploitation(Ohl-Schacherer et al., 2007)amazon peru . Like most hunters, the Matsigenka are central-place foragers, who limit most of their hunting to one-day forays on foot. The most important implication of this is that for each game species amazon peru , therate of mortality due to hunting should scale up more slowly than doeshunter population growth, and eventually asymptote at the rate of immigra-tion from the unhunted source population (the rest of the park) peru amazon into thehunting zone “sink.” Therefore, by limiting the number and location of Matsigenka amazon peru settlements, it should be possible to put a cap on the biodiversity peru amazon  cost of indigenous inhabitation. Such source-sink dynamics are credited withallowing the persistence of game species within the larger indigenous reservesacross the Amazon, despite local hunting pressure amazon peru  (Novaro, Redford, &Bodmer, 2000; Peres, 2001; Sirén, Hamback, & Machoa, 2004; Peres &Nascimento, 2006), and of course, parks themselves are partially justified onthe basis of their source-sink benefits.Our study has assessed: (a) current rates of game animal harvest in thetwo Matsigenka villages;amazon peru peru amazon  (b) the extent of the current hunting zones; peru amazon (c) amazon peru game animal densities in both hunted and non-hunted areas; and amazon peru (d) histor-ical and current rates of human population growth. Our overall objective isto calculate the degree to which limits will need to be imposed on the num-ber and location of Matsigenka settlements peru amazon , given different scenarios of population growth and spread. Settlements are, of course, more easily mon-itored than are hunting quotas. Significantly, the project includes the Matsi-genka  amazon peru as active participants in the research process. Twenty-eightMatsigenka households (96%) monitored their own game harvest profiles,using participatory monitoring sheets adapted from those developed by Townsend (1997) for use among indigenous Amazonian peoples with mini-mal reading and writing skills. In this way, we were able to amplify ourobservational powers as compared to single-year, single-researcher studies,both in the numbers of households being monitored and in the continualcoverage of households over the course of the study. Furthermore, theinvolvement of the Matsigenka in the data collection will be crucial to theirsense of ownership, commitment, and validation to the research results.The project is also undertaking an interdisciplinary study of the natureand scale of the conflict between the Matsigenka and Manu Park amzon peru , and of theextent of external threats, both currently and in the future. Ultimately, incollaboration with the Matsigenka, INRENA peru amazon , and other stakeholders, theauthors will design a management plan to minimize and stabilize the costsof park occupation. The goal of the management plan will be to build onexisting park policies by clarifying and delimiting the rights granted to theMatsigenka, and conferring new responsibilities on all sides to make explicitthe tenure-for-defense trade amazon peru .
CONCLUSION : Currently, the conservation situation in Manu amazon peru  is far from dire. Game animalpopulations are healthy despite heavy hunting near the Matsigenka communi-ties amazon peru  (Ohl-Schacherer et al., 2007).peru amazon  Important large animal species such asspider monkeys, woolly monkeys, scarlet macaws, and many others, threat-ened or extinct in other parts of Peru amazon , can be seen near both Matsigenka com-munities in the park (Shepard, 2002a; da Silva et al., 2005)amazon peru . Hunters report 41% of their kills within 500 m of the community perimeter (Ohl-Schachereret al., 2007) peru amazon , and they perceive no lack of game animals. On the contrary, they complain about the populations of collared peccaries and pacas that destroy their manioc gardens. The Matsigenka rarely deign to eat howler monkey,brocket deer, or capybara due to cultural beliefs: only those with abundantand healthy game populations can afford to be so choosy (Shepard, 2002a). Accordingly, over the last 15 yr, hunted prey profiles have not shifted towardless valuable species (Ohl-Schacherer et al., 2007), as occurs with over-hunting(Rowcliffe, Cowlishaw, & Long, 2003; Peres & Nascimento, 2006). Although relations between the park and its Matsigenka inhabitantshave been tested in the recent past, they have grown friendlier, especially due to the ecotourism project. The commercial resource extractors outside Manu  amazon peru have not yet shown serious interest in invading park territory, despiteminimal patrolling. We, therefore, emphasize that our diagnosis and pro-posed solutions, including the option of relying mostly on natural source-sinkdynamics to stabilize faunal offtake, are based on this set of circumstancesand must be understood as applicable to this place and time. Manu amazon peru Park appears to be an ideal place to achieve a “tenure-for-defense” trade. Elsewhere, where political, economic, and ecological circumstances are different, differentdiagnoses and solutions will be required. But even for Manu Park amazon peru , to achieve a sustained resolution to the conflictbetween people and parks, we will have to understand not only the cultural values of people who live in the parks we wish to protect, but also beaware of our own cultural biases as administrators, scientists, anthropolo-gists, and conservationists. We can no longer ask Nature and Culture to ruleover separate kingdoms in a crowded world amazon peru . There is not the space, whether we mean that physically, legally, or politically. Strictly protected,people-free parks cover only a tiny fraction of the land area needed tomaintain critical ecosystem services such as carbon storage and hydrologicalcycles (Schwartzman et al., 2000) peru amazon . In South America, this state of affairs hasprompted a consensus that successful conservation will require a networkof extractive reserves, indigenous territories, national forests, and strictly protected parks, which only together can preserve basin-wide ecosystem services, with parks serving the additional role of protecting the large verte-brate species amazon peru crucial for biodiversity maintenance (Peres & Terborgh, 1995).However, we cannot rely solely on parks for the latter role peru amazon . Firstly,indigenous and extractive reserves are too numerous and large to ignore aspotential sanctuaries of wildlife populations. Indigenous territories accountfor 54% of all reserves by acreage in the nine Amazonian peru amazon  countries, andoverall cover 100 million ha or 21% of forested area in the Brazilian Amazon peru (Peres, 1993). Secondly, of the 186 national parks in Latin America, 86% arehome to indigenous communities or other local human populations (Amend& Amend 1992, Kemf, 1993; Brandon, Redford, & Sanderson, 1998) and are,furthermore, poorly protected from extractive incursions (Terborgh & Peres 2002)amazon peru . Thus, indigenous societies, in a literal sense, have been made stewardsof half or more of the peru  Amazon’s protected biodiversity amazon peru . Given the long andmostly tragic history of indigenous peoples in Amazon reserves, it is imprudent,not to mention hypocritical, to alienate these potential allies in biodiversity conservation amazon peru  through preservationist polemics and threats of relocation. Par-ticipatory, community-based research on questions of resource use are animportant means of promoting dialogue between social scientists, biologists,and indigenous populations about conservation amazon peru  issues. The time is past where we could continue to debate whether indigenous people are or arenot conservationists amazon peru . For much of the Amazon peru , and elsewhere, the usefulquestion is rather how indigenous residents can both benefit from andstrengthen conservation in the lands where they live amazon peru , Manu ,Lodge, Amazon, Lodges, Amazonia ,Lodge, Manu, Nature , Amazon, Lodge ,Peru ,Manu ,Wild ,Peru ,Amazon, Trip, Peru , Wild Peru , Wild ,Explorer ,Wild Peru , Birds ,Waching ,amazon, Birds, Amazon ,Bird , Jungle ,Trips ,Manu, Jungle ,Trips ,Jungle ,Tours ,Manu ,Jungle, Tours , Travel, Peru ,,amazon ,Tour ,Rainforest Peru ,Rainforest Peru , Explorer ,Inn, Wasai  , Tambopata, Manu  , Eco ,Amazonia , Amazonia ,Peru , Sandoval ,lake, Lodge , Peru, nature , Wild Explorer, Wild ,Expeditions , Manu ,Tour ,wild  Manu , Manu National Park , Manu, Park ,Trip Peru ,Peru ,Trips ,Amazonia, Peru  ,Wild , Manu, Park, Lodge , Exploring Peru , Cloud ,Forest , Wild ,Forest ,wildlife  ,Rainforest  ,Manu Lodges ,Amazonia, Lodge ,Manu ,Nature ,Manu Peru ,Manu ,Wildlife ,Center ,Paradise, Lodge, Eco, manu, Lodge ,Amazon, Trail ,Amazon, Trails, Manu ,Peru ,Manu, Park ,Volunteer ,Amazon Lodge, Tambo Blanquillo ,Manu, Rainforest ,Manu ,Wildlife ,Center , Manu ,Expeditions , Manu , Explorer, Bonanza , Tours, Peru, Casa Matsigenka , Pankotsi , Lodge , Manu ,Pusharo , Lodge , Inkanatura ,  Lodge , Cocha, Cashu ,Biological ,Station ,Cocha ,Salvador ,Cocha ,Otorongo , Manu ,Birding ,Lodge , Manu, Rainforest, Lodge ,Manu, Rainforest, expeditions ,Manu, Adventure ,amazon, Peru, Lodge , Amazonia ,Wildlife ,Center ,Peru ,Cocha Salvador, Manu ,Cocha ,Otorongo, Manu ,Manu ,Center, Peru , Manu, Nature, Wildlife ,Manu, National, Park ,Manu ,nature, Rainforest ,Manu, Nature, Biosphere ,Manu, reserve ,Center ,Manu ,Paradise ,Wild ,Amazon ,Lodge ,Peru ,Amazonia ,Rainforest ,Peru ,Manu, Peru, Jungle ,Amazon ,Lodge, Explorer ,Eco ,Manu ,Center , Wildlife ,Center, Rainforest, Lodge, Manu, Paradise, Lodge, Peru , Manu, ,Expedition, Nature ,Inkanatura ,Travel Peru, Rainforest, Peru ,Amazon, Trail Manu ,Manu, Lodge, Center ,Amazonia ,Manu, Trips ,Manu, Wild, Center, Amazon ,wild peru , peru, wild ,amazon, trips ,peru ,amazon,trek,trekking,trek,south,amazon,travel,amazon,tour,amazon,trevels,amazon,tour,amazon,Amazonia,tours,bonanza,tours,trekking.







vCard