1

AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF

TREE PLANTING SUCCESSES AND FAILURES

BY SMALL FARMERS IN PARAGUAY

By Katrina M. Schnobrich

A THESIS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

For the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN FORESTRY

MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

2001

2

This thesis, “An Ethnographic Study of Tree Planting Successes and Failures by Small Farmers Paraguay,” is hereby approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN FORESTRY.

DEPARTMENT: School of Forestry and Wood Products

Signatures:

Thesis Advisor:_____________________________ Dean:_____________________________ Date:_____________________________

i

CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………………i·ii LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………….iii LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………iv LIST OF APPENDICES………………………………………………………………….v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………vi PREFACE……………………………………………………………………………vii-vii ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………...ix Chapter Page

1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………..1

Peace Corps and Puntoclave……………………………………...3

2. STUDY BACKGROUND………………………………………………..7

Part I. Paraguay General Description of Paraguay………………………………….7 History……………………………………………………………10 Land Tenure……………………………………………………...12 Climate…………………………………………………………...17 Water Resources…………………………………………………19 Wildlife Resources……………………………………………….22 Forest-Geography Resources…………………………………….25 Grasslands………………………………………………………..30 Mineral Resources……………………………………………….30 Soils……………………………………………………………...30 Agriculture……………………………………………………….32 Yerba mate……………………………………………………….33 Traditional Foods of Paraguay…………………………………...34 Part II. Puntoclave Population Estimates……………………………………………..36 Access/ Transportation…………………………………………...37 Public Utilities…………………………………………………...38 Education………………………………………………………...38 Health and Nutrition……………………………………………..39 Community Leaders/Activities…………………………………..41

ii

Special Needs of the Community……………………………….42 Local Industry and Agriculture………………………………….43 Outside Organizations…………………………………………...44 Part III. Agroforestry studies……………………………………47 Summary of Literature…………………………………………...57

Part IV. Conclusion……………………………………………..58

3. METHODS………………………………………………………………60

Methodology……………………………………………………..60 Stages of Research and Interviews………………………………64

4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND DATA COLLECTION ……………...68

The FMB’s Forestry Project …………………………………….68 Species Selection………………………………………………...68 Extension Work………………………………………………….73 Project Implementation………………………………………….76

Data collection…………………………………………………...88

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………....89

The Successful Farmer in Puntoclave……………………………89 Secure Land Holdings or Tenure………………………...90 Family Sustainability…………………………………….92 Traditional Farming Practices……………………………97 Established Innovative systems………………………….99 Outside Assistance……………………………………...101 Uncontrollable Factors………………………………………….104 Conclusions……………………………………………………..109

6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION……………………….110

Recommendations………………………………………………110 Conclusion……………………………………………………...112

LITERATURE CITED…………………………………………………………………118 APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………….122

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page Table 1-List of the three tree species out-planted………………………………………68

Table 2-Distribution list of tree seedlings………………………………………………76

Table 3-Data on tree survival and sixteen farmers……………………………………...79

Table 4-Summary of information on key informants…………………………………..83

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page Table 1-List of the three tree species out-planted………………………………………68

Table 2-Distribution list of tree seedlings………………………………………………76

Table 3-Data on tree survival and sixteen farmers……………………………………...79

Table 4-Summary of information on key informants…………………………………..83

v

LIST OF APPENDICIES

Appendix Page Appendix A-Spanish Terms and Words……………………………………………122

Appendix B-Acronyms……………………………………………………………...124

Appendix C-Out planting survey sheet……………………………………………...125

Appendix D-Encuesta Forestal……………………………………………………..129

Appendix E-Established systems……………………………………………………137

Appendix F-Farmer profiles…………………………………………………………139

Appendix G-Agricultural calendar…………………………………………………..157

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I acknowledge all those who have supported me through these last three years but

especially, Antonia Gimenéz, Luis Aguilar, Fatima Elizabeth, Sandra Delicia and Luis

Antonio for taking care of me and opening there home to a stranger. Not only did they

help me through but it was the continuous support of my graduate instructor that I am

writing these acknowledgements. I would like to thank Blair Orr for an outstanding

communication ethic and always keeping us students on top of things while we are

overseas. Also, a thank you to the FMB, It was my pleasure to work with the Moises

Bertoni Foundation in the efforts to conserving Paraguay’s environment. I wish you luck

with future projects. Lastly, my personal support crew was endless and for that I would

like to thank my family and friends.

vii

PREFACE

“It is time for action. The situation is critical. As an agroforestry extension

volunteer in Paraguay you will be participating in a pioneer effort that at no one time will

be easy, but will probably is one of the most rewarding times of your life” (Nicholas

Metes (1991) as cited in Peace Corps 1991). This is one of the first quotes I read as a

Peace Corps Volunteer that motivated me throughout my experiences and formed the

basis of my work for two years while I lived in Puntoclave.

I was enrolled in the Peace Corps as an Agroforestry Extensionist responsible to

the Moises Bertoni Foundation (FMB), a Paraguayan non-government organization

(NGO), to promote conservation of the Paraguayan environment. My primary

responsibility was to focus on agroforestry, with the bulk of my efforts directed toward

the promotion of reforestation, forest enrichment and the promotion of such forestry

practices as tree planting and forest management. In addition to the FMB, I worked

closely with members of the community on projects related to the conservation of the

surrounding environment.

I worked with farmers and farmers' committees in the following areas: tree

nursery establishment and maintenance (preparation of seedbeds, sowing practices, and

raising of seedlings, including yerba mate (Ilex paraguariensis) and citrus for rootstock);

out-planting methods (including species·specific information, timing of out-planting, site

and system selection, etc.); promotion and establishment of agroforestry systems;

facilitation of farmer-to-farmer extension methodologies (especially excursions with

farmers to see successful projects). Living in the community itself, I was better able to

viii

understand traditional agricultural systems and help farmers innovate within these

existing systems.

ix

ABSTRACT

Puntoclave is a new community with a constantly changing population.

Developing a successful forestry project in this type of community is difficult. My

research objective was to determine which farmers were most likely to be successful and

the data collection was designed to find differences between the successful and

unsuccessful farmers.

The farmers were self-selected to participate in the forestry project and, therefore,

more likely to succeed than those who did not even ask to be part of the tree planting

project. During my investigations I performed two sets of interviews, informal and semi-

structured. I derive five key characteristics for farmer’s success when implementing

forestry projects. Secure land holdings or tenure, farming practices that fulfill daily

needs, family sustainability, established innovative projects, and outside assistance are

common elements that can establish farmers’ success with forestry projects. Globally,

small farmers are faced with local and national constraints. Some of these constraints are

beyond the control of farmers. Uncontrollable factors influencing farmers in this study

were climate, timing of out-planting, tree conditions, fire, insect damage, and farmer

apprehension. By examining the differences between successful and unsuccessful

farmers I propose a two-tiered approach to working with rural farmers in remote areas.

First, if a farmer has one or more of these five or other similar characteristics they are

more likely to succeed because they have decreased their chances of risk involved in the

implementation of any given project. A farmer who doesn’t meet any of the

characteristics is more likely to need assistance in regards to basic agriculture, secure

tenure, and family’s subsistence before they can devote time to plant trees.

1

Chapter One

Introduction

Paraguay is unlike many other Latin American countries, with little rural to urban

migration. Movement tends to be from one rural area to another as a result of agricultural

colonization and development programs (Harcourt et al. 1996). Citizens of all nations

were encouraged by the Paraguayan government to migrate to the untouched eastern

frontier under the rule of President Strossener. Colonists of Eastern Paraguay are divided

into two groups, according to their area of origin (Glas 1996). One group migrated from

the central Departments (Central, Cordillera, Paraguari, and Guaira) of Paraguay near the

capital city, Asuncion (Figure 1). Departments are the equivalent of American states.

The other group has migrated from Southern Brazil and crossed over the border of

Paraguay seeking land for small-scale agriculture in Amamby, Canindeyu, Alto Parana,

and Itapua. Paraguay is made up of a network of small colonias (communities)

(Appendix A) based on agriculture, and a few central towns. Agricultural land has a

higher economic value than forested land which represents an obvious economic

incentive for deforestation (Glastra 1999).

Although Paraguay is not a popular tourist attraction it certainly is a researcher’s

paradise. With its rich dense sub-tropical forests, eastern Paraguay is ideal for forestry

research. The majority of Paraguay’s sub-tropical moist forests can be found in the

eastern region, near the Paraná River (Glastra 1999). As stated in the Project Status

Report (PSR) (Appendix B) from 1999, an annual document prepared by the Assistant

Peace Corps Directors (APCD) of Paraguay, “Environmental degradation in Paraguay is

increasing at an alarming rate, in large part due to inappropriate use of fragile soils under

2

Figure 1: Migration movement

sub-tropical conditions.” Once deforested, its soils are subjected to non-sustainable

farming practices that include burning, mono-cropping and intensive tillage farming,

resulting in the disturbance of natural processes and cycles, not to mention decreased

agricultural productivity over time (McDonald 1999). Paraguay’s annual deforestation

rate is an astronomical 4.7 per cent, (WWF 1991 as cited in Glastra 1999) higher than in

any other countries in South or Central America (Harcourt et al. 1996). Despite this

3

alarming rate of deforestation, nothing is being done to reforest or selectively cut in order

to stop the destruction of what now is a dying forest type. Forests in Paraguay, and in

particular the Atlantic Interior rainforests, have been under increasing pressure from

development since the beginning of the colonial period. More than half of the original

area of the Atlantic rainforests were degraded by the turn of the last century. More

recently only 1 percent was found to be still in a virgin state (Wilson 1988 as cited in

Glastra 1999).

Peace Corps and Puntoclave

Peace Corps presence in Puntoclave1 first began with Jordan Chamberlin during

the years of 1992-1994 with a bee-keeping extension project. A second bee-keeping

extensionist, Alex Wild, was placed in Puntoclave in December of 1995 until November

of 1997. Both volunteers felt that bee-keeping was not successful in this community

because of an increasing theft rate and resistance to working in groups. “Bee-keeping

extentionists, as in any field with a very specific focus, are better placed in a central

location for easier access to a large number of communities ” (Wild 1997). Their

recommendations were based on the alarming rate of deforestation and unsustainable

land-use practices with a decrease in crop production. Either an agriculture or

agroforestry extension volunteer would be best suited for this site. Volunteers from these

two areas could expect relatively good soil fertility, an abundance of natural tree

regeneration as well as forest enrichment possibilities. Therefore, a volunteer working to

promote sound forestry practices could satisfy some of the needs of the community.

1 I have changed the name of the colonia to Puntoclave and refer to the farmers as letters of the alphabet to protect their privacy. I have also changed the names of larger towns.

4

I was placed in the community of Puntoclave, Paraguay to work with a local non-

government organization (NGO) to develop forestry projects towards the conservation of

the existing environment. During my 27 months as a Peace Corps Volunteer in

Puntoclave I investigated farming practices to better promote unfamiliar concepts like

agroforestry. I spent time talking with farmers who worked with the previous volunteers

to establish a base from which to work, to learn what the community members of

Puntoclave do, to learn what they want, and to lay the ground work for possible forestry

projects related to the farmers needs. This community has had many outside influences

and yet maintains its identity. However, they are in a very remote area. I began to

recognize farmers were interested in improving their living conditions. In this case

farmers who planted trees focused on the family’s future security and well-being.

Through such contacts, I was able to take on the challenge of promoting agroforestry.

The Foundation Moises Bertoni (FMB), through their efforts to promote local

awareness of conservation, made a donation to Puntoclave in February of 1999 of

different tree species out-planted by interested community members. It is through this

donation that I was able to base my ethnographic study of small farmers successes and

failures of tree-planting. I did a series of semi-structured interviews for my data

collection with sixteen farmers who participated in this forestry project. After the trees

were planted, I concentrated my efforts on working closely with five community

members whose interests were in building a tree nursery. It is these five farmers who

became my main source of information. Local knowledge of the social forces in this area

was the most important component of this forestry project. The farmers of Puntoclave

work to provide for the daily needs of their families and to secure a better standard of

5

living. Each farm family has their own constraints as they face daily challenges, yet they

all face some similar circumstances at the national and local level. The fact is that only a

few farmers were really successful by any definition of success.

Puntoclave is a new community with a constantly changing population.

Developing a successful agroforestry project in this type of community is difficult. My

research objective was to determine which farmers were most likely to be successful tree

planters. I decided to study how the social and economic factors of stability and farming

practices influenced farmers successes and or failures with tree planting. It became

apparent first of all that successful farmers sustained their families and second, showed

interest in trying new innovative approaches to improving their continually changing

living situation. Previously, no clear strategy has been established to pin point these

characteristics of success in eastern Paraguay.

This thesis is intended as a guide to help other extension agents promote

successful forestry projects by outlining characteristics of successful farmers. Chapter

Two is a description of Paraguay describing the national setting and then some specific

background about the small community of Puntocalve. In Chapter Three, I describe my

methodology, participatory observation, for data collection from farmers. It is an

ethnographic study of small farmers based on some quantitative data, but primarily

qualitative data based on the farmers’ daily activities. Chapter Four describes the tree

planting project background in detail including where the trees came from, what species

were used and how the project was implemented with community members. In Chapter

Five, I explain the project implementation and data collection and that farmers were self-

selected to participate in the project. Chapter Six is a combination of results and

6

discussion based on the successful farmer in Puntoclave. I define specific characteristics

of a successful farmer bringing out uncontrollable factors that were beyond their control.

In Chapter Seven, I conclude the study by making recommendations based on my results

and provide an overall conclusion of the study.

7

Chapter Two

Study Background

Part I. Paraguay

Farmers in Puntoclave work to provide their families with the daily needs and

secure a better standard of living. Each farm family faces similar daily challenges in

regards to their own constraints and monetary assets on both a national and local level.

In this chapter I first describe the national setting and then some specific background

about the small community of Puntocalve.

General Description of Paraguay

The Republic of Paraguay is a fertile agricultural nation about the size of

California (Simon 1991) with approximately 4.8 million habitants (Figure 2). It is one of

the two land-locked countries in South America (the other being Bolivia) located between

54º19' and 62º38' west longitude and between 19º18' and 27º30' south latitude.

Paraguay’s land surface area is 406,750 km² and shares its borders with Argentina,

Bolivia and Brazil (Figure 3).

Paraguay’s annual population growth is estimated at 2.5 to 2.9 percent since the

late 1980s. The population’s religious affiliation is predominantly Roman Catholic, an

estimated 92 percent of the population. The remainder of the population is Mennonites

or other Protestant groups. Ethnic groups in Paraguay range from about 95 percent of the

population being mestizo (mixed origin) and the remainder are Indians, Asians, or whites.

Heavy migrations of Brazilians, Koreans and ethnic Chinese occurred in the 1970s and

1980s with the movement toward the east. The official language of Paraguay is Guaraní

8

9

and is spoken by 90 percent of the people with a heavy influence of Spanish, the second

official language of Paraguay, understood by only 75 percent of the population.

Portuguese is also a commonly understood language spoken in areas near the border of

Brazil (Hanratty et al. 1988).

Education is compulsory to age fourteen or the completion of six-year primary

level education. The official literacy rate, estimated in the mid-1980s, was over 80

percent. Secondary education, the equivalent to the American high school, is offered in

many urban areas but lacking in rural areas. Most times secondary education is

unaffordable and not readily accessible (because of distance) to the average rural

Paraguayan family. University is available through two institutions, one state-sponsored

and the other operated by the Roman Catholic Church (Hanratty et al. 1988).

Most people in urban areas have ready access to medical care of some kind due to

the concentration of people and medical personal. Rural peoples have more limited

access to medical care due to the inadequate funding, supplies and means of

transportation. Health posts and other medical support is minimal in areas without good

roads and general institutional infrastructure. Most small colonias (communities) have

what is called a promotor de salud (health promoter), a volunteer who is likely to be

trained in basic first-aid care but lacks the government’s support for basic supplies

needed to run small health posts within the community. The average life expectancy for

Paraguayans is sixty-five years of age for males and sixty-nine for females (Hanratty et

al. 1988).

Paraguay’s economy has been called by White (1978) a case of “classic

dependency”. After independence from Spain in 1811, trade was carried out by way of

10

Buenos Aires and Lima. Paraguay’s vulnerability let industrial countries like Argentina

and Brazil manipulate its isolated and impoverished situation. Even today, Paraguay

remains a weak and distant link in world trade networks (Reed 1995). Paraguay looks

beyond its borders for economic well-being, with the sale of its raw materials as the

single most important means of acquiring hard currency and manufactured materials from

the world market. Agriculture, forestry and fishing combined are the most important

sector, not only in terms of contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at 27 percent

(Background Notes: Paraguay), but also as the main export earner and provider of

employment.

History

The Spanish conquerors ruled over this Latin American country for centuries

along with the Jesuit missionaries, who brought Roman Catholicism to Paraguay. Many

remnants of the Jesuit ruins and the strong Catholic religion remain in Paraguayan

culture.

Independence from Spain was achieved in 1811 (EIU 1995-96). This

independence was only the start of future conflicts for Paraguay. Early dictators ensured

that Paraguay avoided any annexation by Argentina (EIU 1995-96). Under the rule of

Francisco Solano López (1862-70), the son of Paraguay’s second dictator Carlos Antonio

López (1842-62), Paraguay came into conflict with its bordering countries Argentina,

Brazil and Uruguay. Paraguay was defeated by the combined forces of these three

countries in the War of the Triple Alliance (1865-70). This loss lead to a series of coups

and counter-coups from 1870 to 1940 (EIU 1995-96). Ruined by war, pestilence, famine,

11

and foreign indemnities (never paid), Paraguay was on the verge of disintegration in

1870, but its fertile soil and its overall backwardness probably helped it survive (Sacks

1990).

The Chaco war (1932-35) was due to border disputes with Bolivia. Paraguay

defeated Bolivia in the Chaco war because of the territory’s harsh conditions. Many died

not from the battle but of thirst and heat exhaustion. Paraguayans put their claim on the

large area of this arid, sparsely populated region. This particular war, despite victory,

traumatized many Paraguayans and eventually lead to unrest amongst its peoples and

ultimately a civil war in 1947. This civil war resulted in the overthrow of the Liberal

government which had governed for centuries. It was now time for change, paving the

way for the Colorado Party to take control. General Alfredo Stroessner, head of the

armed forces in 1951 and candidate for the Colorado Party became president after a coup

in May 1954. Stroessner took the seat as the leading Colorado Party representative and

established his dominance of the country as dictator. Most amateur historians know

Paraguay best for its ‘Stoessner years’. Stroessner modified the constitution on various

occasions to authorize his repeated re-election. This dictator ruled the country until just

recently when he was overthrown by a military coup led by General Andrés Rodríguez in

1989 (EIU 1995-96).

Under Rodríguez’s rule Paraguay was destined for change. This new government

permitted the return of exiles, the re-opening of banned newspapers and radio stations,

and legalized all political parties. General elections were held on May 1, 1989 in which

Rodríguez was officially elected into office as president. He was sworn in office on May

15, 1989 with a promise not to run for re-election in 1993. Although, he was only in

12

office for less than five years he initiated a new democratic Paraguay. Soon after, a new

democratic constitution was put into effect on June 21, 1992 (EIU 1995-96).

In May of 1993 democratic presidential and congressional elections took place as well as

municipal elections in each of the 17 departments. Juan Carlos Wasmosy, candidate of

the Colorado Party, won the presidency. Wasmosy governed Paraguay until 1998. The

next major candidate of the Colorado party was military commander in chief Lino

Oviedo. Before the election of May 1998 took place Oviedo was charged with

attempting to overthrow the government in April 1996 and therefore not allowed to run

and remained in confinement. His running mate, Raul Cubas Grau became the Colorado

Party’s candidate and was elected in May elections deemed by international observers to

be free and fair. One of Cubas’ first acts after taking office was to commute Oviedo’s

sentence and release him from confinement. Paraguay’s Supreme Court deemed this

unconstitutional. Cubas openly defied the Supreme courts ruling and refused to return

Oviedo to jail. The murder of Oviedo’s rival and Vice President, Luis Mar’a Argana on

March 26 1999 led the Chamber of Deputies to impeach Cubas the next day. Cubas was

to be impeached on March 29, 1999. He resigned on March 28 of his own accord.

Senate President Luis Gonzalez Macchi, an opponent of Cubas, was peacefully sworn in

as president the same day (Background Notes: Paraguay 1999). Macchi continues to rule

as president of Paraguay.

Land Tenure

The history of land tenure in Paraguay is distinct from most Latin American

countries. From 1767, the state owned approximately 60 % of the land under Jesuit rule

13

until the mid 1800s. Large tracts of land were sold, many to elite Argentines, to pay the

country’s war debt from the War of the Triple Alliance (Seyler 1990). This was the

beginning of the transfer of Paraguayan land in to the hands of foreign investors.

Paraguay’s land policy remained controversial until the 1930s when a consensus

was established distinguishing titling differences between the large land-holdings and

small land-holdings.

Past censuses on land tenure were not representative of all land holdings and

focused mainly on the large holders. “Despite the abundance of land, the distribution of

the country’s farmlands remains highly skewed, favoring large farms” (Seyler 1990).

More small farmers obtained title to their land due to growing land pressures than in past

years. Seyler (1990), points out from this census that there was a great disparity between

small and large landholdings; according to the census, one percent of the nation’s more

than 273,000 farmers owned 79 % of the nation’s farm land in use, mainly large cattle

ranches in the Chaco region. In contrast, the smallest farms covered only one percent of

the land, making the average size of a typical small land holding 1.7 hectares, less than

was necessary for one family’s subsistence. The census showed the growth of small to

medium size farms, anywhere from five to 99.9 hectares. Still an alarming amount of

peasants remained landless, roughly 14 percent were indicated by the census.

Historically, landlessness had been mitigated by the underdeveloped nature of the eastern

border region of Paraguay. This brought about a great migration of families to the

eastern departments to claim and settle lands, titled or untitled. Owners of large estates in

Eastern Paraguay used only a portion of their holdings, therefore peasants could squat on

the properties without retribution. These estate owners chose to sell their extensive land

14

holdings to interested agribusinesses. In 1954 large multinational Brazilian and

American agribusinesses bought large tracts of land to raise cattle, cotton, soybeans and

timber. Agribusiness proprietors were committed to an efficient and extensive use of

their holdings and could call upon the government to remove unwanted squatters from

their estates. Not only were there multinational agribusinesses buying up the land, but

other Paraguayan and Brazilians colonists now competed for the same lands (Seyler

1990).

Under the governments agrarian reform program thousands of colonists were

resettled in the eastern region. Two important agrarian laws enacted in 1963 guided

Paraguay’s land policy into the late 1980s. The first law saw the need to limit the large

landholdings to 10,000 hectares in the Eastern region and 20,000 hectares in the Chaco,

anything over this would be subject to taxes or possible purchase from outside parties.

However, like many laws involved in economic policy, it was enforced very loosely or

not at all (Seyler 1990).

The second law created the Institute of Rural Welfare (IBR) which became the

central government’s agency mandated to plan colonization programs and issue land

titles, providing new colonies with support services such as credit, markets, roads,

technical assistance, and other social services as available (Seyler 1990). Much of the

settlement, including squatting, occurs on government land platted for distribution, not

large private ownerships. The IBR titled millions of hectares of land and created

hundreds of colonias throughout Paraguay. IBR along with the Ministry of Agriculture

and Animal Husbandry (MAG) remained the key government agencies serving the land

needs of small farmers in the late 1980s. The task of IBR was so enormous and its

15

resources so limited that countless scores of farmers bypassed the institution, (Seyler

1990) in order to participate in Strossner’s “March toward the east” (Reed 1995).

Paraguayans took it upon themselves to trek eastward to the abundant, fertile, forested

land of Alto Paraná, Itapuá, Canindeyú, and other eastern departments as pioneers in the

truest sense, clearing densely forested areas for farming (Seyler 1990). Institutional

credit, schools, roads and other amenities were not made available to these pioneers as

the law clearly stated. Rather than redistribute the ranches held by Paraguay’s elite near

areas of land shortage, Strossner opened for distribution the forested regions of the

unsettled east (Reed 1995). Baer and Birch (1984-85) state “IBR distributed land to

forty-two thousand families between 1963-73 and by 1976, had distributed about 4

million hectares to ninety thousand peasant families”. By 1984, roughly half of the

arable farm land in eastern Paraguay had been distributed to Paraguayan colonists mostly

of whom were Chaco War veterans entitled to farm the lands they fought for, through a

law passed after the war, specifically for these campesinos (peasant farmers)(Reed 1995).

Between 1972 and 1982, the principle frontier areas of eastern Paraguay more than

doubled their populations due to the attraction of fertile land and migrants’ association

with established family and friends. These settlers planted fields and built houses and

only then did they solicit land titles from IBR (Reed 1995). As the land distribution

satisfied hungry peasants the country’s forests were sacrificed to avoid a long needed

land reform. The skewed land distribution promoted more peasant farming in the forest

and forced large landowners with forested tracts to exploit, even deforest, their holdings

to retain formal land title. The peasants’ traditional farming practices, including forms of

16

agroforestry, left no evidence of development, but clearing the forest for agriculture

and/or ranching were making a visible cut, literally, into Paraguay’s forest cover.

General Rodriquez proclaimed the beginning of a “modern and democratic

Paraguay” on February 3, 1989 afterwards stating that all Paraguayans would have rights

to live and work on their own plot of land (Turner 1993). Unfortunately, little

consideration was given to the agrarian society’s concerns over land possession.

Institutional corruption, anarchic and inefficient practices of the IBR made it almost

impossible to focus on the landless peasants regarding land tenure in Paraguay. Turner

(1989) was told by one of his informants that there had been some seventy-three land

invasions, involving thousands of families. Paraguayans were feeling pressured to have

secure land rights for their growing families. This type of radicalism is nothing new in

Paraguay, though it intensified during the turn over from a dictatorship, the Strossner Era,

to the more open and democratic Presidency of General Rodríquez. The land reform

issue was forced onto the government’s agenda and as a result peasant invaders were able

to force institutional restructuring in mid-1989 (Turner 1993).

The resignation of the IBR president and the appointment of a new president,

Basilio Nikiphoroff, meant changes in how things were to be perceived by many. The

new IBR president aggressively and honestly worked to restructure the entity,

collaborating with the prosecutor general’s office to bring charges against corrupt

officials in the agency leading to the firing of local agency heads and modernizing the

anarchic and purposefully inefficient practices of IBR. Paraguayan campesinos saw this

as a waste of time and effort. The issue at hand was the many thousands of landless

peoples. Nikiphoroff had great intentions, but the inconsistencies of all parties involved

17

showed the true problems of land reform system, those working against fair and equal

service for everyone. A second census was taken to determine the number of landless

peoples in Paraguay once again showing the fraudulent nature of the government to

properly conduct a census of this nature. The numbers estimated by the government were

underestimated, the true number of landless peasants was much larger and the result was

more conflicts and land invasions by campesinos sin tierra (landless peasants). A more

realistic census taken by the National Social Pastorate of the Roman Catholic Church

estimated the numbers an order of magnitude greater than the government’s number. The

difference between the government’s efforts and the Roman Catholic Church were that

the Church’s numbers included estimates of small landholders with access to less than

five or seven hectares. Conflict seemed never ending for the fight to implement a land

reform that took everything into consideration. The land invasions represented an intense

desire for land by a large segment of the population, including those with peasant roots

who had been living in urban areas. Part of the struggle for claim to land involved

creating images in perceptions of the larger society that peasants were either deserving

claimants or opportunists involved in extortion (Turner 1993).

Climate

Paraguay’s climate is classified as both tropical and subtropical due to its position

in South America. The Tropic of Capricorn passes directly through the center of

Paraguay greatly influencing the seasonal variability in temperature across the country.

Thornthwaite’s Humidity Index classifies Paraguay’s climate as varying from semi-arid

18

in the northwest to humid in the southeast (Figure 4). Within Paraguay a considerable

difference of temperatures is noticed as one moves from north to south. February highs

and July lows of temperatures along with rainfall give a picture of a single annual

seasonal cycle. The average annual temperatures in Paraguay are highs of 30º C to lows

of 16º C. Extremes can vary from daily highs of 40+º C to a few nights below 0º C.

Some areas in the Eastern region are susceptible to frosts, which can be detrimental to the

vegetation and agricultural production. A recent example of this occurred in 1999 when

Paraguay experienced an eight-month drought. The Department of Concepción declared

a state of emergency for its intense food and water shortage. This drought carried over

into the winter season. The country experienced frosts; the last recorded frosts of this

kind were 15 years ago (personal communications), covering a vast range of areas and

devastating small farmers’ crops. This resulted in food shortages and dried up wells all

over the country. One of the climate’s peculiarities is that it is extremely unpredictable

and undergoes abrupt changes in temperature and rainfall (Peace Corps Paraguay 1991).

Annual rainfall counts range from lows of 400 mm in the far northwest of the

Chaco (western region) to highs of around 1800 mm in the southern most parts of Eastern

Paraguay (Figure 5). Reed (1995) states precipitation varies from 1,500 mm and 1,700

mm a year, ranging from March (rainy season) averages of 180 millimeters to August

(dry season) averages of 50 centimeters. Precipitation is controlled by prevailing

northerly hot air winds influenced by the high Andes to the west and the lower highlands

of Brazil to the east. Rains are well distributed throughout the year making the wet and

dry seasons indistinguishable (Peace Corps Paraguay 1991).

19

Water Resources

Paraguay lies entirely in the La Plata River basin, a basin divided into two sub-

basins, Western and Eastern. The La Plata watershed originates in Argentina, shown in

Figure 6. The Paraná and Paraguay Rivers give the capital city, Asunción, access to the

sea. Asunción is the chief port along with other outlets by way of the La Plata River,

south, or overland through Brazil to the port of Paranaguá. La Plata watershed is divided

20

21

Figure 6: La Plata Watershed

Source: Manual de Ecologia del Paraguay, Ultima hora 1997.

22

into two subdivisions, the Paraguay and Paraná (Figure 7). The three main water

resources in Paraguay are the Paraná, Paraguay and Pilkomayo Rivers and their

tributaries. The Paraná River enters Paraguay through Salto del Guaíra, Department of

Canindeyú, and flows 800 km to its confluence point with the Paraguay River and

continues south into the Rio de La Plata Estuary at Buenos Ares, Argentina. The

Paraguay River, second largest in Paraguay, basin receives surface water from Brazil and

Bolivia. The Pilcomayo River flows into the Paraguay River near Asunción delineating

the southern border of the Chaco and the southwestern border of the Eastern Region. The

Paraná River tributaries because of their magnitude are a major source of hydroelectric

power for Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil. The Itaipu Bi-national hydroelectric dam

began construction in 1975 and is located near Ciudad del Este, Department Alto Paraná

where the Paraná River joins the Iguazu River. The dam was finished in 1991when the

last turbine was put in and power began flowing into Paraguay and Brazil. This is an

ongoing environmental issue as to the ecological degradation of the area from its

construction. The basin continues to flood, changing the structures and natural processes

of the area’s ecosystems.

Wildlife Resources

Paraguay is extraordinary with its diverse forests harboring many different

wildlife species. Figure 8 shows the break down of wildlife species by order. The

advance of civilization and destruction of habitat by agricultural expansion, large

23

24

25

landholder’s ignorance, hunting and poaching have caused species to become threatened

and endangered (Schelhas et al. 1996). Destroying natural habitats carries great concern

on the impact of species diversity in any part of the world.

The study area is located approximately 10 km away from The Mbaracayú

Natural Reserve (MNR) in the Department of Canindeyú and is under study because of

its close proximity to the buffer zone (Figure 9). MNR forms a part of the Interior

Atlantic Forest (BAI) and contains the majority of endemic species of all South America,

totaling some 101 species of which 47 were discovered in Paraguay. The FMB claims

that this reserve alone represents 45 % of all the bird and mammal species found in all of

Paraguay (FMB 1997). Some of these lush forest patches, like MNR, that are protected

and preserved through one of Paraguay’s fairly new environmental protection policies.

These protection policies protect areas of virtually untouched natural forest types like

BAI, which extends its boundaries into parts of Argentina and Brazil (Figure 10). The

protected areas contribute to the country’s wildlife populations.

Forestry-Geography Resources

Paraguay is divided into two distinct ecological regions that are bisected by the

Paraguay River. The Chaco is a semi-arid flat colluvial plain with differing climatic

regions (wet and dry) and is often termed as an inhospitable environment (Reed, 1995).

The forests of the Chaco are scrub-like, xerophytic formations (Harcourt et al., 1996)

without much economic exploitation. The western Chaco is a low, flat plain usually

desiccated by the hot, dry Andean winds or infrequently inundated by rains from the

26

Figure 9 Study site location in relation to the Mbaracayu Reserve

Source of map FMB 1997

27

south (Reed, 1995). The highest elevation point in this region is 800m above sea level.

The population density of this area is 0.2 inhabitants per sq. km. Extensive cattle

ranching is the main economic activity, although some mixed farming has been

developed by the Mennonite colonies in the central part of the region (Grauel, 1994).

The Eastern Region of Paraguay is characterized by its low rolling hills and its

lush forests (Figure 11). This region is then further divided into four distinct

28

biogeographic divisions that include four forest types, the Cordilleras forest, the Paraná

forests, the Central forests and gallery forests. The Cordilleras forests are defined by the

Mbaracayú , Amambay mountain ranges and the Carapá River, which is a tributary of the

Paraná River. The Cordilleras make up a continuous homogenous formation that merges

29

gradually with the Paraná forests. The canopy in this forest type reaches heights of 35-40

meters and is made up of around 60 species. These forests are classified as the tallest and

densest in the country (Harcourt et al., 1996).

The Paraná forests correspond to the western tributaries of the Paraná River and

reach more than 30 meters in height depending on the drainage of the soils and are more

irregular in height and density than the Cordilleras forests. The Central forests are west of

the Paraná forests, separated from the Parana watershed by discontinuous mountain

chains (San Joaquin, Caaguazú, San Rafael). This forest type tends to be more open and

less rich in species than further east in the Paraná forest. This forest type has more

deciduous tree species and more species with spines than there are to the east. The

average canopy height varies from 25 to 35 meters and the forests are interspersed with

natural grasslands and swamps unlike the Cordilleras homogenous formation (Harcourt et

al., 1996).

The gallery forests occupy a small strip along the Paraguay River and contain

species both from the Chaco and Eastern Region (Harcourt et al.1996). Ninety-eight

percent of Paraguay’s population lives in the Eastern region and their chief economic

activities are agricultural production and extracting forest products, mostly leña (fire

wood) and lumber. Paraguay has cut and processed only a fraction of its hundred species

known for their quality (Seyler, 1990). “Logging was for several decades the mainspring

of the extractive economy; in the 1970s, high prices for petit grain attracted collectors

into the market for citrus leaves; trees were cut for fence posts, and most recently, the

availability of heavy equipment has stimulated a new wave of logging. “In fact, this final

extractive boom is destroying the region’s forest resources” (Reed, 1995). With the

30

influence of both the Paraná and Paraguay River watershed subdivisions, the Eastern

regions climate holds home to over 150 commercially valuable species of native trees

(Pincus (1968) as cited in Reed (1995)).

Grasslands

Paraguay’s grasslands are located in the Paraguay River basin, alluvial soils

subject to flooding. Flooding is a recurring problem in Asuncion’s river district on the

Paraguay River and well within the basin. Over 21 million hectares totaling 52% of the

country’s total land area are grasslands (Grauel 1994).

Mineral Resources

Paraguay possesses few commercially exploitable metallic minerals but produces

a wide assortment of consumer goods such as simple agricultural tools and general

hardware items. Raw materials such as lime, sand, kaolin, gypsum, wood and stones are

usually found and mined locally for the uses in construction and local needs. For the first

time in the 1980’s some local metallurgical manufacturing companies began producing

items such as water tanks, fuel tanks, and grain silos from locally mined minerals.

Paraguay also had two shipyards to run and operate, generating a need for ship building

materials (Seyler 1990).

Soils

Based on soil surveys, analysts have estimated that only one fifth of the total land

area, 40.6 million hectares, is appropriate for normal crop production (Seyler 1990).

31

Soils vary from residual lateritic in the highest hills to red-yellow spodosols to the

east (Reed 1995). With original forest cover the soil is very productive and has a

sufficient layer of deteriorating organic material, providing the nutrients necessary to

support its vegetative layer. Paraguay’s soils are generally poor and depend heavily on

vegetative cover for stability. Exposed soil’s detritus layer is destroyed by the intense

sunlight and leaching. Generally the soils vary from sand to clay and are composed of

igneous parent material. Soils are ideal for the traditional migratory agriculture’s

production of mandioca, corn and beans, but lack the exchangeable bases necessary for

permanent, unfertilized agriculture (Reed 1995).

The soils of the Chaco region are deep colluvial soils transported from the eastern

slopes of the Andes.

The Paraguay and Paraná River sub-divisional watersheds defines a significant

classification difference in the soil composition of Paraguay. The soil composition in the

Paraguay River watershed is predominantly ultisols formed from sandstone parent

material. The Paraná watershed is predominantly made up of spodosols formed from

basalt parent materials. The red brown laterite soils of the Paraná watershed have

developed on basalt and are considered to be among the deepest in the world (Glas 1996).

The soils of the Paraná watershed have a high clay content (high CEC), retain water well,

and are the most fertile and agriculturally productive in the country. Despite the rather

poor chemical properties, these soils are suitable for cultivating cash crops such as cotton

and soybeans and for use as pasture lands (Glas 1996).

32

Agriculture

Paraguay’s agriculture since time immemorial has been the foundation of its

economy. The agricultural sector constitutes approximately half of the nation’s

employment, 23 % of the GDP in 1985, and 98 % of export earnings. The year 1970

brought a period of rapid growth in agricultural expansion when prices for cotton and

soybeans soared until the early 1980s. This growth in agriculture declined over the years

from limiting factors like weather conditions and soil degradation. Flooding and drought

brought on periods of decreased production, which not only affected the agriculture

sector but other various sectors in the economy directly related to agriculture (Seyler

1990).

Summer is the most important production period of the year for main crops like

cotton, soybeans, tobacco, sugar cane, coffee, oilseeds, mandioca (manioc), corn, beans,

peanuts and wheat. Winter is time to rejuvenate and focus more on subsistence

production rather than cash crops. Subsistence crops such as mandioca, corn, many

varieties of beans, peanuts, sweet potatoes, rice, wheat and sorghum are grown in

abundance in the transition between summer and winter. Naturalized citrus trees like

oranges, grapefruit, mandarins, lemons and limes are a big part of a campesino’s daily

diet. Seasonal fruits like pineapple, peaches, bananas, plums, strawberries, pears,

avocados, guavas, papayas, mangoes, grapes, watermelon and other melons are grown at

various times of the year and used to generate income or for home consumption.

Seasonal vegetables grown include gourds, squash, tomatoes, carrots, green peppers,

onions and garlic and several spices for both domestic consumption and export. Yerba

33

mate is a unique crop to Paraguayan soils and known for its drinking popularity in

Paraguay and nearby Latin American countries.

Traditional tillage is done mainly with hand tools or animal traction and causes

relatively little disturbance of the top-soil. Weeds are removed with a hoe or machete, or

worked into the soil was a small, ox or horse-drawn plough. Planting, weed control and

harvesting are all done by hand (Glas 1996).

Oilseeds represent one of Paraguay’s largest agro-industries. As one of Latin

America’s largest oilseed exporters, Paraguay processes cottonseed, soybean, peanut,

coconut, palm, castor bean, flaxseed and sunflower-seed oils. Paraguay also produces a

number of non-vegetable oils such as petit-grain oil. This oil is derived from Paraguay’s

bitter (sour) oranges. Bitter orange oil essence is used in many products like cosmetics,

soaps, perfumes and flavorings. Paraguay, in the 1980s, remained one of the world’s

leading exporters of petit-grain oil (Seyler 1990).

Yerba mate

Yerba mate (Ilex paraguaiensis), a dusty, dry, green powder, seems an unlikely

object to ignite the passions of state builders and conquistadors (Reed 1995). Yet the

fascination of its trade spurred explorers into the uncharted forests and inspired

politicians to organize the Paraguayan state eventually putting Paraguay on the map for

this unique commodity. Ilex paraguaiensis is a native species to Paraguay unique in its

importance to the Paraguayan culture. Most Paraguayans drink a traditional tea called

tereré or maté. The tea comes from the crushed leaves of the yerba mate plant, the leaves

are harvested once a year just before the spring flush and dried under intense heat and

34

then crushed into a flaky powder and packaged ready for use. Depending on your liking

there are many different brands to choose from, some even have medicinal aromatic

herbs right in the package. Traditionally, yerba is put into a guampa (a cup-like

container), traditionally made out of cow’s horn, and fashioned with a metal straw,

bombilla, acting as a sieve when the cold water is poured over the top. While preparing

the pitcher of water most people add different medicinal plants, aromatics and or herbs to

enhance the flavor or to even act as a natural medicine/healer. Tereré is part of many

Paraguayans daily routine drank once in the late morning around 9:30 A.M. and then in

the afternoon around 2:30 P.M.

Maté is usually drunk in the early morning just after rising while cooking the

mandioca and just plain waking-up. Consumption is higher in the winter months, July-

August, when the temperatures are bone chilling. The yerba is put into a similar recipient

as the guampa but smaller and traditionally called a ka’ygua again fashioned with a metal

straw called a bombilla. Maté is different only in that the water poured over top is

usually boiling hot. Maté is a popular tradition also shared with Argentina, Brazil and

Uruguay.

Traditional Foods of Paraguay

Most small farming families still cook over an open fire or in a fogón and with a

traditional brick oven known as a tatakua. The most common traditional dishes are

chipa, flat bread roll; chipa guazu, a quiche like dish; Sopa Paraguaya, common corn

bread; and Mbeju, tortilla made from mandioca starch. Chipa is made several times

throughout the year, but most commonly during Easter week. It is also the common

35

offering for wakes, special family gatherings, and other occasions. Chipa guazu is a

specialty dish and only common around the harvest of sweet corn in December-January

and May-June. Sopa Paraguaya is Paraguay’s famous corn bread commonly made

throughout the season from dried white corn and various other ingredients. It is also

common for some families to have what is called a fogón in which they can conserve on

firewood consumption and cook more efficiently. A fogón is smaller than the traditional

brick oven and is used to make smaller proportions of these favorite traditional dishes.

36

Part II. Puntoclave

Puntoclave is very much like other small colonias in Paraguay in that the families

are close knit, self-supporting units. All classes of Paraguayans view family and kin as

the center of the social universe and anyone not related through blood or marriage is

regarded with reserve, if not distrust (Kluck 1990). Families have tended to migrate in

groups, connected by previous neighborhood and marriage relationships. Several major

family clans are present in Puntoclave and are distrusting of an outsider, especially with

the fear of rising crime. Rising crime was noted in the previous volunteer’s site report on

his perception of Puntoclave.

Population Estimates

The estimated population as in 1997 in the initial settled areas was 84 houses and

420 inhabitants, taken from a Peace Corps’ site survey. There are surrounding block

districts, which include an additional 40 houses and approximately 300 people (Wild

1997). Age demographics are best described by Chamberlin (1994) as cited in Wild

(1997),“Although ages range from octogenarian to newborn, there is a bias to the

younger end of the spectrum owing to the newness of the area.... there are few people

here over 55 or so”.

Housing is relatively abundant these days with several houses abandoned. The

constant change of population is still a fact of life in Puntoclave. Many of the available

lots are in the various barrios (sub-communities) around Puntoclave and are a distance

from the principle access road. In some circumstances the remote location can be

dangerous, with theft of livestock, merchantable forest timber or personal items.

37

Access and Transportation

Mode of transport in this area consists of airplane, bus, cars, trucks of several

different variations, motorcycles, bicycles, horse/ and cart and oxen and cart. Of course

the main form of transport in and amongst the villages is still by foot.

The main access road heading to Asuncion is unpaved for approximately 155 km.

This causes many problems as far as the transporting of products and services because of

the deteriorating conditions during large rain storms in the area. Due to the high average

rate of rainfall in this area the road is often closed to any passing vehicles in three areas.

This closure is done by the road commission and for the safety of the passengers. In

periods of heavy rain, rising rivers can wash away sections of the road and overflow

bridges, closing the roads for up to two weeks. During these periods the persistent

traveler can travel to Asuncion by crossing the rivers in canoe to buses that shuttle

passengers between washed-out junctions.

Four bus lines travel regularly to this remote area stopping in Arco iris where

there are two access roads that enter into Puntoclave in a north westerly direction for

three kilometers from the main access road heading north to Brazil. The rough condition

of the road, especially during rainstorms limits the buses ability to run. Literally all buses

stop on this section of dirt road because the roads conditions are virtually non passable.

Buses are not reliable sources of transportation because of the mechanical difficulties due

to the age and condition of the buses.

38

Public Utilities

Electricity was installed in the year 1996 with the help of the Foundation Moises

Bertoni. The electricity is monitored by ANDE (Administración Nacional de

Electricidad-Electric company), which controls the majority of electricity throughout

Paraguay. The bills are based on a monthly service, which is still collected by hand in

the country side, by the various employees who usually live in the small communities.

Not all of the residents of Puntoclave have electricity and some have been on the waiting

list for years. On average a family of some affluence can have a bill of 30,000 Gs

monthly while the most impoverished family would pay 1,500 Gs. The average bill was

4,000-5,000 Gs monthly. There is a penalty for late payments.

Telephone services are located in Oga’i (18 km) and Tape pyta (60 km) at the

local ANTELCO (Administración Nacional de Telecomunicaciónes-Telephone

company). The phone services seldom work and are not always reliable. Three local

radio stations broadcast over the local news and shows related to the people’s interest.

Radio is the more reliable communication in this area. The number of talk radio shows

with health and agricultural topics is increasing.

The main water sources are spring fed creeks or personal wells within 15 meters

of the house.

Education

The existing infrastructure is one three room school house that hosts students up

to the sixth year. The community’s parents commission is building a fourth room

39

because of the rising student population. Some members of this community might send

their children to the next school in either Arco iris or Santo Raul. Most children walk to

school though some are not able to make the long walk because of the chores in their

household or in the field. Arco iris recently opened a high school and more families are

sending their children off for further schooling. Still the schools are not effective; many

children complete the sixth grade without basic literacy or mathematical skills. The

primary school in Puntoclave employs one director and three teachers, at least one of

whom has not completed any formal schooling. Scheduling and attendance are

haphazard.

General education of the residents of Puntoclave, “Based on personal

observations, I would estimate that 1/2 to 2/3 of the adult population are illiterate. The

same proportion can not be said to communicate in more than very basic Spanish;

although it is generally understood better than it is spoken, it is not a reliable way to

communicate information or ideas here” (Chamberlin (1994) as cited in Wild (1997)).

Guaraní is the commonly spoken language; second, Spanish; and third, Portuguese

because of the close proximity to Brazil and most satellite television comes from Brazil.

Health and Nutrition

Puntoclave has a puesto de salud, small health post. The building is standing and

in working order, and a promotora nurses aid equivalent lives nearby. Despite this, the

puesto is not working because the community is neither well organized nor well

educated. Occasional visits from the neighboring health care center bring in children’s

vaccinations for measles and mumps. There is a pharmacist within three kilometers, a

40

larger health center within 15 km and two hospitals 30-50 km away. There are also a

couple of natural medicine healers in the area who prescribe various combinations of

locally found medicinal herbs.

Common health problems are wide spread throughout the countryside, but

Paraguay is very fortunate in that it does not have large number of fatal diseases.

Because Puntoclave is remote, it is difficult for these people to receive the proper health

care and to be aware of common health hazards. Common health problems are dental

hygiene awareness and practice, infant and small child death, careless use or misuse of

pesticides and other common poisons contributing to local infirmities, sanitation skills,

lack of sanitary latrines, well tops, touching the well rope to the ground, not protecting

food from flies and walking around barefoot, general health awareness, cardiovascular

disease, and alcohol abuse common amongst the men and some of the women causing

deteriorating health and social problems.

Most health care is home remedy, using natural medicines and praying to God.

There is little confidence in the local health care resources. People are likely to go to the

Señor down the street selling natural medicines out of his house. There are several

pharmacists in the area, but they are poorly trained and oftentimes sell unnecessary or

inappropriate medicines.

For severe health problems community members go to hospitals in Tape pyta (60

km) and Paranhos (30 km). This is not the case for most people because of the cost of

travel and medical expenses.

Diet and nutritional awareness is poor not because proper foods are not available

but because the traditional diet is not diverse. The average diet is high in calories, salt,

41

starch, and somewhat high in protein depending on meat and legume combinations.

Vegetables are known to be high in vitamins, but are only served when in season or on

special occasions. There is an explosive growth in both interest in and the practice of

gardening. Most people expect free seeds since they don’t have enough money to buy

them. Caring for the plants, especially watering, is often inadequate. Vegetables may

grow year round, but gardens are generally tended in the cooler months, which then leads

to the seasonal differences in vegetable consumption. Most families have substantial

garden plots that produce lettuce, green peppers, tomatoes, onions, carrots, cabbage and

garlic. The common fruits are found in season: mango, orange, sour orange, mandarins,

peaches, mammon, and avati ku (native fruit).

The majority of Puntoclave residents are self sufficient in food production and

when there is some money it is spent on supplementary items such as rice, noodles, bread

rolls, sugar, and flour. With a little improvement in this area, things such as the

importance of reducing the daily intake of salt, sugar, fat and cholesterol relative to the

intake of vegetables and fruits is possible.

Community Leaders/Activities

Social hierarchy is evident in the religious or political connections within

Puntoclave. The first volunteer concluded the community is socially decentralized being

there no obvious hierarchy of community leadership reasoning that “ This may stem from

the pattern of settlement of the site, starting 15 years ago and continuing until recently.

Families have tended to migrate in groups, connected by preexisting neighborhood and

marriage relationships. Several major clans exist and while much intermarrying and

42

social fraternization has occurred, there is a marked lack of community solidarity under

any local leadership” (Chamberlin (1994) as cited in Wild (1997)). There is social

organization amongst the two prominent religious groups, Catholic and Adventists.

Puntoclave has several major family clans and there is an incredible resistance to work in

groups not a part of the clan. A clan is a large extended family.

Clubs and special activities take place monthly and sometimes weekly depending

on the seasons. The most active groups are the soccer affiliations. There exists one

equipo, soccer team, that participates in local tournaments during the fall months. There

are other soccer matches that take place in the larger communities and groups of players

travel to participate. Besides soccer games there are occasional bingo tournaments,

fiestas for the youth, festivals for certain holidays, school yard clean-up with the local

parents’ commission, church fund-raisers, and horse racing.

Special Needs of the Community

A Participatory Rural Assessment (PRA) facilitated by the Foundation Moises

Bertoni was conducted in June of 1996 in Puntoclave. It was a four-day workshop

involving five selected families. The extensionists stayed with these five families

monitoring their daily activities and presented a series of questions for these five

community members to discuss together. Also, included in this assessment was a

community mapping session that further identified needs. This evaluation, according to

the community members, determined the most serious problems to be no organization,

the lack of money in the community, and few markets for agricultural products.

Secondary problems were the lack of good health care facilities, poor infrastructure, and

43

difficulty in receiving land titles and rising crime. And, last but not least, they identified

unsustainable land-use practices and their effect on soil productivity.

Local Industry and Agriculture

With the exception of the local director and school teachers everyone living in the

community earns their living from small-scale agriculture. Most plots of land are five to

fifteen hectares and are used for both subsistence and cash crops. There are two main

cash crops, cotton and tobacco, which have generated minimal profits in the last ten years

causing anxiety and an increase in local crime. Many farmers have turned to large scale

plantings of corn and mandioca hoping to sell the surplus of these traditional subsistence

crops. There was a local buyer, Centro Acopiador de Villa Ygatimi Servicio Agricola

(CAVYSA), set up through the FMB that promised to buy corn, beans, manioc, yerba

mate, honey, and other products. Farmers distrusted CAVYSA because of poor service,

bad germination rates of purchased seed, and low prices for their products.

Puntoclave seasons are marked by temperature and rainfall fluctuations and even

light freezes, which limit the growing period. Crops such as mandioca can be grown

beyond one season but still must survive with these sporadic temperature and rainfall

fluctuations. From the soil classification map, NIMA (National Mapping Institute) and

the Republic of Paraguay 1995 map series classified the areas soil composition as an

alfisol, rhodic fine clayey textured soil generally high in fertility. The parent material is

made up of sandstone and is permeable even with a high clay percent. This makes the

area high in fertility, especially right after an area has been cleared of its original forest

cover. Fortunately, the lower temperatures and rainfall of this subtropical region allow

44

accumulation of organic matter preventing the formation of heavily lateric soils (Reed

1995).

Small factories that produce starch from raw mandioca are a steady source of

income for two family clans in Puntoclave. The demand is high, keeping the price stable.

The starch is used to make the traditional dishes of Paraguay (e.g. Mbeju and chipa). In

Puntoclave there are two small factories run by two large family clans. On average these

families can make up to 400,000 Gs (US$1 = 3,500 Gs) a month processing 400 kilos of

raw mandioca a week. Other sources of income include field hands (12,000 Gs per day

with lunch and 15,000 Gs if you bring your own), selling timber, butchering domestic

animals, sale of domestic animals, carpentry on a small scale, and five marginally

profitable stores that sell food and household products. At least two of the six stores

produce cheese to sell and trade for other goods from neighboring markets. On an even

smaller scale, farmers sell petit grain essencia, vegetable crops, honey, molasses, chipa

and cake sold during social activities and yerba mate. Additionally, many young men

and some women move to the cities to look for work as laborers and house maids. Some

have learned general skills from development work and are sometimes able to find work

in these areas. Many find that there are few jobs in the city and return home to work in

the fields.

Outside Organizations

The FMB has been doing a variety of projects in the site, since Puntoclave

borders the buffer zone of the Mbaracayú Reserve, which was purchased by the FMB in

the year 1991. Since purchasing this reserve of approximately 64,000 hectares they have

45

been combating illegal hunting and other pressures on the region’s natural resources. The

FMB has adopted an integrated approach of community development in the area. They

are working in areas of health, agriculture and environmental awareness. They

coordinated and installed electricity, along with the help of ANDE, in Puntoclave and

brought electrical technicians to teach apprentices in this line of work. They were there

as assistance for the community’s queries and needs to continue to have a successful

electricity project. Some students from these classes have found work in Asunción.

The FMB is understaffed with currently four extensionists to work in about

twenty communities, and because of this the FMB’s reputation is spotty and visits are

infrequent. These visits seem to be associated with one or two families and cause

resentment among the excluded family clans. Their recent focus has been working with

properly formed farmers commissions recognized by MAG and the local government in

Oga’i. This has eliminated some of the resentment and distrust, but still has not

improved infrequent visits. The FMB has currently diversified some of the park guard’s

jobs, those who live in the local communities surrounding the MNR, by integrating them

into communities as extensionists.

The FMB is starting several new and exciting projects. Some of these projects

include eco-tourism, environmental education with the local schools, a general

knowledge of the environmental realization of the area, diversification of the park guards

positions by integrating them into the surrounding communities, aid for community

projects, economic development such as creating tree nurseries, bees and honey

production, reforestation plans, promoting natural regeneration in projects, forest

enrichment, local community development, land titles for indigenous communities,

46

donating and helping with school building, health and hygiene projects, organization of

farmers markets in Oga’i and two more Participatory Rural Appraisal workshops.

Peace Corps presence in Puntoclave first began with Jordan Chamberlin during

the years of 1992-1994 a bee-keeping extension project. This was followed by a year

with no Peace Corps Volunteer. A second bee-keeping extensionist, Alex Wild, lived in

Puntoclave from December of 1995 until November of 1997. Both Alex and Jordan felt

bee-keeping extension was not successful in this community because of the high theft

rate and resistance to working in groups. “Bee-keeping extentionists, as in any field with

a very specific focus, are better placed in a central location for easier access to a large

number of communities” (Wild 1997).

From the general observations of both volunteers an agriculture or agroforestry

extension volunteer would be best suited for this site. Volunteers in these two sections

could focus on the high soil fertility rates, an abundance of natural tree regeneration as

well as forest enrichment schemes. Therefore a volunteer working in forestry could

satisfy the needs of the community. I was assigned to this community as an agroforestry

extension agent from December 1997 to December 1999.

47

Part III.

Agroforestry studies

The world is littered with agroforestry projects-large and small, successes and

failures. The ten studies of innovative agroforestry reviewed in this section cover a wide

range of projects from the tropical world. Each paper is briefly summarized and the

concluding paragraphs summarize the differences and similarities which are key to my

thesis.

Bray ,D. B., 1991

Bray analyzed the sustainability of small farmer organizations in Paraguay. His

research argued that for the amount of rural discontent, Paraguay needs to have other

outlets other than classic repression or rebellion that has lead past events because of deep

political and cultural patterns of authoritarianism. He also argues that a way must be

found to build sustainable small farmer organizations so that they can be a part of the

national economic and civic life to shape national policy debates so that their interests are

taken into consideration. Paraguayans were ruled by the most traditional authoritarian

government anywhere in Latin America (Bray 1991). After 1989, Paraguay put aside the

traditional authoritarian government and now has a climate of freedom of discussion and

political liberties (Bray 1991). Bray describes a time line to set the stage of events

bringing in previous research on social movements in Paraguay and its economic context;

defiance in rural Paraguay focusing on ‘The Ligas Agrarias Cristianas’; and the rise of

NGOs and their searches for sustainability. He takes a look at four basic research

divisions: politics, economics, sociology, and technology of sustainable farmer

48

organizations. Bray draws from historical events to account for the changing degree of

representation over time. He focuses on the realistic accomplishments to provide support

with self-help efforts within a repressive political context. He concludes the need for

further research studies on the emergence of sustainable small farmer organizations.

White and Jickling, 1995

These two researchers target rural and environmental degradation in developing

countries with their study on farmer knowledge and local innovations. They focus on

land use in Haiti. Development agencies identify lack of appropriate land-use technology

to be a key cause of degradation (White et al. 1995). They study specific farming

technologies used by indigenous groups based on soil conservation and forestry projects.

Most cases are based on classic conservation techniques like reforestation with exotic

seedlings, woodlots, bench terraces, and stone gully plugs. They focus on combing the

farmers’ and scientists’ knowledge on response to poverty and environmental degradation

to devise a better form of technology transfer from farmer to farmer and farmer to

scientist. First, they underline the causes of land degradation, then discuss in more detail

indigenous peasant land-use innovations, indigenous agroforestry, and indigenous soil

conservations. They then discuss the experiences of conservation projects and

technologies in Haiti and mention what techniques have been adopted. From this

background they reviewed existing documentation along with conducting field research

on economic importance of the common agroforestry and soil conservation practices in

use. White and Jickling’s approach to developing innovative techniques complemented

indigenous techniques and the trend of tree domestication in Haiti. Traditionally outside

49

help has focused on what is thought to be the needs of the peasants. They focus on how

they can promote techniques based on the indigenous traditional farming techniques that

have been revised and improved with technician input. Their main focus is on

information transfer to increase the innovative and management capacity of peasant

groups and to enhance their voice in the policy-making process (White et al. 1995).

Hammer, J., 1986

Hammer’s study is about how the country’s traditional pattern of land allocation

would be affected by the commercialization of millet. Senegal’s main subsistence crop is

millet and the cash crop is groundnuts. The two have a direct correlation to the farmers’

subsistence based on direct experience and observation. Hammer asks how does the

institutional constraint on commercialization and the structure of risk affect the allocation

of farmland. He proposes a series of equations that consider possible combinations of

institutional constraints influencing the economic return of both crops that can be

projected to void some of the risk in allocating land. This model presented helps to

rationalize observed patterns of land-use, which might be mysterious if unconstrained

profit maximization is assumed to be the guiding principle (Hammer 1986). He points

out correlations that model certain constraints farmers are facing. In general, subsistence

requirements of the farmer influence land allocation significantly. The farmers focus on

production levels and crop correlations and if taken into consideration institutional

constraints unrenowned to them.

50

Raintree, 1986

Raintree uses the role of agroforestry to serve as the background to discuss land

tenure constraints in Thailand. He points out two scenarios of agroforestry and tenure.

First he states that tenure may pose constraints to the realization of the potential

ecological and socio-economic benefits of agroforestry in many land-use systems.

Second, agroforestry may offer ways of resolving or mitigating some existing tenure

problems. Intensive agroforestry systems are most commonly found in areas with a long

history of population pressure, which indicates their general efficiency as a land-use

system. It is a fundamental contention of agroforestry that trees have good prospects for

plugging many holes found in tropical farming systems (Raintree 1986). Agroforestry

schemes that are adaptable in areas could provide simple solutions to developing

countries current expectations and lead to the social change within national development.

If a farmer is to adopt any kind of system it will need to show the farmer taking land out

of food-crop production is still productive. Therefore, it is the images of many

agroforestry innovations that Raintree studied that should draw the attention for more

positive approaches to tenure questions in agroforestry and how agroforestry can be a

possible solution to the many constraints on the farmers.

Owusu, D., 1993

This study is structured around a movement to promote agricultural

techniques like agroforestry, mainly incorporating fast-growing trees into the local

farming systems in Ghana. Workshops were offered to provide the farmers with training

sessions, demonstrations as well as visits from local farmers trained in agroforestry

51

techniques to introduce the methods to their peers. The biggest problem this project

faced was land tenure issues. There are two main groups in the area, tenant farmers and

land owners. The populations of tenant farmers outweighs land owners and creates

ownership constraints on tenants whose land owners do not want the farmers to make

improvements. “We have learned that land tenure and land security are crucial issues for

the success of any agroforestry or tree-planting project” (Owusu 1993). Methods chosen

delivered the information to the farmers in the form of workshops and some experimental

farm examination but found when farmers went to implement the projects they realized

their immediate needs to be firewood and not soil conservation techniques. Therefore

farmers should be included in the process to select agroforestry technologies based on

their present and future needs. Agroforestry is just one solution to apparent constraints

faced by farmers. It is the overall big picture that should be kept in mind when

developing agricultural projects identifying everything the farmer does as an integral part

of their well-being. Their experiences were that small-scale farmers needed simple

technologies based on their own internal resources. Farmers should be involved right

from the beginning in refining the proper methods and in adapting them to local needs

and circumstances. It is through careful planning and provisions of incentives that

selected farmers can be used to disseminate information about agroforestry technologies

farmer to farmer.

Baumer, M., 1989

Baumer focuses on the fact that agroforestry may not be the answer to

environmental problems and some trees can create problems. He points out through

52

specific agroforestry examples how harmful effects associated with poor planning, poor

species selection and poor management can lead to other problems with such a complex

system that is so dependent on beneficial inputs. As Baumer points out with caution and

good sense of the basic understanding of the trees and systems you can avoid harmful

effects. His purpose is to remind agroforesters and others that trees are complex

organisms and agroforestry systems are also alive in the sense that they represent a

complexity of interactions that is constantly changing.

Pégorié, J., 1990

Through observational trials, discussion and observation researchers have gained

a better understanding of the farmer’s objectives and strategies. Pégorié illustrates some

of the opportunities, problems and issues that arise when agroforesters take their research

into a farming community. “Trees entail costs, in land, labor and cash, but they provide

products and services for the farm household and for sale” (Pégorié 1990). This case

takes into consideration the tangible and intangible factors to design agroforestry

technologies focused on benefits/(cost + risk) ratios for each different agroforestry

technique and reducing the length of establishment and development phase to produce

anticipated benefits sooner. Better tree-planting techniques can dramatically improve the

farmers’ benefits/(cost + risk) ratio, which has lead to an increase in project adoption.

This group had an advantage in that they worked closely with these farmers on an

experimental farms using innovative techniques that resulted in improvements, which

allowed them to build from a strong pre-existing interest in trees. Farmers must see clear

53

immediate rewards in addition to the long-term, and perhaps more intangible, benefit of

improved sustainability (Pégorié 1990).

Bunch and Lopez, 1995

This study points out the need to design future agricultural development programs

in such a way that villagers are given strong motivation to innovate. It focuses on three

agricultural development efforts in Guatemala and Honduras and assesses impacts up to

fifteen years after the termination of outside intervention. They found relevance to

farmers’ well-being and productivity was the sustaining of increasing yields or more

generally the sustainability of the development process. Not only were they discovering

the sustainability of specific innovations through yield increases, but that farmers were

taking things into their own hands and carrying out projects to increase their well-being.

Their overall results in fact showed that there was a level of continuing innovation

despite program termination. They chose to use the farmer first approach for their

investigations allowing the farmer to become involved in a process of innovation to

search for new ideas, experiment with them, adopt those that prove useful and share the

experimental results with others. This methodology stresses positive reinforcement

through out the process by continuing to do things that bring farmers satisfaction.

Farmers need increased agricultural yields, decreased costs, decreased risk and so

technologies should be carefully chosen for their simplicity to bring significant increases

in yields and/ or decreases in costs without increasing the farmer’s risks.

Experimentation allows farmers to become critical thinkers involved in the development

process for themselves. Class distinctions are drawn and assessed for their adoption

54

levels based on impact. It is commonly believed that wealthier farmers adopt new

technologies faster and profit more from agricultural development efforts than poorer

farmers but in this case small farmers have adopted the technologies faster and profited

more than the wealthier farmers. Most technologies presently promoted in developing

countries require capital, literacy, and access to markets, which favor the wealthy.

Studies that support the thesis of wealthier farmers innovating more are based on capital-

intensive inputs, while most studies that used neutral technologies conclude that all

socioeconomic groups are equally innovative (Bunch and Lopez 1995). Using simple

appropriate technologies let the farmer self-innovate suggested technologies according to

his or her needs. Most of all maintaining flexibility in technological recommendations by

not offering the farmer the only solution to a problem but suggestions leaving room for

the farmer to experiment and make the technology theirs. Also, avoiding dependency on

outside assistance enabled these farmers to be more successful with self-generated

innovation.

Bernadas, 1991

A farming systems development project in the Philippines was initiated in 1982

with the goal to improve living conditions of the resource-poor farmers in selected areas.

The sites were representative of the ecological and socio-economic situation of these

provinces. Bernadas studies the development of appropriate technical solutions by

working in close collaboration with the farmers in the area to understand their problems.

He conducted formal surveys to identify common problems amongst the farmers and

found lower income due to declining soil fertility to be the farmers main concern. The

55

project staff set out to find a technical solution based in this concern. After two years of

the farmers implementing the developed technologies based on the outsiders point of

view proved to be unsuccessful and not matching the needs of the farmers resulting in

very little adoption of the technologies. The farmers had been excluded from the whole

process of formulating the problem as well as developing solutions. A second survey

was done focusing on the inclusion of the farmers discovering that farmers wanted

technologies that enabled them to shorten fallow periods and at the same time increase

soil productivity. In conclusion, technology development requires the participation of

farmers from diagnosis to testing and evaluation. Through this shared effort of farmers

and scientists sustainable results can be achieved. Two lessons were learned from this

study 1.) Farmers participation is crucial to technology development and evaluation 2.)

Collaborative trials such as on farm trials compliment the farmer’s knowledge and allow

farmers more scope for initiative and decision making during the research process.

Bernadas (1991) was able to conduct the second survey through available funding from

outside sources.

Carter et al., 1995

This article discusses local people’s participation in forest resource

assessment from experiences with case studies from Indonesia and Mexico. She makes

two observations about local people participating in forestry resource assessment. First,

farmers’ information needs are often multi-faceted constituting a greater diversity of

assessment methods than just managing for timber harvesting. Secondly, forest resource

assessments should be conducted by the local people for the local people. They derive

56

four reasons why farmers may participate in forest resource assessments: 1.) Secure

tenure rights, 2.) Compensation for lost forest resources, 3.) Managing forest resources

well to achieve formal certification, 4.) Monitoring biodiversity and species of value.

“Given the confidence in forest ownership, local people can be highly motivated to

manage their forest on a sustainable basis” (Carter et al. 1995). The project group chose

to conduct a series of participatory activities to quantify the forest resources with the

farmers through mapping techniques to define forest borders to complex inventories of

many species. Participatory approaches should concentrate on maintaining a fully

participatory decision-making approach in developing criteria used for various

management applications. In any assessment costs are involved as to the complexity of

the intent in which it is to be used by local people. The need for forest assessment should

be externally perceived and further investigated through a process of consultation or

collaboration and occasional co-learning. This idea stems from the different modes of

local people’s participation identified by Cornwall (1995). Cornwall defines four levels

of participation that represent the differences of local peoples’ perceptions. People of

different cultural backgrounds, exposure to formal education and experiences are more

likely to vary in the ease or difficulty in understanding and implementing forest resource

assessments (Carter et al. 1995). They focus on three of Cornwall’s modes of local

participation, which are consultation, collaboration and co-learning. “There are many

ways to be poor, but in today’s world not having the right kind of poverty…Without

information we are nothing at all and have no power to understand things or to change

our life. If Inuit society is to develop we must be able to collect and use information

according to our own terms” (A Nunavik Inuk (1987), quoted by Kemp and Brooke

57

(1995) as cited in Carter et al. (1995). Researchers are able to identify the levels of

participation focusing on these two studies and indicate a tendency for the role of local

people to change between data collection and so participatory approaches may be

questioned. Overall the final decision-making should be left to the local people

themselves. The ideas must originate from the communities. They conclude by

proposing a question as to the validity of the assessment to provide the knowledge

farmers need to equip themselves to take decisions and become managers of their own

forest resources.

Summary of Literature

These studies all involve small farmers and project studies on innovative

techniques in agricultural and forest management. Each study is unique and represents

farmer’s struggles with local and national constraints. Therefore, these studies are

relevant to mine and support my efforts of studying farmers and their living conditions.

Some studies have treated all farmers as if they were equal. However, White and

Jickling, Bunch and Lopez, Baumer, and Carter et al. concluded that it is important to

identify with the different socioeconomic groups when developing agricultural and

forestry projects with farmers.

Land tenure was an obstacle in many studies especially in Owusu and Raintree’s

where farmers because of their land constraints did not adopt certain technologies that

enhanced the production levels on the farm. Many farmers face constraints whether they

are national or local. Several of these studies show the risks involved for farmers to

challenge the constantly changing circumstances. Hammer, Raintree, Pégorié, Owusu,

58

and Baumer identify with constraints faced by farmers and focus their results on

identifying with the farmer needs first. Hammer especially identifies the importance of

the family’s sustainability when discussing the commercialization of their subsistence

crop. Because some of these studies are based on years of intervention they can identify

with farmers who have accepted innovative technologies and are able to assess the

relevancy to the farmers living conditions. Some focus more on the simplicity of

technologies being the better way to promote them especially Owusu, Raintree, White

and Jickling, and Bunch and Lopez. Bernadas is able to take his study several steps

further with the help of outside funding, which I feel has importance especially because

the farmers I worked with had previous experience with outside assistance. There will

always be factors that are uncontrollable, Bunch and Lopez identify with these factors

because of the time frame of their study.

Part IV.

Study Background

Conclusion

Despite dramatic change in national government, global economies, and pioneer

expansion there has been a constant flow of pioneer farmers into the forests of eastern

Paraguay. The resources are still abundant in this region, but diminishing rapidly. In my

two years as a Peace Corps Volunteer I have seen what unsustainable land-use practices

can do to the environment. Initially, campesinos had enough mature forest to cut and

burn new areas for their crops. They have deforested areas for agriculture and pasture.

Soon there will be no more forest reserves for the simple collection of firewood for the

59

family’s cooking and heat resources in the winter. Campesinos have a lot to learn before

they understand the complexities of their ecosystem, and most of them realize it. It is

critical now for these farmers, those who have witnessed drastic changes in the last ten

years, to secure and control their futures.

The farmers have participated in organized projects like chicken raising, tree

nursery establishment, yerba mate planting and much more that have broadened their

knowledge of self generated innovation. They have also seen many failed projects

throughout time, usually from large donations or institutional organizations coming and

going and not much follow through after project implementation. Pioneers by nature,

these farmers find it hard to forego traditional practices learned from generation to

generation. The farmers are only as sustainable as themselves and their practices. There

is a definite need for forestry work in Puntoclave and I was just beginning to see the

enthusiasm of these farmers participating in a forestry project. Therefore, I made it my

goal to determine what would make a successful forestry project in Puntoclave. It is also

important to draw in other projects to validate my findings. Many other research studies

have been done to identify and stress the importance of the farmer’s knowledge and co-

learning techniques.

60

Chapter Three

Methodology

The previous chapter describes in detail the physical, social, and cultural aspects

of Paraguay as a country. Second, I described the characteristics of the community

Puntoclave. It is from this general information that I determined what form of

methodology would be the most practical for collecting data based on the forestry project

and during my interviews.

The forestry project began in October 1997. First, inviting community members

to participate in meetings focusing on tree-planting and farmer interest. Second, The

FMB donated 3,000 or more tree seedlings that were out-planted during the month of

February 1999. Third, March through April I performed my first set of interviews with

the sixteen farmers. Fourth, a second set of interviews was done in Novemeber 1999

with five key informants. I left this study site in December 1999.

My service began with a twelve-week extensive training of the two official

languages in Paraguay (Guaraní and Spanish), cultural, and technical training. Technical

training was intensive and covered several areas such as tree nursery construction and

maintenance, garden training, agroforestry systems, soil conservation with green manure

cover crops, contour lines, grafting citrus and mango, pruning and thinning, beekeeping

activities, extension methodology, forest enrichment, woodlot improvement, natural

pesticides, integrated pest management, petit grain and yerba mate. Training prepared

me with a solid general background.

I was enrolled as an agroforestry extensionist responsible to the Moises Bertoni

Foundation (FMB), a Paraguayan non-government organization (NGO), to promote

61

conservation of the Paraguayan environment. I was assigned to the rural community of

Puntoclave in the Department of Canindeyú. My primary responsibility was to focus on

agroforestry, with the bulk of my efforts directed toward the promotion of reforestation,

forest enrichment and the promotion of such forestry practices as tree planting and forest

management. In addition to the FMB, I worked closely with members of the community

on projects related to the conservation of the surrounding environment. I needed to gain

the trust of the locals to understand their situation and begin some kind of approach to

documenting through interviews and observation. I was to be part of the community

permanently for the next two years.

Participatory observation involves getting close to people and making them feel

comfortable enough with my presence so that I could observe and record information

about their lives. One collects life-history documents, attends sacred festivals, and talks

to people about sensitive topics (Bernard 1995). Attending social activities traditional to

Paraguay and Puntoclave, showed my appreciation for where I was at the moment,

learning the native language from the locals, and sharing my culture on random visits

were important in gaining their trust.

Participant observation also involves establishing rapport in a new community,

learning to act so that people go about their business as usual when you show up, and

removing myself from the every day cultural immersion (so that I could intellectualize

what I learned) put my objectives into perspective so that I could write about it

convincingly. “ If you are a successful participant observer you will know when to laugh

at what your informants think is funny; and when informants laugh at what you say, it

will be because you meant it to be a joke” (Bernard 1995).

62

Participant observation fieldwork can involve an array of data collection methods

including observation, natural conversations, various kinds of interviews (structured,

semi-structured, and unstructured), checklists, questionnaires, and unobtrusive methods

(Bernard 1995). My fieldwork consisted of observation and curiosity as to what the daily

routines of small farmers in Paraguay were, giving me a better understanding of how I

could be of service to these people throughout my two years of service. It was not

immediately accepted by these farmers and families. After one year passed, I had gained

the confidence of many families and could conduct a series of interviews through natural

conversations and unobtrusive methods. These families, through their own observations

saw me go through hard times and were accepting of me as a temporary member of their

community. It was only then I shared with them my intent to complete a research study

involving their lives as farmers. Many farmers could not relate how they were involved

in my graduate studies, but because I had gained their trust they were open to helping me

accomplish my project.

This community had two volunteers before me and were familiar with how

Americans, gringos, lived and breathed amongst them. It was still strange for them to

have a gringa so interested in asking questions about their lives as Paraguayans. It was

through sharing myself and my culture that they opened up to me so that I could conduct

a series of more intense interviews with a selected group of farmers working on the tree

planting project initiated from the outside. It was after putting aside our differences that

we could perform naturally any project at hand. Through general observation and many

individual visits and previous secondary projects I was able to approach farmers that

showed signs of interest in working together. The general observations included having

63

community meetings to allow a complete participation of all who had interest in tree

planting. I also visited select individuals and invited them, knowing they wanted to

participate in this specific project. At times it was necessary to individually invite some

farmers to assure their participation. It was after this that a group of sixteen self-selected

families had trees delivered to their doorsteps or they collected the trees from my house.

I selected some of these participants for their dedication, time, and effort they had into

tree planting. Farmers were not selected randomly. Some were a little less open to

participating than others. This community has experienced years of influence from local

ministries, NGOs, the police and army and were wary and suspicious of outsiders, not

fully understanding their intentions. I sensed a kind of dependency upon this outside help

and a lot of times acted as a bridge between the community and an organization, such as

the FMB, directly involved in this forestry project.

Unfortunately, many projects were initiated and failed because of inconsistent

efforts by the FMB and other organizations. Of course, farmers had established

relationships from previous projects performed by the FMB, but not even their

extensionists were able to see and feel what I did given the trust I gained. I found being

supportive of the farmers’ struggles and activities going on in the community gave me a

better understanding of how we could make this project successful together.

Predicaments are not uncommon in working relationships and so it is better to be a

neutral player and respect all sides of the parties involved. It was my job to work with

everyone: local NGOs, government ministries and anyone else who was interested in

working with me on any type of project whether it be directly related or not to forestry.

64

I conducted two series of interviews. The first was a series of informal individual

house visits with conversations conducted in a way to record information about the

current status of their individual tree-planting projects. For the first interviews, a general

out planting sheet (Appendix C) was created to document data collected from the

individual house interviews. This data collection took place after visiting with the

individual households on my own time and recording observations. The second was after

the project was initiated; a group of farmers dedicated themselves to taking the project

one step further and built a local tree nursery with the help of the FMB. With these five

farmers, all of whom participated in the tree planting, I saw the opportunity to conduct a

more formal interview involving their families and knew I had gained their trust enough

to ask consent to go to their homes and interview the whole family. With the help of

Peace Corps, I decided to use their Encuesta Forestal (Appendix D), a complete series of

questions about the background of these farmers and a more formal record of their

established systems through the tree planting project (Appendix E).

Stage of Research and Interviews

The first set of informal interviews took place during November 1998 through

January 1999 with a series of community meetings and individual family visits until the

actual trees arrived in February 1999. As the trees arrived and were being divided out

amongst the sixteen participants I began formal data collection. Visits took place with

each of the participants through a shared visit plan with the FMB extentionists and

myself. I would go to their fields to demonstrate the different ways to plant each one of

the trees. The FMB extentionists and I also gave a series of demonstration talks when the

65

trees arrived on how to transplant the trees to achieve success. It was also my job to

follow-up on these individual projects to see how the trees were taking; physically

helping the farmer’s families plant the trees. It is from these visits in March 1999 that I

was able to create a table of early tree survival and monitor the problems occurring with

the timing of the project and various other uncontrollable factors like climate, timing of

out-planting, actual tree condition, fire, insect damage and farmer apprehension. After

the initial documentation of the sixteen participants and immediate tree survival rates, I

performed a second follow-up visit in April 1999 to take a late survival reading and

document the causes of any tree mortality.

The second series of more extensive interviews with the five members who

formed a farmers’ commission, building the vivero, were conducted within a week of one

another in their perspective homes in November 1999. Most times the families wondered

why I was doing these interviews and I would explain things over and over to them. This

suspicion, even though we had a certain level of confidence established, made it very

clear to me that any other form of interviewing other than through verbal communication,

for example tape recording, would have skewed the responses to questions asked. I filled

out the interview sheets in front of the family and feeling some resistance to this, I

assured each family that this was the original copy and that I would return it to them

when I was finished extracting the information I needed to do my studies. I think this

was a good exercise for each of the families not only to have what they have on paper,

but also to be able to have record of what they have for future innovations. All of the

interviews done were conducted in Guarani with some Spanish interspersed.

66

I performed interviews with these five farm families to better understand and

determine specific aspects of their lives. The questionnaire subjects covered:

I. General questions a. Family members-how many members, and how long has the family lived in area.

b. Current status of family-water source, land’s general physical features and how many hectares possessed, agricultural divisions of land in use

c. Land use practices-what is out there in terms of crops and how has the farmer prepared his land to cultivate, domesticated animals owned by the family

II. Arboreal components 1. Forest cover-how many hectares of forested land possessed.

Uses of forest products as firewood, construction materials, or charcoal-What they do plan to do with the forest in the future.

2. Fruit species, gardens, ornamentals-Does the family have these components and what are they.

III. Yerba mate (Ilex paraguanensis)-is this a component of the farmers land use or would they like to have it in the future.

IV. Kumandá Yvyra’í (Cajanus cajan)—Pigeon Pea, Part of the families field if so, how?

V. Petit Grain-Does the family harvest essence of sour orange and to what extent. VI. Green Cover Crops (GCC)-Are the families using this in their fields? VII. Energy-Obtained by open fire, gas stove, traditional oven tatakua VIII. Future-What are the future aspirations of the family and their land

IX. Established systems with tree components-recorded the actual project done by the family, objective, description, history, preparation, method of establishment, general observations or occurrences.

The interview sheets were filled out in the presence of my interviewees in their

homes. I performed the interview by asking the family members present the questions

from the outlined form. Each family knew they were not obligated to answer any of the

questions they did not want to. I also made it clear that these original forms, once I had

extrapolated the information I needed, would be returned. After completing all of the

five interviews, I translated them into English. The information I translated were the

direct answers of the farmers and their families during the interviews. This information

was put in a table format and summarized to create individual farm family profiles.

67

The methodology followed naturally from my work as a Peace Corps volunteer. I

was constantly in Puntoclave and had access to people. Working with the FMB, I wanted

to find out what the key to success was for their forestry project. Throughout these

procedures, the interviews and observations have been supplemented with information

from books, journal articles, and government reports.

68

Chapter Four

Project Description and Data Collection

The FMB’s Forestry Project

The FMB received a donation in July of 1998 from the Phillip Morris Company.

From this donation a forestry project was developed concentrating on four communities

around a twelve-kilometer radius from the western border of the MNR. This forestry

project was focused on an existing reforestation plan with in the MNR’s buffer zone of

twenty hectares within the next five years.

Species selection

The project plan started with a donation of 3,500 tree seedlings (from three

different species) to each of the communities. The three species are listed below in Table

1.

Table 1: List of the three tree species out-planted

Scientific name of species Common name of species Class of species

Meliaceae Melia azederach var. gigante Paraiso gigante exotic Leguminosae/ Cedsalpinoideae

Peltophorum dubium Yvyra pyta native

Boraginaceae Cordia trichotoma Peterevy native

Meliaceae Melia azederach var. gigante Paraiso gigante

Paraiso gigante is the most common name used in Paraguay for what otherwise is

known to us as Chinaberry, Persian lilac and or tree of paradise. This species is in the

Meliaceae family and its genus and species are Melia azedrach var. "gigante". This

species is an exotic, its origin India. This species was first studied in Missiones, a

69

province of Argentina, in which the variety "gigante" was chosen because of its

incredible rapid growth rate (Tighe 1997).

There exists plantations of Paraiso gigante in Choré, Colonia Independencia,

Itapua and the Department of San Pedro, all of which are in eastern Paraguay. Research

shows this species in 10 years to have the growth capacity 25 meters in height and 50 cm

in diameter. Annually it is said to have an outstanding growth rate of 1-2 meters in

height and 3-4 cm in diameter girth. An estimated rotation age of 8-15 years for

merchantable for the sale of saw logs. This species has very similar characteristics to

Paraguay's Cedro (Cedrela fissill) being in the same family Meliaceae with the

composure of the wood to be equal to that of Cedro as far as the timber market is

concerned. This species is mainly being researched in the form of plantation systems but

yet can be a very useful component of an agroforestry system (Rombold et al. 1991).

For Paraguay this exotic species can be useful in the conservation of soils

(rehabilitation) specifically referring to it as a component in agroforestry systems in

association with crops and its potential economic value in the long term. Although, it is

in its infantile stages in regards to an established market demand for finished products.

Today, there is a small market for Paraiso gigante in Paraguay and is ever increasing due

to the intensive deforestation of Paraguay's natural forest. This species is used for

firewood, fence posts, roof structures (trusses) and other domestic uses such as furniture

and fruit crates (Rombold et al. 1991).

This species requires intensive management because of its rapid growth rate and

being shade intolerant. It is known to have a commercial value of 11 m² in an intense

plantation system. But without the proper management of cleaning, pruning and thinning

70

the outcome is that of firewood. Paraiso gigante can be planted with the intent to create a

plantation or as a component of an agroforestry system (Rombold et al. 1991). Successes

here in Paraguay show it to be commonly ready to be out planted after a height of 30 cm

(about 6 months) as a seedling containerized or bare root. And has been very successful

as rooted cuttings being much larger at the time of out plantings. Paraiso gigante has re-

sprouting properties so one can also cut them off at ground level in the second year after

out planting, which doesn't significantly affect their growth rate as the tree catches up

quickly in the succeeding years due to it's ready-established root system. Thus providing

a straighter long shoot in the first year that means less pruning because of the length

between whorls. Also, reaching a better height after the initial cleaning of the area

around the stem (Tighe 1997).

As far as the spacing of a species of this nature it is broken down into two

categories one being it a component of an agroforestry system and the other plantation

system. The most common spacing in an agroforestry system is 3 m X 3 m, 4 m X 4 m

and 5 m X 4 m. In a plantation system it is more commonly planted at 2 m X 2 m or 3 m

X 3 m. With the idea in the plantation, the first thinning takes place at 5 years leaving

behind a calculated density of 500 trees/ha. The most intense part of management comes

before planting with the preparation of the site and during the first 3 years of growth,

pruning back the lower branching. If the species is not intensively managed in it first 3

years it will be more difficult to reach the maximum economic value as merchantable

timber (Peace Corps 1991).

This species is also very prone to insect attacks from leaf cutter ants in its first

months after being out planted basically defoliating the young seedlings, but is known to

71

recover quickly and sprout back instantaneously still leaving it open to another attack.

This is a problem amongst small farmers because of the lack of income to purchase

pesticides to protect the tree from being defoliated and is also a discouragement for them

to plant this species. This pest problem also results from the destruction of the natural

predators habitat (Peace Corps 1991).

There is also another disease, mainly problematic in plantation systems, which is

that of a mycoplasm. It has been documented in various publications of the region there

is a vector for the mycoplasm which is a leafhopper. There are multiple varieties of the

leafhopper that are carriers of the mycoplasm. What happens is that the leafhopper feeds

on an infected tree and then moves to the one next to it, serving as a vector for the

bacteria to spread, which causes the mycoplasm. Tetracycline (antibiotic) is shown to

kill the mycoplasm from an injection into the bole of the tree. This is still being tested on

an experimental basis and is very expensive. A recommendation of prompt removal of

symptomatic trees, to stop further spread of the bacteria, seems to be the most

inexpensive/effective control to save ones plantation. There is another idea which is

being experimented with and that is with cloning. First select a mother tree that shows

resistance to the mycoplasm, next cut the lateral roots in a 2 m radius ring all the way

around the tree. Prompting the tree to send out root suckers with the identical genetic

material that can be planted to a farmer’s discretion (Tighe 1997).

A market for this particular species exists to a point in Argentina because all of

the native Cedro has been cut down and therefore established a Paraiso market, but can't

currently supply enough to meet demands. As far as Paraguay is concerned the market is

72

still very much in the initial stages knowing that their are no latifoliates to fulfill the

traditional role of Cedro and Guatambu (Balfourodendron riedelianum) (Tighe 1997).

There is an ever increasing desire to plant Paraiso gigante here in Paraguay and

will soon be an important component of Paraguayan forestry in the near future. But

while there is still some native timber left, Paraiso gigante does not match the demand for

native forest products. As far as Argentina and its Paraiso industry it is based on the lack

of native timber species that are no longer in existence there (Tighe 1997).

Leguminosae, Ceasalpinoideae Peltophorum dubium Yvyra pyta

Yvyra pyta is a common pioneer species local to this forest region. Therefore it is

a main component of the forest and in relative abundance in the Jejui watershed. It is

also one of the most common species of value to be left behind when clearing land to be

cultivated. It is a major component of traditional systems and managed much like a crop.

Yvyra pyta is resistant to drought, does well in semi-degraded soils with no specific

problems associated with fungi, bacteria or insects. General features of Yvyra pyta are its

rapid growth rate, teeters between intolerant and tolerant to shade, has a dicotimis

branching pattern (needs pruning management to be of economic value), vegetative re-

sprouting ability, fixes nitrogen (root nodules), is resistant to frost and is deciduous

loosing its leaves in the fall season. With this general information provided from

previous investigations and the local knowledge of the farmers it lead us to believe this

specific species would prove better as part of forest enrichment innovations. Also, due to

the time of out planting being it the hottest months of the summer season it would have

more protection with forest cover. Its common uses are for furniture and lumber (Peace

Corps 1991)

73

Boraginaceae Cordia trichotoma Peterevy

Peterevy is also a pioneer species common to the Jejui watershed region and is

still a major component of the remaining forests in the buffer zone of the Mbaracayú

Natural Reserve. This species is more of a forest edge species, but is occasionally found

in the interior dense stands with humid, fertile deep soils. General features of Peterevy

are it is not drought resistant, susceptible to competition, intolerant of shade, pruning

required, average growth rates, frost sensitive when in its sapling stage form, and has a

deep rooting system. This species when transplanted can also be planted for its

vegetative re-sprouting properties. Planting a stake with an established root system and is

planted bare root during the autumn season (March-May). Therefore we determined this

species to be better as a component of enrichment activities, but also not ruling out its

possibilities in an open field with regular management. This species is commonly used

for lumber and furniture (Peace Corps 1991)

Extension Work

The FMB’s extensionists job was to visit the selected communities choosing

farmers with interest in planting the trees so they could be distributed accordingly. The

overall objective of the Foundation’s project was to establish five ‘professional’ viveros

(tree nurseries) including the one in Oga’i, located behind their local office. The trees

were an incentive for the farmers to continue working with the FMB on establishing

viveros to continue the efforts of reforestation. The project plan proposed to reforest a

total of twenty hectares within the buffer zone of the reserve. The communities were not

interconnected and so each one accounted for five hectares of the proposed twenty.

74

Three communities were selected by their location in relation to the MNR. Puntoclave

was selected because the FMB had previously conducted a PRA. The PRA, in 1996,

gave the extensionists a better understanding of the special needs of Puntoclave as

described by the community members. The community felt they needed better

organization, more money in the community, better commercial outlets for agricultural

products, good health care facilities, better infrastructure, improved land titling and

reduced crime. I do not mention the three other communities involved in the project

because I did not work with them and as protection for the privacy of the farmers in this

study.

The amount of original time proposed to accomplish the tree planting and vivero

establishment was three months (October, November, and December) including the four

communities setting aside defined areas to be reforested. The FMB drew up the plan

with no allowance for any missed target dates and the time frame was unrealistic. The

FMB approached me for help and I began concentrating my efforts on finding interested

people in planting trees and building a community vivero. Each community would

establish a vivero, twelve square meters, able to produce at capacity over a 1,000 young

trees per year. The production from the FMB’s vivero in Oga’i, would compensate for

any local shortfall. The communities would decide on a general area, neutral within the

colonia, and receive the materials necessary to build a professional vivero. The tree

nurseries were modeled after other successful viveros in Paraguay. Materials included

shade structure made from locally cut timber, plastic netting to string over the structure,

and a strong fence to guard from any unwanted animal traffic in the vivero. It is then up

75

to the colonia to be responsible for general maintenance, watering, sowing of tree seeds,

weeding, and pest control.

I hosted a series of community meetings to determine who was interested in

planting the trees from the FMB. First, I invited farmers I had worked with before.

Second, I announced the meetings, location, and time to the church congregation, to

assure that all others that had an interest in planting trees were informed. The first

meeting took place in November 1998 at my house after church services. We discussed

the project plan and its objectives. The informal setting of the meeting left it open for the

participants to give input and feedback as to who was willing to plant trees. Eleven

people came and from this we agreed to have another meeting following the same

strategy as before, but this time requesting that the FMB come and finalize who would

receive trees. The second meeting took place with the FMB present to assist me in

explaining again what the project entailed. Six people came to discuss matters we had

briefly discussed in the previous meeting. Meanwhile, my counterpart told me that their

extensionist had completed a forestry survey in Puntoclave focused on who had interest

in planting trees. My FMB counterpart mentioned this list many times. Unfortunately, I

had never seen it. There were people on the list who were promised trees that would be

delivered to their houses. Working from the FMB’s list, we visited these other farmers

individually and asked if they wanted trees. Sixteen families were selected for the tree

distribution according to what they had chosen to do with them. A list of the number of

trees taken by each farmer and the type of project are listed in Table 2.

76

Table 2: Distribution list of tree seedlings.

The farmers chose projects to establish agroforestry systems, woodlots, practice

methods of forest enrichment, and yard improvements that would all account for the

proposed five hectares of reforestation.

Project Implementation

In February, 1999, trees arrived sporadically. The tree seedlings were bought from

a tree nursery in Tape pyta (60 km south) and stored in the FMB’s vivero. The bulk of

the young trees were purchased in July after the FMB received the money to start their

forestry project. I assumed they were sown from seed and later transplanted in macetas

(containers) to be sold, which is the common practice. The trees were kept in the FMB’s

vivero for six months, enough time for some to out grow the small macetas. The trees

were in poor condition and with the timing of out-planting had a minimal chance of

survival. The intensity of the sun and inadequate soil moisture levels were not the best

Name Number of seedlings Form of out planting Farmer A 170 Native species Yard surrounding house Farmer B 200 Paraiso gigante Open field 5m x 3m spacing Farmer C 250 Native species Open field, forest Farmer D 200 Native and Paraiso gigante Open field, forest Farmer E 250 Paraiso gigante Open filed, yard

improvements Farmer F 400 Paraiso gigante Open field Farmer G 400 Paraiso gigante Open field Farmer H 150 Native and Paraiso gigante Open field, forest Farmer I 52 Native species Yard improvements Farmer J 100 Paraiso gigante Open filed Farmer K 400 Native species and Paraiso

gigante Open field, forest

Farmer L 50 Paraiso gigante Yard improvements, open field

Farmer M 100 Native species Forest Farmer N 200 Native species and Paraiso

gigante Forest

Farmer O 200 Native species Forest Farmer P 200 Paraiso gigante Open field

77

conditions for out-planting. Tree planting is recommended in the winter months (May to

June), during the rainy season and when there is less work in the fields. The

identification of families and failure to coordinate was the first of several missteps in the

project. Success requires constant extension work in a community and FMB did not have

enough staff to adequately cover Puntoclave.

We held meetings where the technical discussion focused on three tree species.

The species selected were based on information collected from other rural Paraguayan

farmers’ experiences and gathered from one article and a tree manual. These discussions

were designed to provide the farmers with possible planting combinations. The

combinations were structured around out-planting in open fields (stressing the

establishment of agroforestry systems), woodlots, and forest enrichment. We did not

provide a specific recipe for each species, allowing the farmer to take responsibility in

implementing the projects based on their needs.

Most of the trees were delivered to the farmers houses, but due to the amount of

trees and the difficulty of transporting them from Oga’i several hundred were delivered to

my house, we held another meeting proposing some of the farmers come and collect their

trees. This helped facilitate the arrival of all the trees. We performed demonstrations

showing the preferred way to out-plant while delivering the trees and separate

demonstrations for the farmers collecting their trees from my house. At the time the

farmers were preoccupied with all of the other daily activities going on and therefore did

not give priority to out-planting trees. After all the trees were successfully distributed we

visited each of the farmers to see how the projects were coming along and if they needed

help. Several of the families needed assistance so we planted trees together, going over

78

again the preferred way to out-plant. Because there were sixteen families involved I was

not able to work closely with each one during this time of out-planting. The FMB and I

devised a system of revisiting each farmer after the initial planting to monitor how the

projects were doing and I recorded the number of trees surviving. The sixteen farmers

were self-selected from previous events that led the FMB and I to believe they would

benefit from a forestry project. I invited some farmers personally knowing they might

not come on their own to participate in the project meetings.

Data Collection

Throughout the implementation of this forestry project and during my work as a

Peace Corps Volunteer (PCV) I collected information on these farmers and their tree-

planting projects. I began by collecting field data from the sixteen farmers. This was

primarily quantitative data. My quantitative data is divided into several areas: project

distance from house, number of trees given to each farmer, early survival counts, late

survival counts, labor force and number of family members, number of hectares, number

of years lived in the community and farmer age, shown in Table 3.

I also wrote a paragraph summarizing data from each of the sixteen farmers. The

data collection also includes qualitative data collected on individual farmer visits, during

farmer comité meetings and at social events. The qualitative data collected describes the

farmers’ land-use practices, wealth distinctions, sources of family income, general well-

being and educational backgrounds, shown in Appendix F. The data was collected

during the implementation of the FMB’s forestry project with the overall goal of

promoting awareness of environmental conservation practices.

79

Table 3: Data on tree survival and farmers*

Farmer Project # of Early Reasons Late Reasons Labor force distance Trees given Survival for death Survival for death and # of from house to each family in meters farmer members A 5 170 20 NP,NM,D,T 0 NM,D,T 2/4 B 500 200 50 I,D,T 0 I 3/4 C 700 200 89 I,F,NP,D,T 0 I,F 2/4 D 250 E 312 400 312 BP,D,T 312 7/14 F 250 400 250 D,NP,T 250 NM 6/10 G 150 H 10 52 10 NM,T,D 0 NM 2/3 I 750 100 69 D,I,T 15 NM,I,F 7/10 J 300 400 50 D,NP,T 50 D,T,NM 2/5 K 50 L 550 100 30 NP,D,T 30 F,NM 2/7 M 300 200 50 NM,D,T 0 NP 5/5 N 500+ 200 D,T,I 0 F,NM 2/4 O 250-300 200 50 NM,T,D 50 NM 3/4 P 10/500 250 150 T,D,I,NM 150 NM,T 8/9

Farmer Species Description # of Member of

of site hectares other comite A Y,P H 7 San Ramon B PG AF 15 San Ramon C Y,PG DF,E 7 School, Church D ALL 3 10 San Blas E PG CF 5 25 de Diciembre F PG CF 10 no G P ? no H Y H .OO4 no I PG CF 3 School, Church and San Blas J PG,P CF 5 no K PG 7 no L Y,P CF 30 School (Director), Church M PG,P DF,E 20 no N Y,P DF,E 24 School, Church O PG AF,CF 11 25 de Diciembre P PG AF,CF 11 25 de Diciembre

80

Table 3: (continued) Data on tree survival and farmers*

Farmer # of Member of Member Current Status Number of hectares other comite of years lived Tajy Poty in community A 7 San Ramon 9 B 15 San Ramon 9 C 7 School, Church Past M F,Own interest in NR 9 D 10 San Blas FMB employee 9 E 5 25 de Diciembre M F,E,NR 8 F 10 no PastM 20 G ? no segundo linea - H .OO4 no M F,E 10 I 3 School, Church and San Blas Past M F,E 8 J 5 no 10+ K 7 no Moved - L 30 School (Director), Church F 15 M 20 no segundo linea 15 N 24 School, Church E,F 9 O 11 25 de Diciembre F 7 P 11 25 de Diciembre M E,F 19

Legend

Reasons for death Species T- time of season P- Peterevy I- insect damage Y-Yvyra pyta D- drought PG- Paraiso gigante NP- not planted NM- not managed BP- bad planting Current Status F- fire damage E- interviewed F- follow-up work Description of site NR- natural regenerationAF- abandoned field CF- cultivated field DF- degraded forest H- around house E- forest enrichment

81

A total of 3,322 trees seedlings were divided amongst sixteen members of the

community. Follow-up visits were done to assist the farmers with their individual

projects. From the follow-up visits an early survival count of the trees were taken after

out-planting. A month had passed since the early survival count before a second survival

count was taken to determine how many trees survived. While revisiting the farmers to

take survival counts I was reassured of the overall projects goal of reforestation because

the survival was better than I imagined for the conditions and timing of planting.

After the trees were out-planted we formed a group of five farmers, participants of

the initial tree-planting project that were interested in building a tree nursery. Work

parties were scheduled for Saturday mornings, a time arranged by the farmers. After the

initial meeting, discussing the projects goals and objectives, we prepared and cleared the

twelve square meter area proposed to build the tree nursery. This new group of farmers

focused directly on agroforestry projects. This group of farmers is practicing sowing

various types of native/exotic tree species and yerba mate seeds, and raising citrus

rootstock to practice grafting. Some secondary projects include cooking practices and

gardening with several women in the community.

I continued to investigate the farmer successes’ by performing a more formal

series of interviews with these five farmers E, H, I, P, and N who went on to form a

farmer comité focused on building a tree nursery. Over the next 9 months I worked

primarily with these five farmers. These farm households were those I knew the best.

Our trust in each other allowed us to talk openly about the tree-planting projects and

about their farming practices. I was able to use these farmers as key informants. Nichols

(2000) defines a key informant as a person carefully chosen for interview because of their

82

special knowledge of some aspect of the target population. The interviews were semi-

structured and took place in November 1999. Over time I developed a profile of each

family, shown in Table 4.

At one of our meetings I presented the importance of my studies and that I was

interested in visiting each five families to do a series of semi-structured interviews. They

agreed to this and we scheduled a time with each family. These semi-structured

interviews went on over a two-week period in November 1999. I visited with each of the

five families in their houses and conducted an encuesta forestal (Forestry based

interview). All of the interviews were conducted in Guaraní. I continued to work

periodically with the other eleven farmers, but most had lost the majority of their trees

due to uncontrollable factors. Because my Peace Corps service in Puntoclave was ending

soon, I decided to focus my studies on this group of farm families analyzing their

situations to better understand common farming practices and how forestry projects in the

future could be based more on the farmers needs and abilities. I was able to conduct my

research because of the trust I gained from the time involved in organizing the group’s

efforts that focused on the tree nursery.

Puntoclave is a new community with a constantly changing population.

Developing a successful forestry project in this type of community is difficult. My

research objective was to determine which farmers were most likely to be successful and

the data collection was designed to find differences between the successful and

unsuccessful farmers. It became apparent to me farmers who were able to sustain their

families daily needs showed more interest in tree planting focusing on the family’s future

83

well-being. The data I collected is based on my daily observations and project

obligations with each of the farmers.

Table 4: Summary of information on key informants

Farmer # of Family Years lived Water # of Soil ID members in area source Hectares condition 14 8 well 5 no slope E fertile burns 3 10 well 1600 m^2 rents property to cultivate, as well as father H in law lends him available space in the fields burns 10 8 well 3 poor second one never rests always in I culitivation little slope

don't burn direct seeding 9 19 well 11 fertile moved to front of now have erosion due P lot 4 years ago pump in well to sloping and with new land in rest tree nursery burn and plow 4 10 well 24 ha in total Still fertile as family 2 times 2 lots of 12 mostly wife as a child with dried up about 200m pasture land N parents moved here apart to graze the cows 10 ha burns and

plows when necessary

84

Table 4: continued Summary of information on key informants

Farmer Crops Animals/ Honey Land Forest ID cultivated Livestock Bees title condition 4 1/2 ha chickens no no Degraded 1/2 ha soy (eggs and meat) lost in 2000 to rice horse (worker) fire from peanuts dog (safety) neighboring plot E beans pig (meat) corn mandioca sweet potatoe green pepper tomatoe onion (bulb and leaf) sugar cane melons 2 ha chickens no Document N/A beans (eggs and meat) /contract H corn turkeys (meat) with owner cotton dog (safety) tobacco 2 1/2 ha chickens Had bees no Degraded vegetables (eggs and meat) 2 boxes purchased 1/2 ha that cabbage pigs (meat and sale) 11 liters from was lost to fire carrots horse (worker) 6 consump. neighbor from neighbors field peppers dog (safety) 5 sale I (green and red) cat (rodent control) tomatoes mandioca corn beans peanuts Tabacco cotton garlic grass sugar cane pumpkins sweet potatoes

85

Table 4: continued Summary of information on key informants Farmer Crops Animals/ Honey Land Forest

ID cultivated Livestock Bees title condition 4 ha chickens no no 2 ha beans (meat and eggs) Semi degraded corn pigs (for sale in Villa) still merchantable soy cows timbers mandioca (milk and cheese) logs on propertyP peanuts 5 liters per day

melons horses (workers) (annual) geese sandia dog (safety) sweet cat (rodent control) pumpkin ducks sweet potatoe 1 1/2 ha chickens no Yes for one 12 ha corn (eggs, meat, sale) 12 ha block degraded forest mandioca pigs (sale and meat) not with reeped of mainly cows house on it all valuable N for animal (milk and cheese) In wives' trees consumption horse (worker) name except firewood

and dog (safety) the other is some home being paid in quotes

86

Table 4: continued Summary of information on key informants

Farmer Fruit Home Other Yerba Petit ID component garden trees mate Grain orange 8m X 10m Left in field want to 1 time/year mandarin lettuce as natural plant 600 kilos of grapefruit cabbage regeneration leaf returns lemon carrots Agroforestry 50,000 Gs E Mango onions system (US$ 14.30) mamon tomatoe Banana trees Pineapple medicinal plants avacado herbs sour orange green peppers guayaba mandarin Had l year prior around house want to plant - mango H pineapple guayaba orange orange 10m X 12m Agroforestry 150 plants Price mandarin tomatoe systems in production negociated lemon pepper (green) yerba and trees self sufficient before sale mango cabbage Paraiso and for home on average mamon lettuce various crops consumption 70 plants I Banana herbs mandioca and some left yields about guayaba cilantro corn for sale 25,000 Gs sour orange rosemary around house 2,000 Gs (US$ 7.20) arati ku parsley ornimentals per kilo nispero basil Left in field as garlic natural regen. chard beets aloe medicinal plants yerba mate

87

Table 4: continued Summary of information on key informants Farmer Fruit Home Other Yerba Petit

ID component garden trees mate Grain orange 15m X 15m left in field 10 plants Small mandarin lettuce example has producing but plantation grapefruit tomatoes one of a kind not managing on lemon green pepper species that and utilizing property mango herbs is endangered for home 500 kilos mamon medicinal plants Peroba consumption renders P Banana mother tree Eventually one liter pineapple Around house wants for of essence guayaba as wood lot home peach consumption avacado 50 juvenal sour orange plants orange 4m squared left in field no yes mandarin herbs as traditional depends lemon green peppers practice allows other mamon tomatoes community Banana members to N guayaba cut trees

peach with a cost avacado sour orange arati ku

88

Table 4: continued Summary of information on key informants Farmer Abonos Energy El

ID verdes Source Futuro no open fire Family will carry on with the farm 2000 they are traditional They will be lacking enough E planting gmcc brick land for the families members with new volun. oven

- open fire Buy property gas stove Family will carry on with the farm H Want their child to have a good education and able to find

other work For their child any improvements done Experimented Fogon Reforestation but no and brick enrichment cultivation traditional soil conservation that after one oven Determination to take care I planting the of property and children one

production was day will eventually take over the family farm. better compared to nothing no Fogon Lacking sufficient amount of 2000 conserves on hectares for the family to live off of. with firewood They would like to restore new volunteer traditional (conserve) the 2 ha of degraded oven forest into a reserve for the family to enjoy and use. P The younger family members are going further with their educations Very active family, everyone plays their role in the daily routine. Also, very active in community events and commissions (members football, farmers, womens) no fogon Very much business oriented, one N conserves of the more wealthy families in town. on firewood Easy to gain from someones ignorance. traditional oven Own kiosk with higher prices but steady flow of traffic and more of a variety of goods for sale.

89

Chapter Five

Results and Discussion

The Successful Farmer in Puntoclave

Forestry projects contain risk and uncertainty because of the long-term investment

involved. Trees require more care, take-up available planting space and hinder traditional

farming practices. Small farmers anywhere are faced with factors that affect the ability to

control the sustainability of any project. It became apparent to me successful farmers,

first, sustain their families short-term needs; second, showed interest in trying new

approaches to improve their situations. Clearly, the elements of a farmer’s success are

portrayed in their daily activities. In this chapter I will discuss the key characteristics of

successful farmers, supporting my argument with data I collected while in Puntoclave.

First, farmers who have successful agroforestry plantings are secure with their

land holdings or tenure. Second, many traditional farming practices are labor-intensive,

not sustainable, and usually done on a larger scale than planting trees. Therefore,

farming practices that are sustainable enough to fulfill the daily needs of a family will

achieve success for farmers. Thirdly, farmers are dependent on what they produce

through short-term investments (e.g. food crop inputs) having an immediate return (e.g.

family sustenance and money) that, in turn establish the family’s ability to sustain their

short-term needs. Therefore, family sustainability is another element of success.

My fourth characteristic is based on seven farmers who have established

innovative systems based on their needs. Three farmers made the decision to conserve

their small parcels of forest for various reasons. I argue that these farmers are successful

having implemented the projects. The fifth characteristic is their relationship to the past

90

history of outside assistance in the area. I feel very strongly that the success of some of

these farmers was due to a certain amount of outside assistance. Without the presence of

the FMB and their donation these tree projects would not exist. Some farmers have never

worked with outside assistance and are successful on their own, but this is less likely.

These five characteristics: secure land holdings or tenure, farming practices that

fulfill daily needs, family sustainability, established innovative systems, and outside

assistance are common elements that constitute farmers’ success with forestry projects.

They are also elements that farmers who are secure in their day to day existence can

control. However, there are some factors which farmers cannot control. It became clear

what the uncontrollable factors were from the surveys done on early and late tree survival

counts. They are climate, timing of out-planting, actual tree condition, fire, insect

damage and farmer apprehension. The groundwork involved in this forestry project was

not well planned by the NGO in regard to the season and time of year and as a result

farmers were faced with more factors than usual beyond their control.

Farmers who show they are secure with their land holdings or tenure, apply

farming practices that are sustainable enough to fulfill their daily needs, sustain their

family, established agroforestry systems, and access to outside assistance are

characteristics of successful farmers.

Secure Land holdings or Tenure

Ownership of land title is not common in Puntoclave. One has to formally

register their claim to the local IBR office, in this case an office 18 km away and only

open during morning hours. Once the farmer has registered a claim a contract is drawn

91

up defining the purchase agreement, commonly containing a monthly payment. Some

property titles held by the IBR have been taken away on rare occasions for delinquency

on payments (Personal contact with an IBR worker). Mostly, farmers are safe because

the majority of the communities that were platted by the IBR for distribution were just for

that land distribution. Large private owners face campesino movements and landless

peoples, but are able to take action to ward off any unwanted guests. Most larger private

landowners have burnt down a good portion of their forest cover for pasture land and to

ward off unwanted guests. The area is mainly dependent on its small-scale agriculture as

do the towns people. The area is remote and local government is not concerned about

taking action to fine farmers having registered claims and only minimal payments.

Some farmers have registered their claims by paying an initial quota but have not

continued to pay it monthly because of the cost involved in traveling back and forth to the

closest IBR office. My data on the sixteen farmers show farmers N and P hold full title

to their land. Most farmers have bypassed the IBR because of these costs involved.

Granted not all have bypassed the IBR and they continue to pay monthly quotas towards

the purchase of land in order to obtain their official title. Most farmers are squatters

thereby possessing the rights to land by living on and working the land. Some have

purchased small tracts of the land through special land contracts directly with the farmer

from whom they are purchasing the plot. The larger family clans often break up their

properties amongst family members. Between 1972 and 1982, the population in frontier

areas of eastern Paraguay more than doubled. New settlers were attracted by fertile land

and by connection with established family and friends (Reed 1995). The inefficiency of

the government’s land reform system forced farmers to take things into their own hands.

92

These settlers planted fields and built houses and only then did they solicit land titles

from IBR (Reed 1995).

On average farmers interviewed have lived in Puntoclave for 10 or more years

and are secure with their land holdings or formal tenure. Puntoclave, settled in 1978, is a

fairly new community with a constantly changing population. Some project participants

from the original sixteen have since moved on to other areas. However, my five key

informants are still living in Puntoclave. Sellers (1977) presents the idea that where

peasants lack secure tenure they may be discouraged from planting trees. It is not

because these farmers do not hold formal tenure to their property but the uncertainty of

the long-term investment involved in forestry project. It could also be said that a farmer

who possesses formal tenure is more likely to plant trees considering his/her long-term

investment. During follow-up visits I learned that formal tenure was just one way of

showing ownership. Those who are squatting on their properties have generated their

own sense of ownership. Therefore, not having formal tenure did not pose a threat to

these specific farmers. The farmer’s willingness to plant trees showed me they were

secure with their land holdings whether or not they had formal tenure or were squatting

on the land. They set aside areas to experiment with tree-plantings even if they did not

have formal tenure.

Family Sustainability

Raintree (1991) mentions “In practice, the social and economic well being of

farmers and their families will nearly always determine whether or not any particular

agroforestry practice is adopted”. A family’s sustainability is determined by meeting the

93

family’s short-term needs. I describe these short-term inputs from the farmer’s growing

sufficient food crops to provide their family’s with general health and well-being, owning

livestock, wealth status and education.

In subsistence farming the amount of land area and its quality are critical to the

family’s survival. It determines the availability of food and production potential to

generate income for the family to be able to supplement. Farmers who grow sufficient

food crops provide their families with general health and well-being. The most common

grown subsistence crops in Puntoclave were soybeans, rice, beans, corn, mandioca,

peanuts, sugar cane, and sweet potatoes. Once the family is taken care of the extra

production is used as a cash crop. Outside of the chacra, home gardening and knowledge

of medicinal plants prove to be a big part of a campesino’s general health and nutrition.

There is a growing social consensus on the health and economic benefits of gardens.

Home gardens aid farmers in supplementing their basic diet consisting of mostly protein

and starch. Farmers E, I, N, and P have home gardens that provide their family’s with

vitamins necessary to sustain general good health. The most common vegetables grown

are lettuce, cabbage, green peppers, carrots, tomatoes, onions and garlic. Unfortunately,

many of the gardens are tended only during the cooler months, leading to seasonal

differences in vegetable consumption. It is also very common for these and other farmers

to grow medicinal plants for homemade remedies and herbs for cooking in their gardens.

The community has an abundance of fruit trees dispersed throughout their properties.

The most common fruit species are oranges, mandarins, grapefruit, mango, bananas,

pineapple, guava and mammon. Some families even had an occasional avocado tree and

native fruit trees growing around the house. Vegetables and fruit have vital vitamins

94

needed to sustain a constant physical energy or nurture a growing child who needs certain

vitamins for healthy growth. Home gardening and fruit tree production show the family’s

permanence invested in building a garden. It also reinforces their strong attitude toward

family sustenance.

With the exception of a few school teachers everyone living in the community

earns their living from small-scale agriculture. The most common cash crops grown by

the community are cotton and tobacco. Earnings from the cash crops, mainly tobacco

and cotton, have been minimal or non-existent over the past 10 years causing anxiety.

The farmer has no option but to sell to the few buyers who come into the area. Travel or

transportation costs are marketing obstacles for small farmers. Those who don’t have a

means of transportation risk receiving low prices due to market distance and the small

quantities of farm products they sell. During the rainy season roads are frequently

impassable for larger trucks. Farmers do not have a reliable method to get their products

to the market.

Many farmers have turned to large scale planting of mandioca and corn in hopes

of selling the surplus. Other sources of family income are from mandioca starch

operations and selling sour orange leaves to the local distillery for petit grain essencia. A

few people produce vegetables, straw grass, honey, molasses and yerba mate on a small

scale for market in Oga’i. Other sources of income include six local kiosks otherwise

known as almacénes that are marginally profitable, selling timber, and butchering

domestic animals. Additionally, many young men and women have moved to the city

from where they send money back.

95

All my key informants owned livestock. Chickens were the most common

domestic animal owned by small farmers. Chickens provide the family with eggs and

meat. Some farmers raise enough chickens to sell their eggs and an occasional bird for

profit. A good healthy chicken earns 7,000-10,000 Gs, US$1=3,500 Gs. Other common

livestock were pigs, cows, and horses. Farmers I and P own a horse and cart which gave

them the mobility to transport themselves to the nearest towns to sell farm products such

as livestock, mandioca and vegetables. Owning livestock is a sign of security for the

farmer because it provides the family with inputs like dairy products, meat and financial

stability in case of emergencies commonly related to health or accidents. From personal

observation I learned two of my key informants relied on selling livestock to meet

medical expense problems.

Wealth is directly related to family sustainability. There are families that have

only the bare essentials to work with, a hoe and machete. Paraguayans often refer to poor

families by the meals they served. Families serving cooked beans more than twice a

week are seen as poor by their peers. For some families beans are the only reliable

family provisions. None of the sixteen farmers were poor by their own standards.

Other wealth indicators are a well-kept yard, transportation in the form of a horse

or oxen and wooden cart, a satellite dish, television, refrigerator, motorcycle, livestock,

and/or an almacén. All of the farmers who participated in the tree-planting project were

better off than the poorest family of the community and had some combination of these

indicators.

Better education can generate extra income for families that help the family’s

sustainability. Some my informant’s children have acquired teaching, electrical and

96

tailoring skills. It is common for families to have children working in the capital city

who send money home when they can. Basic education is compulsory to age fourteen or

the completion of six-year primary level education. A child who completes the basic

education is more likely to have better Spanish skills. Spanish is the country’s second

official language and therefore an important skill. Unfortunately, the schools are

ineffective and many of the students complete their six years without basic literacy or

mathematical skills. Very few families can afford to send their older children to school

beyond the sixth year because of the costs of uniforms, school materials and the distance

needed to travel to the closest secondary school in the area. In fact some families can’t

even afford to send their children to primary school for their basic education because of

the costs involved in school materials and uniforms. The cost of living has risen from the

country’s unstable economy and earnings from cash crops have been minimal for the last

10 years which does not leave much for the family to purchase extra items like school

materials. Unfortunately, most rural Paraguayans don’t value basic education. Most

families depend on their children for labor on the family’s farm and to watch the younger

children. The smaller families depend more on their children for farm labor and the

larger families have enough labor that they need someone to watch the children while

everyone is working. The family sizes I worked with were variable and covered a wide

range of families in Puntoclave. The smaller farmers out of the sixteen farmer with a

family size of four, one person has to stay home and cook for everyone and so that leaves

possibly three hands depending on the family members ages.

97

Traditional Farming Practices

Implementing farming techniques like planning and diversification can

eventually lead the farmer away from some traditional farming techniques like burning

and plowing which are unsustainable and destructive. A well-planned, diverse and

complex system protects or helps the farmer to mitigate the impact of climatic disasters.

For example Green Cover Crops (GCC) ward off soil erosion, hold in moisture and add

nutrients back to the soil that have been previously depleted.

My key informants were relatively young Paraguayans when they or their families

migrated from the central departments joining others in “the march to the east” during the

‘Strossner years’. They recall the immense forests and productivity of new fertile soils.

They were able to make ends meet from cash crop returns. Traditional farming practice

techniques are passed down from their forefathers since time immemorial. Bound so

closely to the family and culture it is hard to forego such practices as burning and

improper plowing.

The extensive forests of eastern Paraguay have been a source of essentially free

products and services that were considered inexhaustible by many Paraguayans (Grauel

1994). This mentality still exists amongst some farmers who have small forest patches.

Unsustainable land use practices cause environmental degradation and decrease

forest cover. Years of clearing forested areas for cultivation through migratory

agriculture techniques are common farming practices amongst small farmers. Soils are at

their richest when accompanied with forest cover. Tropical soils are dependent on

vegetative cover for nutrients. Once its nutrient source is removed it is necessary to

maintain soil productivity by adding organic material. Soil conditions vary from farm to

98

farm. Smaller land holders are at risk of depleting their soils to the point of exhaustion.

For example Farmer I’s three hectares were in constant use, with no organic inputs or

time for recuperation. This farmer has moved away from traditional farming practice

techniques like burning and plowing because of the drastic effects on his soil

productivity. His family depends on the revenue generated by the way they farm. They

must control farming practices to increase soil productivity. “The most appropriate and

successful way to raise productivity is through improvements in crop husbandry: better

weeding, better plant-configuration, etc. Next is the use of better planting material, better

soil fertility management, and better timing of operations ” (Beets 1990).

Farmers E, H, N, and P use traditional farming techniques like burning and

improper plowing and are aware of lower soil productivity to support even common food

crops. I discussed with farmer E why farmers burn their fields knowing it eventually

leads to decreased soil productivity. His response was that manual labor was involved in

preparing fields by hand. Burning the chacra is simply easier and faster than hoeing it by

hand. This same farmer even mentioned he was afraid to plant trees because of how little

land he owned. Trees take up available space and hinder the cultivation of subsistence

and cash crops. With most traditional farming methods, trees get in the way when

plowing. A burn will kill almost all of the trees.

A farmer short of manual labor is likely to resort to traditional farming practice

techniques like burning to prepare for subsistence or cash crop cultivation. The average

family size of my informants is 5-6 persons per household and their family labor force 3-

4 persons per household. It is also common for smaller families to hire field hands to

make up for their labor shortages. All my key informants depend on their family

99

members to work in the fields. I believe a larger family may steer away from traditional

farming practice techniques like burning if they were introduced to different farming

techniques other than traditional ones. With enough family labor to complete their daily

farming tasks, they could easily experiment with small projects.

Farmers in the area are relatively inexperienced with forestry projects other than

some traditional farming techniques which are agroforestry systems. Farmers may leave

certain valuable trees in their chacra. I noticed one key informant had a single mature

tree in his chacra. I asked him what kind of tree it was and he told me Peroba

(Aspidosperma polyneuron). He was proud of it because today it is one of Paraguay’s

threatened tree species. I think it is clear to state farmers that still use unsustainable

farming techniques like burning are affecting their future production levels. Forestry

projects can provide them with many of the resources they so depend on while actually

lessening the work load in the field. After initial establishment trees may be less work

then traditional agriculture crops. Very few farmers have forested land. Those that do

have a general understanding of the security it can offer the family and their children’s

future. Good or bad, they have been living and farming the same way for generations.

Established Innovative Systems

As elsewhere in Paraguay, the natural forest and soil resources are being used

unsustainably. All my key informants depend on their forest remnants to provide them

with firewood, medicinal plants and construction materials in a way that is sustainable to

the farmers changing needs. Rural peoples continue to use their forest patches for food,

100

fuel, medicine, material for housing construction and other subsistence needs as well as

for items important in local trade. (Robinson 1996).

Fortunately, all of my key informants still have small tracts of forested land to

draw from. Other families have depleted their resources and have to look elsewhere for

firewood most times paying a cost. A tree requires more attention and is a long-term

investment for the farmers future well-being.

Farmers are aware they have the control to plant certain tree species with faster

growth rates that can provide the family’s solution to diminishing wood resources.

Farmers C and E both have transplanted natural regeneration in their open fields, putting

a value to those trees for the future of the family. They both chose their species

accordingly to their value input to their chacras. The country’s shifting economy has

increased the cost of living and put pressure on small farmers to find alternative methods

of supporting their families. Established agroforesty systems will provide farmers with a

constant source of firewood if they continue to manage it with this goal in mind.

Farmer E has an established agroforestry system of Paraiso gigante inter-mixed

with annual crops of corn and beans and, on his own accord, has transplanted some

natural regeneration in their chacra. This particular key informant is successful and the

farmer with the highest survival of trees. Out of the 400 Paraiso gigante they planted

312 trees that survived. This established system covers about one quarter of a hectare. In

eight to ten years this farmer will have the option to harvest merchantable logs and use

the rest for firewood or building materials.

Farmer P has established a woodlot to provide the household with a constant

supply of firewood closer to the house. Although they lost the majority of trees in an

101

open field experiment due to the timing of out- planting, drought conditions and insect

damage they still managed to succeed. Instead of focusing on their lost trees they now

focus on their established woodlot system and wonder what they can do next. It is this

farmers’ dedication to bettering their surroundings that make them successful.

These families owe a part of their success to the FMB for providing the

community with trees to plant. I believe the relationship between outside assistance and

rural farmers is beneficial.

Outside Assistance

Project implementation, outside funding, dependency and farmer fatalism can all

result from outside assistance (Beets 1990). In Guarani there is a saying that describes

fatalism. “Iricorâ, iricopama; isantorâ, isantopama.” He who is going to be rich is

already rich; he who is going to be holy is already holy. Fatalism is the belief that

nothing can be done to improve one’s holdings in life. One is destined to be poor, to be

less than good. The adoption of a new practice requires that the farmers have hope that

life’s situation can be improved and is willing to work toward it. As an extensionist, keep

in mind that any time an attempted project fails it serves to reinforce fatalism, at times

making it even more difficult to convince the farmers to try something new (Peace Corps

1991).

If there is a history of paternalism in an area, it will be difficult to motivate the

audience into taking responsibility of their own well-being. They will expect the

extensionist to do everything for them, or at least make their decisions. An extensionist

therefore needs to be aware of this past history and not fall into this trap. If farmers in

102

general are simply recipients, or merely going along with the extensionist’s ideas, then

there will be no sincere commitment to the project and it will eventually fail (Peace

Corps 1991).

The FMB has been doing a variety of projects in Puntoclave. In combating illegal

hunting and other pressures on the region’s natural resources the FMB has adopted an

integrated approach of community development in the area. Unfortunately, project

failures were a common trend and people have resorted to grumbling about all outside

organizations, from government ministries to NGO’s in the area. Some of the past

projects attempted by these groups have been chicken rearing, vegetable production, and

a yerba mate nursery. Some outside organizations were unreliable and it was hardly

worth the effort to participate in the projects (personal contact). However, the NGOs are

severely understaffed, for example the FMB has currently four extensionists who

working in over twenty communities and as a result extensionists have haphazard

schedules. I was only able to visit and understand just a small fraction of the community

while I lived in Puntoclave. So, it is not entirely the fault of infrequent visits but literally

paucity of extensionists in the field. These agents deal with obstacles too, and so the

FMB has been working to set up and legitimize a series of farmers’ comités. Some have

proven more viable than others, and progress is inconsistent.

This community is dependent on the FMB to bring in project supplies and,

therefore, is demanding of the extension agents. They may promise things hoping to

motivate farmers and fulfill their needs. The extensionist therefore, needs to be realistic

about project planning. Other community interaction was from MAG with random visits

to farmers in Puntoclave, though they pass through Puntoclave without stopping to get to

103

another community. Farmers rely on MAG for cottonseed, chemical pesticides,

agricultural credit, and other various agricultural crop seeds.

At times uncertainty, resistance, apprehension, and fatalism amongst the farmers

results from failed projects once supported by outside assistance. Many projects fail

because they are poorly organized and because of the differences amongst the community

members. Agencies cycle extension agents through the community. Most extension

agents don’t have enough time to understand the community’s infrastructure and farmers

needs.

The working relationship with the FMB and Puntoclave is a fundamental part of

the area’s conservation efforts. These years of outside assistance with the FMB and

minimal government assistance from MAG have had a definite effect on the people’s

attitude. Overall the actual tree-planting project was a failure when looking at the late

survival counts. The total number of trees given was 3322. Final count of surviving trees

was 992, a survival percentage of 29.8 %. One of the goals of the FMB was to reforest

20 hectares in the region. Because the original project included four different

communities the 20 hectares was broken down into five hectares per community. I

estimated, an average tree density for each species from two sources: Brack et al. 1993

and Peace Corps Paraguay 1991. Dividing the actual number of trees planted by an

average tree density of 600 trees/ha gave me an estimation of the number of hectares

covered by the project. The projected number of hectares in reforestation in Puntoclave is

1.65 hectares.

104

These five characteristics: secure land holdings or tenure, farming practices that

fulfill daily needs, family sustainability, established innovative systems, and outside

assistance are common elements that establish farmers’ success with forestry projects.

Uncontrollable Factors

From the summaries of data collected I have shown farmers control certain

aspects of their lives: soil conservation, family sustainability through crop production and

general family well-being, establishment of innovative projects, and accepting outside

assistance to improve their situations. Some farmers, such as B, C, H, I, J, M and N have

all the key characteristics required to succeed in the tree-planting project, yet failed to

generate successful woodlots. Unfortunately there are factors, which at least initially,

seem beyond the control of the farmer.

The uncontrollable factors influencing farmers were climate, timing of out-

planting, actual tree condition, fire, insect damage and farmer apprehension. Of course,

farmers have control over certain factors that affect tree survival as mentioned in the

elements of success, but for many the uncontrollable factors outweighed them.

Unfortunately, in this case the trees arrived in the height of summer, temperatures

reaching up to 40º C and few scattered rains. All farmers knew the timing of the project

with drought like conditions would cause tree mortality. According to a general

agricultural calendar (Appendix G), the best season to out-plant is from May to July

because of the more frequent rains in March to May increase ground moisture level.

Paraguay has two distinct seasons a year, summer and winter. April and September are

considered transitional months where most of the extreme highs and lows occur, even

105

temperatures below freezing (Kluck 1990). Natural crop destruction from drought, heavy

rains, frosts and insect attacks are beyond the farmers’ control. Farmer H lost all of his

trees because of the extreme climate conditions, and he was somewhat discouraged from

the loss. This farmer owns only 1600 square meters of property. A large tree planting

project is impossible for him and his family. The property issue was not a long-term

obstacle for this particular farmer because he planned to buy his own lot.

The tree seedlings brought to these farmers were in fair condition. On average the

tree seedlings ranged from 25cm to 50 cm in height and from 1cm to 3cm diameter. All

the tree seedlings delivered were purchased from a nearby tree nursery in Tape pyta,

which is about 60 km south. I assume the seedlings were produced from seed and then

put in small plastic bag containers to be transplanted at the time of arrival.

The farmers had no control of the project timing, the trees arrived throughout the

month of February 1999. The farmers’ preparations were limited because they were at

the beginning of cotton harvesting season from February to April. Some of the farmers

schedules did not allow much time for extra activities like tree-planting. Farmers A, C,

F, J, and M did not plant their trees mostly due to the timing of the project. It was a busy

time of the year with daily work responsibilities in the chacra.

Fire is used as a type of field preparation before the transplanting or sowing of

crops and is controlled by the farmers themselves. At this time of the month farmers are

preparing to plant corn and tobacco, which require many labor-intensive man hours to

hoe the land by hand. The fire, once out of control, spreads from a few embers into the

adjacent field. This was beyond the farmers control and unfortunately a majority of the

trees were lost to carelessness. Farmers actually lost complete established systems from

106

uncontrolled fires, a traditional farming practice of many small farmers. Farmer I

established an agroforestry system with Paraiso gigante mixed with annual crops of corn

and mandioca. Unfortunately, this farmer had no control over a neighbor’s fire that got

out of hand and burned all of the trees to the ground. This was theoretically a project

failure, but Paraiso gigante has the ability to coppice, and the trees vigor re-sprouted and

not all trees were lost.

Farmer N’s forest enrichment project was also lost to fire. Even though he lost

his trees he learned from the failure and plans to plant more trees when given the next

opportunity to do so. A good portion of his land is either fallow or degraded forest that

provides them with security for their children’s future. The farmer can choose not to

burn and use alternative methods like direct seeding, no-tillage systems. This is

something an extensionist can promote, helping farmers to understand the options that

exist to improve their situations. These alternative strategies are a characteristic of

successful farmers.

Field inspections done by the farmers and myself determined leaf cutter ants to be

the main pest, especially on the Paraiso gigante, even though its foliage is known to be a

natural repellent to ward off other pests and insects, and Yvyra pyta. Akêkê and Ysaú are

the two types of leaf cutter ants recognized by Paraguayans (Wild 1998). Farmers B, C,

I, N, and P reported serious insect damage as the loss of their trees.

These culprits are known for their ability to defoliate viveros overnight even

entire citrus trees in the matter of a few hours (Wild 1998). Akêkê belongs to the genus

Acromyrmex and Ysaú to the genus Atta. The leaf cutter ants collect leaves and stems to

supply the colonies fungus that digests the tougher parts of the plant feeding the fungus.

107

The ants then eat from the fungus for nutrients. To control leaf cutter ants one must kill

the queen to destroy the colony. Many chemicals can be purchased from the local

agricultural store eighteen kilometers one way, and a costly journey for the farmer. The

cost of the pesticide itself and the cost of transportation to buy the products make it

difficult for farmers to obtain them. These farmers were given two types of pesticides to

aid in the control of the leaf cutter ants. Pesticides were brought out upon farmer’s

requests and given out during extension agent visits and comité meetings. These

chemical solutions are expensive and are health hazards when improperly used.

Infrequent use of the chemicals proved to be unsuccessful and so alternative methods of

control were discussed during gatherings and on individual farmer visits. Discussions

centered on using home-made or natural pesticides as an alternative to chemical

solutions. Because of the magnitude and number of colonies most of our attempts were

only temporarily successful and did not solve the problem of these two ants. The habitat

of the anteater, the leaf cutter ants’ natural predator, has been disturbed. There were no

anteaters in the area. “It is only human-disturbed areas that the ants cease being an

integral part of the forest ecosystem and become a despised plaga on our important

plants” (Wild 1998).

After a long history of seeing projects fail and after years of hearing what they

perceive to be lies, farmers greet every new idea with skepticism. A farmer can easily

mask this skepticism, and will even agree to attempt a project, but have no sincere

commitment to it because they have no faith in the extensionist’s ability or willingness to

see it through a successful conclusion. Farmers A, J, and N agreed to do this forestry

project and weren’t actually going to physically plant the trees. Conformity exists

108

amongst rural peoples in that they are use to living in an environment of consensus where

there is little variation between their individual lifestyles. This provides a certain security

(PC 1991). If a few people begin to practice something different than the norm it

threatens that security. They could eventually abandon the project from outside pressures

even if the practice is to their advantage. An example of this was when Farmer C

confided in me that he did not originally ask for the Paraiso gigante he was given. He

recalls that the trees were just dropped off. He had no prior knowledge of the species and

so they ended up throwing the trees away. The farmers’ apprehension was the demise of

100 young trees. He now admits to having had the time, but was afraid of project failure.

From my experience, the extensionist needs to recognize the farmer’s apprehension and

not assume anything. This is especially true when starting projects in which some of

them might not have had prior experience or knowledge. This was not the only farmer

who did not plant the actual amount of trees they received. Unfortunately, the

extensionist can not always guarantee that all of the farmers will plant and so it is

necessary to have a method of follow-up work with the farmers and their projects. This

monitoring and technical assistance can deter a farmer’s apprehension because now the

extensionist knows they have experience.

I have pointed out what factors were beyond the control of the farmer. These

uncontrollable factors were climatic conditions, tree conditions, timing of the project

implementation, fire, insect damage, and farmer apprehension.

109

Conclusions

Each farm family had an interest in planting trees and have all demonstrated their

willingness to work on various projects. Times can be difficult for families, but because

of the diversity of their crops, assets and landholdings these farmers are determined to

sustain themselves first and then and only then focus on other projects to better their

family’s security. Ultimately, the acceptance of the farmer to maintain established

projects defines a successful project, but it is a combination of these characteristics of

success that truly show a successful farmer. It is apparent to me that these farmers are

successful because they first of all are sustained family units.

110

Chapter Six

Recommendations and Conclusions

Recommendations

In 1899 Lenin described the distinctions amongst different Russian peasant

classes; I too found there to be qualities or “class” distinctions amongst the farmers in

Paraguay. By examining the differences between successful and unsuccessful farmers I

propose a two-tiered approach to working with rural farmers on forestry projects. I

suggest taking this two-tiered approach when developing forestry projects in remote areas

because it focuses on the farmers needs and not the extensionists. A farmer that has one

or more of the five characteristics I have outlined is more likely to succeed because they

have decreased their chances of risk involved in the implementation of any given project.

When developing forestry projects it is important to understand the local resources

available to the farmer. A farmer who doesn’t meet any of the characteristics outlined is

more likely to need technical assistance in regards to the basic agriculture, secure tenure

and family’s subsistence before they can devote time to plant trees. Therefore, the

extensionist by identifying the outlined characteristics can work within the different

socioeconomic groups more effectively.

It is from these studies I am able to compare the relevancy of a two-tiered

approach when developing forest projects in remote areas. From this project I wanted to

generate to a model or guide for future extension agents pointing out key characteristics

of farmers that show their successes. I found farmers to be secure with their land

holdings or tenure, use farming practices that fulfill daily needs, have obtained family

sustainability, established innovative systems, and accept outside assistance are common

111

elements for farmers to have a better chance of success participating in forestry projects.

Even if a farmer has any combination of the five or all the characteristics does not

guarantee success. As with every development project there are certain factors beyond

the project’s control. I found the most uncontrollable factors to be climate conditions,

tree conditions, the timing of the project implementation, fire, insect damage, and farmer

apprehension.

I draw from my own experiences as well as research on similar forestry and

agriculture projects done with other small farmers on a global scale. This broad spectrum

of studies I chose identifies similar approaches and recommendations based on studies

with small farmers who face similar local and national constraints. However, this is only

a guide, not a recipe. I address the importance for the organization of local communities

and groups as well as the utilization of the knowledge found within this area. Based on

my experiences and these similar research studies I am able to make several

recommendations towards the future implementation of forestry projects in remote areas

of eastern Paraguay.

• The FMB must promote working with groups on real goal oriented projects that

continue to amplify the elements of success described in this paper and promote

information exchanging amongst groups and their members.

• Projects should follow the farmers’ available time by respecting a general

agricultural calendar when doing project implementation.

• Extensionists should have a general knowledge of the farmer’s local resources

and then generate projects based on the farmers’ needs and not their own.

112

• Using this two-tiered approach extensionists can work within the different farmer

classes more effectively.

• Using participatory tools like farmer excursions let farmers see existing forestry

and agricultural projects so that the farmers can teach themselves through their

own success and failures.

Conclusions

Most times farmers are put in a class as if they are equal. I found in my study that

there were different socioeconomic groups and the extensionist should familiarize

themselves with these distinct groups in order to work more efficiently within these

groups. White and Jickling (1995), Bunch and Lopez (1995), Baumer (1989) and Carter

et al.(1995) found socioeconomic groups to differ in their acceptance levels of projects.

Each of these researchers identifies throughout their studies the distinctions of different

farmer groups and directs their focuses on their characteristics. White and Jickling

(1995) main focus is on information transfer to increase the innovative and management

capacity of peasant groups and to enhance their voice in the policy-making process.

Class distinctions are drawn and assessed for their adoption levels based on impact. It is

commonly believed that wealthier farmers adopt new technologies faster and profit more

from agricultural development efforts than poorer farmers but in this case small farmers

have adopted the technologies faster and profited more than the wealthier farmers. Still

different social characteristics were important. Most technologies presently promoted in

developing countries require capital, literacy, and access to markets, which favor the

wealthy. Studies that support the thesis of wealthier farmers innovating more are based

113

on capital-intensive inputs, while most studies that used neutral technologies conclude

that all socioeconomic groups are equally innovative (Bunch and Lopez 1995). Baumer

(1989) suggests that agroforestry isn’t the answer in many cases and resort back to the

different classes of peasants to identify what problems exist, leaving it to the extensionist

to act on the differences associated with socioeconomic groups within study sites. Carter

et al. (1995) base their studies on the idea that there are different modes of local people’s

participation further identified by Cornwall (1995). People of different cultural

backgrounds, exposure to formal education and experiences are more likely to vary in the

ease or difficulty in understanding and implementing forest resource assessments (Carter

et al. 1995). In general, their results are similar to my results.

Land tenure issues are a common occurrence in research studies of small farmers

in the tropical world. Owusu (1993) and Raintree (1986) showed land tenure constraints

to be apparent in their studies and evaluate accordingly. Owusu study is based on two

distinct groups of farmers, tenant and landowners. The population of tenant farmers was

greater than land owners and creates ownership constraints on tenants whose land owners

did not want them to make improvements or who after the improvements reclaimed the

land for themselves. “We have learned that land tenure and land security are crucial

issues for the success of any agroforestry or tree-planting project” (Owusu 1993).

Raintree’s study focused on agroforestry and land tenure and states that tenure posses

constraints to the realization of the potential ecological and socio-economic benefits of

agroforestry in many land-use systems. Also, agroforestry may offer ways of resolving

or mitigating some existing tenure problems. In the increasing effort to promote

sustainable development, it should be noted that the realistic step is security with a strong

114

agricultural base. If the farmer is secure with their current tenure they are more likely to

innovate. “Whether on marginal or high potential lands, diversified agroforestry systems

may be the most appropriate form of land use where land tenure constraints, lack of

marketing infrastructure or an unfavorable political economy make it imperative for risk-

reducing smallholders to try to satisfy most of their basic needs directly from the land

resources under their control” (Lundgren and Raintree (1983) as cited in Raintree

(1985)).

Several of these studies show the risks involved for farmers in applying

innovative techniques. Hammer (1986), Raintree (1986), Pégorié (1990) and Owusu

(1993) identify with constraints faced by farmers and focus their results on identifying

with the needs first. Hammer (1986) looks at the relevancy of traditional patterns of land

allocation. He formulates an equation based on farmer’s constraints to void some of the

risks farmers must take when implementing projects. By eliminating some of the

farmer’s risk decisions can be made to improve current problem situations. Through a

similar rationalization he is able to derive approaches applicable to the farmer’s

traditional pattern of land allocation. Although I don’t derive specific technologies that

can eliminate farmers’ constraints, I clearly state the importance of specific farmer

characteristics to extensionists, which can enable them to better relate projects according

to the farmers traditional systems. Raintree (1986) in his study looks at a more positive

approach to agroforestry projects that can be possible solutions to the many constraints

faced by farmers. Intensive agroforestry systems are most commonly found in areas with

a long history of population pressure, which indicates their general efficiency as a land

use system (Raintree 1986). The farmers need to see relevance in adopting agroforestry

115

technologies that lead to social change. The extensionist can use participatory tools like

excursions taking farmers to local areas with experimental plots or existing innovative

systems. Pégorié (1990) takes into consideration the tangible and intangible factors to

design agroforestry technologies focused on benefits/(cost + risk) ratios for each different

agroforestry technique and reducing the length of establishment and development phase

to produce anticipated benefits sooner. Pégorié uses a similar methodology based on

participant observation and concludes that “Trees entail costs, in land, labor and cash, but

they provide products and services for the farm household”. Owusu (1993) focuses more

on the local level of added value to existing systems by adding trees. If the farmer can

see direct benefits of implementing innovative technologies through experimentation they

are more likely to implement. Owusu also points out that agroforestry is just one solution

to apparent constraints faced by farmers. Baumer (1989) also states that this may not be

the answer to environmental problems in fact some trees can create problems. The

overall big picture should be kept in mind when developing agricultural projects and that

identifying everything the farmer does as an integral part of their well-being. For

example, it is important for the extensionist to have an understanding of the farmer’s

general agricultural calendar to know when farmers have time for forestry projects.

These studies show that a farmer may be ready to plant trees but the extensionist

needs to have a concise understanding of complex systems and possible approach

methods that are derived from the farmers current needs. Poor planning, poor species

selection and poor management can lead to other problems the farmers may not be able to

control as in this case. Focusing on the farmer’s needs and innovative technologies based

on a constantly changing environment encompasses a broad spectrum of farmers who

116

might be interested in participating in agriculture or forestry projects. I also focus on

similar factors associated with farmers in remote areas related to their current situations.

By focusing on simplistic technologies Bunch and Lopez (1995) bring out the

importance of development programs where villagers are given strong motivation to

innovate. Simple appropriate technologies let the farmer innovate and modify

recommended technologies according to their current needs. They found most of all

maintaining flexibility in technological recommendations by not offering the farmer the

only solution to a problem but these suggestions left room for the farmer to experiment

and make the technology theirs. Owusu, Raintree, and White and Jickling too find that

simplicity was the key to engaging the farmers in innovative technology. These studies

varied in the context of project implementation from revising traditional indigenous

techniques to working with farmers on experimental farms and the ability to asses

established projects and their importance to the daily lives of farmers.

Bernadas (1991) was able to take his study several steps further because of the

outside assistance of funding and the extended time frame. He mentions avoiding

dependency on outside assistance enabled these farmers to be more successful with self-

generated innovation. Bernadas’ study was extensive work over a long time frame in

close collaboration with the farmers in the area to understand their problems. My study

was made possible by the donation from the FMB and their previous efforts in

Puntoclave.

Every study is not without factors that are beyond the control of the scientists and

farmers. I pointed out several uncontrollable factors involved in my study as do Bunch

and Lopez. “It is more likely that most of the technologies have fallen by the wayside

117

because of changing circumstances, such as emerging markets, disease and insect pests,

land tenure, soil fertility and microtopography, labor availability and costs, and the

adoption of new technologies, have reduced or eliminated their usefulness” (Bunch and

Lopez 1995).

A young Paraguayan woman, while on an excursion, said to me “Ver para Creer”.

This is the same as our statement ‘Seeing is Believing’. Through a two-tiered approach

like this an extensionist can help farmers understand the options that exist to improve

their situations.

118

Literature Cited

• Beets, Willem C. 1990. Raising and Sustaining Productivity of small holder Farming systems in the Tropics. Ed. 3. AgBe Publishing, Holland. 738pp.

• Bernadas, C.N., Jr. 1991. Lessons in upland farmer participation: the case of

enriched fallows in Jaro, Leyte, Phillipines. Forest Trees and People Newsletter 14:10-13.

• Bernard, H. Russel. 1995. Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and

quantative approaches (2nd Edition). AltaMira Press. Walnut Creek, CA. 585pp.

• Background Notes. 1999. Paraguay. U.S. Department of State web site accessed on 1/29/01. www.state.gov/www/background_notes/paraguay_0799_bgn.html.

• Baumer, Michel. 1989. Trees-let’s take a balanced view. Agroforestry Today

1(4): 16-17.

• Brack, Willibaldo and Weik, Jörg H. 1993. El Bosque Nativo del Paraguay: Riqueza subestimada. Proyecto de Planificación del Uso de la Tierra. Serie No. 15. DPG/MAG-GTZ. Asunción, Paraguay. 327pp.

• Bray, D.B. 1991. Defiance and the search for sustainable small farmer

organizations: a Paraguayan case study and research agenda. Human Organization. 50(2): 125-135.

• Bruce et al. 1985. Cited in Raintree, John B. (ed.) 1985. Land, Trees and

Tenure: Proceedings of an International Workshop on Tenure Issues in Agroforestry. Nairobi, May 27-31, 1985. ICRAF and the Land Tenure Center Nairobi and Madison, 1987. 412pp.

• Bunch, R., and G. Lopez. 1995. Soil recuperation in central America: sustaining

innovation after intervention. Gatekeeper series No. 55. International Institute for Environment and Development. London, 16pp.

• Carter et al. 1995. Local people’s participation in forest resource assessment:

and analysis of recent experience, with case studies from Indonesia and Mexico. Commonwealth Forestry Review. 74(4): 333-342.

• EIU. 1995-96. Paraguay Country Profile. The Economist Intelligence Unit

Limited. 20pp.

• Evans, Patrick T. 1994. Agroforestry in Paraguay: Getting a system adopted takes skill and planning, while supporting it afterwards requires continuous agency interaction or a simplar support network. Women in Natural Resources, Vol. 9 Nov. 2. 29-34.

119

• Glas, Mariecke van der. 1996. Farmers’ responses to soil degradation in areas of

agricultural colonization: comparisons between Paraguay and Brazil. Geographical studies of development and resource use (SGO).

• Glastra, R. 1999. Cut and Run: Illegal logging and timber trade in the Tropics.

Chapter 5 Paraguay-The Many Faces of Deforestation. Pgs 71-76.

• Grauel, William T. 1994. The Case for Reforestation Forest Management by Small-Scale Farmers in Eastern Paraguay. Thesis. Colorado State University.

• Hanratty, D. and Meditz, S. 1990. Paraguay: a country study. Federal Research

Division, Library of Congress. 288pp.

• Harcourt, C.S. and Sayer, J.A. 1996. . “Paraguay” in Simon and Schuster The conservation atlas of Tropical Forests: The Americas. Pgs 286-293.

• Huxley, Peter. 1999. Tropical Agroforestry. Blackwell Science Ltd. 371pp.

• Kluck, Patricia. 1990. “The Society and its Environment” pgs 51-96 in Hanratty,

D. and Meditz, S. (ed.) 1990. Paraguay: a country study. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. 288pp.

• Lenin, V.I. 1899. “The differentiation of the peasantry” pgs 130-138 in Lenin,

V.I. (ed) 1899. The Development of Capitalism in Russia in Collected Works. Vol. 3, London: Lawrence and Wishart 1960.

• Lyon and Horwich. 1996. “Modification of Tropical Forest Patches for Wildlife

Protection and Community Conservation in Belize” pgs 205-230 in Robinson, John G. (ed.) 1996. Forest Patches in Tropical Landscapes. Island Press. 426pp.

• McDonald, Melissa. 1999. Project Status Report on Environment Sector-Peace

Corps Paraguay.

• Nichols, Paul. 2000. Social Survey Methods: A Field guide for Development workers. Development Guidelines, No. 6. Oxfam, U.K. 131pp.

• Owusu, D.Y. 1993. Farm-based agroforestry: four years of experience in Ghana.

Agroforestry Today. 5(1): 8-10.

• Peace Corps Paraguay. Sept. 1991. Agroforestry extension resource manual. Asuncion, Paraguay. 289pp.

• Peace Corps Paraguay. 1991. The most commonly used trees in Paraguay.

Asuncion, Paraguay. 100pp.

120

• Pégorié, Jacques. 1990. On-farm agroforestry research: Case study from Kenya’s semi-arid zone. Agroforestry Today. 2(4): 4-7.

• Raintree, John B. 1985. Land, Trees and Tenure: Proceedings of an

International Workshop on Tenure Issues in Agroforestry. Nairobi, May 27-31, 1985. ICRAF and the Land Tenure Center Nairobi and Madison, 1987. 412pp.

• Raintree, John B. 1986. Agroforestry pathways: land tenure, shifting cultivation

and sustainable agriculture. Unasylva. 38(4): 2-15.

• Reed, Richard K. 1995. Prophets of Agroforestry: Guarani communities and commercial gathering. University of Texas Press, Austin. 251pp.

• Repulic of Paraguay and NIMA. 1995. Mapa De Reconocimeinto de suelos de la

region Oriental.

• Robinson, John G. 1996. Hunting Wildlife in Forest Patches: An Ephemeral Resource pgs 111-130 in Schelhas, J. and Greenberg, R. (ed.) 1996. Forest Patches in Tropical Landscapes. Island Press. 426pp.

• Rombold, Mueller, Wingerath, Nedobeck, and Ritz. 1991. A case study of

parcels of Paraiso gigante in the department of San Pedro, Paraguay. Forestry Journals No. 3. University National of Asuncion, Engineering faculty agranomia and forestal. San Lorenzo, Asuncion, Paraguay. 35pp.

• Sacks, Richard S. 1990. “Historical setting” pgs 1-47 in Hanratty, D. and

Meditz, S. (ed.). 1990. Paraguay: a country study. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress.

• Sellers. 1977. in Raintree, John B. (ed.) 1985. Land, Trees and Tenure:

Proceedings of an International Workshop on Tenure Issues in Agroforestry. Nairobi, May 27-31, 1985. ICRAF and the Land Tenure Center Nairobi and Madison, 1987. 412pp.

• Schelhas, J. and Greenberg, R. 1996. Forest Patches in Tropical Landscapes.

Island Press. 426pp.

• Seyler, Daniel. 1990. “The economy” pgs 97-155 in Hanratty, D. and Meditz, S. (ed.). 1990. Paraguay: a country study. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress.

• Simon, Helen J. 1991. In Paraguay, peasants get land the hard way: One percent

of the people own 78 percent of land. National Catholic Reporter Vol. 27 No. 34 page 11.

121

• Tighe, Mike. 1997. Paraiso para Paraguay- a summary of paraiso gigante-a case study in Dept. San Pedro. Peace Corps Paraguays Environmental Bulletin. November 1997 Issue.

• Turner, Brian. 1993. Community Politics and Peasant-State Relations in

Paraguay. University Press of America, Maryland. 319pp.

• Ultima hora. 1999. Manual de Ecologia del Paraguay. Published by Ultima hora and Moises Bertoni Foundation. 255pp.

• White, T.A., and J.L. Jickling. 1995. Peasants, experts, and land use in Haiti:

lessons from indigenous and project technology. J. Soil and Water Conservation. (Jan-Feb): 7-14.

• Wild, Alex. 1997. Site report. October. Peace Corps Paraguay.

• Wild, Alex. 1998. Ysaú—Akêkê leaf cutter ants: a history and some control

hints. The Germinator. Agriculture sector news bulletin. July/August 1998 Issue. Peace Corps, Paraguay.

122

Appendix A SPANISH TERMS or WORDS

Ake ake-small leaf cutting ant

Almacén-small store or kiosk that sells household needs

Avati ku-native fruit abundant in area, around houses and in the forest

Barrios-sub-divisions within a town

Bomba-pump put in well to extract water electrically

Bombilla-metal straw to sieve the water out of the yerba with out to much debris in your

mouth

Campesinos sin tierra-landless peasant farmers

Campesinos-peasant farmers

Chacra(s)-open field usually being cultivated with subsistence and cash crops

Charla-a talk usually given with larger sheets of paper, flip chart style

Chipa guazu-traditional corn dish during sweet corn season

Chipa-traditional flat bread

Colonia(s)-small communities

Comité-group of persons working together

Copiador-middleman that owns a transport truck and travels throughout the country side

buying and selling cash crops

Encuesta Forestal-interview I performed with farmers

Equipo-a soccer team, but can also mean the equipment necessary

Essencia-refers to the essence of orange made from sour orange leaves in a small

distillery

Fiestas-dances held for various occasions.

Fogón-wood burning stove

Gringo(a)-Term used to describe a foreigner from North America and other countries.

Guampa-cup like thing that holds yerba to drink terere.

Ka’ygua-original Guaraní name for the cup like container to drink maté with, commonly

made out of a small gourd

Kurupay’y râ- valuable Paraguayan tree species

123

Appendix A continued

SPANISH TERMS or WORDS Leña-firewood

Maceta(s)-small bag used to grow seedlings for out-planting much like a plastic container

Mandioca-manioc

Maté-traditional tea drink but hot water instead of cold like tereré and drunk more often

in the morning or during cold weather spells.

Mbeju-breakfast favorite, usually made out of mandioca starch and sometimes corn flour

Mestizo-person of mixed Indian and Spanish decent

Oga’i-closet market town to Puntoclave, about 2,000 people

Peroba (Aspidosperma polyneuron)-threatened tree species in Paraguay, common to the

eastern forests

Plaga-disease or pest, something detrimental

Promotor(a) de salud-a volunteer trained in general first aid, running the health center

and administering common drugs like antibiotics and vaccines

Puesto de salud-health center

Quota-payment of some kind

Señor-Mister, common way to address farmers as for example; Señor Gonzalez

Sopa Paraguaya-traditional corn bread

Suero-the liquid left from cheese making

Tablón(es)-prepared seed bed

Tatakua-Guaraní word for traditional brick oven, directly translated ‘fire in the hole’

Tecnico(a)-extensionist or person holding a title usually working for an organization

Tereré-traditional tea drink of Paraguay, usually drunken once in the morning and once

in the afternoon and socially with family and friends or with just passer bys

Vivero-tree nursery

Yerba mate-Ilex paraguiensis, natural plant to Paraguay that is used to make tereré and

maté

Ysaú-large leaf cutting ant

124

Appendix B

ACRONYMS ANDE-Administración Nacional de Electricidad, Paraguay’s electrical company

ANTELCO-Adminstración Nacional de Telecomunicaciónes, Paraguay’s telephone

company

APCD-Assistant Peace Corps Director

CAVYSA-Centro Acopiador de Villa Ygatimí Servicio Agricola

CEC-Cation Exchange

FMB-Moises Bertoni Foundation

GCC-Green (manure) Cover Crop

GDP-Gross Domestic Product

Helvetes-Swiss NGO working in Paraguay, a lot times associated with MAG.

IBR-Instituto Bienstar Rural, Rural Welfare Institute

ITAIPU-Binational Hydroelectric dam

MAG-Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry

MNR-Reserva Natural Mbaracayú, Mbaracayú Nature Reserve

NGO-Non-government organization

PC-Peace Corps

PCV-Peace Corps Volunteer

PRA-Participatory Rural Appraisal

PSR-Project Status Report

SFN-Servicio Forestal, government Forest Service

USAID-United States Agency for International Development

125

APPENDIX C OUTPLANTING SHEET

HOUSEHOLD NUMBER: SITE NUMBER: SPECIES NUMBER PLANTED NUMBER SURVIVING

Comments on suspected cause of tree mortality Site characteristics

a. distance from house to site b. soil type c. use description of the site (farm field, garden, abandoned farm field, secondary forest, primary forest, etc.} d. size of total site (hectares) e. area planted (hectares)

126

APPENDIX C continued

f. anything else that looks important to you.

Household characteristics a. Number of adults (male/female) and children (male/female and ages) (Don’t use names) b. Hectares owned by household. c. significant assets. d. innovative farming techniques used by the household. e. significant education within household f. significant leadership role in the community g. previous experience with tree planting? If yes describe.

127

APPENDIX C continued

h. anything else that looks important to you

6. Comments of farmers/tree planters on success and failure. [IMPORTANT]. You should probably ask several household members for their comments on this. PERSON 1. PERSON 2. 6 [CONTINUED]. Comments of farmers/tree planters on success and failure. [IMPORTANT]. You should probably ask several household members for their comments on this.

128

APPENDIX C continued

PERSON 3. PERSON 4.

129

Appendix D

130

Appendix D continued

131

Appendix D continued

132

Appendix D continued

133

Appendix D continued

134

Appendix D continued

135

Appendix D continued

136

Appendix D continued

137

Appendix E

138

Appendix E continued

139

Appendix F

Farmer profiles Farmer A has lived in Puntoclave for the last 10 years. He and his family of 4 (wife and two daughters of the ages 6 and 8) moved from the department of Guaira where they were married. Their level of education is that of grade school up to the sixth grade. They arrived in Puntoclave without land, but the husbands family already established had immediate shelter for them. They purchased, through a informal oral agreement, a piece of 7 hectares from the previous owner who for some reason moved to a different part of the country. Without children yet they struggled to ready there fields to be planted in mandioca (local root producing plant, a lot like yucca in other countries), corn, beans, peanuts and various other basic food staples. This family is considered neutral as far as their community status. This farmer has 2 hectares cultivated with local crops of corn and mandioca. Also, 2 hectares in pasture land for their 3 cows and 1 horse. The families main source of income is with the sale and purchase of mandioca and mandioca starch. On the side they have a small kiosk that sells food basics and some household supplies. This family also has chickens and pigs for home use and periodic trading investments. In and around the house are several fruit species like bananas, mandarins, oranges, mango, and lime along with some traditional plants used for their medicinal purposes. Farmer B has lived in Puntoclave for the last 11 years. He and his family of 4 (wife and 2 children, female of 4 years and male of 11 years) moved from the department of Guaira and have recently been married in Puntoclave by the civil court. Their level of education is that of grade school up to the sixth grade. He shares 15 hectares of land with his mother and Uncle that has not been purchased legally through the Land Bureau (IBR). Their community status is known for the mandioca starch factory and previous membership in a bridge building committee. This farmer has few hectares in production, mainly has mandioca for the production of starch being there main income source for the household. They also have cows and horses which is a joint ownership with his mother. This farmer works other odds and ends through construction and distributor assistantships to bring in income when the opportunity arises. This family is not self sufficient in regards to the basic food staples although they have a small family garden which provides vegetables seasonally. Farmer C has lived in Puntoclave since teenage years when his family moved from Cornel Oviedo in the department of Ca'aguazu. He and his family of 4 (wife and two children, female of 3 years and male of 5 years) have a parcel of land with 7 hectares. His community status is that of a respected farmer and family man. He has been involved in the school and church committees for several years now. This farmer is very innovated in the need for trees in his cultivation fields and occasionally brings in natural regeneration from near by forest tracks. He is a small farmer who is self sufficient and raises food for the home like corn, beans, peanuts and various fruit crops like banana and pineapple. Their main source of income is from the normal cash crops; cotton and Tobacco. He also hires his labor services out to bring in small amounts of money. This farmer was very

140

Appendix F continued

fortunate in that with the electricity project, 3 years back, he received a vocational skill of electrician and is utilizing his learned skills with small household projects within the community. Their level of education is that of grade school up to the sixth grade, but has not let this stop him from educating themselves when the opportunity is there. Farmer D has lived in Puntoclave since his parents moved from Cornel Oviedo in the department of Ca'aguazu. He has recently been employed by the Foundation Moises Bertoní (FMB) for the last 2 years as a park guard. With this he has purchased a piece of land from his sister in Puntoclave. The majority of his time he is living in one of the stations around the Mbaracayu Reserve and has not settled his property. His educational level is that of grade school up to the sixth grade and through the participation of his parents in certain workshops with the FMB received work as a park guard. He has a young boy of 2 years and is planning on marring the mother when the time permits. Therefore his income is that of a monthly salary provided by the FMB, which he supports his family to be and helps his parents with certain needs. From observation his position with the FMB is not well known in Puntoclave as he is not there but once a month. Farmer E's house is situated closer to the entrance of the boundaries of Puntoclave and now a recreational house to go and play pool. They, owning one pool table that which enables many of the community members for a Saturday afternoon at the so called 'pool hall'. This family is one of the largest with 14 family members, recently 2 new additions within the last year, in the area and are also considered to be poor because of it. They have lived in Puntoclave for the last 8 years. The husband has family members in Argentina of which his mother passed away in June of 2000 and they, him and his wife, recently traveled there for the funeral. They have not purchased the title to their land, which is approximately 5 hectares (put here directly from the IBR township sketch). They are currently utilizing 4 and a half hectares in crop production and a half hectare in resting and not in use. This family has recently incorporated different crops like soy bean, but is not planning to plant again this year due to little space in his field and the difficulty of harvesting the seeds. Their main source of income is from the little cotton and Tobacco they plant on a yearly basis. They also plant food staples like peanuts, corn (human and animal consumption), beans of various varieties for consumption and most of all mandioca. These are yearly plantings depending on the year and the availability of other annual crops like onions, peppers, sweet potatoes, squash, watermelon and melons of which are incorporated into the fields preparation. This small farmer still uses traditional farming techniques. They practice such activities like burning their field for preparation before planting it, plowing, planting the same species over and over in one area until the soils are exhausted and haven't a chance of recuperating. For example they have a Paraiso gigante Agroforestry system and his main problem is that of a certain type of grass (pest) called kapiatã, the kind no one wants to work in because of its stickers. In other words this farmer/family have not gone into this part of the field to regularly hoe between the rows of Paraiso gigante in order to maintain a better growth rate of this particular species. Their solutions many times are just to let it go and hope that the problem will take care of itself or if someone comes along and offers to buy the pesticide

141

to kill it off. To reach my point is that this family's soil is still productive, but is certainly bordering on exhaustion as far as the amount of production they should be getting when they first came to Puntoclave. The enthusiasm is here to plant trees but because of the lack of a sufficient land source and space for the use of traditional farming techniques their systems don't coincide and the trees get in the way of work to be done. Perfect scenario this one is that because the tree has possible merchantable value and its incentive as a fast grower qualifying it to be in the field and with the knowledge of the management no-how's for Paraiso gigante has left this part of the field go because of this grass pest mentioned above. They therefore are not able to come through with a plow and possible pesticides to kill it because his trees are there. The family raises chickens, has a pig, and a horse that is used for in the field and transportation to and from the small towns surrounding the area. The chickens were a part of the women's group of which his wife is a current member. Each member was provided with 30 chicks to raise for egg production, and the occasional chicken as their meat source. Along with the chickens came the soy bean seeds and corn to be planted as the chickens feed as to not have the burden of buying special feed for this type of chicken( put here the type of chickens). The animals diets consist mainly of mandioca, corn and grass in the field. Due to the drought and many neighboring people still burning their fields their last parcel of a half hectare was lost to fire. This area is the newest soil having recently burned and probably the most fertile at this stage in their field. When they arrived the condition of this area, still degraded forest at the time, was already degraded and striped of its principle products like merchantable timber and construction materials. They were still using this area to gather seasonal fruits like Yvy haí and medicinal plants used for home sickness remedies. They understand the importance of having forest remnants to provide needs for the family but unfortunately they have very little possibilities of having this type of land cover. They are still lucky to have some neighboring tracts of forest for possible natural regeneration to come in. This is where this farmer would of liked to plant more trees. The firewood collection is a chore because the area where they still collect firewood is 900 meters from the house and it is the woman's job for 2 hours every day to collect and bring back to the house for usage in the daily chores of cooking. They have a family garden, in which they have recently expanded the size of it to plant more vegetables, 8 meters by 10 meters. The most common vegetables planted are carrots, tomatoes, green peppers, onions, parsley, various herbs i.e. oregano, green onions, and lettuce. (This year all of Paraguay was hit pretty hard with frosts killing most tomatoes in peoples gardens and unprotected bananas (July 2000)). This family also has a patch of banana trees along side of the house as well as guayaba, avocados, mango, mammon and common citrus species. They also have bananas through out the field and a patch of orange and grapefruit trees of about 6 or 7 years old (maybe older one must ask) 200 meters from the house that yields plenty home consumption. They are also thinking of planting more mango for fruit production and shade purposes. There is one benefit to having several of the sour orange species commonly called 'apepu'. From this they are able to harvest yearly 600 kilos of this type of foliage which is then processed into essence in a local factory (carried by ox and cart up to 5 kilometers away) which goes for about 50,000 Gs, enough to buy supplies: sugar, noodles, flour, etc.. Unfortunately, this family has not yet included yerba mate (Ilexparaguaensis ) in their overall systems. I mention this because of the dependency a family has on the dried leaf matter of yerba mate to drink the traditional drink of Paraguay called 'terere', served mid-morning and

142

late afternoon with cold water drunken out of a container filled with yerba called a guampa with a metal straw to drain the cup of the yerba flavored water with out pulling up leaf matter in to your mouth. As well as another drink called 'mate' served with hot water usually drunken in the morning and on cold days. The family maintains open fire to cook over and a brick oven otherwise known as a 'tatakua' to cook traditional foods or dishes such as chipa, chipa guazu and Sopa Paraguaya. The families main concern for their future is that of not being able to sustain the family because of the lack of sufficient land space, they, having a large amount of children to have things passed down too. This family was also very fortunate to receive 400 seedlings of Paraiso gigante planted in February of 1999. They were containerized in what is called a 'maceta' a small black plastic bag commonly used in this country in tree nurseries. Their idea was to plant these trees at the spacing of 3 meters between the trees leaving a 4 meter wide cultivating area, understanding that by keeping the base of their trees free of weed competition they experience better growth rates. They have the greatest survival rate of any one involved in the tree planting project, approximately still standing are 300 trees that are growing very slowly due to not managing in between the rows. They prepared this site with what is called a 'rosado sin quema' area prepared with out burning, hoed by hand. It is now up to this farmer to continue to manage this system in order to receive the long term benefits of his short term investment in time assuring the survival of their trees having already taken. Their interest is in planting trees but with very little land to plant they are hesitant to plant more at this point in time. Farmer E has lived in Puntoclave for the last 9 years it was not mentioned from where he and his family moved. He and his family of 14 (wife and 6 females and 6 males ranging from 9 months to 25 years in age) live on a parcel of land, not yet purchased to obtain a land title from the Institute of Rural Welfare (IBR), approximately 5 hectares of property rights. Just recently from a neighboring farmers field, a fire broke out and burned his last half hectare of forest putting all of his 5 hectares in use for cultivation purposes. His community status is that of a well respected farmer struggling with a large family. They are self sufficient with the provisions of beans, peanuts, corn, soy and other seasonal crops. His field is a great example of traditional systems with alternative farming practices such as Agroforestry. He is very innovative in that he took it upon himself to bring in natural regeneration from bordering forest blocks after haven planted the Paraiso gigante. Also, it is a good example of the fatalism still existing in Paraguay today in that his neighbors don't understand why he is taking the time to incorporate trees in with his crops, and nor does the farmer in some respects. Their main income is from cash crops of cotton and Tabacco. His wife is a member of recently reorganized women's group who received funding to start a chicken rearing project at all the women's respective homes. His fields and around the house are very diverse with all the fruit trees and crops such as melons, bananas and pineapple. They also have a family garden that provides the family with ample vegetables seasonally. Farmer F has lived in Puntoclave for the last 10 or more years. It was not discussed where they moved from. He and his family of 10 persons (wife and 3 females and 5 males ranging from the ages 5 months to 16 years) live on a parcel of land with 10 hectares. This land has not been formally purchased from IBR and therefore is still being

143

Appendix F continued

paid in quotas. This farmers community status is well respected in terms of farming and self sufficiency. He is well known for his knowledge of trees and their importance with in the ecosystem. They are very aware of the importance of a balanced system and so farm according to their previous experiences. They family was very active during the first wave of farmers commissions, his wife participated in a women's group receiving a certificate for finishing the workshops provided. She is well aware of the significance outside help can offer. With one sit down they expressed their disinterest in outside help which comes in with the idea of work in projects, but never finishes what they are out to accomplish and has since expressed the disorder of Puntoclave in the sense of working together to better their living conditions. Their educational level is that of grade school up to the sixth grade. Their main source of income comes from the cash crops of cotton, tabacco and occasionally petit grain (leaves of sour orange, which produce essence). Their house is surrounded by native species once covering their whole piece of property. They are traditional farmers with a twist of agroforestry in between. The have a very diverse system growing beans, corn, peanuts, rice also with seasonal fruit production and a home garden, which provides them with seasonal vegetables. Farmer G unfortunately was not followed up in the manner of the others and therefore I have nothing to report on this particular farmer. Farmer H with his house to the right of the chapel and his in-laws to the left. His mother in-law is the local health promoter who caretaker the 'puesto de salud', the little local health center. Farmer H his wife and young son, 5 years old, moved into Puntoclave in 1989 from their former homes of record and were married shortly after with the permission of the wife's parents. They purchased a 1600 meter squared piece of property from the local School Director on which they built their home. This farmer does not own his own land to cultivate crops and therefore rents neighboring tracts of land to plant cash crops such as cotton and Tobacco, that total 2 hectares. He also borrows bits and pieces from his father-in-law to grow basic food staples such as melons, corn, beans and peanuts. He is a traditional farmer meaning he still believes in burning his land to clear which enables him to plant with little or no labor intense preparation. He also hires himself for manual labor to make ends meet. The going rate per day for hired labor is 12,000 guaranies (current exchange rate is 3,400 Gs/US$ approximately US $3.50 per day) with out food or 10,000 guaranies (US $2.95) with your own food. They also own a small kiosk run out of the front room of their home in which the wife takes care of while her husband is working in the field. They have a wide variety of products for sale which are flour, sugar, rice, salt, yerba mate, noodles, cookies, candies, sometimes meat, ice and other house hold items like soap for washing clothes, perfumed soap for bathing, a variety of clothing for children and some underwear for adults and children, pencils, pens, note books, erasers and other small material items for things such as gifts. December 2000 they had sold off most of the merchandise and closed. Their is a nearby sales representative from Villa Ygatimí (18 km south) that comes into Puntoclave on Mondays to take orders from all the small kiosks and delivers the stores goods on Tuesdays. Also, one can travel 30 km to the border of Paraguay and Brazil and cross over to buy products at times cheaper prices than Paraguayan products.

144

Appendix F continued

Their aspirations are to eventually purchase land in which they could call their own. As of now they own the house they live in and have a yard big enough to raise chickens and turkeys free range. From the chickens they have eggs for personal consumption and sale as well as whole chickens to sell and as food for the family. The animals diet consists of corn and mandioca grown in borrowed fields of the in-laws. In their yard they have a variety of fruits ranging from oranges, mandarins, mango, guayabas and pineapple. They use open fire to boil mandioca and prepare various traditional Paraguayan dishes. They collect their firewood from nearby degraded forest, but for the more simple things they own a gas stove. Gas tanks of 10 kilos cost 25,000 Gs (US$7.35) per tank and can last up to 3 months depending on what it is used for. They also own a satellite and television, in which the satellite it self costs 1 million Gs (US$295) depending on the brand purchased. This allows them to receive television channels only from Brazil. They are a small family which lives beyond their means, but at the same time would like to create a better future for their son. This farmer planted 52 trees of Leguminosae Peltphorum dubium , otherwise known commonly as yvyra pytã, in and around his house spacing each tree 3 meters by 3 meters. The time of out planting was February 1999 which timely is the hottest season of the year being it mid- summer. His goal was to plant trees to create the effect of shade and a possible future woodlot to collect firewood from. To this family the importance of this project was to provide a possible example or demonstration for other neighboring farmers to shows the importance of planting trees. Upon the purchase of land they could plant at a larger scale to accomplish his own ideas of sustainable agroforestry systems. During a process of community meetings, to determine what farmers were interested in planting trees donated by the FMB, a demonstration on how to out plant each containerized species (raised in a tree nursery in Curuguaty) with the community participants was conducted and each farmer took his or her perspective trees to be out planted. But due to the timing of planting and lack of maintenance this farmer lost all of the trees to the hot temperatures of summer (February, 1998) reaching up to 40° C (106° F). Farmer H has lived in Puntoclave for the last 10 years. He and his family of 3 (wife and young son of 5 years) live on a purchased piece of property of 40 meters squared which includes there home and space around the house. Although this farmer does not own enough property to participate in any kind of big scale planting he still wants to improve his living situation by diversifying around his house until the day they are able to purchase a larger piece of property. Their main source of income is from the local cash crops of cotton and Tobacco. In order to support his farming practices they have been renting other peoples fallow lands to cultivate and produce basic food staples along with cash crops. His education level is grade school up till the sixth grade and his wives educational level is equivalent to that of a grade school teacher. Their son is currently enrolled in pre-school in the local school in Puntoclave. She unfortunately started out as a local grade school teacher but due to her health had to forfeit her position and has not been able to recover fully to regain her status as school teacher. They also own a small kiosk but are in debt beyond their means and therefore are struggling to make ends meet. Fortunately, the wife's family lives in Puntoclave and can provide them with the assistance necessary

145

Appendix F continued

to maintain sustainability. This farmers main preoccupation is not owning his own land and has expressed his desire to purchase land soon to call his own. Farmer I, the family's house is located in the middle of the small community of Puntoclave located next to the most productive kiosk (almacén) in town. They had purchased their 3 hectare piece of property from the kiosk owners in 1991. When they arrived, they began by clearing a quarter hectare to cultivate and the rest was 2 1/4 hectares in abandoned crop fields and 1/2 ha of degraded forest. They are somewhat traditional farmers in the sense of having the main staple crops planted which are mandioca, corn, peanuts, beans, and vegetables using siembra directa (direct seeding techniques). Also, they rent a portion of property owned by another farmer next door to produce enough for consumption and sale. Distinguished from their neighbors having learned the value in eliminating burning practices to prepare their fields. Aside from their agriculture they raise free range chickens and kept pigs. They also own a horse for work purposes with a cart to transport their goods to the nearest market selling door to door and to established stores in Villa Ygatimí 18 kilometers south from Puntoclave. This family before had 2 langstroff bee boxes containing honey producing africanized bees, thus providing the family with honey for home use and sale. The hives produced 11 liters per year, they consumed 6 Lt.. and sold 5 Lt.. at 8.000 Gs (US$2.35) per liter. The couple is in their mid 50's and have a semi-large family in which 2 young girls and 2 boys are living at home to help manage the property. Their 1/2 ha of degraded forest is in the worst stage of degradation. Meaning it did not provide this family with wood for construction and very little firewood collection. This 1/2 ha also does not provide native fruits or nuts but what it still offers for the family is medicinal plants for home remedies. The beliefs of the family are that the forest is very important to ones survival and to take care of what forest is left by planning to reforest, practice forest enrichment and or implement agroforestry systems in which cultivation is a major part of daily management. And because they have very little land they can not set aside one special parcel to just have in trees. They built the majority of their house from timber found on their family lot. Firewood collection is a walking distance of 700 meters from the house, by means of manual force and or by horse and cart. To make ends meet they will cut small trees of value for firewood or for revenue for the family subsistence. When preparing to build their home they left several of the native tree species for shade and personal preference. Also, they have established a small agroforestry system with yerba mate and native tree species leaving what natural regeneration was there. In this system they had their bee hives and, when still functioning were placed here with shade and plenty of meliferous species to feed off of. They have many naturalized fruits around their house like mango, mandarin, various citrus including lemon, sweet and sour orange, banana trees, mammon (papaya), quayaba. The women are particular interested in learning how to graft citrus having access to seed for rootstock on their property. They also pride in having a family garden to produce enough vegetables for family consumption plus a variety of medicinal plants and have some left over to sell to local neighbors for pocket money. They also cultivate vegetables to sell in Villa Ygatimí which are carrots, peppers and cabbage although with the poor quality of their soil they

146

Appendix F continued

are experiencing less and less yield in production. This home garden is managed by the women of the household. The dimensions of the family garden is 10 meters by 12 meters with a shade structure covering the entire area to protect from the extreme heat in the summer months, which enables them to produce vegetables all year around. They produce yerba mate plants in hopes to be able to sell to the local people and have existing systems with yerba and are able to replace lost plants with the plants from the garden. This family is active within the community and have been members of several past commissions as well as being involved heavily in the church. Because of their past memberships they have a well managed agroforestry system that is made up of trees and yerba mate in between the rows of planted and or natural regeneration. The oldest yerba bushes are 4 years old, 35 to be exact, and produce 40 kilos of leaf matter twice a year. The majority of their yerba bushes are 3 years of age and have not been harvested yet which has provided the family with seed to produce in the garden. Because yerba mate is a main part of the Paraguayan culture a family can go through 2- 3 kilos a week. The price range for yerba today is 1,500 Gs up to 3,000 Gs depending on the quality and packaging. Therefore this family saves from 156.000 Gs up to 468.000 a year by producing their own leaf matter (Please see table below). Also, they are able to sell several kilos (2,000 Gs a kilo) a year to bring extra money into the household. Table 1: Yerba savings by producing their own plants Consumption minimal 2 kilos per week at the minimum price 1,500Gs/kilo

156,000 Gs per year savings

Consumption maximum 3 kilos per week at the minimum price 1,500Gs/kilo

234,000 Gs per year savings

Consumption minimal 2 kilos per week at the maximum price 3,000Gs/kilo

312,000 Gs per year savings

Consumption maximum 3 kilos per week at the maximum price 3,000Gs/kilo

468,000 Gs per year savings

With the amount of sour orange trees they have on their property they are able to harvest 3-4 times a year the foliage. There is a small factory that produces essence from the foliage in which the small farmers can take cart loads. A farmer can successful earn about 25,000 Gs per cart load by harvesting the foliage from 70 trees. Sometimes negotiations are made through another person to share in the work load and have a full cart. Because this family has only 3 hectares of land to be worked on it is always planted and as mentioned above they are starting to see a major decline in the production yields. These low yields are because the soil is very poor in nutrients and without some sort of system to recuperate the nutrients lacking they will see nothing but decline in production yields. With the last Peace Corps volunteer, Alex Wild, they were introduced to green manure's and the ability to rejuvenate the soils. They planted a parcel in velvet beans in the year 1996 and saw the difference in just one cycle how relevant the organic material produced by this one plant was. Unfortunately, they have not continued to pursue more work with green manure's to improve the quality of their soils. Their energy use consists of a brick stove and a tatakua (traditional firewood brick oven) in which they use firewood collected from the small tract of land they live on and the.

147

Appendix F continued

purchase of firewood from neighbors. They previously owned a gas stove, but were not able to afford the purchase of gas and have stopped using it all together For their future they are needing to manage the 3 hectares of land well in order to provide for their large family. The parents are striving to provide their children with the opportunities to become skilled workers outside of farming when they can. For example, one of their sons participated in a apprentice course in electrical work when the lights were brought into the community 2 and half years ago and is able to use his experience to have outside work in this field. Although their son went to Asuncion seeking work in this field he was unsuccessful in finding anything permanent and has since returned to work with his family on the farm and as hired help when the opportunity arises. This family had prior experience in planting trees with the second volunteer, Alex Wild, with him they sowed Paraiso gigante in their home garden and out planted with me by means of bareroot 80 seedlings in May of 1998 in the form of stakes. A brief description is that they established the Paraiso gigante with crops such as corn and mandioca by planting the stakes in between rows to utilize the space available thus creating an agroforestry system. They planted at a spacing of 3 meters in between trees and 5 meters in between the established crops. This system began as a rosado sin quema, meaning meaning an area prepared with out burning to clean first. They prepared the area by hoeing and cleaning the places to plant trees understanding that Paraiso gigante does not do well with weed competition. They proceeded with basic pruning in the 1st and 2nd years until some of their trees reached height of 6 meters and a DBH of 7-10 centimeters. After having established this system they were ready for more trees. In February of 1999 with the donated trees from the FMB they asked for 100 Paraiso gigante to plant and did exactly what they had done before replacing some of the non survivors from the first established system. Very innovative family in the sense of looking for the resource understanding the management involved they proceeded after the non-survival of the trees donated due to timing of planting and found their own resource to replenish the trees that did not survive the out planting. This family is very capable of sustaining themselves and are very interested in bettering their production levels to provide a more substantial way of living understanding the economic problems and controversial environmental problems they are faced with. They believe in having food on the table to support the well being of their large family and are seeking other means of long term investment to ensure they have a future. Unfortunately by fault of a neighboring farmer who burned his fields this year 99/2000 they lost the majority of these agroforestry systems to fire dwindling their inspirations to continue planning for the future. But all is not lost they have done everything possible to obtain what is left of this system and are thankful the tree species planted had vegetative resprouting abilities. This is one of the hardest things for small farmers here is the fatalism that exists and if everyone is not interested in maintaining what they have left with better management the whole community is apt to lose a lot of hard work and determination. Farmer I has lived in Puntoclave for the last 8 years moving from the department of Guaira. He and his family of 10 (wife and 3 females and 5 males ranging from 11 to 25 years of age) live on 3 hectares of land purchased from their neighbor in 1991, with no intention of purchasing legally from the Land Bureau, IBR. They came under the pretense that they could start over and be able to provide for their family with a new

148

Appendix F continued

beginning. Their status in the community is respected in the sense of they are very active with the school and church committees. They are very successful in providing for their family by sustainable farming, but now are facing the problem of depleting their natural resources. They have a very diverse system but at the same time are recognizing lower production levels due to the loss of fertile soils. Their main source of income are from the cash crops of cotton and tobacco. At the same time they grow seasonal vegetables on a larger scale to transport to the next town over, Villa Ygatimí. The level of education is that of grade school up to the sixth grade. At the same time their children have been fortunate to receive vocational skills, one son has the potential to work as an electrician and the other is a seamstress and is able to earn money this way. The system obtained by this family supports them through the hard times. They are very open to new innovative techniques and aware of the need to improve their living situation. They produce their own yerba mate (local plant used in traditional drink), animals (chickens and pigs) and sometimes are able to harvest petit grain for the sale of essence. Unfortunately lately they have suffered due to the drought and the idiocy of their neighboring families traditional farming techniques especially burning their fields. During the interview we discussed the years of the dictator and how most prices were fixed and one could make a living off the common cash crops and still afford to put their children through school and purchase meat. Now that the prices are all over the place they barely have the things they need to survive. They are very self sufficient in that they have their necessities with the system existing and the favor of the climate, there house is surrounded with trees and a large family garden providing them with food to put on the table. With the amount of sour orange trees they have on their property they are able to harvest 3-4 times a year the foliage. There is a small factory that produces essence from the foliage in which the small farmers can take cart loads. A farmer can successful earn about 25,000 Gs per cart load by harvesting the foliage from 70 trees. Sometimes negotiations are made through another person to share in the work load and have a full cart. Because this family has only 3 hectares of land to be worked on it is always planted and as mentioned above they are starting to see a major decline in the production yields. These low yields are because the soil is very poor in nutrients and without some sort of system to recuperate the nutrients lacking they will see nothing but decline in production yields. With the last Peace Corps volunteer, Alex Wild, they were introduced to green manure's and the ability to rejuvenate the soils. They planted a parcel in velvet beans in the year 1996 and saw the difference in just one cycle how relevant the organic material produced by this one plant was. Unfortunately, they have not continued to pursue more work with green manure's to improve the quality of their soils. Their energy use consists of a brick stove and a tatakua (traditional firewood brick oven) in which they use firewood collected from the small tract of land they live on and the purchase of firewood from neighbors. They previously owned a gas stove, but were not able to afford the purchase of gas and have stopped using it all together. For their future they are needing to manage the 3 hectares of land well in order to provide for their large family. The parents are striving to provide their children with the opportunities to become skilled workers outside of farming when they can. For example, one of their sons participated in a apprentice course in electrical work when the lights

149

Appendix F continued

were brought into the community 2 and half years ago and is able to use his experience to have outside work in this field. Although their son went to Asuncion seeking work in this field he was unsuccessful in finding anything permanent and has since returned to work with his family on the farm and as hired help when the opportunity arises. This family had prior experience in planting trees with the second volunteer, Alex Wild, with him they sowed Paraiso gigante in their home garden and out planted with me by means of bareroot 80 seedlings in May of 1998 in the form of stakes. A brief description is that they established the Paraiso gigante with crops such as corn and mandioca by planting the stakes in between rows to utilize the space available thus creating an agroforestry system. They planted at a spacing of 3 meters in between trees and 5 meters in between the established crops. This system began as a rosado sin quema, meaning meaning an area prepared with out burning to clean first. They prepared the area by hoeing and cleaning the places to plant trees understanding that Paraiso gigante does not do well with weed competition. They proceeded with basic pruning in the 1st and 2nd years until some of their trees reached height of 6 meters and a DBH of 7-10 centimeters. After having established this system they were ready for more trees. In February of 1999 with the donated trees from the FMB they asked for 100 Paraiso gigante to plant and did exactly what they had done before replacing some of the non survivors from the first established system. Very innovative family in the sense of looking for the resource understanding the management involved they proceeded after the non-survival of the trees donated due to timing of planting and found their own resource to replenish the trees that did not survive the out planting. This family is very capable of sustaining themselves and are very interested in bettering their production levels to provide a more substantial way of living understanding the economic problems and controversial environmental problems they are faced with. They believe in having food on the table to support the well being of their large family and are seeking other means of long term investment to ensure they have a future. Unfortunately by fault of a neighboring farmer who burned his fields this year 99/2000 they lost the majority of these agroforestry systems to fire dwindling their inspirations to continue planning for the future. But all is not lost they have done everything possible to obtain what is left of this system and are thankful the tree species planted had vegetative resprouting abilities. This is one of the hardest things for small farmers here is the fatalism that exists and if everyone is not interested in maintaining what they have left with better management the whole community is apt to lose a lot of hard work and determination. Farmer I has lived in Puntoclave for the last 8 years moving from the department of Guaira. He and his family of 10 (wife and 3 females and 5 males ranging from 11 to 25 years of age) live on 3 hectares of land purchased from their neighbor in 1991, with no intention of purchasing legally from the Land Bureau, IBR. They came under the pretense that they could start over and be able to provide for their family with a new beginning. Their status in the community is respected in the sense of they are very active with the school and church committees. They are very successful in providing for their family by sustainable farming, but now are facing the problem of depleting their natural resources. They have a very diverse system but at the same time are recognizing lower

150

production levels due to the loss of fertile soils. Their main source of income are from the cash crops of cotton and tobacco. At the same time they grow seasonal vegetables on

Appendix F continued

a larger scale to transport to the next town over, Villa Ygatimí. The level of education is that of grade school up to the sixth grade. At the same time their children have been fortunate to receive vocational skills, one son has the potential to work as an electrician and the other is a seamstress and is able to earn money this way. The system obtained by this family supports them through the hard times. They are very open to new innovative techniques and aware of the need to improve their living situation. They produce their own yerba mate (local plant used in traditional drink), animals (chickens and pigs) and sometimes are able to harvest petit grain for the sale of essence. Unfortunately lately they have suffered due to the drought and the idiocy of their neighboring families traditional farming techniques especially burning their fields. During the interview we discussed the years of the dictator and how most prices were fixed and one could make a living off the common cash crops and still afford to put their children through school and purchase meat. Now that the prices are all over the place they barely have the things they need to survive. They are very self sufficient in that they have their necessities with the system existing and the favor of the climate, there house is surrounded with trees and a large family garden providing them with food to put on the table. Farmer J has lived in Puntoclave since his teenage years along with his wife, who were married and purchased a piece of property in which they are still paying in quotas to the IBR. He and his family of 5 (wife and 2 female and 1 male ranging from 1 to 4 years) live on 5 hectares. This farmer is an entrepreneur in the sense that he seeks his source of income whether it comes from the production of cotton and tabacco as well as the small sales of mandioca, bee honey, cow meat and other material things purchased and sold for profit. This family recently built a new home and kiosk with the earnings gained from persistence in many fields of work. Unfortunately the health of the farmer is serious and he is not able to work his fields any more and does not know what will come of his future. This family relies on the sale of their kiosk to provide staples for the family. They raise cows and chickens which provide the family with milk and meat to eat. The level of education is that of grade school up to the sixth grade. Farmer K was a 15 year old teenager who took interest in planting trees, but since this time he and his family moved to another part of Paraguay. It is believed this family has robbed in the past from many people in Puntoclave and well decided it was better to move elsewhere. Farmer L has lived in Puntoclave for at least the last 15 years and presides as the Director of the local school. He and his family of 8 (wife and 4 females and 2 males ranging from 9 months to 6 years in age) own 30 hectares split into two parcels. On the one parcel sits the school and several hectares and the other is where they live and raise cows. They have more than most others in Puntoclave because he receives a monthly salary of over 1 million gauranies. He is respected for his position of Director of the school and also leads the ceremonies in the church every Sunday of service. Therefore

151

the level of education is equivalent to a University degree. Most of their land is pasture for their cows and they rent out a portion of land to local community members for

Appendix F continued

cultivation purposes. They practically purchase all of the needs of the home and produce very little themselves. The director is a part time farmer when he is not schooling during the year. Farmer M has lived in Puntoclave for the last 10 years. Their land lies on the border of the next incorporated town. They own a parcel of land with 20 hectares that are titled and have been purchased by IBR. Their community status is well respected for their participation in the church and the husband substitutes for teachers when necessary. They are active in the sense of the welfare of the community and very self sufficient in terms of providing for their family. Their main source of income is from cash crops of cotton and tabacco. On the side they produce and sell yerba mate. They have a very diverse system which produces seasonal vegetables from the home garden and also seasonal fruits on their property such as melons and sweet potatoes. They also produce beans, peanuts and corn for fodder for the animals and food for the family. They raise a herd of cows that provides for them milk and occasional income from the sale of individuals. The husbands education is from university and he spends time traveling back and forth from Argentina to visit with family there. This family is well aware of the importance of conserving the environment today because tomorrow is a long way away. They are a very unique family unit and are successful in providing for what they need. Farmer N's primary property is located directly in the middle of the small town Puntoclave and the second piece of land is just 600 meters north of where there house is located. This family of four (wife and two children one boy and one girl) have lived in Puntoclave for nine years, having recently purchased a second piece of property with the intent to land title it after several quotas of small payments. As of right now their house sits on tweleve hectares of land which includes the towns professional soccer field and the other is also exactly tweleve hectares of land. This family's main resources of income are from livestock and a small kiosk run by the wife. On the side they have one hectare in corn for animal consumption and a small parcel of white corn for the family's consumption. Besides this they also have a half hectare in mandioca for the family's consumption. Their property is made up of abandoned farm field now used as pasture land to graze their twenty-five head of cattle. Of these twenty-five head of cattle five are milk cows which give ten liters per day of milk. From the milk they have personal consumption and with the rest they produce cheese for sale in their small kiosk, which goes for 4,500 Gs a kilo (US$ 1.30). On a small scale they raise pigs and chickens which generate small amounts of sporadic income. The diet of these animals consists of mandioca, corn and pasture grass. They have ten hectares between the two properties to graze their cows. This family of four has tweleve hectares in total of degraded forest that still provides them with some merchantable timber, wood for construction and plenty of firewood. This area of forest provides the family with medicinal plants and occasional income. They would like to preserve this area so that one day the children can benefit from it too.

152

Their children are 13 and 8 and do not understand the importance of having this resource and so it is the parents job to take care of it and manage to maintain the integrity of it. At

Appendix F continued

one point in time when we were out planting the trees donated to them the wife said to me, "Aipota che reserva'i", which directly translated into English means "I want my own small reserve". She said this because, this community is within the buffer zone of one of the largest biological reserves in Paraguay. It is also her background having come from an area as a child where all the forest had been cut down and sees the importance of having this commodity and would like to pass this so called 'treasure' on to her children and grandchildren to enjoy. Although on my trip back to the area, I noticed this family having cut down more of this tweleve hectares to plant staple crops such as mandioca and corn of which they can eventually turn into more pasture land for their growing quantity of cows. In my opinion they are not trying to conserve and or protect this area from being one day gone too. Firewood collection is done by the husband with ox and cart once a month which sometimes can last them up to two months maximum (the cart being full to the brim with various sizes of firewood). They do a lot of their collection from newly cleared areas and the forest the closest to the house 400 to 500 meters distance. They have been known to trade work or various things to those families in need of firewood, who don't have this resource within their reach. Within their two properties they have a plethora of fruit trees for home consumption those being sweet and sour orange species, mandarins, lemon species, mammon, bananas, guayaba, peach and avocados. They do harvest occasionally the wet leaf matter from their sour orange trees to take to the nearest Petit grain factory that buys from the local land owners to produce essence of orange. They also have several common trees to the area that bear fruit too for example one species called arati kú, a yellow skinned fruit with a white fleshy center that is consumable by them and neighboring children. This family also has a small garden in which they are able to produce vegetables for the family's own consumption. They are very traditional farmers in that they still use burning techniques to clear and prepare land to be cultivated from which they lost a good portion of their degraded forest land cover to a fire that got out of control. Within this area is where we had done our forest enrichment trials. It is still common for traditional farmers to leave behind valuable trees in their cultivation fields and so therefore they have several young natives that are spread out between the two lots of tweleve hectares. They do understand the importance of continuing to possess small tracts of forest covered land and so therefore would like to continue to plant important species to their advantage. Their energy or form of cooking is with a 'tatakua' and a brick stove called a fogón which for them is a better (safer) way to cook and conserve on firewood. Before having this fogón they used open fire on the ground. This family is not worried about having enough land to pass down to their children and it is not certain that even their children will be interested in obtaining this precious commodity. This family also participated in the out planting of trees on a half hectare of their degraded forest to practice the enrichment of this area. The history of this small parcel of land is that in 1990 it was burned and cleared to plant cotton, mandioca and then corn. After the rotation of these three crop species it was left alone as fallow and because of it

153

being next to an untouched area of forest natural regeneration took over and has since covered the ground. Then in February of 1999 they planted 200 tree seedlings of

Appendix F continued

Peterevy and Yvyra pytã at a spacing of 5 meters between the trees and 10 meters between the rows of trees. (look at my notes in my field book on exact measurements). Unfortunately due to their burning of fields to prepare for cultivation, the fire got out of hand and passed into his enrichment plot and destroyed all of the trees planted. Time and energy spent and I feel nothing was gained in return, but they understand the concept about the importance of conserving what forested land they have. Farmer N has lived in Puntoclave for the last ten years as a married couple. The wife has lived here since she was a teenager, her husband came from Guaria and has no local family members. He and his family of four (wife and one female and one male ages 13 and 8) own 24 hectares split in two parcels. One parcel is titled with tweleve hectares and the other is in process of being purchased legally from IBR. Their main source of income is from their small kiosk which sells a variety of products serving the community. They also rely heavily on the sale of animals raised such as chickens, pigs and cows. The production of milk brings in the sale of cheese produced by hand and also the chicken rearing allows for the sale of eggs in their small kiosk. They produce fodder for their animals and have most of their land in pasture for grazing. The fodder produced is mandioca and corn and at times the surplus is sold for profit to local community members and a profit organization, CAVYSA, in Villa Ygatimí which buys mandioca in bulk for the mandioca starch factory. Their community status is respected for their small business enterprise and the wife is active in the church. The recent illness of the wife has created set backs in revenue for the family and only time will be the judge of her health. The sacrifices made for her operation do not out way the amount of income and have only scratched the surface of the families wealth. Farmer O has lived in Puntoclave for the last 15 years. He and his family of 15 (wife and 13 children lost two through out the years) live on 11 hectares titled legally with IBR. They are a very well respected family in Puntoclave and are active members of the Catholic church. They are very self sufficient well aware of the declining environment. Their main source of income is from the cash crops of cotton and tabacco. They also have animals that they raise for food and sale. They produce sufficient fodder for their animals and basic food staples for the family such as beans, corn, peanuts and seasonally fruits and vegetables. They have recently left the producing and selling of mandioca starch because of the lack of man labor. In return they sell various amounts of raw mandioca to the local buyer, CAVYSA, in Villa Ygatimí. Their main concern is being able to provide for the family and understand the amount of land is not enough to go around for all the children. They are very fortunate in that one of their children is successful and about to receive his teaching degree and currently brings in some family income due to his teaching assistantship in a neighboring town. Their education is that of grade school up to the sixth grade and some children are attending university to better their economic situation. This year has been particularly bad with the drought and the father has left certain production of crops until the next season hoping the drought will end resulting in better chance. Right now he is more worried about providing the needs for the family to maintain their well being.

154

Appendix F continued

Farmer P's house is one of first houses in the beginning of Puntoclave (need to have a map to follow and then I can show in relation to the other areas of interest) 3rd on the right if entering from the northerly entrance???. Their are two ways to enter into Puntoclave a road connecting from Arío to Puntoclave, frequently used by the residents going back and forth from Villa Ygatimí (18 kilometers) the closet supply town from the areas border of Brazil, Paranhos (30 kilometers) in between Curuguaty (50 kilometers) the nearest town with bus station, Health center, and telephone service (twice the size of Villa Ygatimí). This family lives on eleven hectares and has lived in the area for the last fifteen years in the second 'linea', basically on the other side. These last four years, having shifted their current house to the front of their property to be better centered, in the first stretch of family housing in Puntoclave. They do not own the property rights yet from IBR. Part of their property is slightly sloping, but they have not yet lost a lot of top soil to erosion. Four hectares of their property is currently being used to cultivate crops, five hectares is resting to try and recuperate. Their idea with land not in use is that after a certain period of time, for them four years resting, the soil currently used will be exhausted and with the land left alone they will switch their crops to a new area in the field. This family raises chickens for egg production (personal consumption and for sale) and for meat to put food on the table. They also raise pigs, cows, horses as well as some recreational animals for example two geese and ducks. The animals diets consist of mandioca, corn, rice, field grass and soy. The have one cow which provides them with five liters of milk per day from which they are able to make cheese for the family's home consumption. Within the property of this family, still standing, is two hectares of degraded forest. From this small parcel the family is able to collect some merchantable timber for sale or construction and of course for gathering wild fruits and medicinal plants. The family believes that this resource is very important for the family's survival and therefore would like to conserve what is left. Firewood collection is done by the whole family and is collected from an area 200 meters from the house by three to four people by hand. The family has a wide variety of fruit species, the majority of the trees and plants are where their first house was on the back portion of their lot. The species they have are oranges (sweet and sour), mandarins, grapefruit, various lemon species, mango, mammon, peach and avocado. This family is very interested in planting more rootstock to graft different desirable species of citrus for family consumption with the idea of being able to sell eventually a portion of their production on the open market. In fact in this year 1999 they had excellent production from various species of the citrus. They also produce various vegetables in their home garden which is 15 meters by 15 meters. Another important aspect of their farming techniques is that they left a good portion of the natural regeneration in their cultivation fields and have several mother trees like cedro (put scientific name here) and Peroba, which is a species in danger of extinction. With this scenario this family has interest in planting more trees to make up for the lack of several common species lost to the clearing of land for agricultural production.

155

From past experience with other institutions this family has planted several trees of yerba mate (Ilex paraguaensis). As of now they have ten mature plants of five years which can produce up to 100 kilos of leaf matter per year if they are in good condition. Recently,

Appendix F continued

two years ago, planted more yerba to be exact fifty plants in which they have not harvested yet. Their ultimate goal with the production of yerba is to have a complete hectare in production as a cash crop. They also have enough sour orange trees that they can harvest from periodically up to 500-600 kilos of foliage to sell to a factory just outside of Puntoclave in a bordering community in order to generate income for the family's needs. This family's energy source is a traditional brick oven (tatakua) and stove (fogón) with firewood. This method conserves more firewood than having a open fire, which they had before. This is also changing with the times because of the diminishing resource of firewood, to them having changed to a system where it is necessary to conserve. The family's future is questionable, they are definitely worried about not having enough land to support the family's members because of the traditional inheritance of property within the family's members. Also, they are concerned for the education of their children being an expense for the family to put each child through the education system. Wanting their children to have the option of continuing to study further than high school depends on the general income of the family. Therefore, they are lacking ways of generating money to be able to support the idea of sending their children to for say a university. This family's participation in establishing an agroforestry system with 250 Paraiso gigante tree seedlings donated from the FMB results in having an established woodlot close to the house to use for future firewood collection and some outplantings in their cultivation fields, a small quantity for the production of timber for future revenue. They prepared the field by burning an area planting at a determined spacing of 4 meters between each tree and 5 meters distance between rows to be able to cultivate crops such as beans so as not to lose space and help in better managing this particular tree species. Their survival rate of the initial 250 tree seedlings is 150 broken down into the woodlot 10 meters from the house (25 trees) and 500 meters to the agroforestry system (125 trees in poor condition) within their production field. The established woodlot is being managed well and will sustain the family's need for firewood. On the other hand the established agroforestry system is lacking management because of them not continuing to cultivate this small parcel. They are fairly on top of things but lacking man power to continue the effort to maintain this particular system. Farmer P has lived in Puntoclave for the last ninteen years. He and his family of nine (wife and four females and three males ranging from 10 to 22 years in age) live on eleven hectares not legally titled through IBR. Just four years ago they moved to the front part of their lot to be positioned closer to the main access road. Their community status is highly respected, they are very active in the social activities of the community. He is president of the local soccer club and his wife (current president) and daughter are current members of a recently reorganized women's group. They are a self sustaining household and are able to provide the family with the basic food staples of corn, beans, peanuts and seasonal fruits and vegetables from their home garden. They own several cows which produce milk from which they have cheese too. The wife and daughter have began rearing chickens to produce eggs and meat to sell as another source of income.

156

They are able to grow all the fodder needed to provide the proper alimentation for their animals. Their main source of income is from cotton and Tobacco and periodic sales of mandioca and

Appendix F continued

animals. They are able to sell mandioca to the local buyer, CAVYSA, and from door to door in Villa Ygatimí. The have a very diverse range of crops and just recently added soy for the chicken rearing project. They are surrounded by fruits like orange, grapefruit and various native fruits that provide the family with vitamins vital for good health. The husband was recently in a bad accident rendering him unable to work in the field along side his family and are lucky to have the labor force of the family members. The education level is that of grade school up to the sixth grade. Currently they have two children studying in Villa Ygatimí and so therefore have lost some of their work force and so it is up to the women of the family to manage the fields. The idea is that with these projects they will be able to better provide for the family in terms of firewood for cooking and by possibly having merchantable timber within a time span of tweleve years if their agroforestry system is maintained by the necessary management to promote its fast growth rate over other native species left behind in the abandoned fallow fields.

157

Appendix G

AGRICULTURAL CALENDAR

January The second sowing of peanuts, corn, peas, squash, and sweet potato. Garden preparation, choosing summer varieties and giving them plenty of shade to protect from the intense sun light and heat during the day. Harvesting of tobacco, corn, peas, beans and peanuts is also taking place depending on when sowed the year prior in August, September, October through to November. February Peanuts, corn, peas squash and sweet potato sowing. Garden preparations, for common vegetables, like preparing seedbeds. Sugar cane planting. Tobacco harvesting and the beginning of the cotton harvest. March Most common month for the cotton harvesting and completion of tobacco harvesting. Sow the vegetable seeds and time to prepare seedbeds for bulb onion, garlic for transplanting into the field. The beginning of the first harvesting of soybeans. April Transplanting juvenal plants e.g. onions, tomatoes, and peppers. Cotton harvest ends and soybean and rice harvest intensifies. May Vegetable transplanting continues. The first sowing of tobacco in seedbeds and first sowing of wheat in the fields. Late cotton harvest ends as well as corn, peas and rice. Good for out-planting tree species because of the cooler weather and rains. June Best time to sow wheat and also the last soybean harvest. Good month for out-planting tree species and citrus rootstock as well as fruit trees. Sugar cane harvest begins and this is a common time for mandioca starch to be produced. July Tobacco is completely sown, begin planting sugar cane, mandioca, corn, and beans. Start sowing watermelon seeds for early market prices, harvesting in December. August Plant corn, beans, watermelon, sugar cane and mandioca. The first hoeing for tobacco fields to eliminate the weed competition when plants are little. September Sowing patter similar to August. Transplanting and the start of fruit grafting.

158

Appendix G continued

AGRICULTURAL CALENDAR

October Cash crop sowing season for cotton, rice, and soybeans. The last of the mandioca, ramas, are sown in the field. Harvesting of peanuts and beans for the farmers that sowed a second time in January. November Sow soybean and rice and the last possible sowing of cotton, peanuts and corn. Gardeners are preparing shade structures to protect the summer vegetables from sun damage and moisture loss. December Harvesting season begins, beans, sweet corn, watermelon and peas.

• This calendar is based on information from the Peace Corps Paraguay Agroforestry manual 1991 edition and from my personal observations and activities with farmers. Weather conditions, traditional farming practices like burning to prepare fields, and insect infestations occur randomly throughout the year cause destruction of agricultural and tree crops.