Con·t ract NUf1ber ~r:;J S25-0191-C-OO-1019-00 Project Nu. 525-0191 Project Title: Technjcal Assistan~e to REPARE

PANA~m WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROJECT

FINAL REPORT

August 17, 1981 - August 16, 1983

USAID 525-T-049

Experience, Incorporated 1393

Edward J. Finegan

~atershed Management Advisor

EXPERIENCE, IJ~CORPORA TED MINNE,t>.,POLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1. Introduction 1

2. Integrated Watershed Management 2

2.1 A base for future activities 3 2.2 Centralized ad~inistration 4

3. Project Design and Implementation 7

4. Problems and Recommendations from the local level 10

4.1A Policy/Planning problems 11 4.1B Policy/planning recommE:ndations 13 4 •. 2A Project implementation problems 16 '-t.2B Project implementation recommendations 18 4.3A Community relations problems 19 4.3B Community relations recommendations 21

5 . A Base for Land Use Management 23

5.1 Ecological guidelines fo~ planning 23. 5.2 Results for the Panama Canal watershed 26 5.3 Conflicts existing between land capacity - land use 29 5.4 RecommendFttions related to land capacity/land use conflicts 32

6. Conclusion 37 1. IntroQuction

For two years I have participated as a member of the technical assistance team contracted through Experience, Incorporated to work with the RENARE - USAID Watershed Man­ agement Project. During this period, I have had the oppor­ tunity to work within RENARE and to directly experience the aspirations and frustrations that have existed in attempting to implement an ambitious and complex group of programs under constraining circumstances. Over this period of time, RENARE has grown considerably aD a professional natural resources agency. The experiences gained by RENARE during the project have greatly increased its abilities to deal with many of the natural resources management problems facing Panama today, and will greatly help in successfully implementing future projects.

This u:b'inal Report U analyzes some aspects of the watershed project which have caused difficulties during these first years and provides recommendations based on experiences of RENARE personnel and on my own impressions from my 2 years at the agency. In presenting this information, it is hoped that both the successes and problems from the watershed project can pro­ vide guidance for future courses of action.

In the final sections of this paper, the land's capacity to support various uses is discussed, and the problems of conflict between capacity and actual land use within the Panama Canal Watershed are presented. This information can serve as a guide in future project design and can help in ~o~centrating efforts in those areas most critical for preventing environmental de­ gradation.

\ 2ft Integrated Watershed Management

The need for an integrated approach to natural resources management in many tropical areas has required new emphasis in international assistance efforts. The rapid destruction of the world's tropical fo=est resource is well documented and has beco~e the focus of numerous international projects. Becauee of the complicated socio-economic and cultural facto~s involved in the land use changes occurring in many tropical forest areas, multidisciplinary strategies must be built into project designs to produce viable solutions which protect valuable natural resources while helping to solve the problems of econo­ mic development.

The RENARE - AID Watershed project (525-T-049) was envi­ sioned to eventually have a multidisciplinary approach to solving the resource management problems in the Panama Canal watershed (plus the La Villa and Caldera watersheds). This has been partially limited during the first phase of the project (1979-1983) because of the time required to expand RENARE's capabilities in management, administration and local level project implementation.

Like most developing natural resources institutions, RENARE has a forestry backgr0und and remains most active in this field. Almost all field activities have been oriented to re­ forestation ard forest protection, with slowEr advancement in other aspects o~iginally envisicn~d as integral parts of the overall project. The community develop~ent programs, soil con­ servation, pasture improvement activiti~s - all important to all integrated approach in watershed management - have yet to emerge as significant segments of the project. Agro-industrial and marketing studies related to the forestry and agroforestry components of the project have not kept pace with the agency's

2 planting schedule, resulting in discouragement of local partic­ ipants and few outlets for products produced. Advancements have been made in defining and implementing a system of nation­ al parks and forest reserves, but forest cover continues to disappear at an alarming rate.

2.1 A Base for Future Activities

Despite the limita~ions present in the first phase of the project, major advances have been made by RENARE in prepar­

ing the base needed for future activities~ The ngency's infra= structure and overall professional capability has progressed considerably, and the experience gained through its field acti­ vities during this period has provided insights needed for the agency's development and for the planning and implementation of

fu~ure programs.

The first phase of the project has at least set the foundation for meeting the overall objectives of the watershed project, which iGclude the following:

-Protection of the water supply for the Panama Canal and other industrial and urban usas through land-use management;

-Incorporation of the local population into project activities to provide for local and regional needs while meet­ ing land use management Objectives;

-Protection of native flora and t~una at levels needed to maintain the diversity of the tropical environment, to pro­ vide needed protection, and to provide for economic de~!lopmAnt.

3 The actual implementation of activities to meet these land management objectives has faced many difficulties at both local and national levels. Shifting cultivution and the expan­ sion of cattle activities have been the major forces behind la­ nd use change within the Canal Watershed and other areas of the country. Programs have been organized within the watershed to address the unguided e~pansion of these land uses and to pro­ tect selected forest areas. Many of these efforts are begin­ ning to have significcnt effects in the watershed, but these works would best be described as "pilot" activitles that can serve as a base for planning the long-term programs needed for the watershed.

2.2 Centralized Administration

The rapid growth of the agency over this period w'as accompanied by administrative problems that can be expected in RENARE's transition to a large institution. One result is that the use of loan funds by RENARE has not been well distributed across the different project categories, and total fund dis­ bursements are approximately one year behind the original sche­ dule (See Table 1). More serious results include uneven dis­ tribution of resources to the different levels of the agency, planiling and purchase schedules which are not coordinated with field work needs and purchases which do not meet the needs of the agency.

The administrative problems that have effected inte­ grated management during the first phase of the p~oject can be generally grouped as follows:

- Internal communication - both horizontally between departments and programs, and vertically from the local levels to the national headquarters. One of the primary systems for

4 Table 1. .AID LOAN FUNDS FOR THE I!. 5 YEAR PERIOD ASSIGNED TO THE AID/BENARE WATERSHEDPROJECT AND ACTUALAMOUNTS UTILIZED AT THE END OF 4.0 YEARS

(XiS $000)

'I'otal USAID Funds actually Percentage of Funds Programmed uti} ized at funds used for 4.5 year periad end of 4.0 years by cs.tegory

I. l~~titutionalDevelopment 1,665 67.5 1. Personnel 500 500 100.0 2. Technical Assistance 1,120 635 56.7 3. Training 230 171 76.9 4. Construction 185 60 32.4 5. Equipment and materials 380 336 88.4 6. Evaluation 50 0.0

II. Education and Inyestigatio~ 535 61

Information Center and 535 61 11. i. Wood Techn01ogy. Center

III. Watershed Management

1. Canal Watershed 5 2 750 11,919 85.5 47.6 a. Parks and r~SGrves 800 381 b. Reforestation 3,575 4,194 117.3 c . Soil conservation 1,100 29.7 327 6.2 d. Improved Pastures 275 17

2. La Villa and Ca11era 111 ' , Watersheds 1,250 .1. • .1.

'rO'I1AL $ 1°2°00 $ 6,659 66.6 Total Funds used 88.9 Project time passed communication had been through the yearly workshop for organiz­ ing the annual operative plano The potentials for communi­ cation and effective planning between national and local levels through this method were not fully reached.

- External Communication - the Community Relations De­ partment has been a low priority in the distribution of re­ sources during this phase of the project. As a ~esult, com­ munity opinion related to local level projects has not been sufficiently incorporated into the programs of the agency, and agency programs are not adequately presented to potential par­ ticipants and benefactors. The social promotion program has net yet received the type of attention needed for the scope of project envisioned for the Canal Watershed in which widespread participation of private farmers will be necessary.

- Centralized authority - the increased size of the agency is requiring greater dispersing of decision making to the departments and administrative areaSA This has been a slow process partially due to frequent changes in the administra­ tion. Funds directly available to the different sub-divisions of the agency ",ould help remove many of the small decision pro­ blems that currently flood the national level.

- Clerical capacity - this has improved during the first phase of the project. However, the demands placed on this part of the agency have grO'.<1n at a faster pace than the agency's abilities to deal with them. This has been one factor in delayed purchases, voucher processing, 8tC. that has effect­ ed field activities since the beginning of the project.

- Political constraints - as a sub-division of the Ministry of Agriculture (MIDA), RENARE must process many of its needs through an additional level of administration. There are

6 frequent delays, and there are many potential areas of conflict in policy with the agricultural/cattle divisions of the minis­ try_ Government of Panama funds are channeled through MIDA. Such political and financial aspects of administration along with personnel management could be more effectively handled if RENARE existed as an independent public institute.

3. Project Design and Im~mentation

The general concepts in the design of the USAID-RENARE watershed project were sufficiently stated in early studies and in the AID project paper. The need for an integrated approach to the complex natural resources problems in the Canal Water­ shed plus the La Villa and Caldera areas was presented in these earlier works. The division of the project's focus into seg­ ments for institutional development, reforestation, national parks and forest protection, soil conservation and pasture im­ provement provided a framework for addressing particular natural resource problems in the project's watershed areas.

In an attempt to strengthen RENARE across a wide range of natural resource management areas, the AID loan was used for various activities which overlapped with the responsibilities of other agencies. This would include such areas as pasture improvement and soil classification (more appropriately managed by IDlAAP)i hydrology and water quality (monitoring aspects are already handled by IRHE in many parts of the country and by the Panama Canal Commission in the Canal watershed); and certain aspects of agroforestry such as mono-cultural plantations of fruits or nuts and other agricultural experiments (more appro­ priate to IDlAAP). In addition to these overlaping areas, RENARE actively developed programs in more appropriate natural resource areas such as ~eforestation, national parks and reo­ serves, wildlife, and certain aspects of soil conservation.

7 After spending 2 years within RENARE and seeing its technical strengths and weaknesses, I feel that efforts are best spant on the following:

-Natural Resources Protection: extensive forest areas shown to be unsuitable for non-forest use (according to the Tosi land capability classificaticn) continue to be cleared within the Canal watershed and throughout the country. Protect­ ing what is already in place is easier and more economical than reforestation~ Soma advances in park and forest reserve pro­ tection hav~ occurred during the watershed project by strength­ ening the' Parks and Wildlife Department and by organizing man­ agement plans for certain park and reserve areas. Considering the importance of these efforts in the management of the Canal and other watersheds, not nearly enough funds have been direct­ ed into these activities. In future projects, protection must assume a top priority position and funds increaseci according­ ly. This must include the definition and protection of park/ reserve boundaries~ the definition of appropriate multiple-use regulations for forest reserves with t~e needed suppo~t pro­ grams; the setting aside of unique t scenic and other special use areas and reserves; the expansion of public education re­ lated to the appropriate use of these protected lands; and the incorporation of private groups into the agency's protection activities.

-Land Use Man~gement: Foundation work has been com­ pleted during the project period related to land use, land capability, conflicts between current use and land capabi­ lities, and basic strategies to address lanG use management within the Canal watershed. To make further progress ill this area requires concentrated efforts aimed at selected land use problems in specific sub-watershed areas. Investigation is especially necessary in silvo-pastural systems incorporating forest and pasture management systems. This is an obvious area

8 of overlap between RENARE and IDIAAP in which inter~agency co­ operation could help promote solutions to cattle exploitation on lands not totally suited to open pastures. Such "mixed" land uses can help bring many areas within the watershed that are now over exploited from cattle production more into line with their true capacity~ Other important areas related ~o land use management in need of emphasis in futuLe watershed activities include: a legislative framework providing enforce­ ment authority to correct critical land use problems; a system of taxes and incentives to encourage land use in accordance with the land's capacity; investigation and on-the-farm appli­ cation of agri-silviculture in shifting cultivation areas using multilayered production methods incorporating annuals, peren­ nials and tree crops (Oro Charles Briscoe begap- some work using these methods with small farmers in the Canal watershed in 1982); a technical assistance effort aimed at promoting silvo pastoral and agri-silviculture land use at the individual farm level ..

-Tropical forestry/Silviculture - In these fir~t years of watershed management at RENARE considerable force has gone into tree nursery development and reforestation; primarily by monocultural plantations. Although this work in itself can serve certain investigative purposes, a strong tropical fores­ try program incorporating investigation and practical appli­ cation has not yet developed in the context of the watershed project~ To help give direction in the corning years t future project funds would be important in the following areas: inves­ tigative work with native and exotic tree species aimed at pro­ ducing a!?propriate combinations for use in sil'/o-pastoral, agri-silviculture and private and communal WOOGlots within the ecological constraints of the watershed and other designated project areas; proper forest management systems for use within the multiple-use areas of the forest reserves~ the development of a satellite nursery program which would transfer seedling

9 production technology directly to individual farmers or groups in those areas where private reforestation efforts are to be encouraged; and a seed collection and seed bank program which fully meets the needs of the agency.

The funding of integrated watershed development through AID loans and grants would be more effective if a sys- tern ( ller projects incorporating various agencies were The "big" project approach such as with the RENARE

~oan is probably easier to manage but does not pro- v~a _~mulus or a forum for an integrated, inter-agency ap- proach to natural resources management problems. A group of problem specific natural resources loans channeled through an Alb project officer and some form of coordinating committee of host agencies could provide both stimulus and forum.

4~ Problems and Recommendations From the Local Level

As can be expected in the first years of any project's implementation in the field, various problems have surfa~ed which can bl~ helpful in redefining strategies and programs for futur~ phases of the project. The problems and recommendations presented here are based on discussions and interviews with , RENARE professionals and technicians, with farmers and with other participants active in programs at the local level. These problems and recommendations focus on the programs of re­ forestation, protection, soil conservation and pasture improve­ ment, dnd are grouped into the following inter-related cate­ gories: policy/planning, project implementation, and community relations.

10 4.lA Policy/Planning PY.obJ.ems

The following areas were defined by local project participants and staff as important policy-institutional defi­ ciences in the first phase of the wat~rshed project:

-There was not enough flexibility in tne initial proqram models to permit application under the divers ~ ecolo­ gical and social conditions ~ound within the differenc water­ shed areas. The same basic approaches were defln~d for use across all groups, which frequently made the different programs unacceptable to mosi beca~se of socia], e~onomic or ecol~gical constr.aints.

gie5 (.:i.S n".j ~P'''3r: or .. girn 1..:.y pru ..jr21.u.ro,:;'. .t?r0'Ul~~"s t.ha"': surfaLec: in the firc.~, :;C "lp.: E' of.__ +:.~ 1'-< .. <,,_ to only grow t';iL~e!: thc..n be addressle<.?~t> :r:.~ s lc=ci J .. ~ , "r:~}~_ "£Jsa.r:v- program ,",.ifficlllties and failur(~s .

-In the case -:)f t1i.r;; sr.)~;.1. ~,),. . .:.i on and pasture improvement programs! no clear: POllCY,·°Ct.:':; ever presented to the local communities to better direct the actual programs.

-Overall, no global land use policy emerged during the first phase of the project to give RENARE the local level guidance ~eeded for a well coordinated project.

-In the case of reforestation on 'rastrojo' lands in shifting cultivation areas, no long-term policy was def~ned re­ lated to th~ role of participating communities in the manage­ ment of these areas in future yearsQ This has meant less com­ munity acceptance and increased pressures on other forested areaso Community and individual rights on reforested lands were not adequately defined.

11 -Policy dec~sions related tQ the project were or­ ganized at the c~ntral level, a,~d a 1 though l.ocal needs were considered, direct community partic:paticn was not a sufficient part of the process. This has af~ec~ed program adequacy, effi­ ciency and accepta~~e.

~Tlle1:."e 1'_...'..3 be~n r~"J \rlell def.ined P011Cy related to investigatiun anJ da~a collection to help in lung-term planning efforts.

-Re f~n-!stCl tion acti vi ties were frequently concen­

trated i~: second~ry forest areas which had already been provid­ ing prstg~tior.. Fire protection of ret~rested areas was not p-~~erly planned for.

-~he frequent transfer of personnel makes continuity diffi~ult at the local level, and community interactiol1 gained by individual staff members is lost upon their removal.

-There are many areas of overlap with programs of other agenc18s and yet there is little cooperation or communi­ cation. There is little RENARE input into credit and loan decisions by the financial community which affect land use changes.

-Although road construct:on is a primary cause of soil erosion within the Canal watershed, there has been little 6 if any, cooperation between RENARE and MOP to control this pr.o­ blem. MOP decisions on rural road lOCation and construction have a great impact on land use developments which may be coun­ ter to long-term watershed management objectives defined in the

AID-RENARE project~

12 The lack of a clearly defined policy related to the collection or publication of data concerning local level proj­ ects, problems, experiences and successes hinders agency growth, and has ca'lsed repeated errors. Much information is loot when people are transferred, limiting institutional mern0ryo At the central lev~l, the documentation center has not been adequate for many technical needs.

Policy/Planning Recommendations

To provide a basis for redirection in current pro­ grams and general pol icies r the followi:i,g recommendations h':-;'-e 0E.:m organized from lOCCI.l .:.evel discussions:

-As a first ~ policies and programs ior. future phases of the project should be based on the experiences gained during these first years and should use such experiences to de­ fine new alternatives to participants, new te~hniques adaptable to diverse co~ditions, and new systems to provide for a trans­ fer of ideas and technolcgy not only from the national level to the local communities but also vice versao Publications of information by local personnel ~s an important step in tllis procedure.

-RENARE needs to define clear criteria to use in the selection of project lands. This should be based on ecologi­ cal, social and infrastructural considerations to optimize the project objectives of natural resources protection and com­ munity jevelopment in those areas most likely to produce posi­ tive and demonstrable results. mha use of a land capability classification as a guide in this process needs to be incorpo­ r~ted into the overall planning process. Areas suitable for shifting cultivation, permanent crops, intensive agriculture, pastures, forestry, etc. must be defined before implementing the specific programs to avoid conflicts with the land's actual capacity to support selected uses and to minimize wasted ef­ forts.

13 -Cultural and socio-economic characteristics within the different areas must be incorporated into the basic program models to provide the needed flexibility for implementing the programs under the diverse social conditions existing in tre watershed. The traditional technologies of these different groups must be understood and used as much as possib~e within the framework of RENARE's long-term objectives. Existing social structures, such as 'asentimientos ' , need to be better utilized within project activities. This has been done to a limited extent in some administrative areas, but needs greater emphasis.

-The programming of activities within the project needs to be realistic. The operative plans ln the first phase were never in accordanc~ with the abilities to implement the various programs at the local level. The funds available for a given year need to be clearly defined to allow for a national preparation of departmental and local area plans. A clear set of priorities must be presented to give direction to the opera­ tive planning precess, and resources should be allocated ac­ cordingly. Maintenance activities need greater weight in this overall processu

-RENARE needs a management policy that gives clearly defined rights to participants in reforestation areas and pro­ vides them economic returns from the production plantations. This would generate greater acceptance of RENARE's policies in tbaldido ' areas. Maranon and other production sites in areas of shifting cultivation must provide this type of economic re­ turn since they remove land areas potentially usable through traditional cropping systems by the local populations.

14 -There needs to be a policy which would require written annual reports, or at least a final report before leav­ ing or changing assignments. The reports would include des­ criptions of the work accomplished and recommendations for im­ proving the project. This type of "local view" is important for organizing programs that are applicable to the diverse needs that exist in the different geographical areas. Without a collection of this type of information, much experience in each project area is lost each time there is a change of as­ signments. At a more professional level , the publication of work needs to be stimulated. Some works that have been prepar­ ed duriDg the fir~t years of the project are waiting to be published, and those few actually published have not been well distributed.. A more complete and organizF.!d library is needed as a way of providing professional level information and to collect and distribute information concerning RENARE's acti­ vities, problems, solutions, etc., and to provide data from other sources. This would provide for easier planning and evaluation activities. A committee to encourage and evaluate internal pUblications is essential.

-More permanent employees working at the local level would enhance protect experience and interaction with the local communities. Also, longer term contracts with locally hired personnel would aid in the transfer of new technologies.

-There must be an organized system between govern­ ment agencies functioning within the Canal watershed (and other project areas) to coordinate planning and project implemen­ tation activities and to define funding needs and sources. Under the Joint Commission on the Environment (JCE), preli­ minary discussions have begun between the Panama Canal Commis­ sion and other public institutions and agencies functioning in the watershed management system. As the entity most active ln natural resources conservation and related aspects of land-use management, RENARE should assume a dominant role in these dis­ cussions and later activities.

15 4.2A proje~ Implementation Problems

The following is a list of problems cited at the local level of project activities:

-Initial emphasis has been to concentrate refores­ tation activities on state controlled lands. This has proven to be expensive and has limited REN~RE1S ability to expand activities at the projected rates. Local farmers hired to participate in activities on these lands serve primarily as 'peones' and generally do not view these programs as an inte­ grated part of their communities.

-This lack of true integration has been felt by local farmers through RENARE1s use of species which are fre­ quently not prefezred by local farmers (although they may be considered desirable at the national level because of possible export values). Without guarantees of access to markets for such species, private farmers are reluctant to invest in re­ forestation, and salaried farmers expect little return beyond the initial wages paid by RENAREo

-Many plantations are located on lands with poor ac­ cessibility. This has increRsed initial establishment costs, and will increase later costs of taking products to market, or may make product marketing unfeasible.

-There has been emphasis placed on expanding plan­ tation areas at a rate greater than RENARE's a.bility to main­ tain them. As a result, significant areas have been lost to in­ vading secondary growth or saccharum grass. Saccharum grass has been costly to control.

16 -The tree nurseries established under the project have never functioned at their potential. In many cases they are far f~om the actual reforestation sites, and because, of continual transportation problems, trees do not reach planta­ tion areas in sufficient numbers when most needed. Species or varieties present are often of inferior quality. Design and maintenance problems abound.

-In the area of ~oil conservation, too much emphasis has been placed on the idea of constructing physical structures for erosion control and not enough on integrated soil-land use management.

-The majority of field activities has depended on short term contracts with local workers. These contracts have started late each year or not at all. This has caused serious friction with local communities. Contracts generally are for' a maximum of 6 months. This has not been adequate to properly maintain plantation areas.

-Seed collection for forestry programs is not pro­ perly organized. Seed is not collected at optimum periods for various species and does not arrive at the nurseries at the proper time, and is frequently of poor quality.

-The long rotations required by many tree species make it difficult to incorporate local small farmers into many reforestation efforts except through direct contracts.

-Concerning linkage between central and local levels of the agency, coordination of activities with local systems has been far below potential. The local areas have little pet­ ty cash to use in everyday management activities, and requests submitted to the central level to meet even minimum resource needs are not processed promptly, if at all.

17 The pasture improvement program frequently does not have access to needed machinery. No extension system has been developed to reach a significant segment of the population.

4.2B Project Implementation Recommendations

Based on local level discussions, the following eme:::ge:

-There must be a greater emphasis on working with private farmers or organized groups instead of depending so extensively on salaried workers to advance reforestation and land protection objectives. This requires a redefinition of incentives within the programs in which tax credit and exten­ sion would play a major role in encouraging direct participa­ tion of private farmers or organized groups.

-In accordance with results from land capability studies conducted during the first phase of the project, there needs to be an increased emphasis on permanent crops in many areas of the watershed. This would be an important part of any credit/technical assistance program at the local level. RENARE

would play an important role in overall land use ma~ag~;ment activities, but actual program implementation would reC!uire greater inter-agency cooperation to be effective and to avoid waste.

-Government land use management programs have to ac­ commodate local technologies. The Canal watershed has a di­ verse cultural mix and will need programs that are suitable for these different cultural groups. Local RENAru~ and other agency personnel need a more technical understanding of local cropping and land management technologies. Such data needs to be clear- ly organized and distributed. This would provide a foundation on which improvements could be introduced that would be more easily transferred to local farmers.

18 -Specific information on species and varieties of annuals, perennial and permanent tree crops with potential agroforestry applications needs to be organized and thoroughly distributed to stimulate local interest.

-More emphasis should be placed on silvo-pastoral management methods as part of the soil conservation and pasture improvement programs.

-Pasture improvement plots should be smaller and more numerous to reach a greater percentage of farmers and pro­ vide for easier access to produced seed materials for both RENARE and the· farmer s •

-Seedling production in any future reforestation ef­ forts should be based on a system of small satellite nurseries. These should be under the control of local farmers or groups, with RENARE providing technical assistance and certain support resources needed to start-up the program. Such a system would be more economical and provide a better base for technology transfer.

-More basic resources must be transferred to the locaL level to allow personnel in-the-field to actually imple­ ment project activities.

4.3A Communi ty Relations Problems

Difficulties include the following:

-Many small farmers did not feel they were incorpo­ rated into the reforestation effort except to serve as laborers for RENARE's programs. The=e was little information provided

19 to the local communities concerning what FillNARE's programs were or what would be the long-term role of these programs within the communities. Little interaction.

-In the rare circumstances where local communities actually had contact with RENARE's social promotion people, reactions were favorable, but results were limited by an almost complete lack of resources. The fact that the promotion staff commuted from Panama or other communities was viewed as a limi­ ting factor in their ability to motivate community organization and participation.

-There is a low level of education among the rural people located in many areas where RENARE's programs are most needed, such as on the edge of the agriculture-forest frontier. This, and the general poverty of these areas has complicated any efforts to change existing land use systems or to regulate current practices. RENARE's own limited reso~rces have slowed its efforts to provide alternatives.

-The low priority given to the social promotion ac­ tivities during the project has prevented RENARE from integrat­ ing into the local communities.

-There has been little incorporation of existing rural groups into project activities. RENARE has not taken full advantage of existing community structures.

-Under the current programs there is little incen­ tive to participate except for the salaries paid to contracted labor. Some incentives such as seedlings on credit llave exist­ ed but only on a limited scale.

20 -Farmers not incorporated into the RENARE contract system frequently view the agency as a taker of loca~ lands they need fer slash and burn agriculture. This loss of land used for annual production puts increased pressure on other forest land in some areas. The problem of slash and burn agri­ culture remains unsolved unless alternatives can be provided to the entire community for producing or obtaining food needs.

-Lack of titles on many farmed areas of the agricul­ ture-forest frontier reduces the interest of most farmers to participate in long-term rotations of trees or agroforestry at their own expense because of poor security and control in these land areas. There is more interest when land is under greater personal or community control such as those areas closest to individual homes and settlements.

-Unclear ownership rights on 'baldio' lands and the lack of a clear policy by RENARE is a disincentive to private farmers to participate in reforestation efforts.

-Lack of seeds and technica~ assistance limits pri­ vate experimentation with agroforestry. Lack of transport and markets for fruit production are other constraints in many areas.

Community Relations Recommendations

These are primarily related to changes in methods of local participation:

-A new strategy is needed away from the current pa­ tronage approach so that the individual farmers or organized groups assume rights and obligations in reforestation and agro­ forestry programs. In areas where individual use-rights have

21 been established on the land, there is an overwhelming prefe­ rence for private control and responsibility. In these areas, a great part of the cost (primarily labor) of establishing agri silviculture and silvo-pastoral systems would be assumed by the individual participants. It is in these areas where technical assistance through a satellite nursery program would be most effective.

-In areas where use-rights are not secure or where the state will maintain those rights (such as in forest re­ serves), the continuance of a strategy based on a direct pay­ ment system may be necessary. This would really only be desir­ able in areas designated for multiple~use as buffers to parks and protected areas. In these cases a primary objective would oe to stabilize the agriculture-forest frontier and to provide the communities in such areas with an alternative to slash and burn agriculture. This has been done to some extent in the first years of the project. However a necessary change in these early attempts would be to assign certain clear ownership rights to products produced from these state lands. Without such right there is little incentive to maintain established plots and there is increased pressure on neighboring land. Participating farmers should also assume a major role ln de­ signing the agroforestry systems and in the selection of crop species to be used. Costs to RENARE '~ould be greatly reduced with such changes.

-An inter-agency approach is needed in agroforestry activities with local communities to assure proper technical assistance related to agricultural and tree crops, and to as­ sure clear information related to markets and local agroindus­ trial potentials for crops to be produced.

22 5. A Base for Land Use ~naqement

The need for a guide to aid in the implementation of the natural resource management programs of the watershed nas been evident since the first year of field activities. Although there are obvious indicators in the field to help define the more critical areas of degradation, there has been no clear guide that provides ecological and socio-economic conditions and limitations, factors needed to be taken in account when organizing overall management plans. In order to provide this type of information for future activities, work was conducted during the projAct to organize data related to maximum land capacity to support different uses, actual land use conflicts that exist betwee~ the land's capacity and its actual use, and other socio-economic and political factors which effect the dy­ namics of land use change~

5.1 Ecological Guidelines for Plannin~

As part of the technical assistance effort for the watershed project, ecological studies were conducted in the Canal watershed and also the La Villa and Caldera watersheds under an Experience, Incorporated contract with the Tropical Science Center of Costa Rica. This work was conducted under the direction of Dr. Joseph Tosi, and the results are presented in the report, "Tropical Forest Ecology of Three Watersheds in Panama". The study will not be described here except to men­ tion a few points of surumary. The work included the following activities:

1) Identification and delineation of life zones ac­ cording to the Holdridge classification, and the presentation of the different life zones at a map scale of 1:100,000 for the Canal watershed and 1:50,000 for the La Villa and Caldera watersheds;

23 2) Descriptions in each life zone of the most repre­ sentative associations based on soil and vegetative studies conducted in certain areas covered with natur~l vegetation in the Canal watershed;

3) Elaboration of land use capacity maps for the 3 watersheds based on the Tosi system at 1:100,000 scale for the Canal watershed and 1:50,000 for the La Villa and Caldera watersheds.

liThe Tosi system permits in quantitative form the classification of maximum use capacity of rural land according to the bioclimatic conditions, physiographic and edaphic fa~­ tors, and the system of agro-technology employed."

The bioclimatic conditions utilized in the Tosi work are precipitation and bi0temperature as incorporated in Hold­ ridge's life zone ecology classification system. Four dif­ ferent life zones were defined for the Canal watershed: wet tropical forest, very wet tropical forest, very wet premontane forest, and premont~ne rainforest. The work also defined 6 life zones in the Rio La Villa watershed, and 5 life zones in the Rio Caldera watershed. The previously cited work contains ample descriptions of all the above life zones as they occur ln the different watershed.

The land use ccpacity mapping is based on established limits of 10 physiographic and edaphic factors according to prepared keys for each life zone. The 10 factors are:

24 - % of slope ( 5 classes) - microrelief (4 classes) - effective soil depth (5 classes) - soil texture (4 classes) - rockiness (5 classes) - internal drainage (5 classes) - fertility (5 classes) - degree of erosion present (5 classes) - salinity - flood danger (5 classes)

Risk of erosion is one of the basic criteria in the defi­ nition of land capacity. The Tosi system incorporates the uni­ versal equation for determining soil losses (as defined by Wischmeier and Smith) under different climatic and soil con­ ditions. That equation is as follows:

where

A = soil loss in tons/hectare/year

R =: rain factor K = soil's susceptibility to erosion L = length of the slope in meters S = % of slope C = v8getative cover protection index P = protection index of soil conservation methods used

The primary sources of information for land form and soil data were studies conducted during the 1960's by the Castastro Rural de Tierras y Aguas de Panama (CATAPAN). Incorporating this with climatic data provides a means of determining appro­ priate land uses or vegetative cover under the different slope conditions, considering the soil conservation and agricultural techniques used.

25 5.2 Results for the Panama Canal Watershed

Using a grid with a scale of one grid square/16 hec­ tare, I measured the area for each of the diff~rent land capa­ city classes presented on the 1:100,000 scale map of the Canal watershed prepared by the Tropical Science Center. A summary of the results is prese.Lted in Table 2. The capacity classes were defined as follows:

5.2A Protection (X) - land areas mostly located in the upper reaches of the watershed where slopes are steep and the bioclimates are very moist. These areas are found in various life zones - very humid tropical forest, very humid premontane forest and premontane rainforest. Most of this land remains forest covered. Several smaller areas are classified for pro­ tection due to drainage or rockiness.

5.2B Protection - Production Forestry (XB) - This category covers the majority of the land area 'of the watershed (52.4%) and includes most of the Chagres Forest Reserve. These areas are steep and- very moist for the most part, but less so than those under the (X) classification. In conversations, I have had with Joseph Tosi, he has explained that fbr most of these land areas, protection would have to be considered the appropriate land classification considering the importance of most XB areas for protecting the water supply of the Panama Canal. Although XB areas under very controlled circumstances can support a low level of production forestry, without serious environmental damage, this would have to be more site specific than the 1:100,000 scale capacity map can indicate. Extraction of products is difficult and would require special techniques in many areas.

26 5.2C Production Forest.~y (B) - Covering an addi tional 20.2% of the watershed, these areas would have fewer restric­ tions on production than the XB areas. Slopes are less and the gener~l potential for erosion is lower. Caution in harvesting and/or extracting products is needed to conserve and protect the soil.

5.2D Production Forestry - Permanent Tree Crops (BCF) and Production Forestry - Permanent Crops (BC) - Combined, these two land capacity types comprise 20% of the watershed. These areas are most appropriate for agri-silviculture using multi layered cropping systems. Ideally, these areas could be managed relying on local technologies in which various annu~ls, perennials and tree crops are grown on the same site to provide high pro~ection and good returns to farmers.

5.2E Permanent Crops - Pasture (CP and PC) and Pasture Permanent Crops nnual Crops (PCA) - These two land classes have an approximate area of 4% of the Canal Watershed. Areas actually recommended for pastures and permanent crops are generally of moderate to low fertility, or have moderate to low soil depth and/or are rocky. They are of relatively level or rolling topography. Some annual cropping may be appropriate on scattered sites within these land areas where soils are deeper and more fertile.

5.2F Permanen: Crops - Annual Crops (CA) and Annual Crops (A). - CA equals 1.1% and A equals L.2% of the watersheds land area. Because of the low soil fertility in the Canal Watershed, CA and A lands are scarce. In general, these lands have a moderate to high level of natural fertility, are flat or slightly sloped, hav~ good natural drainage, are basic or slightly acidic, have no erosion or stoniness, have moderate to deep soils of light to heavy texture.

27 TABLE 2

Summary of data for the Panama Canal Watershed on the classificiation of the land surface's capacity to support various land uses. (Based on Tropical Forest Ecology of Three Watersheds in Panama, Tropical Science Center, 1983)

Hap Area in % of land

Symbol Hectares ~n Watershed

Protection x 2,932 1.1 Protection - production forestry XB 145,924 52.4 Production forestry B 56,242 20.2 Production forestry - permanent tree crops BCF 51,617 18.5 Production forestry permanent crops BC 3,892 Permanent crops - pasture CP - PC 10,228 Pasture - permanent crops­ annual crops PCA 1,075 0.4 Permanent crops - annual crops CA 2,980 1.1 Annual crops A 3,420 1.2

Total land area 278,310 100.0% Water covered 47,750 Total watershed area 326,060

28 5.3 Conflicts Existing Between Land Capacity and Actual Land Uses

Using the land capacity work of the Tropical Science Center along with the most current land use information avail­ able through RENARE (1980), I constructed a map overlay to show the types of conflict existing between capacity and actual land use. Using a grid overl~y with a scale of 1 grid square /16 hectares, the areas for the different land use/land capacity combination were measured. The results are presented in Table 30 The table combines the 4 illajor land use classes that pre­ sently dominate in the Canal Watershed (primary forest, shift­ ing cultivation/forest fallow, pastures in fallow or weed covered, pastures with scattered agriculture) with the land capacity classification categories previously defined. Al­ though the actual land use categories are not the same as those of the capacity classification, there is enough information to show in general terms the types of conflicts existing batween use and capacity for the watershed's lands.

5.3A Primary Forest - This study's results show that these forest areas cover 45.1% of the watershed's land area for a total of 125,500 hectares. Of this 125,500 hectares, 82% are located on lands classified for having a capacity mainly for protection activities (X and XB); 17% are on areas classified for production forestry and tree crop production (B and BCF); and the remaining areas (less than 2%) are classified primarily for pasture and permanent crop production. Therefore, almost all areas presently covered with forest should remain under some type of forest cover to provide needed protection and to remain within the land's maximum use capacity.

29 TABLE 3. Comparison of Actual Land Use with the Tos1 Land Capacity Classification in the Psnama Canal Watershed

Land Capacity Classification

Pasture­ Produc- Produc- Permanent Permanent tion For- tion For­ Protection Totals - Crops - Crops.­ Permanent estry-Per estry-Per Produc Produc According Annual Annual Annual CroFs - manent manent tion - tion - Protection To Actual Crops Crops Crops Pastur~ Crops Tree Crops Forestry Forestry areas Land Use

1. Primary Forest CP Map Symbol lA leA IPCA 1 PC IBC lBCF IB iXB IX Area in hectares (x's 000) .554 .212 1.18 5.03 15.8 101 1.68 125.5 % of land in watershed .199 .076 .424 1.81 5.68 36.3 .604 45.1%

2. Forest Fallo\oO/Shifting Cultivation CP Map Symbol 2A 2CA 2PCA 2 PC 2BC 2ECF w 2B 2XB 2X o Area in hectares (x's 000) 1.19 1. 82 .375 5.21 2.13 17.0 23.1 31.6 .635 84.06 % of land in watershed .423 .654 .135 1.87 .765 6.11 8.30 11.2 .228 30.27.

3. Pastures - fallow or weed covered CP Map Symbol 3A 3CA 3PCA 3 PC 3BC 3BCF 38 3XB 3X Area in hectares (x's 000) .081 .114 2.07 2.75 5.15 10.16 % of land in watershed .029 .040 .744 .988 1.85 3.6%

4. Pastures with Scattered Agriculture CP Map Symbol 4A 4CA 4PCA 4PC 4BC 4BCi 4B 4XB 4X Area in hectares (x's 000) 2.23 .521 .489 3.73 1. 76 27.5 14.6 7.69 .586 59.11 % of land in watershed .801 .187 .176 1.34 .632 9.88 5.25 2.76 .211 21.2% Total according hee. 3.42 2.98 l.08 10.2 3.89 51.6 56.2 146 2.90 278.3 to land capacity % L 2:! 1. 07 .387 3.67 1.40 18.5 20.2 52.5 1 • .04 100% 5.3B Forest Fallow/Shifting Cultivation - Based on available data, 30.2% of the watershed was used for activities related to shifting cultivation when including areas of forest fallow secondary forest growth. Of the 84,000 hectares within this category, 38% are located on lAndt with capacity classi­ fications for primarily protection a ctivities (X and XB); 50% are in areas classified for production forestry and production forestry incorporated with various permanent crops (B, BCF and

Be); 7% ar~ in areas suitable for pasture and permanent crop combinations (CP, PC and PCA); and 4% are on areas suitable for annual cropping and/or permanent crop combinations (A and CA). If the areas classified for production forestry (without crops) are included with the protection areas, then the shifting cultivation and associated forest fallow areas can be consider­ ed to be exceeding the lands support capacity on 65% of the 84,000 hectares where this use predominates. The actual degree of danger to these sites would be dependent on the length of the forest fallow, cropping techniques, degree of multi-layered cropping present (tree/crop combinations), length of cropping period, plus the various site limitations. There are ~o ' cir­ cumstances where this use can be considered suitable in X and XB sites.

5.3C Pastures - Fallow or Weed Covered - These are land areas previously cleared of forest and which are now covered by weeds such as saccharum grass, or which have been used for pasture, but are currently in fallow or overgrown. Slightly more than 10,000 hectares or 3.6% of the watershed land areas are within this classification. Of this 10,000 hec­ tares, 51% are located on land with a capacity classification for primarily protection activities (XB); 47% are located on areas suited for production forestry and permanent tree crop combinations (B and BCF); and less than 2% are on areas suited for pasture or more intensive uses (PC and CAl. More than 98%

31 of this land use has been located on land not capable of sup­ porting open, non-forest land use without serious site degra­ dation. ~his may be a primary reason for these areas' initial management problems when converted to nonforest use and the abandonment of many such lands to weed cover.

5.3D Pastures With Scattered Agriculture - These areas have pasture as the primary use, but agriculture plots can be found scattered throughout. Photo and land use map scales and categories have not permitted an accurate separation of pasture and most agriculture land useso Slightly more than 59,000 hec­ tares or 21.2% of the watershed's land area are within this land use category. Of these 59,000 hectares, 14% are located in areas with capacity classifications for primarily protection

(X a~d XB); 25% are on production forestry areas (B) and 50% on production forestry/permanent crop lands (BCF and BC); 7% are located on areas classified predominantly for pasture/permanent crop combinations (PC, CP, PCA); and less than 5% are on more intensive use areas for annual crops and permanent crops (CA and A). Eighty-eight percent of this land use category is located on lands in which such use~ is in excess of the land's support capacity. Environmental deterioration and site degrad­ ation can be expected on such areas, the degree of which would depend on specific site conditions and the degree of intensity of the land use practices.

5e4 Recommendations Related to Land Capacity/Land use Conflicts

For future phases of the Watershed project, the types of conflict existing between land capacity and land use shown in this report can be used to help in re-orienting project strategies and design. The following recommendations are made to help in the planning process:

32 5.4A As stated in other sections of this paper, pro­ tection must assume the dominant role in Canal watershed acti­ vitieso The land capacity/land use data clearly indicates that the great majority of agricultural/cattle land use is already on lands ~ot suited for such intensive utilization. There is no evidence to support the view that the first phase of the project has had a significant effect in altering land use pat­ terns or the dynamics of lan~ use change. With 82% of the re­ maining primary forest areas being l0cated on sites classified for protection (X and XB capacity), environmental degradation and soil erosion problems can be expected to increase unless effective systems are implemented to protect these critical forest areas from the encroachment of less suitable land uses. Recommendations from RENARE's Parks and Wildlife Department to incorporate most of this land within a national park are appro­ priate and would lead to a suitable use of these areas if the needed resources and political support are provided to protect the boundaries from encroachment.

5e4B In areas where actual use is already in conflict with the land's support capacity, corrective programs need to be implemented. This has been an objective in the first phase of the project, but the followinif changes in programs are need­ ed to produce more effective results:

B.l Efforts need to be more concentrated on the most critical areas of conflict rather than be widely dispersed as in the first phase. This would lower resource and main­ tenance problems and the results would be more demonstrable and provide a better base for long-term watershed management.

33 B.2 Agro-forest~y must playa more important part in future activities. This does not mean more state mono­ cultural plantations such as maranon (cashew), but a greater

effort on the individ~al farm level with silvo-pastoral systems and multi-layered agri-silvicultural cropping methods. The land capacity classification recommends the use of multi-crop systems on more than 25% of the Canal watershed's land area. In addition, there are some possibilities of using layered forest-tree crop combinations on some of the additional 20% of land areu cl~ssified for forest production. On other forest production sites, the greater use of communal and individual forest management on selected sites could help to integrate such lands into local econo~ies and provide a means of protect­

i~g such areas while generating employment ~nd 10cal le~el d9- velopment.

B03 With 65% of shifting cultivation and 88% of

paR~u~e/open cropping occurring on lands no~ capable of sup­ porting such uses for the long-term, local technical assistance and community education efforts need to be greatly expanded to bring about the shifts in local land use needed to prevent the degradation of the area's natural resource base. To effective­ ly implement such programs, a clear understanding of the diver­ se communities and cultural groups present in the different regions is necessary. Although some basic socioeconomic and cultural information has been gathered in different watershed areas through various public institutions and by individuals ov"r the years, it has not been well coordinated. During the Water.shed project new census data has been collected, and Ing. Rosario de Rivera has organized much of this data so that it can be used in program planning. Additional anthropological and basic sociological data should be gathered in those areas considered of critical importance in overall land use planning and watershed management objectives.

34 S.4C In both the case of protection and addressing land capacity/land use conflicts, systems of incentives and disincentives to encourage compliance with land use regulations need to be implemented. During the first years of the Water­ shed project, the incentive/disincentive systems used to help meet land use objectives were nvt well developed. As a result, RENARE had difficulties in advancing any widespread application of its land protection and management programs by local far­ mers. Some possible incentive/disincentive methods with pos­ sible application in the Canal watershed and other areas in­ clude the following:

C.l Credit be available through future projects specifically designed to address problems related to land ca­ pacity/land use conflicts. This should be aimed at cattle and shifting cultivation land use areas due to the high degree of land use/capacity conflict now existing. This should be chan­ neled through appropriate financial institutions, with RENARE and other institutions providing technical assistance and the needed integration of land use policy objectives.

C.2 Tax systems be devised to encourage desired land management. In many parts of Latin America, reductions in tax rates have been used as incentives to encourage reforesta­ tion and other conservation methods. It might also prove feasible to adjust tax rates downward or upward depending on the degree of land capability/land use conflict existing on different land areas to provide a combination incentive/ dis­ incentive system. RENARE would play an important role in pro­ viding guidance and technical assistance related to land capacitj to both local and national levels and would help de­ fine the most critical areas in need of such incentive/ dis­ incentive systems.

35 C.3 A system of fines for non-compliance. This would be particularly important in critical areas set aside for protection such as parks and forest reserves. In many cases, the most destructive offenders to land protection objectives have been medium to large land holders who would be able to pay

fines. Although many small shifting cultivators may ~ot be directly reachable through a flne system because of inability to pay, transferal of such lands to larger owners could be slowed by providing penalties to the larger owners even after

transferal if such lands ~re officially under protection status.

Cc4 Direct hiring of local population to meet

land use objectives~ This method was used during the first phase of the watershed project by hiring local farmers to plant trees during RENARE's reforestation efforts and to maintain nurseries and plantation areas. This proved to be an expensive way to reforest, but would probably prove to be an economical

way to provide personnel for the managemen~ and protection of park and forest reser.ve areas. Riqhts to use certain lands for agriculture, land titles, credit, full or part-time paid posi­ tions have all been used successfully in various parts of the world to encourage compliance with overall land management obje~tives.

36 7. Conclusion

In the first phase of the Watershed project, RENARE has gained experience in many areas of natural resources management and has emerged as a significant government agency to help form a national land use policy for the coming years. This paper has dealt with some of the problems that have affected RENARE's performance during these past years and provides recommenda­ tions which would help reduce existing limitations.

In the next few years, particularly in the Panama Canal Watershed there will be an increased focus on mUlti-agency land management approaches. The problems of coordination, funding and in-the-field program implementation that have faced RENARE in the watershed project clearly indicated the need of such ap­ proaches in dealing with the complicated social and environ­ mental issues existing within the Watershed area~ RENARE should assume a major coordinating role in these future water­ shed management efforts because of its ability to draw upon the experience it has gained.

During these past 2 years, I have worked witri many members of RENARE' s staff and have seen th€!In grow professionally under difficult conditions. With proper funding and political sup­ port, they will be prepared to carry forward the type of inte­ grated watershed management that an area as diverse and impor­ tant as the Canal region requires. I wish them the greatest success in this challenging endeavor.

37