ka'apor ritual hunting

Ka'apor Ritual HuntingAuthor(s): William BaléeSource: Human Ecology, Vol. 13, No. 4 (Dec., 1985), pp. 485-510Published by: SpringerStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4602793 .Accessed: 25/04/2011 23:04

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Human Ecology.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4602793?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer

Human Ecology, Vol. 13, No. 4, 1985

Ka'apor Ritual Hunting

William Balee

Several investigators cite population control, frequent settlement relocation, trekking, expansion of diet breadth, and food taboos as strategic responses to game depletion by indigenous populations living in interfluvial zones of lowland South America. The Ka'apor Indians of the interfluvial forest of northern Maranhdo, Brazil, employ other means of optimizing hunting efficiency, partly based on ritual. Menstruating women, pubescent girls, and parents of newborns can consume meat only of the tortoise (Gochelone denticulata), the first prey species to be hunted out of an area. Tortoise capture requires, on average, one full day of hunting. This means that the fullpoten- tial of hunting pressure does not materialize near the settlement. Meat productivity is unusually high even near old settlements. I argue that ritual tortoise hunting helps to regulate environmental utilization, to maintain a sustained yield of meat protein, and to expand the catchment area gradually. KEY WORDS: hunting; game depletion; optimization; ritual; tortoises.

INTRODUCTION

Most indigenous people living in the interfluvial habitats of lowland South America tend to hunt for most of their dietary protein. In part, the absence of alternatives dictates this, especially for populations living far from major fishable rivers. In some areas, the streams are generally so small, acidic, and well-shaded that the annual productive potential of fishing is severely con- strained (Gross, 1975; Smith, 1981, p. 5; Schmidt, 1972). Although a few interfluvial groups may acquire as much as 45% of their protein from fish, as with the Shipibo groups studied by Campos (1977, p. 71), this is the ex-

'Institute of Economic Botany, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York 10458.

485

0300-7839/85/1200-0485$04.50/0 ? 1985 Plenum Publishing Corporation

486 Balee

ception. For most groups, the proportion of protein in the diet deriving from fish amounts to only about 2007o and may be highly seasonal. The commonly distributed nutrient-poor oxisols and ultisols of the interfluvial habitats place limitations on the productive potential of protein-rich crops such as maize and legumes, which grow well only in relatively fertile soils (Meggers, 1971, p. 100; Roosevelt, 1980). Manioc roots and plantains, the caloric staples of most interfluvial, indigenous peoples, and which can produce well on well-drained soils of only modest fertility, are poor sources of amino acids.2 The only likely means of acquiring protein, other than by hunting, in the interfluvial habitats, is by collecting grubs, insects, fungi, palm fritus, palm hearts, and nuts (Becker- man, 1979; Fidalgo and Prance, 1976, p. 206; Smith, 1980, p. 565). Yet, only an insignificant percentage of the protein ingested by indigenous, interfluvial peoples for whom there exists specific documentation comes from such sources (Lizot, 1977; Gross, 1982). This may be because the cost/benefit ratio of such collecting activities, as measured in terms of caloric and time expenditure divided by caloric and/or protein returns, outweighs that of hunting (Gross, 1982). The ingestion of significant amounts of protein from some of these sources, such as Brazil nuts (Bertholletia excelsa H.B.K.), moreover, involves simultaneous consumption of excessive calories from the same sources, without benefit of certain other vitamins and minerals; meat protein (which comes in compact form calorically) combined with other foods would obviate this problem (Werner, 1983, pp. 234-235). One can expect that the proportion of a people's diet consisting of minor, inefficient sources of protein, making an optimal diet difficult to achieve, varies inversely with the extent of game depletion in their habitat.

Regardless of whether dietary protein, as a single environmental factor, limits the demographic and sociopolitical expression of interfluvial forest peoples (Gross, 1975, 1982; Harris, 1974; Roosevelt, 1980, p. 94; Ross, 1978), few students would maintain that the supply of comestible game in the interfluvial forest is inexhaustible. Some of the sternest critics of the "protein as a limiting factor" hypothesis acknowledge that interfluvial forest hunters (and some fluvial ones as well, such as the Ye'kwana; Hames, 1980) increas- ingly exploit primarily small game, such as rodents, in specific hunting zones only after large game, such as tapir and deer, have been hunted out (Hames, 1980; Hames and Vickers, 1982; Vickers, 1980; Smith, 1983; Winterhalder,

2In contrast to the roots, manioc leaves contain as much as 30o protein, higher than wheat, corn, alfalfa, and oats. The leaves comprise all nine essential amino acids, with notably high concentrations of lysine, valine, leucine, and isoleucine (Albuquerque and Carvalho, 1980, pp. 210-211, Tables 42 and 45). Nevertheless, lowland South American Indians, with the exception of some Kayap6, tend to avoid eating the leaves. This may be because several continuous days of preparation are needed to render them edible and that, regardless of the mode of preparation, the leaves are not easily digested (Albuquerque and Carvalho, 1980, p. 75).

Ka'apor Ritual Hunting 487

1981).3 As several investigators point out, this is not simply because of the technological efficency of the hunters, but mainly because of low faunal densities in an area in which most of the faunal biomass is comprised of soil- dwelling invertebrates (Fittkau and Klinge, 1973).4 Otherwise, although most nonvolant fauna are of the mammalian class (Eisenberg, O'Connel, and August, 1979), most mammals are small and cryptic (Ross, 1978). In a study of a dry and a moist forest in Panama, Fleming (1975, p. 275) found that rodents constitute 72% and 83%, respectively, of the mammalian biomass, with agoutis and pacas the most common taxa. Large game animals in the forest, moreover, tend to be sparsely distributed, solitary (with the notable exception of the white-lipped peccary (Tayassu pecarn), and, to a lesser extent, of its congener, the collared peccary (T. tajacu), nonmigratory (again, with the exception of T. pecarn), comparatively slow in reproductive rate, and have small litters (Ross, 1978; Gross, 1975). The depletion of important, large game is no remote possibility for interfluvial forest peoples. The problem of killing off individuals of large species at a rate faster than their natural rate of replacement, leading to the prolonged absence of these species in given microhabitats, elicits definable behavioral responses from indigenous peoples of interfluvial forests. That recent studies attempting to refute the "protein as a limiting factor" hypothesis show that many interfluvial groups continually consume amounts of protein well above minimal protein re- quirements by international standards (Chagnon and Hames, 1979; Gross, 1982), attests to the adequacy of strategic, cultural responses to game depletion.

Determination of the nature of the regularities of cross-culturally occurring responses continues, however, to be the subject of much controver-

3In other words, large game rank highest on the list of diet breadth. The Siona-Secoya (Hames and Vickers, 1982, p. 364) and the Yanoama (Smole, 1976, p. 182) state a preference for large as opposed to small game. Hames and Vickers (1982, p. 364) acknowledge that "under ideal conditions one would use efficiency rank-order rather than weight rank-order." To operationalize an optimal diet breadth model, the currency, e.g., energy, should remain constant in cost-benefit ratios (Winterhalder, 1981, p. 20). Hames and Vickers were unable to measure average handling time per species and therefore assumed handling time to be constant across taxa in relatively undisturbed areas.

4The problem with these data is that they pertain to a disturbed area near the city of Manaus and are probably atypical in strictly quantitative terms. Nevertheless, the relative ranking of taxa in terms of biomass per species could well be accurate. The opposite problem exists with respect to the faunal biomass densities reported for some other areas of the neotropics, especially the forest preserve at Barro Colorado Island, where there are no fields, birds of prey, and white-lipped peccaries, and hunting by man is not permitted. Glantz (1982, p. 466) acknowledges that mammals such as primates, tapirs, and sloths may be unusually abundant there because of the absence of jaguars and pumas (as also suggested by Hames and Vickers, 1982, p. 361), but points out also that mammals at Barro Colorado Island may only seem more abundant because they are less wary of man; due to protection from hunting. Mammalian densities at Barro Colorado Island may prove to be lower than those of more representative, undisturbed interfluvial forest areas. Clearly, more zoological research in such areas is needed.

488 Balee

sy. The range of strategic responses to game depletion postulated by different investigators with different perspectives and with experience among different groups, includes (1) population control (Gross, 1975; Harris, 1974; Divale and Harris, 1976), (2) frequent settlement relocation and its usual corollary, the maintenance of small settlements dispersed as widely as possible (Carneiro, 1974b, p. 122; Gross, 1975; p. 527, 1983; Lathrap, 1968; Meggers, 1971, pp. 100-101; Roosvelt, 1980, p. 94), (3) trekking (Dreyfus, 1968; Good, 1982; Smole, 1976, p. 59, 81; Werner, 1983), which entails the hunters' absence from the settlement for up to several months per year, (4) increase in the proportion of time spent hunting in undisturbed areas far from the settlement, yet near enough to allow travel to and from within a few days (Hames, 1980; Vickers, 1980, pp. 15-16), (5) expansion of diet breadth, in which the focus on small game in zones depleted of large game increases markedly as a function of settlement age (Vickers, 1980; Hames and Vickers, 1982), and (6) proscription of threatened species, i.e., large species and/or species whose capture requires energetic/temporal investments above the caloric/protein yields in the diet (Ross, 1978; McDonald, 1977). These strategies are not mutually exclusive. The efficiency of one vs. another (effort to yield) will vary from one ecosystem to another, or earlier to later within the occupation span of a single ecosystem. These strategic responses are analytically separable because fundamentally they involve different activities, regardless of their possible similarities in terms of ecological functions. Each of these strategic responses, if in fact each can be demonstrated to be responsive to game depletion alone and not other factors, involves seemingly high, if variable, costs.

Population control, through systematic infanticide, provoked abortion (the consistent use of contraceptives among indigenous populations is unusual; Prance, 1972, pp. 21-22), and prolonged taboos on sexual intercourse, exact high psychoemotional costs, if not economic ones as well.5 The consistently low population densities reported for interfluvial forest peoples (usually less than one person/km2),6 however, may be a consequence of introduced diseases (Beckerman, 1979) which spread into upstream settlements from the major European-dominated waterways in post-Columbian times, yet prior to the

5In strictly economic terms, for example, the loss of a woman's full-time participation in agriculture, because of pregnancy and childbirth, is balanced if not outweighed by the potential benefits of adding a productive human being to the work force of the family and community, all else being equal. Where agricultural intensification and population growth are contraindicated, and infanticide and child neglect are consistently practiced, conception, preganancy, and childbirth can be measured only as net energetic losses. Groups at self-imposed low densities would also be more subject to military defeat, all else being equal, by those without such controls living at higher densities.

6The outstanding exceptions to this are the Jivaroans of Peru, at 2.6 persons/km2 (Ross, 1978, p 15, 23) and the Yanoama of Venezuela, at 1.3 persons/km2 (Smole, 1976, p. 48).


arrival of census-takers. If culturally prescribed curbs on population growth rates existed among interfluvial forest peoples, the utility of these in main- taining equilibrium between population size and protein density cannot be tested in the present without controlling for introduced disease. There is also a long-standing debate about population control as a cause or consequence of endemic warfare. Because of the costliness of such curbs, they would be probably employed only after other strategic alternatives had proven inade- quate, if consistently employed at all (Lizot, 1977, p. 501).

Frequent settlement relocation, say every 1-2 years, as practiced, for example, by the Amahuaca (Carneiro, 1974a, p. 159, 1974b, p. 123), results in periodic losses of what otherwise could be long-term investments, such as houses and gardens (Meggers, 1971, pp. 100-101). The need to move frequently, in addition, for whatever reason, implies that the group would be less likely to invest much time and energy into house-building and cultivation. Some students suggest that settlement relocation in the interfluvial forest occurs as a response not simply to game depletion, but to any or all of several other factors as well, such as neo-European colonization, warfare, depletion of forest for crop space near the settlement, soil depletion, local depletion of construction materials (such as roofing thatch), and pest intrusion (Beckerman, 1979; Hames, 1980, p. 395; Vickers, 1980, pp. 23-26; Gross, 1982, 1983).

Trekking involves costs similar to those of frequent settlement relocation. Werner estimates that the Mekranoti-Kayapo spend 22% of their time away from the settlement of trek. The costs include the transport of heavy burdens and the almost daily making and breaking of camp (Werner, 1983, p. 226). Trekking groups probably invested less time and energy traditionally in perennial and slow-maturing crops than more sedentary groups. For example, the Amahuaca (Carneiro, 1974b), Arawete (Viveiros de Castro, 1984, pp. 240-242). Siriono (Holmberg, 1969), and Akwe-Shavante (Maybury-Lewis, 1967, p. 47) are all largely dependent on maize. The association between maize dependence and trekking is explicitly recognized by the Arawete. They say that if they do not go into the forest on trek for several months after plant- ing maize, the maize will not grow (Viverios de Castro, 1984, p. 241). Their trekking lasts from between 6-7 months out of the year, occurring in more than one period (Viveiros de Castro, 1984, pp. 240-241). For trekking groups dependent on a perennial staple, such as the Yanoama (Smole, 1976, p. 119), sweet manioc is usually the only variety of manioc cultivated. Although growing periods are similar for both bitter and sweet varieties of manioc (the two constitute one species, Manihot esculenta Crantz), subsistence from bitter manioc requires an investment in expensive food processing equipment, such as griddles, sleeve presses, sieves, mortars, pestles, troughs, sheds, and ovens. Processing of bitter manioc also demands a comparatively large deployment

490 Balee

of labor. Sweet manioc, in contrast, although productive of fewer calories than bitter manioc (Dole, n.d., p. 27; LeCointe, 1947, pp. 267, 280), need be only peeled and boiled in order to be consumed safely.7 One may ask whether trekking is a consequence of the incipient nature of agriculture among these groups or whether the absence of full-time cultivation results from the need to capture game animals, most of which are found far from the settlement.

A lengthening of man-hours spent in hunting as the settlement grows older (Vickers, 1980, pp. 15-16), an increase in the proportion of time that hunters spend in undisturbed zones far from the settlement (Hames, 1980; Hames and Vickers, 1982; Vickers, 1980), and a growing frequency in the capture of small rather than large game near the settlement (expansion of diet breadth in the microhabitat) together would constitute of post hoc response to game depletion. This approach states that hunters think and act on a daily basis only, making not attempt to control the rate of depletion of large game in any zone. In fact, such a strategy would seem to negate sustained yield protein capture in hunting zones near the settlement (Vickers, 1980).

In contrast, Ross (1978) argues that food taboos on large game, those species most susceptible to hunting pressure and local extinction, serve both short-term and long-term interests of a population which depends on game. The food taboo on tapir, deer, and capybara among the Achuara Jivaro, for example, is seen to prevent hunters from wasting time searching for individuals of these species which are rare, if not also difficult to hunt. Ross (1978, p. 5) suggests that the energetic costs of consistently searching for such game would outweigh the long-term beneifts that could accrue to people who observes such taboos. This is at least partly because fishing is unusually productive in the habitat of the Achuara (Ross, 1978, p. 4, Table I). The functions of Achuara taboos may be similar to those of game avoidances by fish-dependent populations in the Upper Xingu River basin, which is not properly an interfluvial zone (Carneiro, 1978). Ross (1978, pp. 6-7) also implies that hunters, consciously or unconsciously, plan for the benefit of future generations, since the food taboos putatively allow regional carrying capacity to rise over time. In other words, the taboos constitute a long-term strategy of adaptation. If the populations of the threatened vulnerable species were to rise to maximal levels because of the long-term observance of the taboos

'The sedentary horticultural Indians of lowland South American apparently exerted more selection on bitter manioc than on sweet manioc, perhaps because of bitter manioc's greater caloric potential. This is suggested by the far larger number of bitter subvarieties and the fact that sweet subvarieties are more susceptible to insect pests and disease (Chernela, 1984, p. 9; Albuquer- que and Carvalho, Caroso, 1980, pp. 161-179).


on them, the taboos could be rescinded for a time (Ross, 1978, pp. 14, 16). Yet both conservation and hunting efficiency optimization could be achieved without recourse to long-term food taboos. First, if any prohibitions are to be invoked, the most logical would be those on search, not pursuit and consumption. A genuinely optimal hunting efficiency model would not pro- hibit the hunter from killing a fat tapir on chance encounter, given that pursuit costs of species, large and small, are probably equal in general (Carneiro, 1978; Hames and Vickers, 1982, p. 374). For example, although tapirs are nocturnal foragers and have the ability to submerge themselves in swamps, the same is true of pacas which are rarely, if ever, the subject of general, permanent food taboos. Second, it remains to be demonstrated whether human beings actively consider the best interests of their descendants generations hence. In fact, the opposite sometimes seems to be the case. The technological skill, organizational ability, and opportunism of the Upper Paleolithic hunters of North America probably contributed to the extinction of Pleistocene megafauna and therefore the subsequent absence of domesticable herbivores; one can argue that these hunters did not act in the best ecological interest of their successors (Harris, 1980, p. 136, 164-165). Thus does not, however, rule out the possibility that interfluvial forest people regulate environmental utilization on short-term and medium-term bases, for example, within one generation.8

All these explanations of possible responses to game depletion assume that interfluvial forest peoples attempt to optimize hunting success. I share that assumption. Yet the Ka'apor Indians of the interfluvial forest of northern Maranhao, Brazil employ none of the possible responses discussed above. Although their population density is only .2 persons/kM2, this could be an artifact of introduced disease; they have no systematic policy of population control. Their settlements, which have an average population of 33 persons each, tend to be long-lived, remaining in place for 10-15 years; this is longer than the occupation span of 5 years which Meggers (1971, p. 101) suggests is an average for interfluvial groups. If a Ka'apor settlement relocates prior to such a period elapsing, the distance involved is usually only about 5 km. Most Ka'apor do not trek, although once a year the residents of one settlement travel 19 km to an oxbow lake for a period of 5 days to fish. This

8Medium-term resource management planning exists with respect to horticulture and arboriculture. Garden dispersal has the effect of increasing ecozonal areas and therefore game densities in these areas, and hunters are often aware of this (Balke, 1984, pp. 212-214; Hames, 1980; Linares, 1976). Posey (1984b, p. 11) shows that the Gorotire-Kayap6 plant several tree species, which require years from germination to first fruiting, specifically to attract edible birds and game. Since medium-term resource management in horticulture and aboriculture occurs, there is no reason to expect a priori that there is not also consideration given to regulating environmental utilization over similar time intervals in strategic hunting zones.

492 Balee

is minimal trekking, if trekking at all. Although hunting trips sometimes take men to distances of as much as 15 km from the settlement, almost all hunts are concluded within a day, i.e., the hunters sleep at home, not in the forest. Moreover, a considerable proportion of the large game animals bagged comes from within about 5 km of the settlement. Although the Ka'apor typically avoid eating certain animal species, there are no taboos on tapir, deer, peccary (both species), and other large game likely to be threatened by overpredation. Yet daily per capita protein consumption exceeds 50 g (Balee, 1984, pp. 289-290), and hunters spend an average of only 2.1 hrs/day hunting. I argue that the effects of certain ritual practices among the Ka'apor help to fulfill the immediate protein needs of the community at comparatively low cost and, at the same time, incidentally contribute to controlling the rate of depletion of important game resources in their habitat. In principle, I agree with Rappaport (1968) and Moore (1957) that ritual acts may have significant ecological consequences.

ETHNOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND

The Ka'apor (who are often referred to as the Urubus or Urubu-Ka'apor; I use their self-designation) are Tupi-Guarani speakers who live in the interfluvial tropical forest of northern Maranhao state, in the watersheds of the Gurupi and Turiagu Rivers. The region, at an elevation lower than 100 meters, is characterized by an annual rainfall of between 2000-2500 mm, most of which occurs from mid-December to late May. The reservation on which the Ka'apor live is composed of 535,000 ha of mostly terra firme forest of pre-Amazonian structure. Less than 5o/ of the region, taken together, is characterized as vairzea forest, swamp forest, and primary and secondary garden lands.

The Ka'apor number approximately 490 people who occupy 16 relatively small settlements, almost all of which are located near tiny streams, many of which dry up almost entirely during the late dry season. Horticulture (mainly involving the cultivation of bitter manioc) and hunting supply most of the calories and protein in the diet.

The Ka'apor migrated into this region from the northwest during the 1870's, fleeing settlers and soldiers who were intruding into their previous lands, drained by the Capim, Guama' and Piria Rivers in eastern Para state. Until 1928, when they entered into peaceful contact with the government, they were considered one of the most hostile tribes in Brazil. They raided


towns and hamlets for steel tools periodically and were also attacked by posses of local settlers. They remained hostile to other indigeneous group in the region as well, such as the Kre-Ye Timbira, Tembe Guajajara, and Guaja'. They have been at peace with the foraging Guaja of the Turia,u River, in particular, only since 1975, when government agents made peaceful contact with this group. The Ka'apor successfully resisted the encroachments of gold prospectors, rubber collectors, resin gatherers, and farmers. Their success was aided by the fact that access to their nonriverine domain was difficult. After pacification, they suffered a catastrophic loss of population because of introduced disease. Since the late 1960's, they have lost about 100,000 ha of forest land to Brazilian settlers, i.e., about one-sixth of their land.

Although the Ka'apor depend on recently introduced trade goods, such as guns, ammunition, flashlights, cloth, kerosene, matches, and packaged salt, as well as those trade goods they could acquire by raiding prior to pacification, such as steel tools, much of their culture remains intact. This is evinced in their deep forest settlement pattern, allocation of time to tradi- tional pursuits, social organization, and ritual life (Balee, 1984). Ka'apor society is principally integrated at the level of the nuclear family, the basic unit of production, consumption, the household, and socialization, and, moreover, the principal locus of rituals that regulate environmental utilization through their effects of hunting behavior.

METHODOLOGY

Field research on which this paper is based was carried out in Ka'apor settlements between January 1981 and June 1982. Most of the time was spent in two settlements, sites 1 and 2 as they will henceforth be called, in the basin of the Turiasu River. Both settlements are located in similar, upland forest habitats. Site 1 was first occupied in 1976 and has a population of 27; site 2, founded in 1970, has a population of 72. A considerably larger amount of primary and secondary garden lands associated with the older and larger site 2 offers evidence of greater habitat disturbance there than at site 1. Yet differences in subsistence effort and return are negligible between married adults at the two sites (Balee, 1984, pp. 105-106). Residents of both sites acquire most of their food, both domesticated and wild, within a radius of 5 km from the settlement.

At both sites, all game animals bagged by hunters were identified and weighed during three sampling periods, including portions of the mid-dry season, late dry season, and early rainy season, for a total of 99 days. Hunters were asked where they bagged each animal, but it was

494 Balee

difficult to locate all capture sites in terms of distance from the settlement (Hames, 1980). Although I visited most of the hunting grounds at least once, many of these were unnamed, so unless I accompanied the hunter, the exact location of the kill could not always be determined. It seemed, nevertheless, that most game came from within 5 km of the settlement, a figure consistent with the measured distance of the many trips on which I accompanied hunters. It was at least possible to distinguish two basic zones, gardens and forest, which are not precisely correlated with distance from the settlement (see the "Ritual and Ecology" section). Although all gardens are within 5 km of the two settlements, the zones of forest which residents of both settlements exploit are both within and beyond the 5 km radius. The amount of game reportedly killed in gardens, then, is a minimal figure in terms of the game taken within the primary catchment area,9, i.e., within a radius of 5 km of the settlement.

All hunting trips were timed during the restricted periods to determine differences in the mean amount of time required by hunters to capture individuals of certain species. In this regard, only successful hunts, i.e., hunts in which any amount of game is bagged, are discussed here. The data on the amount of game captured, location of the capture, and timing of the hunts, combined with data gathered on Ka'apor ritual practices, can be used to construct a model of hunting optimization for the Ka'apor.

RITUAL AND ECOLOGY

The Ka'apor matrimonial and ritual code specifically enjoins a man to capture yellow-footed tortoises (Geochelone denticulata) for his menstruating wife; she is prohibited from consuming any other kind of meat during her menstrual period. It is believed that if a woman broke the taboo on consuming other meat, she would become seriously ill and her husband would become disabled by exhaustion, unable even to rise from his hammock. After a woman gives birth, moreover, she can partake of no other meat except tortoise meat for a period of about 6 months or more, at which time her infant is named. The father of an infant, along with its mother, is also restricted to tortoise meat, but only for a period of about 15 days after the infant's birth. After this period, he can eat other foods, but can kill no game except

9"Catchment area" refers to a general area about the settlement in which hunting takes place. Two catchment areas are distinguished, primary and secondary. Several hunting zones, which are ecologically defined, exist in each catchment area. For example, within the primary catchment area there is garden land, terra firme forest, and a small amount of varzea forest. Within the secondary catchment area, defined as land beyond a 5-km radius of the settlement, one encounters hunting zones associated mainly with undisturbed terra firme forest.


for tortoise (G. denticulata) and white-lipped peccaries (T. pecar) until the infant is named. Finally, when a girl menstruates for the first time, she can eat meat only from the tortoise (G. denticulata) for a period which typically lasts for about 8 months, following the conclusion of her initiation rite (Balee, 1984, pp. 238-244). Her father, or a potential affine, such as mother's brother, must supply her with this meat. It is, moreover, the menstruating woman's husband, and not some other hunter, who is obligated to supply her with tortoise meat; she can accept it from no one else during these times. A husband who neglects to hunt tortoise for his wife is considered to be failing in his matrimonial duties. The ritual obligation that men supply their wives and daughters with tortoise meat at the appropriate times in their natural cycles constitutes one of symbolic anchors of the integrity of the nuclear family.

The tortoise (G. denticulata) functions on another level of analysis as well. It is also an ecological marker. Tables I, II, and III show hunting yields at sites 1 and 2 during specific sampling periods. The yields are cross-tabulated according to species, number of individuals taken, total weight of each set of individuals of one species, and whether the individuals were taken in forest or garden zones. The forest and gardens are separate hunting zones, and may be taken as indirect measures of distance, since all gardens (primary and secondary) where game were taken are located within 5 km of both sites, although exploited forest reaches a distance of up to 15 km from both sites.10

What is remarkable in these tables is that none of the ritually prescribed tortoises (G. denticulata, its congener, the red-footed G. carbonaria, is prohibited in the diet of menstruating women, men and women in the postpar- tum ritual period, and girls undergoing initiation) were taken in gardens, yet 270Wo of all game meat taken at the two sites over all sampling periods came from the gardens. The amount of land under primary and secondary cultivation, as well as very old garden land within a radius of 5 km of site 1, is only 24 ha. The total number of hectares within this area, which can be considered to be a primary catchment area, is 7850. Yet, as can be deduced from Table I, 14.7% of the meat captured at site 1 came from gardens, which constitute only .3%o of the primary catchment area. It is clear that hunting is not random within the primary catchment area site of 1. A similarly unusual level of meat productivity in the gardens is seen at site 2. There are 152 ha

10I am aware of the ecological differences between primary gardens and secondary growth. Never- theless, for analytical reasons, the two are combined here. It would be incorrect to draw a dichotomy between primary and "abandoned" gardens. The Ka'apor gather mangos, guava, citrus fruits, and cotton from gardens well past peak productivity, and they hunt in gardens of all ages. Rather, there is a continuum of garden types, ranging from the freshly cleared and planted gardens to those that resemble primary forest, except for many light gaps, small overall tree biomass, etc. The distinction drawn between gardens and forest is based on the presence or absence of a key variable, human disturbance.

496 Balee

a= W) c7 r- 0 a, al cn os4 tn _ ._

CY 00 00 _- 00 o om N

co T

bo t

00 co C4t

c> b> _ 0 00 r- ? Fm c r- CZ ;

3n r4 __ > ^ 4

:: E4 emS

O O cd E; xs >> c) ? 3 ?>a . :: ? >


'ICa e_nn cq _ _ooN 0

Ct VS I4 0I 1-1> 1-: 1

N cq-o- o. t- ~oo

00

a C 0 _ -(>l

0

00 n - _

a) Xa 5 5 i, C s 5 _

~~~~~~~~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q

S 0000~C 0 z0 co

000

a)~~~~~~~0 Z

0 0 ceo -t to -

0. <UC O

z U

498 Balee

: mr '

'000 a c. 00 en

0 ,>~~~~ _,( 1t_

ire 0- s - .-tX?I

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.

00

n v o00 00e

E0No0W o _ o N W N ^ 0

CO N

00 00~~~~~t30 0e d 0; 0 0 ro 0

- - ~~~~~, Z E~-- a) I- ~ ~ ~ s ") -

0 0

$-.. 0>

HE-U C ( oo

U o-


of garden land, most of which is between 5-15 years old, within the primary catchment area of site 2. That is, 1.7% of the primary catchment area is under primary or secondary cultivation, yet fully 36.6% of the meat bagged during two periods of observation came from that relatively small zone (Tables II and III). Game animals such as birds, deer, peccaries, pacas, armadillos, agoutis, and monkeys are attracted to gardens for several reasons (Linares, 1976; Posey, 1984a, p. 888). Peccaries, agoutis, and pacas forage on manioc, yams, and sweet potatoes. Deer browse on manioc leaves and on grasses and seeds along the edge of the gardens; they also take refuge in the undergrowth of secondary gardens. Monkeys raid gardens for maize and fruits such as bananas, cashews, papayas, and mangos. Armadillos enter gardens to consume insect pests. The garden lands and forest within the primary catchment area, however convenient their location from the hunters' point of view, are no cornucopia of game. I suggest that the periodic injunction that men capture tortoises for their women functions to prevent maximal, potential hunting pressure in the area of primary catchment from materializing.

The tortoise (G. denticulata) is the first comestible game species to be hunted out of an area, according to the Ka'apor. This is no doubt because (1) its pursuit costs are very low compared to other game, since it is sluggish and offers little resistance to being captured; (2) it can be captured by hand, unlike other game, and therefore requires no waste of expensive, scarce ammunition, and (3) hunting pressure on the tortoise is incessant because its meat is actually prescribed. That tortoises are quickly depleted from hunting zones seems to be supported by evidence from other interfluvial groups. The Arawete-men capture G. denticulata, found far from the settlement, and collect honey during their treks, while women collect wild plant foods and insect larva (Viveiros de Castro, 1984, pp. 240-241). Among the Siona-Secoya of Ecuador, Vickers (1980, p. 24, Table 2; Hames and Vickers, 1982, p. 367, Table 2) found that at one site 6 years after his first period of field work, large game were being taken less frequently and small game were being taken more frequently, which accords with optimal diet breadth predictions. What is interesting, however, is that of the small game taken, only the frequency of the tortoise (G. denticulata) underwent decline; all others were increasing in the numbers they contributed to the diet. Although this situation may reflect sampling error, due to the relatively small numbers of tortoises taken at any time (Vickers, 1984, personal communication), it does not contradict my argument that tortoises are likely to be hunted out prior to other game species, regardless of relative size. More definite evidence of support for this argument is offered by Werner (1984, p. 193) who states that for the Mekranoti, "Tortoises are probably a good indicator of the amount of game in an area." He implies (1984, p. 193) that an abundance of tortoises indicates an abundance of game in general; tortoises, moreover, tend to be found in

500 Balee

the deep forest, far from the settlement site. G. denticulata reportedly prefers a terra firme forest habitat (Medem, 1960; Pritchard, 1975; Williams, 1960). Another way of stating this is the species occurs where human disturbance is minimal.

To the Ka'apor, the tortoise stands apart from those desirable large species, such as deer, peccary, and tapir, which a hunter pursues on chance encounter. This is graphically shown in Table IV. Of the several species captured in two restricted sampling periods at sites 1 and 2, capture of a tortoise (G. denticulata) requires the most time. This time is used up mainly searching for the animal, not in actual pursuit and handling. On average, it takes a hunter between 505-550 minutes (or between 8.4-9.2 hr) from the time he leaves the settlement to the time he returns with a tortoise in hand (note that this applies to successful hunts only. All hunts represented in Table IV were concluded within the daylight hours; as a rule, the Ka'apor avoid hunting trips that would obligate them to sleep away from the settlement). A hunter searching for tortoise for his wife or daughter cannot spend suffi- cient time investigating the spoor of other game near the settlement and track them if he is to return home with tortoise. The man hunting for tortoise to fulfill his ritual and matrimonial obligations is, in effect, reducing the hunting pressure that could potentially be brought to bear on game near the settlement, especially in the productive gardens and other zones within the primary catchment area. In addition to reducing the potential hunting pressure near the settlement, the obligation to capture tortoises has the effect of familiarizing hunters with frontier zones relatively far from the settlement, where large game may be in abundance. A hunter who has, during a tortoise hunt gained knowledge of fresh spoor of large game animal in the deep forest transmits this information to others upon his return. Since large game animals are normally shared among all families in a settlement, there is no incentive to keep such knowledge secret. Also, if the settlement should move, hunters have knowledge of the best possible sites to move to, in terms of the qualities of soils, water, vegetation, and game density.

It seems that neither the conservation model of hunting optimization in the interfluvial forest (Ross, 1978) nor the opportunism model of hunting optimization in the interfluvial forest, i.e., optimal diet breadth theory

'Table IV should not be read to imply that the Ka'apor hunt in a single-minded way. These tables represent average times of capture/species. Since we were studying all hunts on a daily basis, and the data were collected in the settlement, actual pursuit times are not available for all species. Nevertheless, a general list of search, pursuit, and handling time per species can be assembled, since it is a matter of chance regarding which, if any, species a hunter returns with. Moreover, since pursuit time for G. denticulata as well as its congener, G. carbonaria) is no doubt lowest of all species and since the hunter need not run or shoot to capture it, that G. denticulata ranks last on these litsts is all the more significant.


Table IV. Rank Order of Mean Amount of Time Required by Hunters to Capture Various Speciesa

Number of Number Species observations Time (min)

Site lb

1 Howler monkey 2 5OC 2 Collared peccary 1 240C 3 Paca 10 240 4 Armadillo 8 276 5 River turtle 3 353 6 Birds 8 354 7 Agouti 14 368 8 Cayman 1 390c 9 Deer 3 443

10 Tortoise (G. carbonaria) 7 454 11 Tortoise (G. denticulata) 35 505

Site 2d 1 Howler monkey 4 96 2 Collared Peccary 14 239 3 Deer 8 318 4 Agouti 11 319 5 Armadillo 6 324 6 Paca 4 371 7 Cayman 1 420C 8 Tortoise (G. carbonaria) 5 468 9 River turtle 3 481

10 Tortoise (G. denticulata) 25 550

aComputed on the basis of the time elapsed between when the hunter(s) left and returned to the settlement site. b7/18/81-8/19/81. cThe number of observations is significant, but the time obtained is included for the sake of completeness and comparison with the other scores.

dl 1/4/81-11/26/81 and 1/12/82-2/4/82.

(Hames and Vickers, 1982) can adequately explain Ka'apor hunting behavior. It is true that the Ka'apor avoid eating many species. All Ka'apor, for example, habitually eschew capybars, porcupines, sloths, anteaters, bats, rats, mice, opossums, snakes, lizards, corrion-eating birds, most insects and grubs, and all carnivores with the exception of the coati (Ribeiro, 1976, pp. 56-56). Ross writes:

It is evident that, where hunting range is not expandable, focus on the less populous, more slowly reproducing species, such as tapir, deer, capybara, etc., cannot be pur- sued indefinitely without approaching overpredation (1978, p. 6).

The Ka'apor, however, consistently avoid hunting and eating only one of these species, the capybara. (Although no tapirs were taken during the sampling periods, hunters will bag them when available, and everyone, except

502 Balee

those ritually restricted to tortoise meat, will consume their flesh). The mam- malogists Eisenberg et al. point out:

The capybara retains a reproductive system somewhat uncharacteristic of an animal in its size class, having far larger litters than the other two large neotropical caviomorphs, the agouti and paca. As such, the capybara probably represents by its reproductive adaptations a species that can sustain high predation levels and expand into new habitats [emphasis mine] (1979, p. 200).

In other words, Ross's conservation model, which states that hunters logically avoid hunting those species that are most vulnerable to predation pressure, cannot explain why the Ka'apor avoids the capybara, yet regularly pursue tapirs, deer, peccaries, and other large game. To understand how the Ka'apor hunt large game consistently, yet sustain adequate protein yields with comparatively little effort, one must focus not on the food taboos, but on the food injunction, namely, that of the tortoise (G. denticulata). Although the Ka'apor seem to practice overkill on this tortoise, and therefore appear to lack a strategy for conservation at least of this species, the issue is not the exploitation of any one species, but rather the conservation over the medium term of something more generic, specifically, meat protein.

Ka'apor hunting behavior does not conform to the predictions of the opportunism model of hunting optimization in the forest, either. Both sites 1 and 2 are relatively old for interfluvial forest settlements. One would expect, then, according to optimal diet breadth theory, that principally low- ranking, small taxa be taken near the settlement, e.g., in the gardens and garden/forest ecotones, and that high-ranking, large taxa be taken far from the settlement, to the exclusion of small taxa. Therefore, the rank order of taxa from the data presented in Tables I, II, and III should be as that shown in Table V. One would anticipate the capture rate to reflect the ranking, i.e.,

Table V. Rank Order by Mean Weight of Species Captured at Site 1 and 2

Number Species Mean weight (kg)

1 Cayman 35.3 2 Deer 26.4 3 Collared peccary 22.3 4 Paca 6.3 5 Howler monkey 6.1 6 Tortoise (G. carbonaria) 5.5 7 Armadillo 3.7 8 Coati 3.2 9 Tortoise (G. denticulata) 2.7

10 Agouti 2.2 11 Birds (various taxa) 1.1 12 Turtle .8 13 Squirrel .2


Table VI. Rank Order of Species by Number of Individuals Captured at Sites 1 and 2

Number Species Number taken

1 Tortoise (G. denticulata) 75 2 Agouti 44 3 Armadillo 32 4 Paca 22 5 Collared Peccary 18 6 Birds (various taxa) 18 7 Tortoise (G. carbonaria) 15 8 Deer 12 9 Turtle 8

10 Howler moneky 7 11 Cayman 3 12 Coati 2 13 Squirrel I

large game should be near the top in frequency, and the most commonly exploited zone should be located far from the settlement. But this is not the case, as Table VI, which presents the rank order of number of animals killed, shows. Optimal foraging theorists could interpret this evidence to mean that the Ka'apor hunt mostly near the settlement, where large game, theoretically, should be depleted, and therefore they have a narrow diet breadth consisting of mainly small game, taken near the settlement only. Yet the prescribed species of tortoise (G. denticulata), which is ninth on the list of game ranked according to size and thus should be encountered more frequently near the settlement, was found, in fact, only in the deep forest on average farther from the two settlements than any other species in the hunt, using time as an indirect measure of distance (Vickers, 1980). Moreover, of the large game, which theoretically should be taken in the distant forest, fully 420/0 of the deer, 28Wo of the peccaries, and 34% of the howler monkeys were taken in gardens alone.

CONCLUSION

Much remains to be learned about the variability in hunting optimization strategies of indigenous, interfluvial forest peoples. Local niches clearly vary in susceptibility to overpredation in general, and in the point at which the dwindling supply of game becomes noticeable in terms of increasing effort relative to yield; further, a number of quite distinct potential strategies, or combinations of strategies, could in principle represent successful responses to these conditions. I have attempted to describe here how certain Ka'apor rituals contribute to sustaining a yield of protein from hunting with minimal expenditure.

504 Balee

It is true that other factors are involved in the optimization of Ka'apor hunting behavior. In general, each Ka'apor nuclear family possesses usufruct over specific gardens, which tend to be dispersed through the forest within 5 km of the settlement. This dispersal of relatively small garden plots max- imizes the area of ecotones, which are probably more attractive to important mammalian taxa than either undisturbed forest or the gardens alone (Posey, 1984a, p. 888). Ka'apor hunters are fully conscious of the edge effect, and often, when they are not hunting for tortoises, they investigate the garden/forest ecotones for spoor.

The small size of settlements, dispersal of settlements, and low regional population density must also contribute to the high yield relative to hunting effort. These demographic conditions may in part account for the high meat productivity in the gardens, garden/forest ecotones, and other zones within a 5 km radius of the typical settlement. On the other hand, it is plausible to argue that ritual tortoise hunting evolved at a time when Ka'apor population density was much higher than it is at present, despite a lack of direct evidence that Ka'apor protein consumption and the cost/benefit ratio of hunting would have been any less favorable in the past. Because of possibly higher population density in the remote past, the tortoise injuction could have been functionally more significant then than it is now. My point is that regardless of minimal population and maximal ecotonal areas in the vicinity of Ka'apor settlements at present, ceteris paribus, the rate of depletion of large mammalian taxa in the vicinity of settlements would probably be higher than it is without ritual tortoise hunting which spreads predation over a wide area.

Ka'apor ritual tortoise hunting is both similar to and different from other possible responses to game depletion employed by other groups in the interfluvial forest. Although the injunction to capture a species is the logical opposite of a food taboo, these could be functionally similar. One can argue that both the Ka'apor food injunction and the Achuara Jivaro food taboos, for example, prevent the extinction of large game species in local habitats. The chief difference, however, is that the food injunction permits the controlled harvest of large taxa near the settlement, controlled because for at least a few days per month a hunter will be directing his activities in some more distant region. The taboos basically preclude the sustained yield of any large taxa, other than migratory herds of white-lipped peccaries, which are not tabooed by the Achuara anyway (Ross, 1978). The periodic food injunction of the Ka'apor seems to obviate the need for any long-term, general food taboos on large, vulnerable species.

Ritual tortoise hunting also functionally resembles trekking in certain respects. Clearly, one of the consequences of making long-distance treks of extended periods of time is the alleviation of hunting pressure in the vicinity of the settlement. Yet trekking does not always imply that hunters are travel-


ing great distances, as the crow flies, from the settlement. Werner (1984, pp. 194-195) describes treks in which the Mekranoti traveled in the forest con- tinuously for 2 weeks but could return to the settlement in only a full day of walking. This suggests the possibility that trekking randomizes hunting pressure in a slightly wider circle about the settlement, not unlike the effect of scapulimancy among the Naskapi as stated by Moore (1957). Ka'apor tortoise hunting, the one subsistence activity that exploits the farthest reaches of their effective catchment area (and thus defines the limits of that area), involves distances approximately one-half of those traveled by the Mekranoti. Also, Ka'apor tortoise hunting zones seem to be much closer to the settlement than are the tortoise hunting zones of the Arawete to their settlement (Viveiros de Castro, 1984, pp. 240-241). Several factors combine to explain this difference. Ka'apor settlements are smaller and dispersed. The only Mekranoti settlement has a population of 285 (Werner, 1984, p. 38) and the only Arawete settlement has a population of 135 (Viveiros de Castro, 1984, p. 158), in sharp contrast to an average Ka'apor settlement size of 33. The smaller populations, ceteris paribus, would not require so large a radius for their support, and would not overhunt a territory so quickly. The fact that, from the inception of a Ka'apor settlement, hunting activities are divided between "central" and "marginal" zones will also retard the onset of severe pressures; an agricultural system involving small, dispersed gardens within the forest rather than contiguous plots, as seems to be the case with the Mekranoti (Werner, 1984, pp. 139-140), prey species even quite close to home by expanding the total size of niches favored by game.

Although food taboos, frequent settlement relocation, trekking, expansion of diet breadth as large game are depleted from microhabitats, and other practices demonstrably responsive to game depletion occur cross-culturally in lowland South America, the tortoise injunction, as it exists among the Ka'apor, does not. If the prescription is interpreted historically or "genetically" (Vogt, 1971) one might expect similar beliefs and behavior among other Tupi- Guarani groups with regard to menstruation, birth-giving, and the tortoise. But nothing of the kind has been reported. In fact, at least some of the aboriginal Tupinambal proscribed tortoise meat, for it was believed that consumption of tortoise meat would make hunters sluggish! (Metraux, 1950, pp. 292-293). This leaves open the possibility that the tortoise injunction for menstruating women, pubescent girls, and new parents dates from post- Columbian times, an artifact, perhaps, of the collision of European and aboriginal cultures. If so, however, the connection is apparently not a direct historical one, since I know of no comparable European complex of beliefs about this species. My analysis here, admittedly, focuses on the functional, synchronic aspects of hunting optimization among the Ka'apor. One could only speculate about the specific factors that propelled proto-Ka'apor socie-

506 Balee

ty to adopt these ritual hunting practices. It would be equally difficult to predict the factors that might lead the Ka'apor to abandon these practices, short of ethnocide and habitat degradation by encroaching settlers.

I hypothesize that Ka'apor rituals help to regulate hunting patterns, even if these rituals consistitute only one factor in determining hunting effort relative to yield. How might one falsify this hypothesis? The null hypothesis would state that men do not hunt tortoises at the appropriate times for their wives and daughters and that tortoises are consistently captured near settlements. First, the data show that men do hunt tortoises for their wives and daughters. It was observed that menstruating women ate meat only from tortoises captured by their husbands and that all married couples in the postpar- tum ritual period had a supply of several G. denticulata individuals in small pens and were avoiding other meat. The same is true with respect to girls who had recently menstruated for the first time. Second, Tables IV demonstrates that average search, pursuit, and handling time (taken together) are greater for G. denticulata than for any other species, indicating, indirectly, that this species is captured typically in relatively distinct, undisturbed forest.

The data on Ka'apor ritual and hunting are not likely to be explained by a model that emphasizes conservation (McDonald, 1977; Ross, 1978) nor one that stresses only opportunism (Hames and Vickers, 1982). The most economical explanation of Ka'apor hunting optimization lies somewhere between these two extremes. I suggest that the rate of depletion of large game in the vicinity of the settlement is partly controlled by ritual. Since tortoises are the first species to be hunted out of the vicinity of a pristine settlement in undisturbed forest, because of their natural susceptibility of predation and because hunters must capture them to fulfill their ritual and matrimonial obligations, their decline in a zone automatically reduces the hunting pressure on other game, large and small, within the same zone. The overall contribution of tortoises to the diet, in terms of the total faunal biomass captured during the three periods of observation, is 203.3 kg. (This is arrived at by adding the values for the prescribed species, G. denticulata, from Tables I, II, and III). Deer at 315 kg and peccaries at 402.2 kg in total from the three tables rank well above the tortoise by this measure; these values, combined with the total weight of pacas, caymans, howler monkeys, and armadillos from the tables, all of which can be considered to be "large" game, clearly outweigh the significance of tortoise in the diet (although not necessarily in the hunt). Tortoises contribute only 13W7o or less of the meat (excluding fish) in the diet. In other words, as tortoise depletion occurs, the rate of depletion of other, more important game, from a quantitative point of view, slows down in a given zone. The ritual prescription to capture tortoises, which are found only in relatively undisturbed, frontier zones, contributes to the gradual expansion of the entire catchment area around a settlement and to the ran- domization of hunting pressure in areas beyond the vicinity of the settlement.


Culturally-induced tortoise depletion not only helps control general hunting pressure near a settlement, contributes to the shifting of hunting zones, and promotes greater familiarity with frontier hunting zones, it also seems to be associated with settlement relocation. Informants frequently cite the absence of tortoises within acceptable range of the settlement as a reason among others, such as depletion of roofing thatch (Geonoma sp.), excessive secondary growth near the settlement, epidemic diseases, deaths, and ghosts, for moving to a new site. The "acceptable" range is probably about 15 km. Greater average distances of tortoises would require hunters to remain in the forest overnight, and eventually to trek for days or weeks to capture tortoises. Before this point reached, the costs of the tortoise capture begin to limit the benefits of sedentary life and to exceed the start-up costs involved in moving the settlement. Although the Ka'apor could rescind the tortoise injunction, they prefer to relocate their settlements deeper into the forest, closer to some of the tortoise hunting grounds where, in fact, the abundance of this one index species, is per se a reliable indicator of probably good hunting in general. Settlement relocation would thus occur before large mammalian taxa near the settlement had been hunted out, at least partly because of the con- tinuity of ritually prescribed tortoise hunting. Ka'apor settlement relocation, therefore, seems to respond not simply to general resource depletion, but rather only to the depletion and inaccessibility of tortoises. The abandoned settlements recover faunal densities gradually. The breeding stock needed to reproduce game populations has not been obliterated, with the possible exception of the tortoise. At present, the rate of depletion of tortoises and the time which elapses before a zone is recolonized by tortoises in the habitat of the Ka'apor are unknown. Research is needed on the reproductive capacity and survival rates of tortoises in the wild (Debra Muskovitz, 1983, personal communication). One can state, however, that hunting pressure in recently abandoned settlements is probably limited because of (1) the fact that new settlements are typically located in relatively undisturbed zones, (2) the distance of the old settlement from the new settlement, and (3) the initial depletion of tortoises near the settlement.

In summary, I have raised questions about the specific applicability to the Ka'apor of Ross's conservation model and the opportunism model of the optimal foraging theorists. But the argument advanced here should not be construed to mean that there is an unlimited series of adaptive responses to the same problem, nor is it intended to discourage general theorizing. There are not one, but many forests in lowland South America. The protein "problem" should be studied in light of this variation. We need more comparative research on the hunting practices of demographically similar indigeneous populations occupying quite similar habitats. Moreover, quantitative ethnological and zoological research should be carried out on the possible effects of ritual on hunting behavior and hunting efficiency among other

508 Balee

lowland South American groups. It is possible that ritual game prescriptions (of species other than the tortoise) may have effects similar to the tortoise prescription among the Ka'apor.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The research on which this paper is based was supported by a Fulbright- Hays Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad Fellowship (U.S. Department of Education), an Organization of American States Training Grant, and Columbia University. Versions of this paper were presented at the South American Indian Caucus in New York (January 1983), the Northeastern An- thropological Association Meeting in Hartford, Connecticut (March 1984), and the New York Botanical Garden (April 1984). I am grateful to several people for their suggestions. I would particularly like to acknowledge the comments of Pamela Van Rees, Marvin Harris, Robert Murphy, Barbara Price, and Kent Redford. Pamela Van Rees's gathering of much of the data herein was indispensable.

REFERENCES

Albuquerque, M., and Carvalho, E. M. R. (1980). A Mandioca no Tropico Umido. Editerra, Brasilia.

Balee W. (1984). The Persistence of Ka'apor Culture. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Depart- ment of Anthropology, Columbia University.

Beckerman, S. (1979). The abundance of protein in Amazonia: A reply to Gross. American Anthropologist 81: 533-560.

Campos, R. (1977). Producci6n de pesca y caza de una aldea Shipibo en el Rio Pisqui. Amazonia Peruana 1(2): 53-74.

Carneior, R. (1974a). The transition of hunting to horticulture in the Amazon basin. In Cohen, Y. A. (ed.), Adaptation: The Cultural Present. Aldine, Chicago, pp. 157-166.

Carneiro, (1974b). Hunting and hunting magic among the Amahuaca of the Peruvian Mon- tana. In Lyon, P. (ed.), Native South Americans: Ethnology of the Least Known Con- tinent. Little, Brown, Boston, pp. 122-132.

Carnelro, R. (1978). Comment on Ross. Current Anthropology 19(1): 19-20. Chagnon, N., and Hames, R. (1979). Protein deficiency and tribal warfare in Amazonia: New

data. Science 203: 910-913. Chernela, J. M. (1984). Classificaqao e selesao indigena de grupos subespecificos de Manihot

esculenta na area do Rio Uaupes no noroeste da Amaz6nia. Paper presented at XXV Congresso Nacional de Botanica, Manaus.

Divale, W., and Harris, M. (1976). Population, warfare, and the male supremacist complex. American Anthropologist 78: 521-538.

Dole, G. (n.d.). The use of manioc among the Kuikuru: Some interpretations. Manuscript. Dreyfus, S. (1968). Kayap6 du Nord, Etat de Pard-Bresil: Contribution a l'Etudes des Indiens

Ge. Mouton, Paris. Eisenberg, J., O'Connel, M. A., and August, P. (1979). Density, productivity, and distribution

of mammals in two Venezuelan habitats. In Eisenberg, J. (ed.), Vertebrate Ecology in the Northern Neotropics. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 187-207.


Fidalgo, O., and Prance, G. T. (1976). The ethnomycology of the Sanama Indians. Mycologia 68(1): 201-210.

Fittkau, E. J., and Klinge, H. (1973). On biomass and tropic structure of the Central Amazon rain forest ecosystem. Biotropica 5: 1-14.

Fleming, T. H. (1975). The role of small mammals in tropical ecosystems. In Golley, F. B., Petrusewicz, K., and Ryszkowski, C. (eds.), Small Mammals: Their Productivity and Population Dynamics. International Biological Programme 5, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 269-298.

Glanz, W. E. (1982). The terrestrial mammal fauna of Barro Colorado Island: Censuses and long-term changes. In Leigh, E. G., Jr., Rand, A. S., and Windsor, D. M. (eds.), The Ecology of a Tropical Forest: Seasonal Rhythms and Long-term Changes. Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 455-468.

Good, K. (1982). Hunting and meat distribution in Yanomami society. Paper presented at the 81st Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C.

Gross, D. R. (1975). Protein capture and cultural development in the Amazon basin. American Anthropologist 77(3): 526-549.

Gross, D. R. (1982). Proteina y cultura en la Amazonia: Una segunda revisi6n. Amazonia Peruana 3(6): 127-144.

Gross, D. R. (1983). Village movement in relation to resources in Amazonia. In Hames, R., and Vickers, W. (eds.), Adaptive Responses of Native Amazonians. Academic Press, New York, pp. 429-449.

Hames, R. (1980). Game depletion and hunting zone rotation among the Ye'kwana and Yanomamo of Amazonas, Venezuela. In Hames, R. (ed.), Working Papers on South American Indians (No. 2). Bennington College, Bennington, Vermont, pp. 31-66.

Hames, R., and Vickers, W. (1982). Optimal diet breadth theory as a model to explain variability in Amazonian hunting. American Ethnologist 9(2): 358-378.

Harris, M. (1974). Cows, Pigs, Wars, and Witches: The Riddles of Culture. Random House, New York.

Harris, M. (1980). Culture, People, Nature: An Introduction to General Anthropology (3rd ed.). Harper and Row, New York.

Holmberg, A. (1969). Nomads of the Long Bow: The Siriono of Eastern Bolivia. Natural History Press, Garden City, New York.

Lathrap, D. (1968). The "hunting" economies of the tropical forest zone of South America. In Lee, R. B., and Devore, I. (eds.), Man the Hunter. Aldine, Chicago, pp. 23-29.

LeCointe, P. (1947). Arvores e Plantas Uteis. Cia. Editora Nacional, Sao Paulo. Linares, 0. (1976). "Garden hunting" in the American tropics. Human Ecology 4(4): 331-349. Lizot, J. (1977). Population, resources, and warfare among the Yanomami. Man 12: 497-517. Maybury-Lewis, D. (1967). Akwe-Shavante Society. Clarendon Press, Oxford. McDonald, D. (1977). Food taboos: A primitive environmental protection agency (South

America). Anthropos 72(5): 735-748. Medem, F. (1960). Data zoo-geograficos y ecol6gicos sobre los Crocodylia e Testudinata de

los rios Amazonas, Putumayo y Caqueta. Caldasia 8: 19-45. Meggers, B. (1971). Amazonia: Man and Culture in a Counterfeit Paradise. AHM Publishing,

Arlington Heights, Illinois. Metraux, A. (1950). A Religido Dos Tupinambds Suas Relaoves Com a Das Demais Tribus Tupi-

Guaranis (Translated by E. Pinto). Colesao Brasiliana, v. 267, Cia. Editora Nacional, Sao Paulo.

Moore, 0. (1957). Divination: A new perspective. American Anthropologist 59: 69-74. Posey, D. A. (1984a). Indigenous knowledge and development: An ideological bridge to the

future. Ciencia e Cultura 35(7): 877-894. Posey, D. A. (1984b). Keepers of the campo. Garden 8(6): 8-12, 32. Prance, G. T. (1972). Ethnobotanical comparison of four tribes of Amazonian Indians. Acta

Amazonica 2(2): 7-27. Prance, G. T. (1978). The mycological diet of the Yanoam Indians. Mycologia 68(1): 248-250. Pritchard, D. H. (1975). Distribution of tortoises of tropical South America. Chelonia 1: 3-10. Rappaport, R. (1968). Pigsfor the Ancestors. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

510 Balee

Ribeiro, D. (1976). Os indios Urubus: Ciclo anual das atividades de subsistencia de uma tribo da floresta tropical. In Ribeiro, D. (ed.), Uird Sai a Procura de Deus. Paz e Terra, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 31-59.

Roosevelt, A. (1980). Parmana: Prehistoric Maize and Manioc Subsistence along the Amazon and Orinoco. Academic Press, New York.

Ross, E. (1978). Food taboos, diet, and hunting strategy: The adaptation to animals in Amazon cultural ecology. Current Anthropology 19(1): 1-36.

Schmidt, G. W. (1972). Chemical properties of some waters in the tropical rain-forest region of Central Amazonia along the new road Manaus-Caracarai. Amazoniana 3(2): 199-207.

Smith, E. A. (1983). Anthropological application of optimal foraging theory: A critical review. Current Anthropology 24(5): 625-651.

Smith, N. (1980). Anthrosols and human carrying capacity in Amazonia. Annals of the Associa- tion of American Geographers 70(4): 553-566.

Smith, N. (1981). Man, Fishes, and the Amazon. Columbia University Press, New York. Smole, W. (1976). The Yanomama Indians: A Cultural Geography. University of Texas Press,

Austin. Vickers, W. T. (1980). An analysis of Amazonian hunting yields as a function of settlement

age. In Hames, R. (ed.), Working Papers of South American Indians (No. 2). Benn- ington College, Bennington, Vermont, pp. 7-29.

Viverios de Castro, E. (1984). Arawete': Uma visdo de cosmologia e da pessoa Tupi-guarani. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro-Museu Nacional, Program de P6s Graduacao em Antropologia Social.

Vogt, E. Z. (1971). The genetic model and Maya cultural development. In Vogt, E. Z. and Ruiz, A. (eds.), Desarrollo cultural de los Mayas. Mexico City, pp. 9-48.

Werner, D. (1983). Why do the Mekranoti trek? In Hames, R., and Vickers, W. (ed.), Adap- tive Responses of Native Amazonians. Academic Press, New York pp. 225-238.

Werner, D. (1984). Amazon Journey: An Anthropologist's YearAmong Brazil's Mekranoti In- dians. Simon and Schuster, New York.

Williams, E. E. (1960). Two species of tortoises in northern South America. Breviora 120: 1-13. Winterhalder, B. (1981). Optimal foraging strategies and hunter-gatherer research in an-

thropology: Theory and models. In Winterhalder, B., and Smith, E. A. (eds.), Hunter- Gatherer Foraging Strategies: Ethnographic and Archaeological Analyses. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 13-35.

ka'apor ritual hunting

Spiritual