Dinâmica de uso e cobertura da terra em imóveis rurais sob conflito agrário no Estado do Pará, Amazônia Oriental

Abstract

The objective of this study was to analyze the dynamics of land use and land cover and its relation to the presence of litigation in the rural areas, subject to possessory actions of the Land Judge of the Castanhal Region of the Court of Justice of the State of Pará. For this, we have mapped 144 processes (properties), from their cartographic data, and analyzed the situations and procedural characteristics. Then, the land use classes observed in these properties were quantified in the period from 2004 to 2014, based on data from the TERRACLASS / PRODES project. In addition, the dynamics of land use transition were analyzed. Finally, it was also related the types of use mapped with the presence or not of the conflict by the ownership of the land. The main methodologies used were the transition matrix technique and the ANOVA statistic. The results showed that, in the analyzed properties, the predominant classes of land use were Forest, Secondary Vegetation and Pasture. The Forest class accounted for about 70% of the landscape in the mapped areas. And, around 95% of this forested area remained unchanged throughout the study period, although deforestation of approximately 25,000 hectares was recorded. In the deforested areas, 43% were converted to pasture and 34% to secondary vegetation. The Annual Agriculture class increased from 44.65 ha in 2004 to 8,027.19 ha in 2014, of which 80% came from grazing. About 24% of the increment of pasture area came from forest in 2014. In addition, there was a progressive increase of urbanization in these rural properties. The relationship between the presence of judicial agrarian litigation showed that there was an effect of the group (rural properties with and without agrarian conflict) on the classes of land use and land cover, so that at least one of the groups is statistically different. Thus, for the Agriculture (Ag) and Other (Or) use classes there was a statistical difference between the groups, whereas for Forest (Fl) and secondary vegetation (SV) there was no.