During the past two decades, several authors have advanced the notion that the Amazonian-Orinoco lowlands consist of eminently anthropogenic rather than pristine ecosystems (Smith 1980; Posey 1983a, 1984; Stocks 1983; Eden et al. 1984; Clark & Uhl 1987; Denevan & Padoch 1987; Balee 1988,1989,1993; Anderson & Posey 1989; Irvine 1989; Smole 1989; Denevan 1992a; Roosevelt 1992; Gragson 1995; Heinen et al. 1995; Junk 1995; Zent 1997). According to this viewpoint, the historical hand of human intervention is evident in various key aspects of contemporary landscapes, including vegetation, fauna, soils, topography, and hydrology. In a previous article, E. L. Zent (1998) reviewed several case studies in support of this argument and concluded that indigenous human populations that maintain a traditional (i.e., subsistence-dominated, low technology, low population density) lifestyle not only have a nondetrimental impact on their surrounding environment but also are agents of creative disturbance in dynamically configured Amazonian ecosystems. The theoretical perspective adopted in the previous study and continued in the present one conceives of the humannature relationship as art (in its literal meaning from the Latin ars, ability, expertise, skill), which is creative in the sense of triggering ecosystemic outcomes beyond those aimed solely at satisfying needs.