https://hemerotecadigital.uanl.mx/files/original/347/14509/1975._Publicaciones_Biologicas_del_Inst._de_Inv._Cient._1975._No._7._0002016430.ocr.pdf 8590dbac84a096db491dec2a4663eccb PDF Text Text PUBLICACIONES BIOLOGICAS INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTIFICAS U. A. N. L. Julio lo., 1975 ,Volumen 1, Número 7 SIMPOSIO FLORA Y FAUNA SILVESTRE Y SU MEDIO AMBIENTE EN EL CONTINENTE AMERICANO SY M POSIU M WILDLIFE AND ITS ENVIRONMENTS IN THE AMERICAS CONACYT / AAAS Junio 25, 1973 México, D. F. Capil14 AUotJIÍ1'14 llif>fiDreM 1.'ai. ,,a.ieril UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA DE NUEVO LEON Dirección General de la Investigación Científica y Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas Monterrey, N. L., México �Las Publicaciones (Biológicas, etc.) del Ex Instituto de Investigaciones Cientifica.s de la Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, hoy Dirección General de la Investigación Científica son series destinadas principalmente a presentar los resultados de investigaciones originales realiza.das en sus dependencias. Los trabajos se imprimen según se aceptan, uno o varios en cada número, sin periodicidad fija. Se aceptan suscripciones institucionales par una o varias suscripcknes individuales. Las personas. interesadas pueden adquirir números sueltos remitiendo la orden. Las Publicaeiones pueden ser adquirida.s en intercambio. Los autores afiliados a la Universidad Autóncma de Nuevo León ordenarán sus sobreliros en la requisición que se les proporcionará, •Otros autores recibirán 100 sobretiros par articulo, pudiendo ordenar más al costo. En ambos casos, el pedido se hará al entregar las pruebas corregida.s. Al citar esta serie, se solicita atentamente a los autores usar las siguientes abreviaturas: PubL BioL Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., Méx. PRECIO DEL EJEMPLAR: $ 50.00 OFICINA EDITORTAL Dr. SalvadOl""C'ontreras-Balderas, Jefe �PUBLICACIO ES BIOLOGICAS I STITUTO DE I VESTIGACIO ES CIE TIFICAS U.A. .L. Julio lo. 1975 Volumen 1, Número 7 I I N D I C E PRESENTACION R. F. Baker y B. Villa R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 MIGRATORY WATERFOWL: A HEMISPHERIC PERSPECTIVE Milton W. Weller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 FELIDS OF LATIN AMERICA: IMPORTANCE AND FUTURE PROSPECTS Carl B. Koford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE NEOTROPICAL TINAMOUS AND GALLIFORMS Douglas A. IAncaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 CERVIDOS NEafROPICALES: ESTADO ACTUAL Y FUTURO Fernando Dias de Avila--Pirés . .. . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. IMPORTED WILD UNGULATES IN LATIN AMERICA. WITH GUIDELINE PRINCIPLES TO GOVERN SPECIES INTRODUCTIONS George A. Petr ides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CAMBIOS DE COMPOSICION DE ESPECIES EN COMUNIDADES DE PECES EN ZONAS SEMIARIDAS DE MEXICO Salvador Ccmtreras-Bo.lderas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 169 181 �88 PulJl. Biol. Inst. Inv . Cient., U. A . N. L., México Vol. 1 VIDA SILVESTRE Y SU MEDIO AMBIENTE EN EL CONTINENTE AMERICANO La fauna silvestre encuentra obstáculos muy serios para podei sobrevivir en muchos países del Continente Americano donde las CPndiciones er0lógicas están siendo alteradas rápidamente debido a prácticas lw...rativas vinculadas con el uso de la tierra. Dado que estos recursos de l<.l vida silvestre se encuentran distribuidos de manera ecológica y no por razoues políticas, uno de los objetivos de este simposio es el de llamar la atención (mediante ciertos ejemplos) sobre la necesidad que tiene cada pais en este hemisferio de preocuparse cada vez más por los ecosistemas amenazados y las plantas y animales que les son característicos, ya sea (1) conservando especies valiosas y raras restringidas a habitats iocalizados dentro de sus limites políticos, o bien (2) colaborando con otros países para conservar y manejar adecuadamente tales ambientales naturales y los recursos de la fauna silvestre que en ellos se encuentran y que disfrutan en común. MIGRATORY WATERFOWL: A HEMISPHERIC PERSPECTIVE Miltnn W. Weller I N I D C E . . . .. . . . 89 SUMMARY ................ . ....... . .. .. ... . . .. ... . .... . . . .. . 91 INTRODUCTION . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · . ... .. .. . ... . .. .. . . . .. 93 DISTRIBUTIONAL PATTERNS · · · · · · · .. . ... . .. . . ... . . . .... .. . 93 WILDLIFE AND ITS ENVIROMENTS IN THE AMERICAS RECENT CHANGES IN DISTRIBUTION .... .. . . ... .. .. ... ... . 95 Wildlife resources face major obstacles in order to survive in maoy American states where natural enviroments ar e rapidly being altered to carry out lucrative land-use practices. Sinoe tha;e wildlife reSources are distributed ecologically instead of politically, an objective of this symposium is to help bring into focus (using a few selected examples) the need for each American state to show progressively greate r concern for endangered enviroments and their characteristic plants and animals by (1) conserving cherished and rare species uniquely restricted to habitats fcund solely within its political ooundaries and (2) joining with othcr countries to conserve and manage compatibly such enviroments and their wi;dlife resources which are shared in comrnon. PATIERNS OF REPRODUCTION · · · · · · . . . . .. ..... . ..... .. . . . 96 HABITAT ECOLOGY · -· - · - · · · · · · · · · · · · · · . . . ... . . . . . . . ... . .. . 96 FOOD RESOURCES . - . - · · - · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ... . .... . 99 ROLLIN H. BAKER (Director, The Museum, Professor of Fisheries, Wildlife and Zoology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mich.) BERNARDO VILLA RAMIREZ (Profesor de Zoología, Instituto de Biologia, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad Universitaria, México, D. F.) . ... ..... . RESUMEN ....... - - - · · · · - - - · · · · · · · · ·· · · 1'11IGRATION AND OTHER SPATIAL SIIlFTS ......... . .. . . 100 ECOLOGICAL STRATEGY OF NICHE ......... . .. . .. . . . .. . . AND HABITAT USE BY MIGRATORY ... ..... .. ... .... .. . ... . WATERFOWL IN NORTH AMERICA · . . .............. . ... . .. . 101 CURRENT AND FUTURE PROBLEMS - · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 103 TABLES ... . . - · -· · · · · · · · •••••• • ••••• • • ♦ •• • ••• • ••• • •••• •• • • 108 . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .... - .. 115 LITERATURE CITED . - - - - · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · . · . . .. 124 FIGURES - ..... . . . ... . . . . �90 PulJl. Biol. lnst. lnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., Méxioo I' RESUMEN Patos, gansos y cisnes de las Americas constituyen vaiosos recursos _que cruzan fronteras nacionales en sus migraciones, por lo que se requiere la cooperación in1·ernacional paro su conservación. Au~q_ue algunos patos norteamericanos inviernan en el norte de Sudomarica, hay rela1ivamente muy poco intercambio intercontinental. Sol~n:iente 5_ de 7~ especies se rep.·oducen en ambas áreas. Nortea~é:rica esta do~inada por patos marinos y los verdaderos gansos que ani~an en la dilatada tundra están ausentes en Sudamérica. El comple¡o de aves acuáticas sudamericanas, carece de los verdaderos ¡eª;sos, pero _los chajás lle~an este nicho ecológico en los pastizales piados, fnos. Hay vanas especies de bosques tropicales y varios form_as que .probab_lemente se originaron en Africa. De este modo, los con!•~entes tienen diferentes complejos de fauna acuática y los de Sudamerica, han estado aislados por muchos miles de años. son únicos en el mundo. 11111~-- lri:iiit ' · Lo fauna acu~tica en los respectivos continentes se ha adopta~º- 0 todos los tt~os de tie~ras húmedas en grandes regiones fisiograficas Y vegetativa. Los Sistemas de adaptación están repres:mtados _por los patos tortuga que pueden nadar y alimentarse en los despenaderos de agua de los Andes, los patos eider del norte y nue<,tros ~otos del sur que llevan a sus hijos a o largo de las costas mas escabrosas del mundo Las ada~taciones alimenticias incluyen herbfvorcs que se alimer. tan ~bre la tierra, aguas dulces y a lo largo de la línea costera. Los omnivoros parecen ser los patos más abundantes y ellos pueden tornarse_ de comedores de plantas a comedores de animales, según las nec~sida~s d~- proteínas que requieran. Las hembras, antes de ovopositor Y. os ¡ov~nes utilizan los más grandes cantidades de alimentos de origen animal que los que no están en reproducción o que los mach~s adultos. Los carnívoros son menos numerosos O causa de que se alimentan en los niveles superiores de lo cadena alimen1icia. . Muchos oves acuáticas de Norteamérica son precísamente migratoria~. a cous,o de los dramáticos cambios estacionales ahí aunque tamb1~n se presenta. migración _regularmente en los climds templados f~1os de Sudamenca. Los movimientos nómades son comúnes aun en dimas templados calientes hacia los regiones subtropicales. '? • ~a estrategia ecológica que parmite tan grandes números de aves ocuaticos de Norteamérica es: Vol 1 No. 7 91 Weller: Waterfotcl of America 2). Su cambio en los niveles de consumo de invertebrados endla época de reproducción a semillas o follaje en los perío de no reproducción. Esto tiene el efecto de aume~tar la existencia de alimento por unidad de área, la capacidad de sustentación de las áreas invernales del sur. ?s Lo grandes problemas d~ lo conservación de las aves acuáticas en Sudamérica incluyen la necesidad de vigilancia federal de las aves acuáticos más que programas de conservación y admi~istració~ provinciales o estatales y un c!eciente número de trotados internacionales para regular lo cosecho de los especies migratorios. Uno gran diversidad de habita! es esencial para con~rvar la diversidad de especies de oves acuáticos migratorias. Los mayores pelig~os a las vastos áreas de hobitat incluyen el de_sarrol~o ~trolero en las vertientes norteñas de Alaska, el desarrollo h1droelectnco de transportación a lo largo de las corrientes de aguo tanto de Norte como en Sudamérica y la pérdida de lagunas y estuarios costeros d~ Nor!eoméric::i que son vitales para el mantenimiento de los poblaciones invernales. Si las tendencias en Centro y Sudamérica siguen o las de los Estados Unidos y Canadá, lo compro es el único medio de salvaguardar los áreas de reproducción y de invernoción. Lo cazo ~o mostrado que sólo es posible el uso de este recurso, en la medido que lo cosecho se conserve a niveles r,egulodos. Los programas poro evaluar lo producción, movilidad, potencialidad de cosecho y la_ ~osech~, son esenciales en Sudamérica. La introducción de oves acuat1cas migratorios sudamericanos en Norteamérica implican una a~noza .º la singularidad y producción de este complejo de aves ocuaticas migratorios. Sería desalentador como potencialmente. dañino e inneceario. SUMMARY Ducks, gees and swans of the Americas ore valuable resources which cross notional boundaries in their migration and hence require internotional cooperation in their conservotio~. Althoug~ sorne North American ducks winter in northern South America, there 1s relatively little intercontinental exchange. Only five of 78 species breed in both oreas. North America is dominated by sea ducks and true geiese which nest in the extensive tundra absent in South Americe. The South American waterfowl complex locks true geese but sheldgeese fill this ecological niche in cold-temperate grasslands.. There are severo! tropical forest species, ond severa! forms which probably originoted in Africo. Thus, the contments hove quite different complexes of woterfowl, ond those in South Americo hove been isoloted many thousand of years and are unique in the world. 1). Su adaptabilidad al cambio de hobitat de áreas de e d ·• d r pro ucc1on e aguas dulces a áreas marinas en donde no e ducen y s repro- Waterfowl in the respective continents hove adopted to ali types of wetlands in majar physiog110phk and Vegelotive regions. �92 Publ. Biol. lnst. lnv. Cient., U. A. N. L ., México Vol. 1 Ex~remes of adaptation ore represented by Torrent Duck which can sw'; and fe-ed in cascading Andean streams, to eiders ~f the north an steamer-ducks of the south which rear their young along the most rugged seashores of the world. Adaptations to íood include herbivores which feed on land in freshwater and along seashores. Omnivores seem to be the ~cst a~undant ducks. and they switch from plant to animal foods as rote,n needs req_u,re. Pre-laying females and young birds utilize hi:her ª'.11ounts of animal foods than donen breeders or adult males Carnh1vorfes dareh (ess numerous because they feed at the upper lev~ls of t e oo e am. , M?st North American waterfowl are migratory because of the ?ramat,c seasonal chages there, but migration also occurs re ularl rn cold-temperate South America. Nomadic movements are c~mmo~ even in warm-temperate to subtropical regions. The ecological strategy which permits such larg b f t f 1· N h A • . e num ers o wa er ow in ort me~1ca ,s. 1) their adaptability to shift habitats from ·freshhºfwater breed,ng oreas to marine non-breed ·rng oreas and · 2) therr s I t in consumer level from invertebrot · b d. ' • d f 1· . es rn ree rng season ,o see orh of roge •n· d in non-breeding periods· Th,·s has the e ffect of 1 creas1~g t e oo supply p·er unit orea and increasing the · capac,ty of southern wintering a-reas. corryrng . I Mojar problems in conservation of waterfowl in South A . rnc ude the need far federal rather than state or pro . . 1 mencal of t f 1 . vrnc,a centro programs' and ·rnc;,.L.,osed 1 - ...1,. • t fwa er ow conservGJtron 1 rnernahonol rea tes to regu ate harvest of migratory species. t~~¡/ t- A great diversity of habitat is essential to maint . h . waterfowl species. Mojor threats to vast oreas of d;v~r011 development on Alaska's north slope hydroel et . d a me u e tation development along waterways in' both N ethnc dan S transpor. d I f or an outh Am-enc~, an ~ss o lagoons and estuaries of coastal North A . wh1ch are vital to the maintenance of winterin menea 1 . in Central and South America follow those ing tio~u ~t,onsd ~ trends purchase is the only mea ns of safeguarding p·•od et·ron · ·an adn wrntenng _ana?a, , uc oreas. Hunters an d non-consumptive users must pay to f· h d · ·t· b manee t ese a qu1s1 ,ons, ut many wetlands are unique and should b . ,?as \ state and national parks. e acqurred ~ ~ ITu~ '-' . ~ •f Hunting h has been shown to be feasible use of the resource as o..1 9 as arvest levels are contro'led. Programs for measuring pro- y'f ~ •uorecA CENTRA.\ 93 We'llm: Waterf<nvl of America No. 7 duction, mobility, harvest potentials, and harvest are essential in South America. The introduction of So uth American migratory waterfowl into North America poses a threat to the uniqueness and production of this waterfow l complex. lt should be discouraged as potentially harmful and unnecessary. INTRODUOTION Ducks, geese and swans (Order Anseriformes) are fascinating components of the avifauna of the Americas and important and valuable resources. Their great mobility and wide range create problems of preservation and management unique to only few groups of game animals, and demand international involvement in their conservation. In addition, their association with wetland habitats so vulnerable to the expansion of civilization creates a delicate balance between human activities and the welfare of this resouroe. The objectives of this paper are to outline the uniqueness of these faunal components on each continent, to indicate the degree to which these resources are shared, to appraise the ecological strategy which maintains the continental waterfowl population, and to relate these patterns to conservation needs common to both areas. Field work in South America was funded by NSF Grants Bq-1067 and Gv-21491 to Iowa State University. DISTRIBUTIONAL PATTERNS Fifty-five percent of the 151 waterlowl species of the world are folli7d in the Americas: 43 in the clasd cal Nearctic Region north of tropical Middle America (Table 1), and 40 in the Neotropical Region (Table 2). Although a number of taxa are similar in both regions, the Neotropical Anseriformes, like other birds of the region, are characterized by a high level of endemism involving one of the two families, 57 % of the genera, and 80% of the species (Table 3). In contrast, North America shares ali but one genus (Campvarhynchus labrwiorius, the extinct Labrador Duck) with either Palearctic or Neotropical Regions, and only 33% of the species are endemics (Table 3). .As would be expected from the relative sizes of major habitats, the two faunal groups differ mainly in the dominance of tundra and boreal �94 Publ. Biol. lnst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 forest species in N orth America and of tropical forest forms in South America. Sea ducks (Tribe Mergini), i. e. eiders, scoters and Long-taUed duck of the open tundra, and füe scoters, goldeneyes and Harlcquin of the boreal forest, form the dominant Nearctic tribe (Table 4). These same zones also have many species of true geese which are not found in the Southern Hemisphere. Species using northern tundra and occasionally boreal forest tend to be circumboreal, or at least span the Bering Sea (Weller, 1964b:120; Salomonsen, 1972). North America also has a large number of pochards (Tribe Aythyini) in the Prairie Bothole Region and southern Boreal Forest. The only tropical species in the N earctic are the two whistling ducks which have very restricted ranges in southern California and Texas and the Masked Duck which rarely nests in Mexioo and Texas. ' Most endemic ducks and sorne endemic geese in North America are found in interior and east.ern North America. Speciation in North America is a product both of continental isolation and glacial refugia (see for cxample Amadon, 1953; Weller, 1964a; Ploeger, 1968; Salomonsen, 1972). Areas of endemism appear to be the Banks Refugia, the boreal forest the southwestern Great Basin, the eastern dedduous forest, and the pr~rie pothole region. The uniqueness of Neotropical waterfowl among those of the world is exemplified by a number of groups whose taxonomic affinities are still hypothetical. The endemic family Anhimidae, made up of 3 species of screamers (Table 2), obviously is an ancient group and may even have affinities with the Australian Magpie Goose ( Anseranas anserana,s) (Serventy, 1972). The ruggedly-built divers of the M a gel l a ni c Region, the St:eamer-Ducks, r-ecently have been placed in a separate tribe (Tachyerini; Moynihan, 1958). The beautiful Torrent Duck of cascading Andean streams is of uncertain relationships but is riva1ed by few ducks in its adaptation to this habitat. The Crested Duck Spectacled Duck and Ringed Teal have been treated diff,er~ntly by ~arious taxonomists and often ali are placed in the genus Anas for lack of data confirming the suspicion that they belong to different genera and even tribes. Also unique are the five spedes of sheldgoose of the genus Chk>ephaga which are really grazing ducks of the tribe Tadornini and which fill the ecological niche of the true geese. These five cold-temperate species fill five diverse habitats and, with the tropical Orinoco Sh0ldgoose, constitute a strong repres.entation of a tribe represented in North America only by slight fossil evidence from the Pliocene (Howard, 1964). They may repre~nt radia_tion from an ~ly invasion by an African sheldgoose, and, m fact, Ormoco and Egyptian sheldgeese are quite similar. Interchange with Africa is shown by at least four species. Two spe-cies shared directly with the Ethiopian are whistling ducks which show No. 7 Weller: Waterfowl of America 95 no significant subspeciation in any of their range and which could hre been early immigrants to South America (Table 5). However, two duc sthe Comb Duck and Southern Pochard, obviously rep~ent ~ reoent wave of immigrants which differ sub-specific?-lly from thell' Afri~ counterparts. One other Neotropical duck, the Silver Teal, strongly resembles the African Hottentot Teal (Anas punctata). That these species originated in Africa rather t~an S_outh ~eric~ is suggested by the strength of Plaearctic and Ethi?pian ~irbes m Sout America (Tadornirú and Cairinirú) absent or restricted in North America Moreover the recent immigration of the Cattl,e Egret (BuJrul,cus ibis) from Af~ica to South America demo?5trat,es tha! even ~eaker flyers can cross the Atlantic in the easterly wmds of tropical latitudes. Currently, only five ducks are Pan Ameri~an and, of ~bese, only the Cinnamon Teal and Ruddy Duck have extensive non-tropical ranges o_n both continents (Table 6) . The lack_ of ~ater interc~ange probably i~ dueto· 1) the extensive belt of tropical ram forest which acts as ~ bar rier ~ the fauna of temperate South America where most endemics of all birds species are prevalent (Olrog, 1972); 2) the absence of _true tropical forest in the southern U.S. which w?uld a~tract ~eotropical forest species; and 3) the presence of a sea barrier wh~ch ex~st€d for long periods (Mayr, 1972). Mo:reover, temperature regimes In teI?perate and sorne montane areas of South America may have reduced mobihty common to Nearctic birds. As seems to be true of all of the avifauna of the Neotropical Region (Keast, 1972; Olrog, 1969, 1972), t~•~ wa_terfowl_ ai:e a product of several waves of inmmigrants with extens1ve different1ation between. Areas of greatest endemism for South American waterfowl appear to be ~he pampas marshes, Chaco swamps and tropical rain fore~t, An~ean ~ighlands, and the Magellanic Region (Fig. t). Becaus-~. o~ maJor habitat differenc~ during the Pleisfocene (Vuilleurmer, 1971), it 1s probabl~ that ~a~agoma and the Falkland Islands were major areas of recent d1fferentiation. RECENT CHANGES IN DISTRIBUTION The waterfowl complexes of the two cont!nents and 8:5SOCiated islan~s are dynamic. The northward extent ?f breedmg_ ranges m _North Amenca has changed with long-term warmmg trends m the Afctlc as Gudmundsson (1950) noted in Iceland. Temporary ran~e extens1ons also were I'i:corded in response to drought in major breedrng areas of No1:'íh Amenca during the late 1950's and early 1960'~ (8:ansen and !YicKmght, 19?4; Smith. 1970). Breeding populations of pmtails even shifted 3000 ~1!es into Siberia during that drought (Henny, 1973), ~nd Redhe3:d dens1~ies increased both in the southern and northern p0rt1ons of !heir breedrng range (Weller, 1964a). There is a radiating pulse from optimal to subop- �96 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient. U. A. N. L., Méxioo timal habitat as drought reduces carrying capacity in the center of the breeding areas. A newly established br:eeding popuJation of a Palearctic bird in North America has been recorded with the Whooper Swan (Cygnus c. cygnus) now breeding in Alaska near populations of Trumpeter Swans (C. c. buccinator). This should test the subspecific status now given the two forros. Whether the recent invasion of wintering blue-winged teal into Argentina and Chile (Olrog, 1968) is new or just recently documented is uncertain. It is the only case of a Nearctic duck crossing the Neotropical forest zone-perhaps along the Andes, and has the potential for establishing a breeding population in temperate South America. At the southern extreme, the ubiquitous South American Speckled Teal has extended its breeding area over 1000 miles east to the island of South Georgia (Weller and Howard, 1972). PATTERNS OF REPRODUCTION Patterns of reproductive behavior and associated morphological features differ markedly in ducks of the two oontinents. The differences are related to climatic regimes and resultant mobility patterns as well as to taxonomic affinities of the groups. Whereas waterfowl in most of northern North America by necessity have a restricred breeding period, southern anatids may occupy the same area year-round and breed over a longer period of time. However, in south temperate regions, breeding seasons also may be restricted to spring, or may be bimodal in spring and fall. It is not known whether this is a result of double-bI'oodedness or different cohorts of the population. Patterns in the tropics are less clearcut and sorne breeding occurs in the winter (Partridge, 1956; Wel1er, 1968). The dominant foroe in regulating chronology of breeding seems to be water rather than temperature, as is true in Australia (Frith, 1967). Southern ducks more nearly resemble northern geese than northern ducks in that pairs may be permanent and hence the male assists in brood care, and in their common lack of sexual dimorphism in color and str>~mg territoriality. These generalized patterns are shown in Table 7 based on summaries by Weller (1968) and Kear (1970). Sorne dramatic exceptions to these general patterns in temperate and tropical South America have been outlined for anatids of the Magellanic Region (Weller, 1972). HABITAT ECOLOGY Most North Americans think of ducks and geese solely as cold-climate species but waterfowl have adapta:l to a broad range of tempera- Weller: Waterfowl of America No. 7 97 tures. Most waterfowl are associated with water thro~ghout the year, an~ nearly all species need wetlands during brood reanng. Al~hough se:i:111aquatic birds are less influenced by the surrounding terr~tr1al vegietat1on than the character of the wetland, major plant commun1tlfS often denote general patterns of waterfowl distribution because th~ geomorp~ology of an area influences both wetland types and surroundmg v:egetation. Species clearly linked with terrestrial vegetati~n are h:;:ile-nes_tmg or_perchn~g ducks of forest regions. Thus, large phys1ograph1c reg10ns w1tp. their characteristic wetland type tend to be dominated by certam taxa (Table 8). Evolution of greatest species diversity an~ popula~ion ~ensities. of waterfowl are centered in water-rich areas wh1ch combme h1gh nutrient levels moderate invertebratei and plant diversity, and excellent yield of food ~esources. The major production regions are the temperate grassland marshes of the Prairie Pothole Region of the. U. S. and Can!ida, and th pampas marshes of Argentina and Uruguay. It 1s known that in North America this 10% of the land area produces a minimum of 50% of continental 'auck production (Smith, Stoudt, and Gallop, ~964). The nature of these wetlands and their dynamics have been o;:ins1dered by severa! authors (Stewart and Kantrud, 1971; Weller an~ Spatcher, 1965; Weller, 1969b) but there are many habitats which are m need of study. The grassland pro<;luction areas often undergo season~ drough~. Species which have evolved in such areas tend _also !º be social and 9wte adaptable in choice of habitat, food, and. nestmg s1tes. These restr1cted "islands" of habitat presumably force soc1~ t<?lerance, an~ year t~ year water fluctuations induce mobility and utihzation of a var1ety of diverse wetland types. These areas are dominated by member~ of the genera Anas and Ayth'!JO,, the dabbling ducks and pcch~ds, wh1ch are abundant and which also constitute the favored game spec1es. The vast tundra biome, which links Nell!'ctic and Palearctic du~ks and geese, is esseintially absent in South Amer1ca except as less _extens1ve alpine areas. The dominance of sea ducks, a few adaptable d_abbling du~ks and sev€'1.'al geese of the genus Anser and Branta, make th1s a v~ry rich and valuable region despite its apparent barrenness, sho~ gro~ng ~ason and severe weather. The abundance of ~etlands prov1des h1gh y1eld of a few species of invertebrates for. the carruvorous sea ducks, and coldclimate grasses and sedges for herb1vorous geese. Sea ducks such as mergansers, goldeneyes, Buffleheads and Harlequins dominate the dense northem coniferous forest but i~ low densities. One dabbler, the Black Duck, and one pochard, the Rmg-necked Duck also use the forest region in eastern Canada. Severa! races of the Canada Goose nest in the muskeg lakes of the sparse boreal forest-tundra eootone and similar lakes are used by Trumpeter Swans lil western ' �98 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cielnt., U. A. N. L., Méxioo Vol. 1 Canada and Alaska. Such lakes also may be used by Green-winged Teal American Widgeon and scoters. ' The eastern deciduous forest biome is the major breeding area of one of only two _northern hemisphere perching ducks (Tribe Cairinini), the Nqrth Ame~1can Wood Duck. However, populations also occur in northwestern Umted States and Canada. River backwaters and oxbows are major breeding areas but wetland basins of any type may be US€ti where ~ollow trees a~e available as nest sites. Little comparable habitat exists m South America because of the topography of wooded areas in the temperate zone. . Dense tropical rain_ forest of South America (Fig. 1) seems to be httle used by ducks wh1ch favor more open savannah areas tropical marshes and complex river systems within the rain forest. ' . River deltas or complex river systems are typically productive area.s wh1ch may stand out strikingly in areas either less rich or areas of difforent lif,e form of vegetation. Thus, the river deltas of the northern ~orth America meander through tundra regions and are th-e major 11€\Stmg areas of brant, snow geese and smaller raoes of Canada Geese In South America, it is the vast complex of streams of the Orinoco ·an<l Amazon basins which create unique habitats for several tropical waterfowl such as the Orinoco Sheldgoose, whistling ducks Muscovy Comb Duck, and other perching ducks. ' ' . :rhe stream systems to which one would least expect waterfow1 uti· lizatlon are the Andean torrents. Yet the Torrent Duck swims and dives in w~i_te water in whi~h man ~annot stand. Another stream specialist, the Braz1han Merganser, 1s found m the slower tropical streams of the Araucaria forest highlands of southern Brazil and northeastern Argentina (f:>artrid~e, 1956). BE;C~use of its habitat,. it could be very common-or very rare. It 1s the only livrng southern hem1sphere merganser and its distribution is very restricted (Fig. 1). The Neotropical grasslands range from the tropical savannahs of the Llanos Region in northern South America to the long-grass of the rich Pampa Region. Both areas have unique species or sub-species but the pampas marshes seem to harbor the richest and most productive waterfowl population. The Alpine puna zone of Peru, Bolivia and northern Argentina is the center of the range of the Andean Sheldgoose, a nearly white herbivore of !he altiplano m~adows. This are~ also_ has the Puna Teal, a rece ntly deriv€d form of Silver Teal of semi-spec1es status g¡enerally isolat€d by its range. Several other subspecies of dabbling ducks have differentiated in the Andean highlands. No. 7 Wellér: Waterfawl of America 99 Patagonia mountain foothills and the Magellanic region have rich short-grass areas where most of the sheldgeese are found. Repres-e_!ltat!ves of the genus Chloephaga include: the Magellan Sheldgoose, wh1ch 1s considered a major competitor with sheep for short-grasses; the Ruddyheaded Sheldgoose which occurs in dryer and perhaps higher areas of coarse grass; and the woodland stream or Iake species, the Ashy-headed Sheldgoose which may even nest in tree stumps (Johnson, 1965:182). FOOD RESOURCES In any of t'he diverse habitats in which waterfowl are found, they must find usable food to meet the needs of body maintenance throughout the year and the specialired requirements of breeding. It is now known, for example, that females of several pochards and the northern pintail, which have diets of vegetable material much of the year, switch to animal foods during the pre-laying p-eriod (Bartonek and Hickey, 1969; Krapu, 1974). In fact, experimental pintails on low plant protein diets produced fewer eggs of lower fertility (Krapu, 1972). Invertebrates also are the major food of young but males apparently do not nood and do not use such high levels of animal protein. If geese, which are physiologically adapted to pure plant diets, have any special sel~tivity at the prelaying period, it has not been determined. Selection of plants with higher nutrients is known in other herbivorous birds (Moss, Miller & Allen, 1972). Trophic niches of waterrowl include a large number of primary consumers: terrestrial herbivores such as geese and sheldgeese, and aquatic herbivores such as swans, whistling ducks, brant and widgeon. Omnivores are very abundant and the relative amounts of plant versus animal foods differ by area and season. Carnivores are especially common among sea ducks and sorne pochards in the n<>rthern hemisphere and by Flightless Steamer-Ducks in the Magellanic Region. Because of the greater species diversity of continents, niche segregation is difficult to assess and rarely has been attempted (Olney, 1963). Th~ pattern of a reduced fauna of the grasslands of cold-temperate. Falkland Islands is shown in Fig. 2. This group is dominated by herbivores and marine carnivores, and overlap in habitat use occurs only in food rich freshwat.er areas and by closely related and widely distributed forms. Even these species seem to subdivide foods of freshwater lakes by their structural and behavioral adaptaüons for food items of different siz€s ana depths. The understanding of the production of roods in relation to wetland type, nutrient base and water fluctuation is in need of intense consideration. We are beginning to understand the dynamics of vegetation in the Prairie Pothole Region, and are looking now at invertebrate pl'oduction �100 Puhl. Biol. lnst. lnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México and succession. It is clear that both cover and waterfowl foods are strongly related to wa~r fructuatiions, and that droqght, so fuared by those concerned with waterlowl populations, is the rejuvenator that results in blooms of food resouroes and subsequent high production when such areas are reflooded. It is also obvious that waterlowl of North American prairie wetlands and South American pampas marshes are adapted to these water dynamics by mobility if they have altemate water areas. Tropical wetlands also have their droughts but sorne also are stable. Food resources of such areas need to be studied to evaluate concepts of relative yield of specific foods available to ducks. Is the yield constant year-round with less of a seasonal bloom? How do permanent residents use these resources? Do tropical species differ in niche width from temperate species? Answers to these questions are vital to the understanding of the a'[YJ)llrent low production of tropical areas. As ducks are dominantly a freshwater group, it appears that few have made the transition to use of marine re:;ources during that crucially limiting time, the rearing of young. Among herbivores, thre South American Kelp Sheldgoooe, lives almost exclusively on marine algae as do the young (Weller, 1972) but both seek and utilize freshwater for drinking (Pettingill, 1965). North American brant seem to switch mainly to terrestrial foods and often are associated with river deltas during breeding (Barry, 1964). Among carnivores, only Common Eiders in the north and steamer-ducks and Crested Ducks in the south use strictly marine foods during rearing of the young, but Crested Ducks favor estuaries. What is of special interest, however, is that ducks adapted to marine foods are located only at high latitudes (Fig. 3). Productivity of cold seas ancl coastal regions in reknown (Ashmole, 1971) and this richness may be reflected in coastal benthos. The exploitation of this benthos by eiders and steamer-ducks may explain why they are such abundant species in their habitat range. But sorne tropical shorelines are among the most productive areas in the world (Odum, 1971:51); why haven't ducks exploited these? MIGRATION AND OTHER SPATIAL SHIFTS As a result of the extreme seasonal temperature pulses of northern North America, migration is most oommon there and essentially involves movement out of the continental interior north of the January mean isotherm of 30ºF (Fig. 4). Sorne wintering birds may reside in coastal regions within the 20ºF isotherm, but most move southward after breeding to warm-temperate inland lakes or subtropical coastal lagoons. Patbways of movement in North America have been documented by intensive banding and recovery programs but also by visual and radar observations (see for example, Bellrose, 1968). About 26 species of northern ducks move into Mexico in winter constituting about 9 to 17 % of the continen- No. 7 Weller: Waterfmvl of America 101 tal populatkm (Leopold, 1972:133). However, it is a major ~teri!1g area for Northern Pintail, Northern Shoveller, Redhead, American W1dgeon, teal and White-fronted Goose (Saunders, ur~d~tetl ms). Only 9 species reach South America proper (Table 9) and 1t 1s dou_btful that they constitute more than 2 or 3% of the total North American waterfo~l population, although a significantly higher perrentag~ of the Blue-~mged Teal population. As Leopold (1972 :126) noted, th1s pattern r,estr1cts managem.ent of the resources to essentially continental rather than intercontinental problems. Only a f ew Nearctic species of waterfowl are not migratory and even these seem to shift populations sorne. These are relatively sedentary isolates of the mallard: the Mottled Duck of the Gulf Ooast and the Mexican Duck of interior Mexico and New Mexico. Sorne east coast and western intermountain populations of other species also may be essentially permanent residents. Waterfowl of tropical regions from Middle America to the southern edge of the tropical forest are not strongly migratory. However, many South American speciies at least seven in the Magellanic Region migrate seasonally in an annual pattern like that of northern North America (Table 10). This is an area south of the 40ºF isotherm of July (Fig. 4). Presumably, birds also move out of still more northerly alpine regions as well. According to range maps presented by Olrog (1968) and banding data he has obtained (Olrog, 1974, and Pers. Comm.), most species living south ,nf the 60ºF isotherm show sorne mobility (Table 10). Other shifts include movement between the Pampas, Chaco and coastal lagoons but too few band records are available to decipher patterns. At least 16 species of waterfowl in South America tend to use different ranges in non-breeding periods (Table 10). However, because of the general dryness of this region, water fluctuations probably are more important than temperature. Nomadism probably is the rule in tropical spedes in the non-breeding period but this needs study. Sorne Holarctic ducks also have shorter non-breeding or post-breeding movements but which may involve flights of hundreds of miles (see Hochbaum, 1955 and Salomonsen 1968 for reviews). These are annual movements, apparently to specific areas, and the wing molt normally cccurs there leaving birds flightless for approximately a month. Although Neotropical ducks may congregate during the wing molt, extensive movements have not !>€en documented. EC0L0GICAL STRATEGY OF NICHE AND HABITAT USE BY MIGRATORY W ATERF'OWL IN NORTH AMERICA In reviewing the patterns of mobility of ducks of the Americas, it is obvious that migration and other forms of spatial shifts in ducks are pro- �102 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Oient.) U. A. N. L.) México Vol. 1 ducts t>f unstable ecosystems. This instability modifies available food and may result from free'Zing of wetlands in high latitudes or from drought. In the case of strong seasonal migrations, populations may be viewed as exploiters of surges of high seasonal production with a forced return to more permanent, warmer and more stable wetlands in winter. These seasonal pulses are synchronized with breeding and the total biomass of birds returning southward (in the case of North American migrants) presumably is greater than that moving north. By what system then does the generally smaller wintering area support the huge population which results from the vastly larger breeding areas (Figs. 5 to 8). This is especially difficult to explain when we conside the apparent low resident populations of tropical areas, although we lack quantitative data to support this popular assumption. Severa! possible explanations exist. First, there is a behavioral change which allows gr,eater density of birds in nonbreeding periods. That gr€"clter spacing in necessary during rearing of young in the north is logical, but winter ooncentrations merely magnify the problem of avalla· bility of food resources. Secondly, there is a strong shift in selection of habitats (Fig. 9). During breeding, ali but a few species are linked to freshwater by requirements for rearing the young. In the nonbreeding period, adults and young of the year can move to coastal lagoons, seashores and even shallow open ocean. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there may be a major shift in consumer lev.el which provides a grearer biomass of potential food in the same sized area thereby increasing the carrying capacity of such areas for ducks (Fig. 10). This flexibility in fond habits is great€St in the dabbling ducks and pochards which are our most abundant species. Not only is fall the peak period for seed availability in southern wetlands (Arner, Norwood and Tells, 1970), but agricultura! production makc; field-feeding possible (Bossenmaier and Marshall, 1958). Examples of sorne shifts are shown in Table 11. The major unanswered question is why aren't these same productive estuaries, lagoons and subtropical freshwaters used in winter also su• pporting greater species diversity or larger numbers of individuals as breeding residents as occurs in other groups of birds? Although this may be related to the basic adaptations of Anseriformes to colder climates, I suspect that the answer lies in niche adaptability, competition and the relatively low yield of topical ecosystems as proposed by Margalef (1963) and expanded by 0dum (1969). If tropical species we less versatile in food habits and use the same areas year-round, they cannot exploit potential eneirgy as do those species that shift habitats and trophic levels. 0bviously, much work needs to be done in this area and it is vital to understand the role of these diverse habitats if we are to pre~erve both resident and wintering waterfowl. No. 7 Weller: Waterfoivl of America 103 CURRENT AND FUTURE PR,OBLEMS I hope this brief review of waterfowl of the Americas has ~amat;zed the uniqueness and integrity of the two continental faunas w1thout de-emphasizing the sharing of respective resources by nations within the continents. Nor do I wish to belittle the importance of northern South America for certain wintering Nearctic ducks, and this importance could increase as habitat is destroyed in North America and as tropical forests are opened in South America. But it is obvious that the continents share more problems than waterfowl resources. Most countries in Central and South America have not been intensively involved in waterfowl conservation and management and probably only a few will do so even in the near future. But the same forces which have eliminated waterfowl habitat in North America are moving rapidly in South America, and concern and advice are necessary from countries that have experienced losses of waterbirds and that have developed conservation techruques. These shared problems in conservation and management can best be considered under topics of interriational agreements, habitat, resource use, and exotics. 1nternatimu:il Agreements Legal protection of migratory birds in North Am.erica provides a classic example of what can be done in interna!. and international resource affairs. The conflict of differing regulations in different states of the United States of America was clarified in 1913 by the Weeks-McLea11 law which shifted protection of migratory birds from individual states to the Federal Government (Day, 1959). This simple law made possible great progress by having one authority assess populations and set and cnforce laws regardless of the state in which the hunting occurred. It also protected non-game species. This problem of multiple state or provincial regulations exists currently in sorne South American countries l Weller, 1969b) . International cooperation was gained in a series of agreements :starting in 1916, when the Migratory Bird Act was signed with England fur Canada, with Mexico in 1936, and with Japan in 1972. Also in 1972, the Treaty with Mexico was amended to protect oertain endangered lpecies (American Ornithologist's Union, 1972). Eventually th€Se treaties need to include at least Colombia and Venezuela. In South America, limited banding data demonstrates movement of waterfowl ~tween Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil (Olrog, 1974). 01rog's 1968 summary suggests movement also between Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay. As shared resources, international cooperation eventually must come if these waterfowl are to be protected. Preceding this we need further ck>cumentation of production, population movement and harvest. �104 1 Puhl. füol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L. Méxioo Weller: Waterf0t0l of America 105 Habitat mary objectives of the system by allowing excessive recreational use Waterfowl have adapted to various wetland types to a point w~ere few habitats seem unused. As a result, any loss of wetlands porent~ally reduces the abundance of waterfowl. Moreover, ~ause man's _act1~ns 1end to modify certain types of water areas more than othe1;s, ~versity of habitat suffers. While sorne dabbling ducks are nearly ub1qmtous be· cause of their adaptability in habitat use, reduct~on in diyersity ~f wetlands tends to eliminate rather specialized spec1es. At times th1s may increase those species considered less desirable, as seem to be the case of the Magellan Sheldgoose as a major competitor of sheep (Weller, 1968; 1972). To fulfili man's obligation to preserve a . balanced natur~ and usable resource, it is essential to preserve diversity of wetlands without unciuly modifying the ratios of one to another. In the late 1940's when the great duck production of the myriad of tiny wetlands in the prairies was recognized, their drainage was occurring at a rate of 2 to 4 per cent per y.ear. Their acquistion by purchase or easement now totals about 11/ 2 million acres of what have been called "waterfowl production areas" (International Union for Conservation of Nature, 1973). This status protects the habitat without creating a refuge. These production areas are designed to satisfy the needs of spo~t hunters who are paying the bill. but a great diversity of wetlands acqmred concurrently has preserved waterfowl species of less importance to the hunter and other marsh wildlife as well. At the present time, massive engineering plans for hydroelectric dams, waterways and flood control, threate~ vast areas of so-c~ed was· telands which happen to be major produchon areas for certam waterrowl species. Sorne of these plans have been rejected, at least temp~ra· rily, and others are only at the discussion stage but could become ~eahtt They include projects such as the Ra.mpart Dam on ~e Yuk•;)n Rlver 1~ Alaska (Bartonek, K.ing and Nelson, 1971), th~ creatlon of sev~ral lake:, which will cover one-fourth of the Ungava Penmsula, the dredgmg of the Río de la P1ata and filling of adjacent river marshes, and a series of Iakes which would flood much of the Orinoco and Amazon basins. While many of these schemes will prove economically W1Sound, they indicate ahe extent of the problem. These projects may not eliminate any water· fowl species, but the mor~ specialized. species s~er from reduced ha· bitat diversity and populations must sh1ft dramahcally and adapt t-o new habitats with 'added interspecific competition. t t No. 7 Even without such drastic habitat changes, there are day to day Iosses of fragments of habitat. The losses of breeding habitat in the Prai· 1ie Pothole Region and fertile int-ermountain valleys of the United Sta· tes eventually reached such a leyel that they could only be P.I':ltected bY acquisition or easement. .The _st1mulus to sav<: lar~e and un~que water· fowl production areas, m1gration st_ops, and wmtermg arras mduced the development of the refuge_ system (Leopol~ E:t al, ~968). That these refuges have been effective 1s shown by the1r mtens1ve use by waterfowl and their apparent eff€Cts on timing of migration, route~ of travel and wintering areas. Intensive ma~agement of refuges on m1gratory_ routes is now designed to avoid such mfluences. Nevertheless, preservation had to take precedenoe over the unknown influences because the rate of loss of such habitats was so great. At ione time refuges were considered inviolate sanctuaries and hun· ting and other r~reational uses were not included. This is no longer true and in fact sorne workers suggest that we have lost sight of the pri· ' (Leopold et al, 1968). Direct acquisition seems to be the only method of safeguar ding waterfowl habitats throughout the Americas. Whereas there has been extensive acquisition of forest preserves in temperate South America (Acosta-Solis, 1972), and more n>eeds to be done in the tropical forest zone, little effort has been direcred toward acquisition of various types of wetlands. These can still be acquired at relatively low cost if they can be legally protected and kept free of political involvements. Interest has developed and pI'Jgress is being made in Mexico (Corzo, 1964; 1970), Argentina, and the unique Puna Zone of Peru (Dourojeanni, 1968). Unfortunately, we lack information on waterf.owl habitat selection, production and on other measures of the relative value of tropical wetlands. Rather ba sic biological studies still need to be done in much of Latín America. Other losses of breeding grounds involve modification via human disi.urbance and pollution. U. S. conservationists presently are concerne<l with potential losses of wildlife resulting from the proposed oíl pipeline across Alaska. Most of the national concern has bren over possible breaks in the huge pipe itself, but it will be the smaller disturbances of a larger area that create the greatest and least controllable damage._At present, we can't evaluate which wetland is best preserved when a choice is necessary. How do we prevent losses at the well sites and feeder pipeline systems where one small leaking pipe on a stream at spring breakup could deposit oíl in hundl'eds of wetland basins as the thaw ensues? Little data are available on the impact of oíl on the tundra wetland invertebrates which are the key to the avian richness in summer. We badly need t o devise clean-up technology for waterfowl nesting areas as accidents are a certainty (B.moks, et al, 1971) . It is vital that these data be obtained prior to major drilling operations and that conservationists have a voice in selection of areas and methods of activity by oil companies. It will be vital to maintain blocks of undisturbed habitat, and it is within our engineering capability to do this and still extract oil. Similar problems of oil development exist on wintering areas in the southern United States and on breeding grounds in South America. �106 Publ. Bwl. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 In reviewing the ecological strategy of migratio~ it is obvious that North American waterfowl have evolved a system h1ghly dependent on wintering areas. In the past, textbook discussions of wintering habi~t expressed lack of concern or at least little concern that such extens1ve areas could be lost in the southern U. S. and Mexioo. But on-the-ground observers have been concerned over habitat losses of wintering areas in Mexico (Leopold, 1972; Saunders, 1964 and undat~ manus~ript; Corzo, 1934 and 1970), and Josses of br,eeding _marshes m Argentina. (Weller, 1969b). Recently the Leopold Committee Re{X)rt (1968) has pomted ?ut the need for wintering refug,es in Mexico to complement those of breedmg and migration areias in the U. S. and Canada. Freshwater and tidal coastal marshes, brackish lagoons and estuaries are rapidly becoming agricultural land, factory sites, housing developments, sewage lagoons, mineral production areas, and marinas. Su~h wetlands are not limitless and although many seem to be used only bnefly by waterfowl, there is evidence that populations shift constantly because they utilize food resources of one area and move elsewhere. Parttime use of many areas in a vast network of habitats see~s to be part of the ecol,ogical strategy of a contirtental waterf<?wl_ population. A r~~ction in nurnber of areas available can only result m mcreased compet1t1on for food and space and the eventual loss of a portion of the population. Wetlands in the s~uthern U. S., Mexioo and Central America probably play a much more important role in sustaining the continental waterfowl population than previously appreciated. Use of the wa;terfowl resource Consumptive uses of waterfowl, such as harvest for sport or food and non-consurnptive (i. e. esthetic recreational) uses_ are ~th feasible wit_hout detriment to the resource. Both uses are mcreasmg. Commerc1al harvest is apparently not feasible, at least with intensi~e sport-hunti1'.g concurrently, and has been outlawed, but not ntteSsanly enforced, m most nations of the Americas. That waterfowl may be successafully harvested by sport-shooting without serious damage to the species is well established. We have no data proving that any s{)€cies has been eliminated or endangered because of hunting. Several species on both continents are rare, endangered or of uncertain status (Table 12) bu~ habitat losses ~m to be the major prob1em. Hunting dogs, however, mfluenoe populat1on levels, but systems for measuring and ~8.!1aging !he !evel of harvest !!re ¡:,crhaps as sophisticated as for any wildllfe spec1es m North America. V"aterfowl harvest has been shown to be partially additive rather than or endangered or of uncertain s~atus (Table 12) bu~ habitat losses s~m to be the major problem. Hunting does, however, mf~uence populat1?n the replacement type of mortality known for small res1dent game (Ge1s, 1963). This means that harvest levels must be lower, perhaps 30 per cent of the population (Geis, Martinson and Anderson, 1969) rather than 70%, No. 7 Weller: Wate-rfowl of America 107 and that adults may be "stockpiled" to bulld up breeding populations in suitable habitat. Whereas restrictive harvest re,gulations are of questionable value in sorne game species, thy are meaningful tools in conserving the waterfowl resource. Oooch (1969) has estimated that there are 1,700,000 duck hunters in the U. S., 400,000 in Canada, and 250,000 in Mexico for a total of 2,350,000 duck hunters in North America. lt is difficult to obtain precise data for much of South America because hunting may not be licensed and sport-hunting is only developing in sorne areas. It is the sport hunter who has funded programs of habitat acquisition and population management in the U. S. and this hunter interest and financmg are the major reasons why conservation programs have moved more rapidly in the Northern Hemisphere than in the South. Not only is money needed to acquire habitat in South America but advisory oodies of intcrested citizens are a necessary stimulus to preservation of the resource. It is vital that appreciation for waterfowl, and for harvest regulations be developed through information-education work. Licensing usually is t-ssential to finance such work. That Canada rears a high percentage of the major game ducks shot in the U. S. and that Mexico winters many is obvious. These proportions will increase if current trends of loss of habitat continue in the U. S. With rising interes~ by Mexican and Canadian hunters, the future problem will be to fairly proportion harvest to ali nations which oontribute to the welfare of the resource. It is shocking that officials of states in the ~- S. cannot agree on approaches to equalizing harvest; it is hoped that mternational cooperation will fare better. Exotics The natural barriers which have maintained the integrity of the fauna of the two continents are in danger of deterioration due to man's act!vities diriected to other goals such as timber cutting, agriculture and hyGroelectric power developments. Of greater concern immediately are efforts by hunters and sorne wildlife management agencies to introduce common sporting ducks from South America to North America and potE>ntially destroy this uniqueness. This is not a probl,em comparable to the introduction of non-migratory game animals; it is unique in its potential to introduce Neotropical ducks into the entire northern hemisph~re.. Muscovies have already been released in Florida. Yellow-billed ~mtail and Rosy-billed Pochards have been reared in Louisiana and Flor-~da with interest in their release to the wild. This is being done at a ~me ~hen the understanding of niche specialization and competition are in_their infancy and when we have proven that prediction of success ,or fallure is beyond our capabilities. My own guess has been (Weller, 1969a) that these birds can become established, would migrate and W?uld compete with their Nearctic counterparts. Bolen (1971) has contributed evidence to support this concern over oompetition f_o r nest si- �108 Publ. Biol. Jnst. lnv. C'ient., U. A. N. L., México No. 7 1 TABLE l. BREEDING WATERFOWL OF THE NEARCTIC REGION 1 Adapted :from Delaeou.r (1954, 56, 59); Johnsgard (1965) and Meyer de ScJiau_e;ru;ee (1966). 2 Figure in pa;renttteses indkates: (No. of s!)ecies in region or tribe/m>. of specie6 in world). 109 N orthern Shoveler ( A nas cly'[)Bata) Tribe Aythyini (5/ 16 Species) Canvasback ( Aythya ooJlisineria) Redhead ( Aythya arnericaM) Ring-necked Duc ( Aythya oollaris) Greater Scaup ( Aythya mariui) Lesser Scaup ( Aythya affinis) Tribe Mergini (16/ 20 Species) Common Eider (Somaterw mollissima) King Eider (S. spectabilis) Spectacled Eider (S. fischeri) Steller's Eider (Polysticta soolleri) * Labrador Duck ( Camptorhynchus kwradorius) Harlequin Duck (Histrionicus histrionicus) Long-tailed Duck (Clangula hyernnlis) Black Scotrer (Me"lmnitta nigra) Surf Scotier (Melanitta perspicillata) White-winged Scoter (Meuinitta fusca) Bufflehead (Bucephaln, albeo"fa) Barrow's Golden.eye (Bucephxila islandica) Common Goldeneye (Buoephala clangula) .. Hooded Merganser (Mergus aucuJliJtus) Red-breasted Merganser (Mergus serrawr) Common Merganser (Mérgus me:rganser) Tribe Ox:yu:rini (2/ 8 Species) Masked Duck (Norrwnyx dmninica) Rudy Duck (Oxyura jamaicensis) tes Regardless of the esthetic and scientific objections to this program, we· should face the fact that we may introduce managef!lent proble~ which decrease harvest freedom for native species as m1ght occur_ if ducks with bimodal nesting patterns ne~t during_ the fall harvest per_1od There is no legislation to prevent th:ese _n~trodu~t10ns ~ long as !he bmls are disease-free. It is vital that sc1ent1f1c bod1es wh1ch _apprec1ate faunal uniqueness oppose such intentional transfers of spec1~ and suppo~ instead the preservation and management of native spec1es and their diverse habitats. ORDER ANSERIFORMES (43/ 1512 Species; 147 Extant) Family Anatidae (43/ 148 Species; 144 Extant) Subfamily Anserinae Tribe Dendrocygnini (2/ 9 Speci€S) . Fulvous Whistling Duck ( Dendrocygr111, bicolor) . Black-bellied Whistling Duck (Dendrocygna autumnalis) Tribe Anserini (8/ 20 Species) . Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus c. buccinator) Whooper Swª11 (C. c. cygnus) . •Whistling Swan (Cygnus oolummanus columbianus) Whire-fronted Goose ( Ainser albifrons) Snow Goose ( Anser caeruksoens) Ross's Goose ( Anser rossi) Emperor Goose ( Anser canagicus) Canada Goose (Branta caru:urensis) Brant (Brama bernicla) Subfamily Anatinae Tribe Cairinini (1/ 13 Speciies) North American Wood Duck ( Aix spcmsa) Tribe Anatini (9/ 40 Species) American Wigeon ( Anas americana) Gadwall ( Anas strepera) Gr€len-winged Teal ( Anas crecoa) Mallard ( A nas p. pwtyrhynchos) Mottled Duck ( A nas p. fulviguT,a) Mexican Duck ( Anas p. diazi) American Black Duck ( A nas rulJripes) Northern Pintail ( Anas acuta,) Blue-winged Teal (Anas discors) Cinnamon Teal ( A nas cyaruYptera) Weller: Waterfowl of America TABLE 2. BREEDING WATERFOWL OF THE NEOTROPICAL REGIONl 0RDER ANSERIFORMES (40/1512 Species: 147 Extant) Family Anhimidae {3/ 3 Species) Horned Screamer ( Anhima cornuto,) Northern Screamer (Chauna chauvaria) Southern Screamer (Chauna torqual:a) Family Anatidae ( 40/ 148 Species; 144 Extant) Subfamily Anserinae Tribe Dendrocygnini ( 4/ 9 Species) • Extinct. 1 Adapted from Delaoour (19M, 56, 59); Johnsgard (1965) and Meyer de Seha.uensee (1966). 2 Figure in parentheses indica.tes: (No. of speeies in region or tribe/n('. of speo-\es in World). �110 11 Publ. Biol. Jnst. Inv . Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 Fulvous Whistling Duck ( Dendrocygna bico~) White-faced Whistling Duck (Dendrocygrw, viduata) Cuban or Black-billed Whistling Duck (Dendrocygna a7:"borea) Black-bellied Whistling Duck (Dendrocygna autumrwl,is) Tribe Anserini (2/ 20 Species) Coscoroba Swan (Coscoroba cosooroba) Black-necked Swan (Cygnus melanocoryphus) Subfamily Anatinae Tribe Tadornini (6/ 15 Species) Andean Sheldgoose ( Chl,oephaga melanoptera) Ashy-headed Sheldgoose (Chl!oephaga pol~1uila) Ruddy-headed Slíeldgoose ( Chloephaga rubidweps) Magellan -or Upland Sheldgoose (Chloephaga picta) ~elp Sheldgoose (Chloephaga hybrida) Orinoco Sheldgoose (Nooc"hen jubatu.s) Tribe Tachyerini (3/ 3 Species) . Flying Steamer-Duck (Tachyeres patachonicu.s) Magellanic Flightless Steamer-Duck (Tachyeres pteneres) Falkland Flightless Steamer-Duck (Tachyeres brachypterus) Tribe Cairinini (4/ 13 Species) Muscovy Duck (Cairina moschata} Comb Duck (Sarkidiornis melanotos) Ringed Teal (Calonetta leUIXYJ)hyr'J!~) . Brazilian Duck ( Amazonetta brasil'IB'nS'l,,S) Tribe Merganettini (1/1 Species) T,orrent Duck (Merganetta armata) Tribe Anatini (10/ 40 Specie;) . Spectacled or Bronz€Lwinged Duck ( Anas specularis) Southern or Chiloé Wigeon ( A nas sibil.atrix) Speckled Teal ( A nas fla~ros~ris) . Yellow-billed or Brown Pmta1l ( Anas grorgica) White-cheeked or Bahama Pintail ( Anas bahamensis) Silver Teal ( Anas versicowr) Puna Teal (Anas puna) Cinnarnon Teal (Anas cyan,aptera) Roed Shoveler ( A nas platoJR,a) Tribe Aythyini (2/ 16 Species) Southern Pochard (Netta e~ ·t hroptholma) Rosy-billed Pochard (Met<Ypiana peposaca) Tribe Mergini (1/20 Species) Brazilian Merganser (Mergus octosetaoeus) Tribe Oxyurini (4/ 8 Species) Blac'k-headed Duck (Heteronetta atricapilla) Masked Duck (Noml>nYX dominica) Ruddy Duck ( Oxyum jamaicensis) Arg,entine Ruddy Duck (Ox yura mttata) We71!3r: Waterfowl No. 7 TABLE 3. DISTRIBUTIONAL PATTERNS OF BREEDING WATERFOWL OF THE AMERICAS. NEARCTIC No. Families G€nera Emiemic genera Species Endemic species Shared Nearc./Neotr Shared Palearctic Shared Ethiopian Shared Oriental Area in sq. miles Species/ 100,000 sq. mi. TABLE 4. Percent 1 17 6 1 43 14 33 12 5 67 29 02 1 02 1 9,384,000 .46 NEOTROPICAL No. Percent 2 21 12 40 32 5 57 80 13 o o 4 10 1 03 7,035,357 .57 SPECIES PER HIGHER TAXA IN NEARCTIC AND NEOTROPICAL REGIONS. NEARCTIC FAMILY ANHIMIDAE FAMILY ANATIDAE Whistling Ducks (Dendrocygnini) Geese and Swans ( Anserini) Sheldgeese (Tadornini) Perching Ducks (Cairinini) Torrent Ducks (Merganettini) Dabbling Ducks (Anatini) Pochards (Aythyini) Sea Ducks (Mergini) Stifftails (Oxyurini) Steamer-Ducks (Tachyerini) TABLE 5. 111 of America NEOTROPICAL o 3 40 2 4 2 6 4 1 10 2 1 4 3 43 8 o 1 o 9 5 16 2 o SPECIES SHARED BETWEEN NEOTROPICAL AND ETHIOPIAN. Fulvous Whistling Duck (Dendrocygna bicolor) White-faced Whistling Duck (Doodrocygna viduata) Comb Duck (.Sarkidiornis melanotos caruncul.atus) Southern Pochard (Netta e. erythr<Yphthalma) �112 TABLE. 6. PulJl. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L.,, México PAN AMERICAN SPECTES. DOMINANT DISTRIBUTION SPECIES Cinnamon Teal Ruddy Duck Masked Duck Fulvous Whistling Duck Black-bellied Whistling Duck TABLE 7. Vol. 1 NA SA SA SA TABLE. 9. ZONE Temperate Temperate Tropical Sub-tropical Sub-tropical DOMINANT PATTERNS OF BREEDING BIOLOGY IN DUCK:S OF NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA Breeding Season Mobility Pair bond Brood care Seasonal Sexual Dim~rph Permanent Sexual Dimorphism Monomorphism Territoriality Flightlessness No. 7 NORTH AMERICA SOUTH AMERICA Short Strongly migratory Seasonal Female only Regular in migrants Absent L:mg Nomadic to sedantary Long to permanent Often both sexes Rare Ur...common Weller: Waterf<YWl of America WATERFOWL WHICH MIGRATE FROM NORTH Tu SOUTH AMERICA (FROM OLROG 1968· MEYER DE SCHAUNESEE, 1966). ' ' Mallard American Widgeon Green-winged Teal Northern Pintail Blue-winged T.eal Northern Shoveller Ring-necked Duck Lesser Scaup Cinnamon Teal TiillLE 10. Trinidad and Tobago Columbia and Vene-zuela Columbia and Tobago Columbia and Venezuela Oolumbia-Guineas to Argentina Columbia Venezuela and Trinidad VenBZUela, Columbia, Ecuador Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador MOBILITY OF NEOTROPICAL DUCKS BASED ON OLROG (1968) AND WELLER (1968). Strong!y migra~ory. in Patagonia and Magellanic Region (breeding to wmtermg areas) 1. Black-necked Swan 2 Ashy-headed Sheldgoose 3. Ruddy-headed Sheldgoose 4. Magellan Sheldgoose 5. Southern Widgeon 6. Speckled Teal 7. YeUow-billed Pintan Rare in non-migrants Common Weak Strong None Rare Shift major distances in non-breeding periods TABLE. 8. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MAJOR GROUPS OF WATERFOWL AND THE MAJOR PLANT COMMUNITY IN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA. MAJOR PLANT COMMUNITY DOMINANT TRIBES and GENERP Latitute tundra Alpine Temperate grass Temperate forest Coniferous forest Sea Ducks, Brant, Snow Geese T,Jrr•ent Ducks Dabblers, Pochards Wood Duck, Black Duck Sea Ducks, Branta, Cygnus Trumpeter Swans Perching and Whistling Ducks Perching and Whistling Ducks Steamer, Eiders, Kelp Sg. Xerophytic forest Tropical rain forest Cold seashores l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 3. 10. ll. 12- Fulvous Whistling Duck Coscoroba Kelp Sheldgoose M_agellanic Flightless Steamer-Duck Rmged Teal Crested Duck Spectacled Duck White-cheeked Pintan Silver Teal Cinnamon Teal Red Shoveller Southern Pochard 13- Rosy-oilled Pochard 4_. Black-headed Duck 5 Masked Duck 16- Argentine Ruddy Duck j 113 �Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México 114 Vol. 1 Weller: Waterfowl of A11wrica No. 7 115 TABLE. 11. SOME MAJOR NICHE USE PATTERNS IN NORTH AMERICAN WATERFOWL POPULATION SHIFTS. POSTBREEDING BREEDING AREA WINTERING T-Hl T-H F-H F-0 T-H M-H F-H F-0 T-H M-H F-H/M-H F-H/M-H F-C F-0 F-O/F-H/ M-0/ M-H F-0 F-0 F-C F-H F-0/M-O F-C T-H F-0/ M-C F-C/M-C F-C M-C M-C M-C M-C M-C EXAMPLES2 Geese Brant Widgeon, Swans Male Dabblers and Pochards Female and young Dabblers and Pochards Dabblers Black Ducks Inland scoters, mergansers; sorne Fochards Inland eiders and scoters Common Eider TABLE 12. FORMS OF RARE OR UNCERTAIN STATUS. ~~- ARAUCARIA Hl6HWIDS 6W CHACO NEARCTIC Tule White-fronted Goose ( Anser aJ,bifrons gambelli)* Aleutian Canada Goose (Branta canadensis "/euc(ypareia)* Mexican Duck (Anas platyr~hos dwzi)* Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus c. buccinator )* ~ TALL 6RASS 11 XEROPHYTIC fOREST □ TROPIW fOREST ■ PUNA mi SAVANIWI lml ARAUCARIA fOREST NEOTROPICAL Brazilian Merganser (Mergus octooot;aceu,s) Ruddy-headed Sheldgoose (Chloephaga rubidiceps) Niceforo's Brown Pintan ( Anas gem-gica niceforoi) Cuban Whistling Duck (DeruJ,rocygM arborea)** 1 T H = - terrestrial; F herbivore; O = = freshwater; M Omnivore; C = = ** fil] DECIDUOUS fOREST ■ DESERT SCRUB ■ UIIVE6ETATED OR ICE marine carnivore 2 Data from Barry, 1964; Bartxmek and ffickey, 1969; Bergman; 1973; Bossenmaier ánd Marshall, 1958; Cottom, 1939; Cottam; Lynch and Nelson; 1944; Hartman.; 1963; Kra,po; 1972; Martín, Zimm & Nelson, 1951; Mendall; 1949; St.ewart and l\lanning; 1958. * Bureau of FAWAIIDS ✓ Sport Fisheries & Wildlife, 1973. Intemaüonal Commission for Bird Prorectfon, 1971. Fig. l. Major ve~et1;ltion and physiographic regions im{X)rtant in wc1.terfowl spec1at10n and distribution in South America. �Vol. l Publ. Biol. l nst. lnv. Cient., U. A . N. L., Méxioo 116 40 30 20 10 o Weller: Waterfowl of Arnerica 117 CARNIVORES HABITAT MARINE ESTUARY FRESH LAND HERBIVORES No. 7 YBPT FSD CD ~\ o 10 20 30 40 PERCENT OF TOTAL POPULATION F~·1g . 2. An example of niche segregation in re<luced waterfowl conwle.'< of the F alkland Isla nds (after Weller, 1972) . i¡,· - tg. 3. Distribut ion of waterfowl dependent on marine plant and ani- ma l food resources. �118 Publ. Biol. Jnst. Jnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., Méxioo Vol. 1 :'-ío. 7 Wellrr: Waf('rfoicl of Amcrica 11 !l 30ºF ... JAN 40ºF JAN ■ BREEDING .... WINTERING ---1SOTHERMS 40ºf JULY --· Fig. -l ..·· . ••••• ..__ SOºFJULY Brccding a rcas of major wa_terfowl mi~rants and excnt of _tr:rir winter rangc in relation to 1sotherms rn dcgrees Fahrenhe1L Fig. 5. Major breeding areas of migratory ducks of northern N0rth America (after Linduska, 1964). �120 Publ. Biol. Jnst. I nv. Cient., U. A . N. L., México Vol. 1 No. 7 Weller: Waterfowl of America 121 MUSCOVY & WHIS1Ull6 DUOO Fig. G. Breeding areas of ducks of the southern United States a nd cldle America (aftcr Linduska, 1964 and Leo¡x>ld, 1972) . Fig. 7- Wintering areas of ducks of North America (after Linduska, 1964). �122 Publ. Biol. I nst. Inv. Cient., U. A . N. L. México Vol. 1 123 Weller: Waterfowl o/ America No. 7 HABITAT SHIFT l FRESH TERRESTRIAL WATER MARINE TROPHIC NICHE SHIFT ~ CARNIVORE (C2) co ex: ....J :;; ex: g OMNIVORE (C½) o LL.. 1.1..1 o:: ~ HERBIVORE (Cl) l O Breeding Area ■ ■ F·g. 8. - Migration ► Wintering Area TUNDRA 6EESE WINTERIN6 AREl ?\csting and wintcring arcas of tundra gees.e (genus Ans(')') and Brant (after Linduska, 1964). Fig. 9. F_ood -and hahitat shifts in migratory waterfowl of North .Amen ca. �124 Publ. Biol. lnst. lnv. Gient.) U. A. N. L.) Méxioo Vol. 1 LITERATURE CITED AGOSTA-SOLIS) M. . . 1972. Protección y conservación de la naturaleza en Sudamer:1ca. pp. 230-250 In: Fittkau, E.J., (Ed.) ~iogeography and Ecology m Sout~ America, Vol. I. Monographiae Biologicae 19, Dr. W. Junk. N. V. Publishers, The Hague, Netherlands. pp. 1-448. A.MADON, D. . . . . . uk 70 1953. Migratory birds of relict d1stnbut1on: sorne inferences. A : 461-469. AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS) UNION GOMMITTEE ON CONSERVATION 1971- 72. Legislation, Auk 89:872-878. ARNER) D. H.) E. D. NORWOOD, Jr. and_ B. M. TE~LS 1970. A study of the aquatic ecosystems m two nat1onal _waterfowl ~efuges in Mississippi. Water Resournes Res. Inst. Miss. St. Urnv., State College, Miss. ASHMOLE, N. P. I 1971. Sea bird ecology and the marine envi:ri?nme~t. pp. 223-286 11: Farner, D. S. and J. R. King, Eds., Av1an B1ology, Vol. l. Academic Press, New York. 586 pp. BARRY) T. W. · k Ed 1964 Brant Ross' Goose and Emperor Goose. In: J. P. Lmdus a, • · Wate:riowl tomorro~. Bur. Sport Fis. and Wildl., Washington, D. C. 770 pp. BARTONEK, J. C. and J. J. HICKEY 1969. Food habits of canvasbacks, redheads, and lesser scaup in Mani· toba. Condor 71:280-290. BARTONEK, J. a., J. G. KIN(!) and H. ~- NIJ!LSON 1971. Problems confronting m1gratory birds m Alaska. Trans. N. A. Wildl. and Nat. Res. Conf: 36:345-361. BELLROSE, F. O. . · the 1968. Waterfowl migration corridors east of the Rocky Mounta1ns m United States. ru. Nat. Hist. Surv. B1ol. Notes 61. Urbana 24 pp. BERGMAN) R. D. d 1973. Use of southern boreal lakes by postbreeding canvasbacks and re · heads, J. Wildl. Mgmt. 37: 160-170. No. 7 Weller: Waterfowl of America 125 BOLEN) ERIG 1971. Sorne views on exotic waterfowl. Wilson Bull. 83:430-434. BOSSENMAIER) E. F . and W. H. MARSHALL 1958. Field-feeding by waterfowl in southeastern Manitoba. Wildl. Soc Wildl. Mooogr. 1:1-32. BROOKS, J. W.) J. O. BARTONEK, D. R. KLEIN, D. L. SPENGER and A. S. THAYER 1971. Environmental influences influenoes of oil and gas developm€'11t in the Arctic Slope and Beaufort Sea. Bur. Sport Fish. and Wildl. Res. Publ. 96, Washington, D. C. 24 pp. BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES and WILDLIFE 1973. Threatened Wildlife of the United States. BSF and W Resource Publ. No. 114. U. S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 289 pp. GOOCH) F. G. 1969. Waterfowl production habitat r,equirements. In: Saskatoon Wet'lands Seminar. Can. Wildl. Serv. Report Series, No. 6, Ottawa. 262 pp. CORZO, R. H . 1964. Wat€'rfowl conservation in Mexico. Trans. N. Am. Nat. Resourc. Conf. 29:260-265. CORZO, R. H. 1970. Mexico: Avifauna and modification of habitat. pp. 63-68 In: Buechner, H. K. and J. H. Buechner, Eds. The Avifauna of Northern Latín America. Smithsonian Contrib. to Biology No. 26, Washington, D. C. 119 pp. fJOTTAM, C. 1939. Food habits of North America diving ducks. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bull. No. 643, Washington, D. C. 140 pp. OOTTAM) C., J. J. LYNGH and A. L. NELSON lJ44. Food habits and management of American sea brant. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 8:36-56. ~AY, A.M. J:,59_ North American wat•erfowl. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, P A. 363 pp. DELAOOUR J lS54- 65. The ~aterfowl of the world, 4 vols. Oountry Life, Ltd., London. �126 PuJJl. Biol. Inst. I'Y/,V. Gient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 No. 7 Weller: Wa;terfowl of America 127 DOUROJEANNI, M. J. 1968. Estado actual de la conservación de la flora y de la fauna en el Perú. Ciencia interamericana 9 (1-6) :1-12. JOHNSGARD, P. A. 1965. Handbook of waterfowl behavior. Comen Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY. 378 pp. FRJTH, H. J. 1967. Waterfowl in Australia. East-West Cenrer Press, Honolulu. 326 pp. JOHNSON, A. W. 1965. The birds of Chile, Vol. l. Platt Establecimientos Gráficos, S. A. Buenos Aires. 397 pp. GEIS, A . D. 1963. Role of hunting regulations in migratory bird management. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf. 28:164-172. KEAR, J. 1970. The adaptive radiation ,of parental care in waterfowl. pp. 357392 In: Crook, J. H. (Ed.), Social behavior in birds and mammals. Academic Press, London and New York. 492 pp. GEIS, A. D., R. K. MARTINSON, and D. R. ANDERSON 1969. Establishing hunting regulations and allowable harvest of mallards in the United Stares. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 33:848-866. KEAST, A. 1972. Faunal elements and evolutionary patterns: sorne comparisons bet- ween the continental avifaunas of Africa, South America and Australia. Proc. Int. Ornith. Congr. 15: 594-622. GUDMUNDSSON, F. 1950. The effects of the recent climatic changes on the bird life of Iceland. Proc. Int. Ornith. Cong. 10:502-514. KRAPU, G. 1972. Feeding ecology of the Pintail ( Anas acuta) in North Dakota. Ph. D. dissertation, Iowa State University, Ames. 88 pp. HANSEN, H. A. and D. E. MGKNIGHT . 1964. Emigration of drought displaced ducks to the Arctic. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl and Nat. Res. Conf. 29:119-127. LEOPOLD, A. S., CHAIRMAN 1968. The national wildlife refuge system Report of committee appointed by Interior Secretary Stewart L. Udalil. Trans. N.A. Wildl and Nat. HARTMAN, F. E. 1963. Estuarine wintering habitat for black ducks J. Wildl. Mgmt. Zi: 339-347. Res. Oonf. 33:30-54. LEOPOLD, A . S. 1972. Wildlife of Mexico. The game birds and mammals. U. Calif. Press, Berkeley. 568 pp. HENNY, C. J. J 1973. Drought displaced movement of N. A. pintails into Siberia. • Wildl. Mgmt. 37:23-29. LINDUSKA, J. P. 1964. Warerfowl tomorrow. Buretau Sports Fish. Wildl., Washington, D.C. 770 pp. HOGHBAUM, H. A. 1955. Travels and traditiions of waterfowl. U. of Minn. Press, Minneapolis. 301 pp. MARGALEF, R. 1963. On certain unifying principles in ecology. Amer. Nat. 97:357-374. HOWARD,H. , 1964. Fossil an&eriformes. pp . .233-326 In: Delacour, J. The waterfoWI of the world, Vol. IV. Country Life Ltd., London. MARTIN, A. C., H. S. ZIM, wui, A. L. NELSON 1951. American wildlife and plants. McGraw Hill Book Co., Inc. 500 pp. 1 INTERNATIONAL GOUNGIL FOR BIRD PROTEGTION 1971. Red data book, Vol. 2, Aves. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Morges, Switzerland. JNTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE 1973. More than 500,000 ha of small wetlands now protected in USA. IUcN Bull. New Series 4, 1 :3. MAYR, E. 1972. Geography and ecology Congr. 15 :551-561. as faunal determinants. Proc. Int. Ornith. MENDALL, H. L. 1949. Food habits in relation to black duck management in Maine. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 13:64-101 �128 Vol. 1 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cwnt., U. A. N. L., México Weller: Waterfowl of Amerioa No. 7 129 MEYER DE SCHAUENSEE, R. PWEGER, P. L. 1966. The species of birds of South America and their distribution. Livingston Publishing Co., Narberth, Pa. 577 pp. 1968. ºGeographical differentiation in Arctic anatidae as a result of isolation cturing the last glacial. Ardea 56:1-159. SALOMONSEN, F. MOSS, R., G. R. MILLER arul S. E. ALLEN 1972. Selection of heather by captive red grouse in relation to the age of the plant. J. Appl. Ecol. 9:771-781. MOYNIHAN, M. 1958. Notes on the behavior of the flying steamer duck. Auk 75:183-202. 1968. The moult-migration. Wildfowl 19:5-24. SALOMONSEN, . F. í.972. Zoogeographical and ecological problems in arctic birds. Proc. Intern. Ornith. Congr. 15:25-77. 8AUNDERS, G. B. ODUM, E. P. 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164:262-270. 1964. South of the border. pp. 253-262 In: Linduska, J . P., Ed. Waterfowl Tomorrow. Bur. Sport Fish. and Wildl., Washington, D. C. ODUM, E. P. SAUNDERS, G. B. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology. W. B. Saunders, Co., Philadelphia. 574 pp. (undated) Waterfowl of Mexioo. Unpublished manuscript, Bur. Sport Fish and Wildl., Washington, D. C. 313 pp. OLNEY, P. J. S. 1963. The autumn and winter feeding b_iology of certain sympatric ducks. Trans. Int. Union of Game Biol. 6:309-320. 1972. Causal ornithogeogr;why of Australia. Proc. Int. Ornith. Congr. 15 :574-584. OLROG, C. C. . . . . S~RVENTY, D. L. SMITH, A. G., J. H. STOUDT and J. B. GALLOP. 1968. Las aves sudamericanas, una guia de campo. Instituto Miguel L1llo, Tucurnán, Argentina. 507 pp. 1964. Prairie potholes and marshes. pp. 39-50 In: Linduska, J. P., Ed. Waterfowl tomorrow. Bur Sport Fish and Wildl., Washington, D. c. 770 pp. OLROG, C. C. SMITH, R. l. 1969. Birds of South America, pp. 849-878 In: Fittkau, E . J., Ed. Biologicae 19, Dr. W. Junk N . V. Publishers, The Hague, Nether· lands. l\J70. Response of pintail breeding populations to drought. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 34:943-946. STEWART, R. E. and J. H. MANNING OLROG, C. C. 1972. Causal ornithogeography of South America. Proc. Int. Ornith. Congr. 15:562-573. OLROG, C. C. 1974. Recoveries of banded Argentine waterfowl. Bird Banding 45: 170-177. PARTRIDGE, W. H. 1956. Notes on the Brazilian Merganse<r in Argentina. Auk 73:473-488. 1958. Distribution and €COlogy of whistling swans in tbe Chesapeake Bay Region. Auk 75:203-212. STEWART, R. E. o:n4 H. A. KANTRUD 1971. Classification o_f natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region. Bur. Sport Fish. and Wildl. Res. Publ. 92, Washington, D. C. 57 pp. VUJLLEUMIER, F. 1971. Pleistocene changes in the flora and fauna of South America. Science 173 (No. 3999) :771-780. PETTINGILL, O. S. WELLER, M. W. 1965. Kelp geese and flightless steamer ducks in the Falkland IslandEThe Living Bird 4:65-78. 1964a. Distribution and migration of the redhead. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 28: 64-103.. �130 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., MéxicO Vol. 1 WELLER, M. W. . . h' p 108-120 In: Delacour, J. 1964b. Distribution and species relatwns ips. p · Life Ltd., London The waterfowl of the world, Vol. lV. Country ' 364 pp. WELLER, M. W. and C. E. S!'A'f'CH_ER d abundance of rnarsh birds. 1~65. Role of habitat in t_he distrH1but1onEan Exp Sta Spec. Rept. No. Iowa St. Univ. Agric. and orne con. . . 43, Ames. 31 pp. - WELLER, . anat1·as. h)68. NotesM.onw. sorne Argent1ne w·1I son Bull. 80:189-212. WELLER, M. W. . te f 1 introductions. Wildfowl 20: 1969a. Potential dangers of exot1c wa r ow 55-58. WELLER, M. W. t f wl habitat and managernent problerns in Ar1969b. Cornments on wa er o gentina. Wildfowl 20:126-130. WELLER, M. W. . kl d Islands' waterfowl. Wildfowl 23: 1!;72. Ecological studies of Fal an 25-44. No. 7 Koford: Latin American Felidae 131 FELIDS OF LATIN AMERICA: IMPORT.ANCE AND FUTURE PROSPECTS Carl B. K.of<Yfd RESUMEN De una a seis especies de los once félidos latinoamericanos viven en tierras de tipo silve:;tre con vegetación casi completa. El jaguar, el ocelote, y otros gatos fuertemente moteados han sido extensamente cazados, epecialmente durante la década del '60. Conseguir y manejar las. pieles dio empleo a miles de gentes rurales y urbanas, y. en algunos países las exportaciones anuales excedieron al millén de dólares. Sin embargo, las diferencias regionales en la restricción comer¡::ial, la inadecuada ejecución de la ley, y la cacería furtiva ampliamente difundida también causan perdidas financieras. Los félidos silvestres son de beneficio indirecto en ayudar a controlar la sobrepobiación y el daño a las cosechas causados por roedores, ungulados, y otras presas. Ellos también matan varios animales nativos comestibles, y ocasionalmente ganado. Debido a que nuestros WELLEBReed,~- W.faSrulpeciJº,fejR~ntl8 flavirostris on South Georgia. "!972 r mg O 68 .. . Brit. Antarct. Surv. Bull. 30:65- . gatos son nocturnos y escurridizos, el turismo para avistarlos o cazarlos por deporte ha sido mínimo. Especialmente los gatos moteados han disminuido en distribución y número debido a la reducción del habitat. Estos cambios destruyeron su cubierta vegetal, su presa, y la protección contra los cazadores. Aunque la tala de bosques, la reforestación con exóticos, lo minería, la inhumación arriba de las presas, la construcción de nuevos caminos, y el clareo para cuJtivos en gran esca!a han sido perjudiciales, lo mayor causa de pérdida de hobitat ha sido la expansión del pastoreo, a menudo agravado por anual. la quema Conforme las economías nacionales crezcan, estos tendencias conti9uorá n. Pero el turismo, nacional y extranjero aumentarán y la vida silvestre pvede convertirse en un gran atractivo. Avistar conjuntos de vida silvestre diversa, jaguares, ocelotes, y otros predatores le darán ñlrección -del Autor: Mus eum of Vertebrate Zoology, .University of California, B erkeley, CaJif., U. S. A. Fecha de Recepción: Enero 24, 1974. �132 Publ. Biol. lnst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol.1 excitación. Los métodos especiales tales como encandilar de noche se pueden desarrollar para mejorar la observación de los gatos y se deben preparar reservas bien patrulladas. Algunos de los actuales parques de selva lluviosa pueden probar ser adecuadas, pero las reser- 133 Koford: Latin American Felidae No. 7 loss has been exponded cattle grazing, often aggravoted by annual burning. vas de sabana, mucho mejor para avistar animales, se necesitan. La As national econornies grow, these trends will continue. But tourisrn, national and foreign, will also increase and wildlife can be made caza deportiva probablemente continuará para las especies abundantes o great attraction. To viewing ossemblages of varied wildlife, jaguars, pero no para el jaguar, tal vez mayormente en cotos de paga. La caza comercial probablemente se dará lugar a la producción de gatos en es night lighting can be developed to enhonce observation of cots and tierras silvestres administradas, en colonias encerradas de animales libres, well-patrolled preserves should be readied. Sorne present rain forest parks may prove suitable but savonnah pr:eserves, far better for se-e- y en criaderos, siempre y que la demanda por los productos felinos continúe y que las operaciones resulten económicas. para cualquier pro- acelots, and oth·er predators will lend exciternent. Special rnethods such ing animals, are needed. Sport hunting will p robably continue for grama futuro, es necesaria la investigación extensiva; inicialmente in- abundant species, but not for jaguar, perhaps largely on paying "co- ventarios de la distribución y números de las especies importantes, luehabitat. tos". Commercial hunting will probably give way to production of cats on managed wildlands, in free-ranging enclosed colonies, and in "cria- Para llevar a cabo estudios a largo plazo, necesitamos grandes áreas de investigación permanente en laselva lluviosa, las sabanos,y otros ti- deros". provided that demand for cat products continues and the operotions prove economical. Far any future program, extensive research pos de vegetación, así como intercambio máximo entre países de la is necessary, initially surveys of important species, then studies of population dynamics in relation to habitat. To realize long-term studies, we need large permanent research oreas in the rain forest, savannahs, go los estudios de dinámica de poblaciones en relación al información y personal para la vida silvestre. SUMMARY Frorn one to six species of the 11 La·tin American felids ond other vegetation types, and maximal exchange of wildlife information and personnel among countries. cccur in nearly all vegetoted wild land types. The jaguar, ocelot, and other strongly spotted cats hove been hunted extensively, especiolly during the 1960's. Procuring ond handling the pelts employed thousands of rural and urbon people and in sorne countries annual exports exceeded one million dollars. But regional differences in commercial restrictions, inadequote low enforcement, and widespreod furtive hunting caused financia! losses too. The wild felids are of indirect benefit in helping to control overpopulation and crop damage by rodents, ungulates, and other prey. But they also kill various native food animals and occasionally farm stock. Because our cats ore nocturnal ond elusive, tourism for recreotional viewing and sport hunting of cats hove been minor. Especially the spotted cats hove diminished in dislribution and numbers becouse of reduced habitat. These chonges des~roycd their plant cover, prey, and protection from hunters. Although logging, reforestation with exotics, mining, flooding behind dams, building new roads, and clearing for lorge scale crops has been detrimental, the greatest cause of haoitot Cats excite strong human emotions. As highly specialized killers they sy~bolize "nature, red iñ tooth and claw." Yet, their lissome gait and variegated pelage enchant us. In Latín America there are 11 kinds of wild cats (Table 1) varying in weight from about three kilos to over 150 kilos. From one to six species occupy essentially ali of the major vegetation zones, from montane grasslands to lowland rain forest and semi-desert scrub. Four species (puma, jaguarundi, ocelot, and jaguar) occur in at lcast 19 of the 21 countries. Because of hunting and reduction of habita t, most cats have declined in distribution and numbers. Importance Skin trade.-Pelts of jaguar, ocel,ot, and three samller species with ~,bong markings (margay, tigrito, and Geoffroy's cat), the so-callc"i 8POtted cats", have long beien prized but uncommon materials for the ranufacture of luxurious coats, hats, and other trappings of the affluent uman female. Through vagartes of fashion, in the middle 1960s the demand far spotted cat pelts soared. The hunter price for prime ocelot Pehl~ rose from a few U. S. dollars to about $100 and for jaguar abouL \. rice that. �134 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Oient.) U. A. N. L.) México Vol. 1 In 1968, official fur imports to the U. S. A alone inc~u~eJ rougly 13 000 jaguar and 130 000 ocelot pelts valued at over $8 m1D:10~ (Mye~; 1973) .Probably similar numbers went t~ other m_arkets,_ I?rmc1pally rn Europe. The main exporters were Braz1l, Colombia, Bolivia and_ Paraguay. In sorne years their national income from exported c~t skms exceeded $1 million. However, the known trade fell_ about .ª third by 197u and has decreased since in large part because of mcreasmg legal restn~tions but also, I think, because of depletion of the accessible cat populations near settlements, roads, and rivers. As to internal national income, the business of tanning cat ski118, making coats and selling them employs hundreds of people in Buenos Aires. The bést coats, made of select pelts from fiiree jaguars or 12 ocelots retail at about $5 000. This year Colombia, the chief producer of cat skiIIB prohibited export of unprocessed skins ("pieles en bruto") so a.; to heÍp the tanning industry. In Colombia, 1?razil,. México1 and other co:m· tries with large numbers of rural_ people, m~lud}~g Indians, c?-t hunt1r.g provides valuable supplementary moome to mdiv1duals, espec1ally when crops fail. In addition, rural people make and ~ll curios and other "artesanías" incorporating cat skins. The sale of hve. cats for ~ts and zo_os has been minor, less than five per cent of the h1de trade m Colombia, where ocelots are priced at $200. Tourist viewing.-In East Africa, lions help to attract tourists who bring foreign exchange. But compared to pride:; of open-country African lions the Neotropical felids are solitary, secretive, and nocturnal, thus poor' for recreational viewing. There are no "National Parks" where one can be sure of seeing a jaguar or ocelot during a given week. Another difficulty is that heavy rains and floods preclude tourist travel to jung1e habitats during about five months of the year. North of the equator, this rainy period includes the main tourist season, from June to August. At present, cat viewing is a neg!igible tourist attraction. '¡ Hunting.-Hunting cats for sport and trophies benefits the economY through payment of license fees, expenditures for plane, car, horse, and boat transportation, and employment of guides and trackers. Theodore Roosevelt's party shot jaguars in Brazil more than 50 years ago. Star· ting about 1950 there was a great increase in s¡x:,rt hunting for jaguars by nationals and aliens, especially in Mexiro, Venezuela, Brazil and Para· guay. Usual hunts required a week of. tÍn!e, train~ dogs, and $1 qoo ~or the guide. Although such hunts are still hcensed In several countrtes, mcreased expenses, decreasing success, and restrictive laws have made professional guiding a minor part-time activity. Commercial hunting for all cats is still permitted in Colombia, Pa· nama Peru ( except jaguar) , and sorne other countries. The g.overnments recei~e license rees, repopulation fees (Colombia), export duties (Peru), and other income. Against the payments from dealers, however, govern· No. 7 Koford: Latin American Felidae 135 ments must debit the costs of control inlcuding law enforcement. National financia! losses from the smuggling of skins to the highest-paying alíen markets might equal the value of the legal trade. Most cat hunting is done by individuals, though chains of buyers may be organized. In sorne regions, Indians who formerly lived in isolation and rarely took cats with their bows and arrows now have guns, dogs, and access to buy€rs. Sorne hunters in Brazil operate 40 or more crude box traps for ocelots. In Paraguay and Colombia, sorne now use steel traps ("trampas de cepo"). Missionaries working to improve the living standards of Indians help them to market their catch at fair prices. Where skin commerce is prohibited, furtive hunters receive low prices - under $10 for ocelot in Mexico - whereas dealers are said to gain huge profits. Indirect ecanomic '00.lues.-In tropical America, jaguars and pumas fulfill the ecological role of culling herds of deer, peccaries, and other mammals of high reproductive potential (Leopold 1965). Presumably this action helps to limit prey numbers short of the carrying capacity of the habitat. In addition, at least jaguars scavenge carrion such as the rotting bodies of fish and caimans left as flood waters recede, and the remains of peccaries, capybaras, and livestock. Smaller cats aid in the control of sorne bird and mammal pests. In Uruguay, for example, Geoffroy's cat preys on cropeating birds (e. g. Miapsitta monachus) declared a "plaga nacional") and in Argentina, cats doubtless attack hole-digging grass-eating plains viscachas ( Lagostmnus), burrowing tucotucos (CtfmQmys)) and the newly invading European rabits (Oryctolagus). In Venezuela, jaguarundis and ocelots surely consume large numbers of the rats that destroy rice and other crops and spread Ieptospirosis. Harmful etfects.-On rare occasions a jaguar attacks a man. Most such accidents occur to hunters who have wounded the cat or harassed it ~th dogs. But because of the potential danger, jaguars are nearly ~ways killed when found near human dwellings. Largely for this reason, Jaguars were eliminated from over 1000 km. of their range in Argentina before 1900. Wild cats may kill various animals su&eful to man. Probably all forest cats take curassows, tinamous, and smaller game birds. Jaguars take deer, peccaries, pacas., river turtles, and other potential human foods. In sorne areas, ocelots and jagúarundis kill poultry. The former is called "gato gallinero" in Colombia, the later a "plaga" in southern Mexico. Jaguars occasionally take houSe dogs, pigs, calves, and even grown bulls. Rare individuals become regular stock-killers or "tigres cebados" and are hunted down, often in defiance of protective laws. Pumas also may take calves, goats, and smaller stock. They are said at times to kill far more than they can eat, whereas jaguars usually kili but one animal and con- �136 B . l Jnst Jnv. w· · ·1,t;1,w,., e~~.,. Vol. 1 U • A. N. L., MéxicO redations by cats . ·n It may be that cattle dep rate, losses 01 sume it before huntm1. ~~~ ~f their natural prey · such as are largely_ due to dep i less than those from accep cattle to b1g cats are ar m.iring in mud holes. Pu1Jl. A\:I'hazards t Future Prospects eatly decreased thc . duction of forests has greeded by the felids, Habitat alteration.-¡Re from hunters that are n human populations cover prey, and p~tec ~nThis trend will continu~~tions for the 1980s. especi~y the ~º!e<Iscfncrease. Here are sorne pr and agr1cultur . th Atlantic side of the_land l:llll~ pec1ally on e · nd h1lls W1 North of the equator, €S d brush of roastal plains a mangroves, fa· most of the forest, scrub,b:::anas and other crop~ r~al construction, re laced by cotton, cane, will be Íargely cu~ for e '·n and eucalyptus vJed habitat of o~elotsCl -floored plantat1ons of. p1 of Brazil and and land reclamat1ont: ~est as they al!e~dy do md~mands for monoswill replace much na l~e ood industries. w1ll mcrease Venezuela. Pulp poor for wildhfe. . _ pecies forests w a·rt road now impassa . a the Trans-Chaco 1 d in Panama the As to roads, 1~ Para~v~ for year around use anwill augment hu· ble during rains, will be pbia will be completed. Both 5000 km. Transa· Darien highway t~ cleared for cdr~~~ O g~~jungle cat h~bit<3:1i man disturbance e land development an 1 00 km wide stnp wi mazan h~ghway, \fuction ~f spurs will spe€d iron and bauxite _in nor· and grazmg. Cons ure Mining for mangan~, d Íikely Peru will open crease hun~ing pr~ts drilling in eastern Ecua r an thern Brazil and . Amazon forest. . more large gaps m the . dr additional forest hab1ft . reservoirs will ~wn . Panama, for examp ~• Along larger r~ver~, The Bayano proJeCt m . Surinam an addi· and facilitate colomz;Jbº~2 the Brokopondo _lak~~een Brazil and Pa· will inundate a~~d the Sete Quedas rese~i:r savannahs such_ as t~ tional 20qo kml d fart more cat country. ~~ will diminish or d1sappe raguay W1ll f 00 alleries and patc .,;:;.s Orinoco llanos, fores. g and annual burmng. under continued cuttmg th jaguarundi, which ma~ ¡ f cover may be e th gay ocelot, an Least affected by~:. ~ost affected ~ll ~ gf ~orestation, scat· even increa_se on f~ertik! lowlan~. But !n s~1~teep infertile, or verY jaguar, wh1ch P~~s or brush will remam o ' tered tracts of :rts hlci ~ie !1ºri;~~ 1 / km2 .4 * Area equivalents.. 4 = 2.6 / 1 ha / acr es 8 _000 000 km2/ mi2 = 1/ (XX) 000 km2, ccntiguous U.~\an2. Mexico approx. 2 k 2 YeHowstone N. P. 9 California 400 OOO m ' 2.5 / l. No. 7 Koford: L«tin American Felidae 137 wet lands. Brazilian law requires at least 20% of forest holdings, as weU as woods bordering lakes and rivers, to remain uncut. These various wooded patches may sustain the smaller cats but not jaguars, which seem to need about 100 km2 per adult during the year. Apparently too, the s~er cats survive or guickly reestablish in cut-over forests, whereas Jaguars, once gone, seldom repopula~ an area. These big cats rould well disappear from Argentina and Mexico within the next decade. It may be argued that even allowing 1.5 million km2 for planned developments in Amazonia, it will still comprise about 3 million km2 of humid tropical forest, enough for thousands of jaguars. But the population density of carnivores in this region is probably low, because most of it is poor in soil nutrients (Sioli 1968) and presumably prey. Henry Bates, Alfred Wallace, and Robert Spruce wrote books about central Amazonia a century ago but scarcely mentioneu jaguars, whereas Alexander Humboldt and Felix Azara re!ated many encount-ers with these cats in less forested regions of the Orimco and Paraguay rivers. Future development of forests will be based largely on detailed maps made from aerial inventaries of vegetation and land use, surveys such as the current RADAM project across Brazil. Hopefully such studies will include assessment of wildlife habitats and consider the impact on them of further land develiopment. Tourist viewing.-As a counter to the inexorable loss of habitat, faunal preserves will increase in numbers, area, and tourist facilities. The obviously essentiaJ feature is that tourist dollars support adequate patrol against wood-cutting, grazing, poaching, and other invasions. In contrast to "National Parks" in the U. S. A., Latín American parks will include much private land, as at present. The very difficulty of seeing jungle cats will lend high recreational Value to a glimpse of a jaguar or ocelot. Even though only tracks and roars revea! their presence, the big cats will lend excitement to the natural scene. Viewing of cats will reguire special tow€'I'S, boats, or cars fitted with artificial lights, as used in East African parks and Indian tiger Preserves. One developing site for tourist viewing of animals including spotted cats is Parque Nacional de Manu, a 14 000 km2 preserve situat.ed in rain forest north of Cuzco. Another potential rain forest viewing site is Par9ue Nacional La Macarena, Colombia, about 8 000 krn2. Severa! ranches !n the Venezuelan llanos or Brazilian pantanal have spectacuJar wildlife lncluding spotted cats and may eventualJy accomodate paying visitors. Less venturesome tourists could view native cats in semi-natural fenced enclosures, such as the Afri•can lion "safaris" of the U . S. A. In all animal parks and zoos, conservation education in preclator-prey relations shou.Id be part of the interpretive program. �138 Publ. Biol. Inst. /no. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 No. 7 tl . Koford: Latin American Felidae 139 Although restrictions will vary among countries, sport hunting by nationals and aliens will probably continue. In general, the fully "protected" species will inelude jaguar, margay, tigrito, and Andean cat. Wbere jaguars kili livestock, offending individuals can be taken by govermnent or contract hunters skilled in live capture. These cats may then be used for rcstocking parks, for exhibits, and research. "Game" species, taken under special license and regulations, may inelude puma, Geoffroy's cat, pampas cat, and perhaps ocelot. The last would seem to be well suited to hunting in semiarid thorn scrub, mangrove swamps, and other nonagricultural rones as well as on controlled "cotos de caza." Through field examination of kills or by questionnaires, data essential to proper mana· gement would be assembled. Unprotected "nongame" cats will usually in· elude jaguarundi and locally others if they prey heavily on farm animals. par Y met by tourISt viewin f P~oduction has been carried g ee~ and foundation grants. Such :::~Wbeith both th~e .system~~\~;i~~h~~sd borealys on islets off opporturustic hunters e oc men who might oth- Commercial hunting.-As national economies improve, commerce in wild life will be increasingly prohibited, as it now is in Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Costa Rica, lVfexico, and other countries. When other sources of income are available to campesinos, they will have little rea· son to take wild cats. Near contiguous international borders, wildlife laws will become increasingly uniform. The fact that Peru charged a 10% ex· port duty on skins whereas Colombia paid a 15% export subsidy encouraged smuggling ck>wn the Amazon to Leticia, where prices were maxi· mal. At the same time, elosure of wildlife commerce in Brazil stimulateJ the flow of hides to markets up the Amazon. The international agreements emerging from the 1973 conference on world wildlife trade may be effective in controlling commerce in pelts. . blR.esearch.-To formulate wise 1· · ~!melopulat~ons of all cat subspr~~l~ifh~d practices f~r maintaining detaiIJrJdiour¡:am, or producing animaJs for s~ eac~ nat10n, managing habitat andow ge of each kind. especially of i~ an exchéf!1ge, we need cat has bee prey..Yet, not a single ecologicaJ stud numfbers ll'_l relation to mai n carried out. Further, a numbe Y o a ~atm American cogn1z~o~ed and ther:e is danger of depfo~i;f taxonom1c problems reex . ur present ignorance seems d g sorne forms not yet rebukrts. Sdome countries (e. g. Venerzuela/ equa\e grounds for banning ecolo;ca;J fi~Wwbeorrsk of ·nmajor _species inelu~-;g Pf!J~dsto Tshuresevey tuthde. distrie h wi I'c"QUire tra · ed ild · · s 1es and xc ange among countries of infor~~ti w dhfe spe~i~ists and the free on an techruc1ans. p~:J~ Production of cats.-Assuming that perfection of synthetic furs and . To understand seasonal worldwide growth of ecological conscience does 11ot quench the demruid 1~~nsbe, wle need long-term 'st~~!\nand habit~i.t variations in cat popufor spotted cat pelts, how can they be produced with □inimal impact on arge enough to minimi . permanent research a.reas Th deelining populations? One possible system is management on wild Jan~ ~~ntain viabl~ popufation:-eo¡~ueroes from surrounding land ~ to produce a high sustained yield of prime animals. Measures would in- Furt may be needed to insure e arge cats. For jaguars at least elude strict control of hunting and improvement of the habitat For poJygaher, research areas are needed ~nuaJ production of severa'l youn in each of th · . g. mous cats, mostly males could be taken. Small dams would increase dis- Manu and Ma tribution of water and associated cat prey such as fish, turtles, and capy· baras. Clearing around fruit trees might increase food production fot no suitatil l ress tn the border by eager colonis ians who hunt and agoutis, peccaries, and other prey animals. Huge areas would be requir· vannahs fn ~ge government pre3erves in brushla~dsThere are, however, ed because financia! returns would be low. On unmanaged lands, assu- but rath e pantanaJ, Caracara fauna} • mangroves, or saminga density of 10 kffi2 per adult ocelot (worth $100) anda 10% annual la.rger 2;Óosmal1 700 ~2. In eastern CoioJ:~rve seems well situated harvest rate, annual returns would be only $1 per km2, but this figute might be increased several fold by management. Sale of hunting rights :ually by I~i~n~u!n~ mostly grass~~ar:ii~iunif for other species could supplement income. and~f s;~a1 prívate ranches of ab~te i:~s: Inhspite of their cattle tect s to 4000 km2 in the Brazili m t e Vene-zuelan llanos A more intensive system would be to produce ueelots or other smal {~~~\~t~fdli~~d thus ;~~~~fvly procats on islands or in fenced compounds. Litters could be hand-raised 13 for stud1es . ~e commumties Res e areas free mothers for another mating. Quality oould be controlled by remo\" cal 1 ~ion at ali '1e;~mg, managem~nt, international cooearc~. areas, ecolog1ing the unfit, such as poor reproducers. Management would require p!'O' lntriguing Laf aAmre n~eded to msure maximum hu perabe1qn,. and educavision of supplementáfy food, water, and cover, but expenses could lt In erican felid fauna. man nef1ts from thc :g& ~tt!º~~ ~t~r:;:sn~~n~id:S ~v't"~ix}-1r.~~rf;,~;ta~~'j; ~~{ifi\ r~~ c~~ ló; g~~~~t~~m~~ fi~~ �Publ. Biol. lnst. Jnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., Méxioo 140 Vol. 1 No. 7 141 ~oford: Latin American Felidae ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: This report is based on a status swvey of the Neotropical spotted cats b€ing conducted under a grant from the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources / World Wildlife Fund. LITERATURE CITED LEOPOLD, A. S. 1965. Fauna Silvestre de México, Instituto Mexicano de Recursos Naturales Renovables, México, D. F. (English version. 1959, Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley). Puma ( Felis CünC-OWT) Jaguarundi MYERS, N. 1973. The spotted cats and the fur trade pp. 276-326 in R. L. Eaton (ed.) "The World's Cats',, World Wildlife Safari, Winston, Oregon. SIOLI, H. 1968. Zur okologie des Amazonas - gebietes. pp. 137 - 179 in E. J. Fittkau, et al. ( eds.), "Biogeography and Ecology in South America',, W. Junk, The Hague. ""l'I '". •t' (F. yagouarundi) Jaguar (F. onca) Octfot (F. pardalis) Margay (F. wiedii) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXRXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X L L X X X X R X X X X X X X X X X X X X L X X X X R X X X X X X LRXXXXXL l'igrito (F. ligrina) Geoffroy's cat X X Pampas cat (F. coloco/o) LXXXXXXX Andean cat L L (F. jacobita) Huiña (Lynx rufus) L L LL (F. guigna) Bobcat L XLXXXL (F. gooffroyi) l X X X X X R XX TABLE. l. National distribution of Latin American Felidae. X, uncommon to abundant occurrence. L, limited region. R, very rare �No. 7 w ncasrer: Neotropical Tinamous and Gallifarms ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE NEOTROPICAL TINAMOUS AND GALLIFORMS D<Yuglas A. Lancaster RESUMEN Este trabajo presenta una rev1s1o n general de la ecología y distribución de las aves de caza en la América Latina pertenecientes a las familias Tinornidae (Tinamus) y Cracidae (hoco fdisan, ajol y chachalacas) y la subfamilia Odontophorinae (Bolonchaco). Se discuten los há bitos generales, lo ecología alimentaria y lo distribución de cado grupo. Cracidae es endémica en los neotropicos, con excepc1o n de lo chachalaca común (Ortalis vetula) que llega al sur de Texas. Los miembros de este grupo son principalmente vegetarianos, anidan en árboles y arbustos y buscan su alimento a diferentes nive~es, incluyendc el suelo. De las 44 especies, muy pocas se distribuyen de modo que incluyan tonto Centro corno Sudamérica. Un número de especies estan desapareciendo, o sus áreas de distribución eston reduciéndose, debido, principalmente, a las actividades humanos a través de la cocería y de lo destrucció n de los bosques. Los tinomus son totalmente terrestres, con excepció n, hasta cierto punto de los miembros del g énero Tinamus que posan la noche en los árboles o cuando escapan o los depredadores. Su número y áreas de distribució n está n disminuyendo a medida que la presió n de la cacería aumenta y los bosques son destruídos. Cuatro de las 45 especies se encuentran en México. A d iferencio de los otros dos grupos, los bolonchacos o codornice! del Nuevo Mundo son aves de las zonas predominantemente templados. Centro América es el centro de distribución, con 15 especies en México. Solamente un g énero (Odontophorus) se ha radiado hasta Sudamérica . Este trabajo se refiere o generalidades de la ecología y comportamiento de los oves que son la fuente principal de carne para el pequeño agricultor y para los que viven en pequeños poblados. --- ·r~ión de l Autor : L aborat'Ory of Ornithology, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. ectia de Recepción : Enero 24, 1974. 143 �144 Vol. l No. 7 Pul:Jl. Biol. Jnst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Es preciso hacer un esfuerzo concertado ¡ara lo~l~~~g::t:d~:u~~:: servación con el propósito de asegurar as po e inclu en edude estas aves de caza para el futuro, progra:~tu~urios o~ervancia cación, establecimiento de reservas, ~arques y . t , de biólogos d I t . , de estas oreas entrenamien o forzosa e a pro e_cc'.on d .. f . , n , de fauna silvestre, recursos en disciplinas ecolog1cas, a m1nis rac,ode d ., de aves cinenaturales y conservación, programas repro ucc1on géticas y tal vez su domesticación.: Ue las aves de caza son grandemente sedentarias, los proPuesto q 11 1 bo sobre la base de pms a gramas sugeridos preden evarse a ca . ro la protec's s·,n la cooperación entre países po, , . . tan necesaria pa ción de las aves acuáticas m1gratonas. SUMMARY This paper provides a general review of the ecology ?l~d . A • b longing to the fam1 ,es distribution of game birds in Lahn menea e d Chacha- G~t~d Tinamidae (tinamous) ond Crocidae (~urasso(~s, ª;uails) lacas) and the subfamily Odontophonnoe ew or . general habits, feeding ecology and distributions are d,scusse eoch group. The d for The Crocidae is endemic to the neotropics, with the exception of t~~ Plain Chachalaca (Orta lis vetula), which reach~s s~uthern Tex~\ M~es bers of this group are chrefly vegetarians, nestmg in trees on us e~ and foroging ot different levels, i ncluding the grounr ~f ;~ef h ranges that include both Centro o ou c!es, vernyum~:r : / : ecies are disappeoring or their ranges are diminca. A p , et· ·t · through hunting ond forest nishing, primarily due to man s a 1v1 ,es clearing. tet:4 The tinamous ore totally terresfrial, except. to the extenf t~:t member of the genus Tinamus roost in trees adt. ni~t~ :~gwh~: e~~:iin~ d Their numbers and ronges are ,smin1s ' . pre otors. i ncrease and forests are cleared. Four of the 45 spec,es are pressures found in Mexico. Unlike !he other two groups, the New Wo~ld <?uailhs ore pt redof b. d M.ddl Amenca ,s f e cen er o minantl~ tem~ehralt5 e zon~ _ir ~exi~o ~nly one genus (Odontophodislribut1on, w,t spec,es in . · rus) has rodiated in South Amenca. ºl Th. poper deals with generolities of ecology and behovior ,s that are a major saurce of meat for the small former on the birds those living in smoll villages. Lanca,st&r: Neotrctpical Tina:rrunts and GallifCYrms 145 A concerted effort for conser ✓Otion programs must be mode to ensure adequate populations of th3se game birds for the future, programs thot include education, establishment of preserves, parks, ond sonctuaries_. enforcement of the pr.)tection of these oreas, training of biologists in disciplines of ecology, wildlife management, natural rescurces, and conservation, game bird breeding programs, and perhaps domesticafion. Since the terrestiol game birds are highly sedentary, the sedentcry, the suggested programs can be undertaken on o country by country basis, without the cooperotion between countries necessary for the protection of rnigratory waterfowl. When the watergap between Central and South America closed in ~e upper Pliocene, and the series of islands that made up Central Ame-f(ca coalesced to establish a continuous land bridge, the flow of marnmals, b1rds, and other organisms passed in both directions. The long separation of the land masses resulted in a degree of avifaunal endemism that was not paralleled on other continents. Central America also exhibited a high degree of speciation of its bird fauna. The orogeny that resulted in the Andes began in the late Pliocene. The Pleistocene glaciations brought numerous changes in the climate and flora, causing numerous extinctionst and enhancing speciation of new forms. Among the endemic products of this new world evolution were two families of neotropical game birds, the tinamous (Tinamidae) and the cracids (Cracidae). A third group, the subfamily Odontophorinae, the ~~w World quails, evolved in ·Middle America. And the two species of li_Vll1g turkeys (Meleagrididae) probably evolved in southern North Amenca. Since the birds in question are under considerable pressure by man t~ough hunting and habitat alteration, the status of these birds and a discussion of their eoology is highly relevant to this symposium. New World Quails The New World quails, subfamily Odontophorinae, number 30 species '.1Jld nine genera. Relatively little is known of the New World quails found !~ the neotropics. They are monogamous, but not highly territorial, and ttnd to form covieys when not breeding. All quail are terrestrial and nest on the ground. . Only six species and four genera inhabit the United States. Ali occur lllhi!he west. In varying degrees they reach into western Mexico. The Boow ~e (Colinus virginianus) inhabits eastern North America, the oruy qua1I to do so. By contrast, 10 species and three genera of this subfamily �146 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Gient., U. A. N. L., México Vol.1 No. 7 Lancaster: Neotrapical Tinamous and Galliforms 147 are endemic to Middle America, including three species of tree quaii ~on~ary semi_-desert habit~t. The crest,ed Bobwhite probably is expan(Dendrartyx), the Singing Quail (Dactylortyx), and !he. Ba.r:red Qu:iil d!ng 1ts range m par~ of Middl~ an~ South America, for it readily colo(Philortyx). Middle America is clearly the center of distr1but1oi:i, of this ruzes new forest openmgs that mev1tably follow roads and milpas. subfamily with 15 species in Mexico, eight in Hondur~s, seven ,n P~ma. Most of the nine genera consist of one to four spec1es, none of wh1cn . By oontrast, the foi:est quails are inevitably ti€d to the fate of troare endemic to South America. The large genus Odmitophm'lfS, on th.€ ol· pical forests. _In mountam terr~in too rugged for human exploitation, her hand, radiated in South America, for 12 o_f the 14 spec1es are foum small populations of these quail will remain. The pr-~erred habitat :or there, 10 of which are restricted to that contrnent. ~rortyx, DactyZortyx, Rhynchmtyx, and sorne Odont<Yphmus is 0001, moISt, montane forests. Such forests do not form a continuous belt of uniThe Odontophorinae show a dichotomy in their ecological adapta- form habitat in Middle America; thus, the ranga; of many of these forms tions. One group (Deml:rortyx, Oiwnt<Yp_lwrus, _Dactylort_Yx, _and Rhyr, are correspondingly disjunct. chartyx) inhabits the forests where the1r omrpvorous d1ets rnclude f1o. wers, flower buds, small friuts, seeds, tubers, ~ft rootlets, and to a Je. Of the 19 species of forest qu~ils in _the neotropics, 14 belong to the sser extent insect larva.e, pupae, and adults of dipterar orthoptera, col~ genus_ Odont?Plwrus, tr.e wood quruls. Th1s group is predominantly South tera and lepidoptera, as well as centipedes and other arth~opods.. F ~ ~encan _w1th a oenter of distribution ir, Colombia and Panama where mostly on the forest floor, these species scartc~ the leaf htter w1th th~ e1ght spec1es occur. The wood quails prefer rain forest with a relatively feet to expose food irems. As suggested by the1r name, the three specút open understory. When the canopy is interruptf1d allowing a brushy unof Dendrortyx feed al.>ng the branches of trees as well as on the groUDl derst?ry to develop the W<?OO quaíls disappear. N~t ali OdontopllJOrus are 1 restr1cted to the h1gh, mo1st forest, however. While common there the Another group of qualis (Ore<rrty!J, Cal[,iP€1fJla, Philnrtyx, Coli~ Spotted Wood Quail (O. guttatus) occurs in Costa Rica in secon'dru·y and Oyrtonyx) evolved in the more xenc regKms of W€S~rn North__~ Woodland, scrub, and thickets. Where overlap occurs between two or moJVliddle America. These genera feed more on ~ s than the1~ forest <-~ re ~ood quails in Middle America, they usually ocuppy forests at differ ent terparts, taking 1egwnes, and depending on the1_r range a ~anE.ty of w~ altitud~. In South Americ? most of the _nine species of Ooonúüphorus herbs, sunflowers, thistles, ragweed ( Am~osia), mesqmte (Pros~¡ occur m the ~<lean foo~h1lls ~nd mountam~. _ünly one spedes, the Marelbowbrush (Forestiera), cat's-claw ( A ~ ) , and ot~rs. Sorne spec: bled Wood_ Quall (0. guJO,nensis), occurs widely in Amazonia. And only fe€d on the seeds of pines and Douglas f1r, and the dec1duous black loe the ~pot-wmged Wood-Quail (O. capueira) inhabits the forests of eastern Braz1l south of Amawnia. Leaves, buds, flowers, and fruit are taken. li: Most species of this xeric adapted . gro~p take r€'lative~y Tinamous animal food, often one to five per oent, relymg mstead º!1 the f~hage tli seeds of a variety of plants. Legume see.ds make up a ~Jor port1on_ of . The New World quails have adapted to both the xeric and humid endi,et of sorne of these more ope~-land dwellers, wh1le grams and frmt cOlt VIrorunents of Middle America and •only Odant<Yphorus and Golinus crisprise a minor portion of the d1e<t. ~us have moved into South America to any appreciable degree. They m_ight ~ave penetrated farther were it not, perhaps for the comp,etition . The arid country quails live mostly in North America and w \VJ.th Tmam<?us _(Tinamidae), the most sucoessful terrestrial family in Mexico. Only a few of the 11 species in these five genera have ran South_ Amenca in terms of number ,of species and variety of habitats ext:ending south to Guatemala and Honduras. And only t~e Crested . ¡. occup1ed. white (Oolinus cristatu.s) reaches beyond to S::>Uth_Amenca where 1\~ ves in fairly open savannas with scattered bushes m northem Coloro la . Tinamous evo~ved in South America during the long period of isoVenezuela, the Guíanas, and the Rio Br~nco region of noI1:hem B l)hon of that contment. Two centers of origin of tinamous appear to be The ranges of these quail are often exte1:1s1ve and ~ostl_y _contmuous. the ~azon forests where the genera Tioomus and Grypturellus aropopulations in Middle and South Amenca are ~am_tam1ng themselves : and radiated, and ?) southern South America where the open-land gemost areas. The thorn forests, deserts, and sem1:an<;1 scrub preferretl ra Noth11.ra, '!'anni.scus, Rhynclwtus and Eudromi.a evolved. Several most of these species offer les~ for human expl01tation. Thus, the~e ( r,nera eyolved 1n the Andes, N othocercus in the northern forests and cíes are generally in no inmediate danger. I~ fact, the Scaled Quail inamotis and N oth&procta in the central híghlands. llipépla squarnata) has apparently extended 1~ range southward to . v alley of Mexico in recent decades, probably m r~ponse to the _ele d Tinan:ious !ll'e totally tE:rrestrial_ except. for sorne Tinamus species that of forests and extensive grazing that has resulted m the format10n l'Oost at mght In trees. The1r secret1ve hablts and cryptic plumage render �148 Publ. Biol. Inst. lnv. Cient., ·U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 them inconspicuous in whatever habitat they occur but their presence ~ r.evealed by melancholy whistle-characterístic so~~ of the trop1• cal forest, the mountain slopes, the pampas, the sem1-ar1d steppes. Tinamous are chunky-bodied birds with relatively small heads, long necks and diminutive tails. The species vary in size from a House Sparrow (Passer dorrlesticus) to that of a large domestic rooster. These solitary birds have always been sought after for their mea! and eggs. They nest on the ground, commonly laying ~heir unmarked and highly glazed eggs between the buttresses of a tropical tree or at ~he base of a bush or clum of overhanging grass. The males of many spec1es, unlike the curassows and New World quails, are polygamous, maintaining harems which lay their eggs in a oommon nest to be attended by the ma• le alone. ,, ' The tinamous of the Neotropics fill the niches occupied by the gro'!' se and quail in the Nearctic. Neither the Cracidae nor the Odontophon• nae have penetrated the open country south of the tropical and subtropical forests in Argentina. On the other hand, no~ have the open-lam tinamous crossed the vast Amazon forest to colomze the llams and sa· vannas of northern South America. Of the 45 species of tinamous, only five have ~eached Middl~ Ame~ ca four of these occuring in Mexioo. None of the f1ve are endem1c to Mr aa'Ie America. South American populations of three of the tinamous are separated from their conspecifics in Middle America by most of Panama (Nothocercus bonapartei) and much of Costa Rica (Crypturellus boucardi, O. cinnammneus). Most of the five Middle American tinamous show distinctly differ~I ecological preferences: the Great Tinamou (Tinamus majar) in tall pnmary and secondary lowland forests; the Slaty-br4:asted Tinamou (C1"J!P' turellus boucardi) in tall and low sec~mdary trop1c~ forests as _wel1 _as primary tropical forests; the Thicket Tm~mou (C. cinna~) m drier secondary tropical forests; the Little Tu~amou (C._ soui) m dense, lo\l secondary forest and thickets; and the Hlghland Tmamou (N_othocerClJ,I bonapartei) in tall, moist, montane forests. Most of these ~pec1es are not. however, confined to these habitats. Thus, º™: may_ sometimes enc_olll!~ Tinamus in the dense second growth usually mhablted by C. ~oui. au• the latter sometimes traverses the tall open forests that typ1cally are home for the Great Tinamou. Nothoprocf;a is a ~ontane group of ?pecies, five of which have ranges extending for varymg lengths and altitµdes from the routhern .Argell' tine Andes to northern Ecuador, gener~y between ~,500 and 4,090 mt ters. The sixth species, the Brushland Trnamou (N. mnerasoons), lryes íll the open or dense thorn woods, scrub, wood savannas, and the sem1-opell No. 7 Lanc<18ter: Neotropical Tinamous and Galliforms 149 Chaco forests of north-central Argentina southwes~rn Paraguay and extreme southeastern Bolivia. ' ' _On_ the southern grasslands, or pampas, the Patagonian steppes, the sem1-ar1d thorn-scrub, an~ ~ava~as of Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Peru, an~ ~raz1l hve f1ve small spedes of the genus Nothura. Only one, N. darwin1!1,, penetrates the semi-arid montane environment. The Patagoni3:Il Tinamou (Tinamotis ingoufi) inhabits the semi-arid s~p~ of Patagoma and the southern Andes in both Chile and Argentina, while 1ts congener, the Puna Tinamou (T. -penflandii) reaches the highest elevation of ª?Y tin':'111ou, l~ving almost entirely b~tween 13,000 and 15,qo9 feet (sometlmes h1gher) m northern Argentina and Chile, western Bolivia,. and southern Peru. The Patagonian Tinamou shares its environment wlth two Noth_uras ~~d the Elegant Crested-Tinamou (Eudrcrmia eli3garIB), the latter mhabitmg the steppes and the semi-desert regions in the western part of Argentina to about 10,000 feet. The monotypic genus Rhynchotus, or Red-winged Tinamou prefers ~he savannas ~d tall gra8$. Ano!her_ mol}9typic genus, Tamiiscus, occurs In a very restncted savanna reg1on m southeastern Brazil (Parana and Sao Paulo). . No neotropic!11 family of terrestrial birds come;; close to inhabiting th1s cl!ray of env1ronments. There are few major environments in South Amenca wher~ one does not find tinamous. Swamps, marshes, and salt flats exclude tinamous, of course, as well as many other terr.estrial birds An~ tinamous do not live in the N<Ythofagus beech forests of souther~ C~nle, or the Paramo in the Andes of northern Peru, Ecuador, an<l Colombi~. North ~f the Amazon ?-1'€ numerous isolated patches of savanna formmg_ exteJ?.sive open areas m the Gmanas and the expansive llanos of Col?mb1a and Venezuela. The surrounding forests contain many species of tmamous, but none occur in the grasslands. SC?me species of tinamous have extensive ranges. Crypturellus soui and Tinamus major occur in the thickets and tropical forests respecti- ?ly, from Vera Cruz, Mexico to Bolivia. Other tinamous have'very con- m~ ranges. The Choco Tinamou (Crypturellus kerriae) lives only in the tropical forests of t!ie Baudo Mountains on the Pacific coast of Colomoia. The Pale-browed Tmamou (C. trwnsfasciatus) occurs in extreme northwestern Ecuado1;. Th~ Barred Tinamou (C. casiquiare) and the Tepui Tinamou (C. ptaritepui) are known only from a few localities in southeastern _Colo!llbi~ and southern Venezuela. The ~agdalena Tinamou (C. saltuarius) 1s still known only from a type spec1men taken in the valley by that name. Tinamous are more omnivorous than either the Cracidae or the Odontophorinae. The forest species search the leaf-11nered floor for seeds and �150 P'Ubl. Bwl. Inst. lnv. Cient., u. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 fruit and insects. Termites, ants, and insect larvae are common items. No tinarnous scratch for food; but in an equally effective manner, Cry¡r turellus species sweep leaves aside with a sideways movement of the hmcL The non-forest dwelling Nothura and Nothoprocta have slightly decurved and sharper bilis with which they probe in the ooil for tubers and larvae in addition to picking up much of their food from the surface. Rhynchotus has a straight, strong bill and also probes in the soil. Tinamous not only take ins€Cts, but occasionally eat larger prey, inoluding small frogs, lizards, and field mice. .. , The status of many tinamous is good, but many others are showing the efiects of changes in their environrnent or hunting pressures. For those species whose ranges are extensive, there is little inrnediate danger. For those whose ranges are small, the story may be different. The ranges <i most of the Amazonian tinarnous -one-half the entire family- are shrinking as the forests are opened up and the hunting increases. Tinamur. majar is far less common in the Middle American forests due to clearill and hunting. So is the Solitary Tinamou (Tinamus solitarius) in eastern Brazil. The range of Rhynch.i0tu.s has shrunk due to hunting in Argentim and Brazil. Clearing the Quebracho forests of tbe Chaoo has caused a marked reduction in Eudrorni.a formosa. Where years ago, Eudram· el,egans and N otlwprocta cinera.scens were common in the environs Mendoza City in Argentina, I failed to find them in the week I spent ching for tinamous in the areas of Mendoza City, Tunuyan, and Rafael. A few tinamous are expanding their ranges. The Andean Tinam~ (NothoproclXL pe-ntlandii) readily colonizes farmed areas where they sometimes a source of irritation to potato growers. And the Little · mou (Crypturellus soui) readily moves into newly cleared areas w dense undergrowth becomes established. Curassows, Guans, and Chachalacas The large game birds of South and Middle America are the CracidM an attractive group of 44 species and 11 genera of curassows, guans, chachalacas. Like the Tinamidae, the Cracidae is endemic to the Neotrf!l pies. Unlike the tinamous, the Cracidae are more arboreal. In fact, are the only tree-dwelling galliforms, aside from the Hoatzin, which not be a galliform at all. The Cracidae are long-tailed and primitive naceous birds. They climb, leap, and glide with agility, but fiy laborío They nest above ground, with few exceptions, often high in the fo They wear a plumage that is mostly back or brown, often with sorne te or chestnut areas. The legs are strong, the feet large. The hallUX long, incumbent, and well developed for grasping. Primarily vegetarians, they feed on a variety of soft fruits, tender leaves, green shoots, nuts and seeds, and occasionally insects, s No. 7 Lanooster: NeotropicaJ, Tinamous and G-alliforms 151 anct od.ther smal1 invertebrates obtained in the trees bushes, or on the groun .0f the three groups the ch hal fam1ly that avoid the hlmlid for 1c acas ~e t~e only members of th~ and woodland borders They prefer~mg th1ck-2ts, secondary wood:; si:: a' guans, but not as much as th n more time on the ground than th~ come to the ground whereas ~~urassows. Sorne guans apparently rarely day on the forest floor. assows may spend as much as half the . The cracids range widel ¡ th . a variety of habitats af ti~am~ Ne~tro¡;:cs, but do not occupy as Plain Chachalaca ( Ortalis vetula) us.h O e north, one species the occupy the extensive open lands s reac es southe_rn Texas. No c~acicls Iests of northern Argentina Nor ~~t\if t1e trop_1cal and subtropical fo~- Chachalacas (Ortalis) · and _e• ey ouTid •~ ~ny grassland or debirds when not breeding often seePIJ?mg-guans (Apile) are gregarious members of the family clre usually ~~~~~1~f~ o_f a d_ozen or m?re. Other m pa1rs or family groups. All cracids are monogamous Alth ~. and care for the chicks the · femalough mal~ and female build the s17.e is two or three unmarked wh T h e usuaJiy mcubates alone. Clutch ~gdah high1y precocious and able ~~sny°fnt6f11•coloved eggs. Chicks, alt1ve . ys o1d, are fed or shown food b o ow cover when only four te At th1s age, however, they get much Y the parents ev~n when half grown. ' or most, of their own food ~ivers mark the boundaries betw · Amenca. Nowhere is this mor een ª m.1n:iber of species in Soutn laca (0rtalis nwtmot) whose r~nip!;e;t t~an in the Variable Chacha~º-. the west by the' Rio N : oun ed on the north by the Orith~ 1~ the most dramatic ex:i• nd the sout_h by the Amazon. While rr1er In cracids, other membert~ ~t~hi effftiveness º! rivers as a ba~eno~ to lesser degress. The Amazon a d ~ ~ manifest this pheno~ nver barriers, but sorne of the 90~the~~ t~I~~taco ~ the most effecprevent range expansions. u r1es of the Amazon w1~ ili~ tal" Very few cracids are found in both M"d Gu~n i1:e:;u~1:~~as=dugs to no~h!~ ª~o~bit 1 ~er~~s~~ and the Great Curassow (Cra~ 'l:J::.a)M¡: co to tVenezuel~ and Ecuador, lec! om eas €Tn Mex1co to Ecuador. J:;:nra>~ of so~e cracidae are highly restricted. The White-cr ~~!1)t~e Rio~a=ta¿3c~~~i~~ 1 baJ'!k of the Amaz~~ IV nis 1s confined to the extrem · e--wrnged Guan (P. aldw~n ~o~er of Ecuador. The 0~~~hwJ~~º«? of and ~outhCh· 0 Y In the cloud forests in w t G reop,=is dermanu.s) ~apas, Mexico. And the Southern ~~~l:ed uGtemala _a nd S<;mth~tern wn only from the ty-pe locality in Bolivia. uan (Cmx unicorrns) is 1,p~/~\ J !.:~ �152 Publ. Biol. Inst. lnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México No. 7 Lanroster: Neotrapical Tinarrwus and Galliforms 153 More species of curassows and their relatives live in Amazonia t of Managua, Nicaragu~, ~d from much of the lowland areas, as well. elsewhere. The curassows and guans are largely restricted to the wet ~ lands or rnontane and cloud forests. Sorne species, however, do occur ID Th~ cause has ~n primanly due to the cutting of forests for coffee cotton, c~ttle ~azmg, and small scale farming. While OrtaJ,is vet'lila hM alvariety of forests. Thus Penelope purpurascens can be found in h so declmed In many parts of Nicaragua, it does rather well in secondpine-oak forest, oak-sweetgum and beech for~, as_ well as lowland . growth areas, even under fairly heavy pressure. pical rain forest. The Highland Guan (Pvnewpina nigra) a}so rnoves oak-pine forests adjacent to its preferred cloud-forest hab1tat. The c .. H~rnandez 9ürzo believ~ that in the Yucatan Península the diverssows and guans are relatively common where extensive stands <?f t s~1cation of agr1culture that IS opening the forests will reduce the game cal forest still exist and where they are not persEX!uted by huntmg. birds found there. since both factors prevail in rnany parts of ~h_e neotropics, the rang~_ a number of guans and curassows have dim1mshed. T~e ~rnmon P1p . In Colombia the altera~ion of the environment proceeds at an alarGuan (Aburria pipile) has disappeared_from m~ch of 1ts formE:r range nung rate. Ali the forest b1rds have sufíe red, disappearing from Iarge Brazil and Argentina due to deforestation. An _1Solated po~ulation of . tracts of land that once supported tropical and subtropical forests As vin's Curassow (Crax salvini) in eastern Brazil probably 1s now ext1 ~ forests are_ cut, humai:i colonization follows close· behind, and. the Only scattered populations of the_ &mthern Helmetro Curassow (C huntin~ greatly mcreases. Tmamous, according to Olivares and Lehman, unicornis) survive in the subtr?p1cal fort:'ts ~m the easoorn slope of !13ve d1sappeared or become rare in sorne areas: Nothocercus t>01'1,Q,partei Andes in Bolivia and on the Sierra del S1ra m eastern Peru, where in the central _Andes northwest of Bogota, Tinamus tao in the region north horn on the bill of this curassow is used to fashion cigarette lighte~s. . of the Serrarua de I;-a Macarena, ~d Crypturellus soui in the Cauca VaRed-billed Curassow (Crax blumenlx,.chii) appears to be near_ extmc lley. For many crac1ds, the story IS the same, especially in areas such as in eastern Brazil, where indians use the large feathers for their arro La Macarena where two decades ago a number of garne birds were oommon but no longer can be found in the areas of human colonization that has_ taken place there. ':!'h,ese game birds inc.lude the Crestless Curassow Since the chachalacas (Ortalis) live mostly in thick, second gr scrub savannas with dense bushy growth, and thickets, thcy pro ~ to'fM!l-~8a), Salvm s Cura_ssow (C. salvini), Black Curassow (C. will survive the clearing of forest and take advantage of dense un . _r), Sp1x s Guan (Pene"lnpe J(lCquacu), Common Piping Guan ( Abbugrowth that replaces it, so long as their repr<?ctuc~ive output can ma na '[Jt'f>'l"ie), and the Variable Chachalaca. the hunting pressure, which it ,:;eems to be domg m rnany areas. The non-forest Cres~ Bobwhite has likewise disappeared from the Central Andes In the reg1on of Bogota where it once flourished. At a symposium held at the. Srniths~nian In_stitution in 1966 to. cuss the avifauna of northern Latm Amer1ca, various experts on the b of these countries painted a dishearrening picture. LITERATURE CITED !barra recounted that while van Tyne apparently found such b" as the Ocellated Turkey ( Agriocharis ocellata), Penek>pe pu:rpura f'IADON, D. and J. DELACOUR Crax rubra Ortalis vetula and TiMmus rnajor in great abundance 973. Curassows and Related Birds. Amer. Mus. Natural History, N. Y. the area of 'uaxactun, Guatemala in the late 192q's, one ~arely encoun them there today. The Horned Guan (Ore,opllílS1S derl?i,anus) _no lo !f. K., and J. H. BUECHNER, e4itors exists in sorne areas where it once was common now _bemg confmed to fUECHNER, 97 o. 1:he AVlfauna of Northern Latin America. Smithwnian Institumote areas of the mountains in Guatemala and Mexico. tion Press, Washington, D. C. Cloud forests usually occur in scattered patches and hold a disf JOHNSGARD P A ' . · · tive avifauna. In Honduras, according to M<;>nrre, "Man has severely 1973 - Grouse and Quails of North America. Univ. Nebraska Press, Lincoln. duoed these rernaining patches." The en~m1~s of thE:se cloud forests in danger, including three races of the Smgm_g Quail ( Dactylorty~ . racicus). Other game birds in Honduras showing a marked reduction y~CA~TE~, D. A. ª· L~e ~1st<;>ry of the Boucard Tmamou in British Honduras. Part I: numbers in recent years include Crax 1'1:W1"ª and Penél0'f!8 purpur Distr1buhon and General Behavior. Condor, 66: 165-181. Russell doubts that any appreciable dechne of these spec1es has o~cu from hunting pressures in British Honduras. These same two spec1es, . 1 964b. Life ~istor):' ,of the Boucard Tinamou in British Honduras. Part n: Great Curassow and the Crested Guan, have disappeared from the r Breedmg B1ology. Condor 66: 253-276. �PulJl. Biol . I nst. I nv. Cient., U. A. N. L., 154 . M'exico Vol. 1 f h Br shland Tinamou, N othnprocta cinerasoens. Bull. 1964c. B10logy o t Nea t • uHist ., l27 (6) : 269-314. Amer . Mus. VAURIE, C. , (Aves) . Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 1968. Taxonomy of the Crac1ºda,e 138 (4) : 133-259. No. 7 Amla Pirés: Céroidos N eot ropical,es 155 CERVIDOS NEOTROPICALES: ESTADO ACTUAL Y FUTURO* F erroondo Dias de Amln,;-Pi r és RESUMEN. los cérvidos están entre los mayores animales neotrop k ales, por lo que su pa11icipación en los ciclos biogeoqiJimicos es grande, y su importancb elevada. Por sus exigencias terr.itoriales y dependencia de áreas poco alteradas, es difícil prever su futuro cercano. Seis géneros y once especies con treinta y tres subespecies son reconocidas en Amériaa T.ropical, las poblacion·e s actuales se encuen.~ron ampliamente dispersas y aisladas. Los principales propiernas regioniales de los cérvidos son la caza excesiva, tanto alimenticia como deportiva, en la Amazonia; en Uruguay y en Venezuela apenas si sobreviven; en Argenti11¡a están siendo desplazados por especies introducidas de cérvidos. La ganaderia , la demando de tierras para coloniz¡:idó11, la construcción de vías y la desforestación, contribuyen a d isminui.- el área disponible para éstos grandes animales selváticos, por lo que su extinción se está llevando a cabo a gran velocidad. Los Parques Nocionales no están todavía en condiciones de cump'ir su ¡función de protección de esta fauna. Es notoria lo necesidad de contar con Escuelas de Ecología TI-opical que permitan desarrollar los p rincipios básicos de la mismo, pana diseñar las técnicos adecu,::idas de conservación, y el uso racional de los r~cursos na tu,roles, así como paro facilitar La presión por lo comunidad científica y los agenc~as internacionales conservacionistos sobre los gobiemos y los pue blos a fin de alcanzar un desarrolto armónico y durade~o (S. C. B. ) . SUMMARY. T'he neotropical rr~:immols ~ the deer family are some of the larger and more important animals in concenn, with their participotion in the bigeochemical cycles. Because- of their territorial requirements, dependense on little developed rotura! oreas, it is dHficult to predict their n·eor futul'e. Six genera and e-leven species with thir;ty thrlee subspecies are known from tropical Ameirca. Popu !ations are widely dispersed ond isolated. Their main regio111ial problems are excesive hunting for food and sport in the Amazonia; in lJ.ruguay and Venezueb they barely survive; in Argentina they are being d isplaced by introduced cervid species. Livestock, lond Dirección del Autor: Museo Nacional, Río de Janeiro, Brasil. Fecl:Jia de Recepción: E nero 24, 1974. * Traducción del Portugués de Bernardo ViJ!a-Ramírez. �156 Pul:>l. Biol. lnst. lnv. Cient.; U. A. N. L.; México Vol. 1 redamation, road building and deforestation, all ctmtribute to diminish the sp,::ice avaifoble for these large forest animals; for these reasons, their extinction is being accomplished rapidly. National Parks are not yet capable clf fullfi i!i ng their protec!ive tasks. There is a need for Schools of T·ropiQal Eco:ogy that would· develop adequate conservation pr.:ictices for the rational uses of natural resources, and that would facilit01te pressures by the scie111tific community and the international conservation agencies on the government and people, towards reaching hermonious cmd long-lasting development. (S. C. B. ). INTRODUCCION No es tarea sencilla tratar de preveier el fi;turo de las poblaciones remanentes de los cérvidos tropicales dentro de los próximos cinco o diez años. ' l 1 ' f.:_. 1 1,, Por un lado, la explosión demográfica que se observa en las regiones subdesarrolladas desde el punto de vista socio-económico y la expansión industrial de los países en desarrollo, que entran en la rera tecnológica, demandando la colonización de las áreas degradadas y la explotación de los recursos naturales en gran escala, amenazan el equilibrio ecológico Y la persistencia de los ecosist-emas de los que los cérvidos forman parte; por otro lado, los primeros resultados de las campañas desarrolladas en pro del conservacionismo científico y el establecimiento de una política de aprovechamiento racional de los recursos naturales renovables ya se dejan sentir en varios países. Una legislación específica se va estableciendo o se revisa y se actualiza; la explotación predatoria de los animales y plantas silvestres hasta ahora considerados como recursos "extractivos" esta siendo restringida; el pueblo comienza a tomar conciencia de la gravedad y de la urgencia del problema, gracias al impacto de la divulgación de los riesgos impuestos por la polución de las aguas, del suelo y del aire. Una conquista más redente fue la prohibición absoluta de la exportación de primates impuesta por el gobierno de Colombia, a partir del primero de junio del presente año, que puso fin a un tráfico anual de cerca de 25000 ejemplares (de cuatro o cinco especies) o qUe representaba una captura de tres veces ese número, dos tercios de los cuales perecían en el mismo prooeso de captura, transporte y aclimatación (Avila Pires 1968b). Algunos países importadores establecieron reglamentos es· trictos para no infringir las leyes de protección de los países d,e origen de las especies consideradas por ellos, amenazadas, aún cuando no estuvieran protegidas en sus áreas nativas. En la evolución histórica del conservacionismo podemos distinguir dos tendencias que no se oponen y que antes bien se complementan. En primer lugar, el hombre se ha dado cuenta de la necesidad de preservar ciertas especies importantes para su propia sobrevivencia. H. Von Hagen No. 7 Avil.a Pirés: Cérvidos Neotropicdles 157 nos_ ?frece un ejemplo bastante pertinent.e al analizar el papel de la explotac10n del guano en la economía de las poblaciones primitivas que habitaron la c~ta. d~sértica del Perú: "Under Inca rule, the birds (PhalacrocoTf!-X boug'!-inml~ii); guanay, were protected by very severe laws: it was forb1den to k11l a smgle of them or ev.en to approach their islands during laying season, under penalty of death". Entre los indígenas brasileños el curupira era una entidad mitológica protectora de los bosques y de 'sus habitantes, es por eso que se le escogió como símbolo de la Fundación Brasilera para la Conservación de la Naturaleza. Noé San Francisco de Asís, San. Humberto y Buda están asociados, en algmia forma, a la actitud pante1sta del amor por la Naturaleza. Pero no fue sino hasta el siglo XIX que nos dimos cuenta de que la protección de la Naturale-za en sus nultiples aspectos, es esencial para el mantenimiento y preserv~ción de las condiciones que permitan nuestra propia existencia. El concepto de Com,unidad biótioo, oorruo unidad eoológica vino a permitirnos descubrir que el incremento demográfico y una explotación desordenada e imprevisora de los recursos naturales renovables, que más se hicieron sentir después del advenimiento de la revolución industrial, son responsablai de la destrucción de las condiciones del habitat de la biosfera y amenazan nuestra propia seguridad y bienestar. En el último siglo, la evolución de la Ecologia en el sentido de convertirSe en una disciplina autónoma permitió el enjuiciamiento de la problemática fundamental e indicó eÍ C'.1Jllino para el encuentro de _las ~olu~kmes. La creación del Parque Nacional Yellowstone, en 1872, mauguro una nueva era y estableció una nueva filosofía conservacionista: la de la creación ,de refugios para la flora y la fauna los que, en el futuro, constituirán verdaderas "islas" en un mar de civilización. En términos generales, dos grandes problemas confrontamos: el mantenimiento de las condiciones global€S de habitabilidad del planeta como n:iesoclima, agua, oxígeno, solo en índioes compatibles de polución física, química y atómica y una pr:.>tección de determinados ecosistemas en biotopos limitados, que servirán como bancos genéticos o estacion€~ biológicas y muestras de lo que fue la Tierra antes del advenimiento de la civilización tecnológica-industrial. LOS CERVIDOS De entre los mamíferos de mayor porte en la Región Neotropical se cuentan los cérvidos. Este hecho les confiere un importante papel en' las cadenas biogeoquimicas que integran y al mismo tiempo oonstituyen una amenaza a su sobrevivencia (Avila Pires, 1968). ' Además de e?'-igir áreas extensas de dominio vital, son cazados por su carne, por la piel y por deporte. Apenas aparece una especie en las estadísticas oficiales d~l comercio de pieles o cueros en la América Tropical: M azama americana. �158 Publ. Biol. lnst. lnv. Cient.) U. A. N. L.) México Vol. 1 No. 7 Avila Pirés: Cérvidos Nootropicales Género Odocoileus Rafinesque) 1932 Mientras tanto, los demás cérvidos forman parte de la dieta normal de muchas poblaciones rurales para las que son importante fuente de proteínas: "Parmi les resouroes les plus précieuses qui existent dans la nature, il faut placer au premier rang celles que réprésent les divers peuplements de mamiferes sauvages, hervibores pour la plupart. (Tribe et al.) Los datos disponibles sobre la biomasa de los herbívoros africanos, que ocupan el nicho ecológico de algunas especies de cérvidos neotropicales, indican su importancia en la €COnomía de la naturaleza; puede alcanzar de 575 a 1050 Kg/ha en los bosques de Acacia de Africa Oriental, más del que alcanza el ganado bovino introducido: la fauna nativa está mejor adaptada al habitat, estando en equilibrio con los demás elementos del biota-tanto de macrobiota, con los que compite o coopera, como de microbiota que la parasita o con la que vive en comensalismo o simbiosis (UNESCO; Bell, 1971; Vesey-Fitz-Gerald, 1960). Los cérvidos neotropicales se originaron en el Continente Norteamericano, no obstante, su historia paleontológica es mal conocida. Substitutos de los bóvidos africanos, ocupan nichos ecológicos definidos, en bosques o campos. En este continente vive el más pequeño cérvido del mundo, el P-wiu pudu. Dubost, estudiando el problema de las convergencias entre elementos de la fauna de mamíferos africanos y americanos resaltó que "Nous avons . . . été frappé~ par l'étroit parallélisme entre la faune des herbivores Artiodactyles de la foret africaine, formé de Ruminants, Bovidés, et Traguludés et de non-Ruminats Hippopotamidés, et de celle des herbjvores néotropicaux ccmposée de familles et de ordres fondamentalement différents, Artiodactyles, Ruminants, Cervidés, et Rongeurs Nototrogo· morphes de diverses familles". Si el estudio de la ecología de los bóvidos africanos esta desarrollada regularmente, sobre todo en Africa Oriental gracias a las inva;tigaciones realizadas en Serengeti (por Grzimek y colaborador.es) y las regiones vecinas (Vesey-Fitz-Gerald, 1960; Bell, 1971), muy poco se sabe respecto de los cérvidos neotropicales más allá de lo que dice MacGonagh sobre B. bezoartious. De acuerdo con Hershkovitz (1972) los seis géneros y once especies existentes son autóctonas en la región neotropical y nueve están restrin· gidas a la América del Sur. Su taxonomía aún presenta dudas y en 1959 el mismo autor describía una nueva especie de Mazama. Una lista anexa reúne las formas actuales que ocurren al sur de México, con su distribu· ción conocida. Tengase en cuenta que las poblaciones remanentes se en· cuentran dispersas y cada vez más aisladas. 159 Odoooileus virginianus cariacou (B dd N egro Camposalde la GuaY norte del y~a Y Guayana Brasileiraº at:~ 1:~Í!0 R10 Amazonas. ' Odoc<Yileus mrginwnus · · · curassavicus Hummelinck 1940 - zao, Venezuela. Odoc<Yile · , Isl d Curaa e · · ~;{[~~:~aiiz~ii\}G~y and Ger_v~is, 1846) _ Andes ae ye Lasiotis Osgood, 1914f_1erra de Merida, en Venezuela (inclu- ~ 0 Odocoileus virginiatnus gymnot· de Colombia Venezuel! ' , (w· surmam i~ann, 1833) y Guayana. Odocoi~ virginianus margaritce Osgood 1910 v enezuela. ' Isla de M ·ta argar1 , - Odoc<Yileus virginwnus · · peruvianus (Gray, 1874) Odoomleus virginianus tropical. e Sabanas (llanos) Andes del Perú. b les de los Andes de ~omªb1_rera,l_tl91al8 - Vertientes occidentaa Y 1 or de Ecuador. Odocmleus virginmnus · · ustus Trouessart, 1911 - Andes de Ecuador. Género. Edocerus Avila Pires 1957 omus (lli1ger 1815) R ·· ' Sur: Norte de Arge~tina Par- egion central de _América del (de Río Grande do Sul ~ Bah~r)f al esit_': de .Bohv1a y Brasil parte de su área de distribución . ~ - e ·ctamgual1do en la mayor tanal además de al . '. mg¡ Chaco y Panalto Central BrasileWc2as areas aisladas Y despobladas del Plan- Edocerus dichot Género Blastocerus Wagner, 1844 lJezoarticus lJezoarticus (L. . . 758 y oriental: del planalto oentr~~~i ! )1 Brasil central este. Extinguido en las r . eno a os estados de nortados Centrales. Hacia el~!nTIJi~~aias.taSoUbrevive en los Esse ha extinguido. as ruguay en donde Blastocerus lJezoarticus celer Cabrera 1943 gentina, hasta el Río Negro.' - Blastocerus ff · . IStfito Pampas1co de Ar- lJezoarticus leucogaster ( Goldfu Argentina (Santa Fé y Oorrientes) ss, / 817 ) - Del norte de livia y suroeste de Mato Grosso en ~ras~laguay, Sureste de Bo- Blastocerus ' 1 . .. . �160 Vol. 1 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México No. 7 Género Hippocamelu.s Leuckart, 1816 Bolivia Y noroeste de Arg.entma, hasta lt1azama guoazaubira cita Osgood, 1912 - Mazama goua.z<Ylibira gouazaubira (Fischer, 1814) - Región centro-meridional de América del sur, en las sabanas y espesuras de Brasil central, hacia el sur hasta Paraguay noite de Argentina y Uruguay. ª Género Mazama Rafinesque, 1817 Mazama gouazoumra nemmivaga (F. Cuvrer, 1817) - Región austral de la América del Sur, en los campos y sabanas de las Guayanas, Surinam y Guayana Francesa, sureste de Venezuela y norte de Brasil y en las vertientes orientales de los Ande; de Colombia y Ecuador. (Incluida murellia J. A. Allen, 1915). (Erxleben, l 777) _ Orilla norte del Mazama arnericaoo J : d o hacia el norte la región quayanense Y el ~~iw:{i~ela, más' allá de la depr€sión del Onnoco. . IYla • .-.n,rno1,'na Hollister 1914 América Central, de Gua. ' R' temala hacia el sur hasta Costa ica. Mazama americana \/V'"° . ··~1~~ J · A · Allen? 1915 Mazama americaoo g·w.,u.,cu Mazama gouazaubira '[Jan.dora Merriam, 1901 - Andes occidentales del . ···~···,J- Sureste de Brasil, de Sao Mazama gouawubira tschudii (Wagner, 1855) - Argentina del Río Bermejo . Santiago del Estero Y Santa Fé. hasta la provmc1a de Tucuman, . . 1815 _ Región meridional d-e la AméMazama a_mericana rudf~ R(~lhg¡BeerhneJ·o en el norte de Argentina, a Para1 rica del sur, e 10 ' ) guay y suroeste de Brasil (Mato Grosso . . Thornas ' 1925 _ Región M ma amerioana sarae . de las sierras del sur az.a de Bolivia Y ronas limítrofes de Argentina. .. l9l9 he'la Thomas' 1913 i . Noreste de Venezuela. Mazama americana s Mazami1, amerioana ternama (~err1 1792) - , Mazama americana -u:hitelyi (Gray, _1844) - ""r· , , · ,;,__ M azama americana za.mora ' . Mazama americana namby (Fitzing,er, 1874) rondoni). Brasil central (incluye Mazama americana rutina (Bourcier and Pucheran, 1852) - Ecuador, entre 3.000 e 4.000 m de altitud. Andes de Género Pudu ·Gray, 1852 Sur de Perú. Pudu (Puilella) m.ephistophiles (De Winton, 1896) bia y Ecuador d C 1 tf l>' zetta Thomas 1897 _ ' ronas limítrofes de Colombia. Pudu (Pudu) pudu (Molina, 1782) - Región boscosa de Argentina y Chile, entre 39º y 50º de latitud. J A Allen 1915 _ Sureste e · · ' · Andes orientales de Ecuador y Peru. M azama americt1/Ylll, Mazama rutina bricenii Thomas, 1898 Región occidental de Venezuela y México, San Luis Potosi hacia el sur, hasta Chiapas. 1 . , Andes del nor- Andes del norte de Perú. Maroma americaoo ro_sii _Lonnberg, lombia. Mazama gouaz<Ylibira sanctaemarcúie J. A. Allen, 1915 - Panamá, de Darien a Gatum. .. ,.-s•.;,--••......· - Panamá, Isla de San Jo- te de Colombia. . ~.,...,., Mazama americaoo , c,¡,v, ••...,.... Goldman, 1913 - .\ Mazama gouazoubira permira Kellogg, 1946 - sé, Las Perlas. Jt<Nw·rw.a Thomas • 1913 Paulo al Río Grande do Sul. Península de Yucatán, México. Ecuador y sureste de Colombia. Mazama americana Norte de VenEzuela. l . . . 1882) - Andes Australes, de 35º de laHi'fY[)OCarni3lu.s bisulcus (Molma, . I 1 de Wellington. titud al Estrecho de Magallarres e s . 161 Mazama chunyi Hershkovitz, 1959 -Andes de Bolivia y del sur del Perú. ~e~i~~aEcuador, Perú, Hippocamelu.s antisiensis (D'Orbigny, f834) - A vila Pirés: Cérvidos N eotrü]Yic<iles vali.es b' Y o om ia interandinos de Co· Andes de Colom- Hershkovitz considera que Pudu y Mazama son muy primitivos y que pudieron haberse originado en América del Sur. siendo las formas centroam'ericanas inmigrantes Ileciientes. Pudu es el más pequeño cérvido del mundo. Od:IJcoileus llegó a la América del Sur durante el Pleistoceno �162 Publ. Biol. Inst. Jnv . Cient.) U. A. N. L.) México Vol. 1 y está confinado a la región Austral, limitado P<;>r el bosque a~azónico. _en el PleistJooeno, derivan de grupos anoestrales sudamericanos mas_antiguos: No obstante, los detalles de su historia paleontológica no son bien conocidos. Hippocamelus) Edfx:,erus y Blastooerus) ya con~idos De conformidad con la Convención Panamericana para la Prot~ció? de la Flora y de la Fauna, las siguient~ especies se encuentran baJo regimen especial y fueron declaras protegidas: Edocerus dicholXlmus - en Brasil y Uruguay. en Brasil y Uruguay. . Orwcoiwus mrginianus - Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru y Venezuela. . Mamrnt1 americana - Guatemala y Peru. Mamma gouawubira - Guatemala y Perú. HiP'[JOCamelus antisiensis - Perú. Blasbocerus bezoarticus - PROBLEMAS REGIONALES La caza irrestricta de las especies nativas efectuada. p~r los c~lonizadores del continente americano se encuadraba en la practica corriente de la exploración de los recursos naturales o "riquezas naturr.~es" de l_<:5 nuevas colonias y es difícil evaluar su impacto sobre las po~l~c~ones eXI:s· tentes en la época. A pesar de disponer de armas primitivas y de reducidos medios de transporte, ciertamente Sf..! a~~ión no fue dlespreciablé. Von Hagen, por ejemplo, atribuye la extmcion de _la, llama f;D la costa peruana a la estrategia de Gonzalo Pizarro, que privo a los meas del uso de esos animales, facilitando su derrota y o:m9msta. El p~o-~rasil (Cesalpinea echinata), que dio el nombre al Brasil, estaba practicamente extinguido en el siglo XIX. Durante la época de la colonia, algunos cérvidos .~pecialmente "!3· bezoarticus eran cazados para la colecta de bezoar, una pi€dra de propiedades mágicas y medicinales". Actualmente, los paises de la depresión amazónic?- .~tá~ .empeñados en incorporar grandes áreas donde no ha llegad? la civihzacion r.explorar los recursos naturales allí _existentes. C8;mmos de penetrac10n, C'?' mo la trasamazónica en el Brasil y una margmal de la selv~,, en Per1:1, crean núcleos de población en ~l seno de}a selva, donde 1~ agricultura pri· mitiva es practicada por el metodo de Slash and Bum , ( oortar Y quemar). En la selva peruana, por lo menos el 85% de la proteína animal ~on· sumida por la población rural pr?viene de la caza Y de_ l_a J¡eSCa ~uc€die~: do lo mismo en Brasil. Un estudio efectuado en la reg10n d_e! Rio Pachí tea (Dourojeanni, 1968), reveló que la carne de caza es utihzada en ra· zón de 460 gm. diarios por persona. No. 7 Avila Pirés: Cérvidos Neotropicaws 163 En la depresión de Ucayali, donde la pesca es abundante, la carne de caz8: co~respoi:ide a 52 gm. por día. Allí viven 4.202 familias, en 56% del territorio nacional. En el Departamento de Loreto el valor mínimo de la pro_ducción de carne de <::aza fue e~aluado en U. S. dólares 2.185,000 por ano. De entre las especies que mas aparecen en la estadística esta Maroma americana. La "Caza deportiva" incluye Odocoileus, Mazarna e Hi'P'[)Ocamelus. . En Uruguay,_ E. dichotom.U:8 se encuentra prácticamente extinguido. Segun Vaz Ferreira, aJ;?enas existe un rebaño de cinco o seis ejemplares en una hacienda particWar. B. cezairticus otrora abundante en los cam~ pos, tuy5> sus poblacion~ reducidas a partir del siglo XVIII, debido a la e:"pansion de la ganadena, como sucedió en México con sus especies nativas (Baker, 1958). Hoy cerca de un centener de ,ejemplares sobreviven en haciendas privadas, distribuidas por cinco departame:,;itos. En ~enezuela, Odocaj,leus es cazado_por su carne y constituye importante articulo de comercio entre los animales silvestres Eichler en un viaje de seis meses a la región de la Guayana Venezolana vio a~nas dos venados. En una región de 25 000 has. en los llanos don'de la fauna silvestre es rica y abundante, los venados "que en mayor número representan la fauna local . . . han tomado la región como refugio por las constantes persecuciones de que son objeto en todo el Estado'1. En una temporada anual favorable, durante 40 días de observación, apenas 114 animales fueron observados. En ese país las especies más amenazadas son Od!ocoioous v. gymrwtis y M. american (Mondolfi). En Argentina1 la introducción de especies importadas, como Cervus ewph~, que constituye plaga en los Parques na~ionales de Nahuel Huapi Y~Lru:im; Dama dama, :en ~l _sur del pru~ y A xis axis, en la patagonia Cv~tituye un problema adic10nal: compiten con las especies nativas esc::cialmente Hippocamelus. El huemul, de hábitos noctivagos que h;bita los_páramos_ de la cord_illera entre 2500 y 5000 m de altitud, f~e uno de los arumales mas persegmdos por los habitantes de la . región, que iban a vender sus cueros hasta Bahía Blanca. En B~asil, ~a introducción de~ ganad~ también afectó el equilibrio de la fauna, mclusive como reservono de ciertas zoonosis como el mal de caderas y la rabia paralizante. . En Sao Paulo, el Dr. Paulo Nogueira Neto se dedica a la cría de esPe<!1es nativas en semicautiverio o bien estudiando e n especial el ciervo (E. diclwtomus). ' ' De la Amazona Brasileña (incluyendo los estados de Acre y Maranhao), en el período de cinco años que va de 1960 a 1964, se exportaron �164 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 987,787 cueros de M. americana, la única especie considerada de valor económico y al precio por piel, en Belém de 0.80 crureiros (U. S. $0.12 al cambio actual). En el decenio 1950-60 se exportaron 2000 000 cueros de ese venado. Las demás especies son cazadas como fuente de alimento o por deporte. La creación de perros venaderos aún constituye un orgullo de los aficionados. No. 7 A vila Pirés: Cérvidos Neotropiailes 165 guir, como lo han demostrado las recientes conquistas en el campo del conservacionismo. Mientras tanto, en cuanto dispongamos de técnicos capaces de desarrollar técnicas apropiadas y de realizarse un inventario ecológico de 1a. !>ituación real, no estaremos en condiciones de enfrentar los problema:. que confrontamos, de manera racional y satisfactoria. CONCLUSIONES La extinción de los mamíferos de gran talla se está llevando al cabo de manera acelerada en toda la Am~rica Tropical, la demanda de tierras para colonización, la construcción de vías de penetración y la reducción de extensiones salváticas continuas constituyen una amenaza creciente. La caza, al igual que los países que poseen una lf!gíslación específica actualizada, es otro factor que debe ser considerado. Además de las necesidades tróficas, el campesino es un destructor por inclinación natural y, cuanto más raro es un animal, mayor placer experimenta al abatirlo, aún cuando no lo aproveche. El manejo de los Parques Nacionales aún deja mucho que desear y, con fr€Cuencia, una mejor garantía de sobrevivencia la encuentra un animal en las haciendas particulares que bajo la "protección" de funcionarios públicos mal pagados y menos enterados en lo que se refiere a la misión que tienen encomendada. Si oo existe observancia de los preceptos legales y la coerción de las autoridades no se hace sentir, una publicación de las listas de especies raras pasa a construir un obituario previo y su precio sube en la bolsa negra internacional. La Conservación constituye una de las aplicaciones más importante!> de la Ecología: fail.tan, en América Latina, escuelas de Ecología que desarrollen los principios básicos de la Ecología tropical. Es indispensable que pensemos en desarróllar técnicas adecuadas para efectuar oensos cie poblaciones silvestres, especialmente de las que viven en las selvas. La falta d tales datos no nos permite una evaluación siquiera aproximada de la situación actual. En los países en proceso de desarrollo acelerado, algunos (pocos), se oonsumen en esfuerzos inadecuados, para contrarrestar y reorientar los intereses políticos y €Conómicos de carácter inmediato, buscando obtener un equilibrio entre el desarrollo y la conservación, por el uso racional de los recursos naturales, con el fin de alcanzar un desarrollo nacional armónico y duradero. La presión de la comunidad científica y de las agencias internacier nales sobre los gobiernos y sobre la opinión pública mucho puede conse- LITERATURA crrADA AV!LA-PIRES, F'. D. de 1~68a. Causas e fatores de extincao das especies. In: A Conservacoo da Natureza e a lm'J)Tensa na América Latina. Atas 2a. Mesa Redonda Inf. Cons. Nat., F. B. C. N., Río de Janeiro, 1968 :1-5. 1968b. Sorne problems ooncerning primates. In: Proc. Lat. Am.er. Confer. Oonserv. Nat. Rewur., I. U. C. N. :132-142, Morges. 1958a. Contribuicao ao conhecimento dos cervídeos sul americanos. An. Acad. Brasil. Cienc., 30(4) :585-598, Río de Janeiro. 1959b. Sobre a validade de Blastocerus Wagner, 1844. Atas. Soc. BiJol. Río de Janeiro, Julho-agosto, 1958: 41-42. 1959c. Sobre algumas formas do género Mazama Rafinesque, 1817. Atas. Soc. Biol. Río de Janeiro, 3 (3) :7-10. 1960. As formas sul americanas do veado-virá. An. Acad. brasil. Cienc., 31(4) :547-556, Río de Janeiro. BAKER, R. H. 1957. E,1 futuro de la fauna silvestre en el norte de México. An. Inst. Biol. XXVIII (1-2), México. BELL, H . V. 1971. A grazing ecosystem in the Serengeti. Sci. Amer., 225(1) :86-93, N. Y. CARVALHO, J. C. M. 1867. A conservacao da natureza e recursos naturais na Amazonia Brasileira Atas Sim:pós. Biota Amazon., 7:1-47, Río de Janeiro. DOUROJEANNI, M. J . 1967. La importancia de la conservación de los recursos naturales renovables en América Latina, con especial referencia al Perú. Ibid.: 51-64. �166 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. C'ient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 DUBOST, G. 1968. Les niches écologiques des forets tropicales Sud-Americaines et Africaines, sources de convergmces rémarquab1es entre rongeurs et artiodaétyles. La Terre et 7JJ, Vie, XXII(l) :3-28- Paris. EICHLER, A. 1966. Conservación. 2 vols., Mérida. GRZIMEK, M. and B. GRZIMEK 1960. A study of the game of the Serengeti plains. Herausg. Det. Gesell. f. Saug. e. v. 25:1-61, Berlim. VON HAGEN, H. 1964. The Desert Kingdoms of Peru. Mentor Books, ed. 1968. HERSHKOVITZ, P. 1972. The recent mamrnals of the Neotropical Region: a Zoogeographical and Ecological account. IN: Mammals and Southern Continents. Allan Keast, F. C. Erk and B. Glass, ed., State Univ. N. York Press, Albany. HUXLEY, J. 1961. The Conservation of Wildlife and Natural Habitats in Central and East Africa. UNESCO, Paris. MAC DONAGH, E. J. 1940. La etología del venado en el Tuyú Notas MUB. La Plata, 5 Zool. 33:49-68. MONDOLF'I, E. 1965. Nuestra Fauna. El Farol, XXVII (214), Caracas. PEARSALL, W. H. 1962. The conservation of African plains game as a form of land use. In E. D. Le Creu and H. Holgate, ed., The Expl,oitation of Natural Populations. Willey, N. Y. TRI.BE, D., F'. GURRY-LINDALL, J. PAGOT, V. SOKOLOV and F. SMITH 1970. L'Ecologie animale. l'élcvage et l'aménagement efficace de la faune sauvag,e et de son habitat. In: UNESCO, Utilization et Conserva· twn de la Biosphere. :137-159, Paris. UNESCO 1970. Utilization et conservation de la Biwphere. Paris. No. 7 Avila Pirés: Cérvidos Nootropicales 167 V AZ-FERREIRA, R. 1968. Fauna indígena y recursos natural . servación. In: A conservacao da /mmales del Uruguay, su conrica Latina Atas 2 ureza e a Impensa na Améde Janeiro. · ª· Mesa Red. Inf. Omserv. Nat.: 135-143, Río ;3 ª VESEY-FIT_Z-GERALD, D. F'. 1960. Grazmg succession among East Af mmal., 41(2) :161-172, Baltimore. rican game animals. J. Ma- �No. 7 Petrides: I mported UnguJ,aoos in Lalin America 169 IMPORTED WILD UNGULATES IN LATIN AMERICA, WITH GUIDELINE PRINCIPLES TO GOVERN SPECIES INTRODUCTIONS George A. Petrides RESUMEN Una investigación p reliminar en trece naciones latinoa mericanos indicó que tanto el número como . el ritmo de importaciones de animales silvestres de pezuña desde Europa, Asia y Africa estaba aumentando rá pidamente. Esto fue cierto especialmente para México, Argentina y Chile. Lo tendencia de las especies importados de alternativamente fra. casar o florecer, lo incertidumbre de que el estudio preliminar de especies de importación prospectiva aseguraría beneficios subsecuentes, y la casi inevitabilidad de que los ungulados exóticos cercados en ranchos escaparían al medio silvestre, están entre varios de los principios y guías señalados. La revisión y reglamentación de importaciones de ungulados por ecólogos clasificados de instituciones naáonales e internacionales es esencial para restringir el daño económico. SUMMARY A preliminary survey of thirteen Latin American notions indicated that both the number and rote of importations of wild hoofed onimals from Europe, Asia and Africa wos increasing rapidly. This wos especiolly true for Mexico, Argentino and Chile. The tendency for imported species either to foil or to flourish, th':) uncertainty thot prior study of prospective import species would insure successor benefits, and the near inevitobility thot ranch-fenced exotic ungulates would escape to the wild are among several guiding principies stated. Review ond regulation of ungulote imports by quolified ecologists of notional and internotional agencies is essentiol to restrict economic harm. The purposeful transplantation of plants and animals from one part of the world to another has been one of man's activities extending into t~e past for sorne centuries. In Latin America, foreign ungu]ates were f1r:.t introduced by early explorers and colonists in the form of domestic Dirección del Autor: Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansina, Mioh. Fecha de Recepción: Enero 24, 1974. �170 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 No. 7 . . Knowledgeable biologists throughout Latín America were asked to respon9 to a questionnaire on ungulate importations into their home countries. It was only through the active participation of the following 35 experts from 13 countries that this survey was possible. Their generous and esential cooperation is gratefully acknowledged. The ir surnames are listed occasionally in this paperas authorities for the data given: Argentina: Dra. Maria Buchinger, Latín America Natural Area Programs, Foresta Institute; Ing. Agr. Italo N. Constantino, Director General del Servicio For€stal Nacional¡; Delmiro Juan Cutillo, Ex· perto en Caza y Conservación de la Fauna, Servicio Forestal Nacional; Dr. J,orge A. Crespo, Departamento de Museos; Rodolfo Crhistello, Asociacion Natura; Arq. Octavio Pico Estrada and Vir· gilio A. Giustinian, Servicio Nacional de Parques Nacionales; Ello Massoia and Jose A. Pastrona, Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria; Diego Niel, Asesor Director, Servicio Nacional Forestal; Dr. Roberto J. Varela, Presidente, Asociación Natura, Buenos Arres. Brazil: Professor Paulo Noguiero-Neto, University of Sao Paulo. , . e, ort-au-Pnnce. Mexico:. Ing. Fiacro Martínez M , . .. Silvestre; Jaime Carrillo S~~ez, D1_recc1on General de la Fauna Y Repoblación Forestales· In ~• pn'eetor General de Prorección partamento de Parques Nací~ alose AI:r~la Tinoco. J cfü del Den es, Mexico D F Panamá·. Lic. D ario · Tovar, Director de Serv· . F' · · p ,. ic10 orestal, P anamá. eru. Ríos, Marc Dourojeanni Dir t _Departamento d'; Planificación, e Ing. Manuel A Agraria, Lima. eJo Forestal, Universidad NacionaÍ :Je. 8an Salvador·· Antomo . Argum€"do B"10.1 ' ogo, Parque Zoológico Nacional El Salvador. Venezuela. Alfr d ' rroll e o A~~anio, Gerente General d .. .. G (!, Corporac1on Nacional de Tu . e Plamf1cac1on Y Desaarc1a, Jef~ de la División de Par nsmo; ~ng. Agr. José Rafael !f.t~~oSa~lfi, Central Universit~u~f NJc10nales; Profesor Edt '. ociedad Conservacionist A d enezuela; B etsy Trent <?r, Jardm Zoológico "El Pinar"· a u ubon Pedro Trebau, Direcdinadora Nacional, Parques de B Elsa Salos de White CoorVir . 1 o I o, Caracas. ' gin slands (USA): Richard Phil oos· Bureau of Fish and Wildlife· Do E;tn, Environmental Specialist ces Foundation St. Thomas., r. ward L. TowJe, Island Resour~ t% d At Michigan State Universit Dr . ,iti;ntd suplplied severa! helpful .oRf~nfllin B aker encouraged this stu rans ated ali cor 1 ormation Mr Lar · Who translated th . r~spondenc~ int-:.> English and . Mr . D _ry B~wdre Spanish both e ong:¡~al_ quest1onnaire and expJan t . av1d. Brower survey ' gave unstmtmg assistance which ~ ory materials int.:> . was md1spensible to the fiems Cihle: Kenton R. Miller, Regional Advisor and Team Leader, FAq, Santiago; Bernardo Zentilli Vankilsdonk, Jefe División de Servicios, Corporation Nacional Forestal, Santiago. 171 Haiti: Nodzu Dambrev··n S . 1 · e t de 1a Protectione,de ervice la Faunde C ponservati~m du Sol des Forets live stock. Later, wild ungulates were imported and released as sentimental reminders of home and for sport and r€creation. Most recently, the release of exotic hoofed animals for paid sport-hunting has become a commercial enterprise. The history of wild animals imported into South and Central America has not been much reviewed. This paper is a preliminary effort to attract attention to the subject and to in<ii.cate both the dangers and benefits that are inherent in the practice of species importation. Because of the need to confine the subject ar-ea to manageable proportions, and because of their popular interest and potential for damaging crops a nd wild areas, this study was restricted to the introduced ungulates (hoofed mammals). Survey Cooperators Petrides.• Jmparted U ngulates in Latín America Terminology Ecwu:lor: Juan Black M., Universid ad Cn.tolica del Ecuador, Quito; Jng. Several . ternati al years . ago, t h e Comm1ttee on s · ed the º~ne~~o~ ~ra!_he Conservation of N~~: ~~~uctions of the Inand animal .n ngers of S'J)eei,es introduce n es, 1968) reviewPreviously Ts~1es are translocated into areas wwnsh, wthherein wild plant 1, t· • o msure clarity f th ere ey had oe Ined. Accordin t t¡.,.o ought, several additi al not ived be successful, · • g O •N:: IYCN report: An introd on . te~'ms were 1 continuing su~~1s envi~onment if it thrives t~~ i~~es ~ said to Mario R. Ordoñez L., J efe de la Sección Control y Movilyacion, Servicio Forestal del Ecuador, Quito. ess u m the biological sense yet h rmfuis ~nother matter. ' a l In terms of hu- Costa Rica: J. Douglas Cuillard, National Parks Department, San Jose; He rbert Nanne E., Wildlife Biologist, Ministerio de Agricultura Y Guanaderia, San Jose. Dorninica: C. C. Maximea, Chief Fo rest Officer, Roseau. rtv •=uJ~~?º1"1ti~':ic;~i¡;!~g~a':i ":f:::},'í;f;,,i~t ,1.,he~i•~~•n~l Ít �172 Publ. Bwl. Inst. Inv. Cient., u. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 No. 7 man welfare. As indicated further in that report, a species introduction may occur by human agency as eith€'I' an accidental or deliberate occurrence. The introduction of hoofed animals into Latin America has been largely purpJseful and it would seem that th~ term species im'J)011ation is appropriate, emphasizing the planned and deliberate nature of the introductions. ..... N ational Reports z Of the 13 countries responding to the questionnaire, by far the largest numbers of foreign ungulate species were reported from Argentina and México. In contrast, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Haití, Panama and San Salvador reporteci none. Domestic stock of several species may once have becn feral in Haití, however, and five kinds of domestic livestock still run wild on the Galapagos Islands, Ecuador. Dominica, the Virgin Islands (USA), and Venezuela each have one wild exotic ungulate each and Brazil has two. Peru has imported two (possibly three) and five speci-es are established in Chile (Table 1). j .o s:: .So ü > § 13 Argentioo. At least fifteen hoofed species have been introduced from t- Q') r-i t ~ -~ r-1 /¡ '• The European pig (Sus scrofa) also has now become feral nearlY throughout the country. The domestic goat (Capa hircus) escaped into the wild prior to 1700 (Massoia). Reindeer (R.angifer tarandus) are reported to have been released in Tierra del Fuego and Georgia del Sud in 1947 (Crespo) ami 1948 (Massois) but were exterminated by local hun· ters (Giustinian). A large number of additional sp...,oeies have been introduced for specialized sport hunting. This possibly may be true of the water buffalo ( Bubalus buba.lis) which has been established in Corrientes province sin· :::> ~ s:: ro U1 1-1 i... ctl < ::s i... s .....s:: ~ j ir¡ Q,> E-➔ ~ '-' -~ ~ 4! ,-.. ~ > s:: ro t) ~ Red deer (Cer'IJUS elaphus) were imported from Germany, Austria and Hungary on several occasions between 1902 and 1971 and have become established on ranches in La Pampa, Neuquen and Chubut Provinces (Giustinian). Axis deer ( A. axis) became established in Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, Neuquen and Río Negro as a result of transplantations from India in 1906 (Giustinian), 1910 (Varela), and 1932 o::>r thereabouts (Cu· tillo). In 1906, failow deer (D. dama) from Spain were relea.sed in Bue· nos Aires, Santa Fe and Río Negro provine.es (Giustinian). Importations on other occasions were made elsewhere in the counrty (Culillo, Varela). The blackbuck ( Antilope rervicapra) also was introduced in 1912 in San· ta Fe, Cordoba and Buenos Aires provine-es (Giustinian) and again in Santa Fe in the 1960's (Varela). It was released still again in Buenos Ai· _res province in 1940 (Cutillo) and also more recently (Varela). According to several cooperators, all of the above species have beoome numerous over large areas. 173 e,:; Europe and Asia, of which at least six are well established in the wild. t; Petrides: lmported Ungulaf:es in Latin America !s:: ..... ! (1) 8- C) s:: o § ..... .., ::s ..o ..... !:l .....U1 Cl 0$ ~ ; 1 ... (1) P'.l '+-< f ~ ¡ 'O ..... ..... ~ X o i... :o X .....C) - ~ C-• ¡l.¡ i ;:) ti-• § X X X X Q) i ..... ..s N cÓ ~ :rs ti! :p ! X X X X ::< X < .-1 o ~ ..... 'g .o i... ..., Q) ro ~ i... i... ~ 't (1) ¡z ~ ~ "@ ~ .....gj ·@ g. ..... i... Q) (1) 'O 'O ~ ~ iz:¡ .....s::Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ +,> :a ~ ~ ~ o Q) ! ~ "' ::s Q) 1 § g :e 'O o ~ C"I ~ $ "' ,,; '!t 'a ~ i... $ ~ ll> "'g .. Q) E '" 1 ~ z .... e, 1 3 �174 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Oient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 ce 1900 (Guistinian) and is certainly the case for many exotic ungulates now held on ranches in the mountainous province of. Neuquen. Since mar.y imports are being held on lands adjacent to national parks, there is sorne conoern that they may spread into those natural reserves. The exotic ani• mals involved include the mule deer (Odocoil,eus hemoniu.s), Pere David cteer (El,aphus davidi'l,nus), mouflon sheep (Ovis musimon), ibex (Capra ibex), European chamois (R. rupicapra), Himalayan tahr (Hemitragus jemalhicus), and European bison (Biscm bcmasuS) (Crespo, Cutillo, Massoia, Neil, Varela). Chile. Red deer and fallow deer are widespread over much of the c:ountry and, as iu Argentina, feral pigs and goats have an extensive distribution. In Osorno province, mouflon are ranched for commercial sport hunting. Fallow deer were imported in 1887. Reindeer were released in Tierra del Fuego in 1971. Domestic goats were first stocked on Isla Juan Fernandez in 15í4 as a food supply for stranded sailors (Vankilsdonk). Peru. According to survey replies (Dourojeanni; Ríos), 30 red &er were imported from Argentina in 1948. At first tbey were kept under fence but, typically, they later escaped. Both disease and predation are rported to be important factors which restricted survival, especially of young, and red deer may even now total only 200-300 animals. Yet they compe1;e vigorously and apparently successfully with native deer there, Fallow deer also were released in 1948 bµt have been persistently poached so that only 20-25 probably remain. Both species now occur in Cajamar· ca, where Dourojeanni (1972) feels that the potential exists for development of cornm.ercial sport hunting based on both the native and exotic fauna. Water buffalo also have been introduced into an Amazonian dis• trict as domestic stock (Dourojeanni) but, presumably, they are confi· ned. Ecw:tdor. No wild exoti_c hcdeg animals have been imported into mainland Ecuador (Black M.: Ordoñez) but the offshore Galapagos Is· lands provide a renowned example of dangers inherent in species introduction. The unique faunal evolutionary development on the isolated is· Jands provided Charles Darwin with evidence leading to bis epic Origin of Species. These unparalleled living laboratories, where one of man's most revolutionary philosophical concepts was lK>rn, nevertheless ha~e been threatened with deotruction by uncontrolled numbers of domestiC goats, sheep, cattle, hogs and burros. The grazing of sheep has been for· bidden there (Black M.) but there may still be no legal restrictions ~n the other species. Brazil. This huge country evidently has been involved in the impor· tation of few exotic wild ungulates. As advertized in North America (I{ll· neburger, 1973), opportunities to hunt water buffalo on Marejo Islan~, in the mouth of the Amazon River, seern to indicate that this species 1s present there in sorne abundance and may have escaped into the wild. Tbe No. 7 Petrides: lm'[>Orted UngulatJes in Latín America 175 eland (Taurotragus (ffyx) f th 1 stocked on ranches in Sa, 0 ne o e ar_gest African antelopes has been nomic potential. At prese~t ~dogmedro-Neto: 1970) !~ t~t its eco, '° un er capt1ve condit1ons. pfti~ bau; ~f:fla~o ~fa~e:;1tlyat~~scanio; Gar~ia¡; Mondolfi; Thomas· TreAsiatic wate~ buffalo on~veral have ~n imported for wild relea~. The imported as domestic stock occas1ons over the last 35-40 years was 1935 and 1936, sorne of th ' e:rb3:bly always fro~ Trinidad. Between 1 Bey but are believed to ha~e ;ikrts. escedaped in the Río Limon vax rmmat by hunters (Mondolfi). t>e!n most of the .ear· neverOaribbean been anyNations native .unonulates . ibbean islands, there have feral since the 16th éenim; bút-áift1o~~mc°i~~• d~~estic pigs have been troduced they were hunted to extinctiorf (M w . lteta1l. ) deer _w~e once inhumat~ po~ulation densities have pr~;~~. t t Haitt\F1chmreasingly ornes 1c ammals (Dambreville) Wh't t .1 d e es a 1s ent of St. Croix and St. Thomas Virgin Islands eer were imported into recently as 1945 (Philob~sian). as early as 1790 and as f!Ta hJs~) r Central América No ungul t f ported into Costa Ri~a (Nanne aEesJ release( in the wild have been im(Argumedo) . · ' anama Tovar), or San Salvador a un~fe Mea:ico. Records ,of animal im rts d then very large number of a_te o~y to 1971, but even since ed ranches in Nuevo Leon Tamauli a:pecies . a~e been released of fenc11ear Puebla. Though originally Affica:11ihwith~n. safari-type open zoos mostly ~~ed from sources in the Uní ' e specimens r:eleased were t(hMe cl~siflc~t ion of Ansell (1968) and ~nftates(19o6f9)Amen~a. Following artinez Tmoco) are: ry , spec1es of record Black rhinocerus (Dioeros bicornis ~ readter kudu (Tragelaphus strepsi~eros) 1an (Taurotragus <rryx) Waterbuck (Ko"bu.s ellipsiprymnus) Sable antelope (Hippotragus niger) 0ryx ( Oryx gazella) Brmdled gnu (C. taurinus) White-tailed gnu (Oon'YWChaetus gnou Hartebeest ( Alcel,aphus "bu.sel,aphus) ) Blesbok ( Damaliscus dorcas) Impala ( Aepyceros me/,am'JYUS) Grant's gazelle (Gazelle granti) Th~mson's gazelle (G. thomwn,i ) Sp!'mg~ok ( Antidorcas marsupialis) Khpsprmger (O. areotragus) �176 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 In addition to the species of African origin, the guanaco and its domesticated counterpart the llama (Llama g7ama) from South America have bee11 stocked in the Puebla location. In wild portions of the state of San Luis P_otosi, there h¡~ve been extensive liberations of pronghorn antelope (Antilocarrro americana). Confirmed to have occurred at least as far south as Durango (Bahart, Greer, 1962), the pronghorn may also have beep native in San Luis _Potosi and hence th,e releases there may have merely been efforts at species restoration. The Barbary sheep (Amnnotragus 7,ervia) from North Afr~ca will soon be newly stocked in that state, however, and the latter spec1es alro _has been established for sorne years in Coahuila (Martinez). (~t the mee~mgs at which this paper was presented, Profesor ~arct:o Villa ~-, U~iversidad Autonoma de Mexico, added that American bison (Bwcm b~on) have been reintroduced into Sonora· and Chihuahua and that American 'flk ,or wapiti (Cervus canadensis) will soon be released in those states). Importations and Public Policy ' 1 As has been experienced in other parts of the world, it seems that ~ species newly-arrived in Latín America either finds environmental con<li· tions to be less suitable than in its original locality, in which case th_e population fails to increase and finally disappears, or it e~co_unters a s1tuation in which an environrnental factor that formerly hmited popula• tion growth is absent or is less effective than in th~ former ~lace.. Instances in which an introduced species merely endur€'S ~n a ne~ s1tuat10n t~nd to be few, if any, and to end in eventual populatlon fadure. Fo~o~ release in a new area it seems to be generally true that a population either dies out promptÍy or increases rapidly. For nearly ali cases surveyed, the cooperating biol~sts reporte_d ~at the original importers were landowners hoping to provide game-v1ewi?g and hunting opportunities for themselves and guests. In neiarly every mstance reported, the original stock of hoofed g ~ was _held under fen~ under normal ranching conditions. There was no mtentlon to alk>w ani· mals to leave the ranch. But probably without exception, escapes did occ~ and wild breeding populations developed. This is the history of exo~c imports everywhere. Henoe, it. seems that eventual escapes froi:n a thrí".'· ing captive population of ungulares held under normal ranchmg condi· tions on any large tract can be regarded as a virtual certainty. If after escape the animals die, this is unfortunate but at Ieast no widespread problem~ are caused. Where the escaped animals do bec~me establish€d however the population obviously possesses strong surv1val and reproductive capabilities. Its furthe~ vig?rous _expansion is merely a matter of time if additional suitable habitat is available. Imported ungulates established in the wild, as might be expected, can be both helpful and harrnful. Among the benefits to be derived are No. 7 Petrides: lm'[)Orted Ungukltes in Latín America 177 increased opportunities for local srx>rt and r€Creation and for the production of meat and hides. There are also possibilities for the development of economically significant hunting operations with local employment of guides, wranglers and outfitters and with both national and local beuefits from various aspects of tourism. In contrast, even if veterinary controls are adequate to prevent the entry of diseases and parasites, there is the hazard that the nurnbers of even large animals will not be as easily controlled as might at first be envisioned. The damaging increases of kinds of deer and other hoofed mammals in New Zealand is the most noforious example of large aríimals increasing in numbers beyond the capabilities of ranchers and hunters to contain them (Wodzicky, 1970). Where ungulate densities become excessive, their preferred food plants tend to become depleted and soils to be eroded. Less-palatable forage plants tend to increase and possibilities for fi:res to spread or to be controlled may be affected. Coml)€'tition with both native ungulates and domestic stock is probable, forest reproduction and growth may be hindered, and agricultural crops may be damaged. In national parks natural conditions will be altered either directly or indirectly. In all cas'es, there will be interactions with native wildlife, both desirable and undesirable. Stream flow and siltation may be aff€Cted. These and other aspects of S()€Cies importation have beer~ reviewed in further detail by Mondolfi (1970) and by Petrides (1968) . Given sufficient time, of course, it is to be expected that continuing biotic interaction would lead to adaptive modifications in both the intro~uced species and its plant and animal neighbors. Eventually, a successful 1mported species is certain to become intiegrated into the local eoosystem as a normal component of the community. But for ungulates, ev€'I1 though some semblance of balanoed interactions may occur sooner, seores of Yea.rs or even centuries may be required under sorne circunstances before full adaptive stability is achieved in the biotic community. Long-term adaptive evolution falls outside the realm of practical wildlife management or nature preservation and canoot be viewed as a practica} solution to problems of escaped exotic ungulates. . When asked about the attitude of the general public toward ungulate unportations, most cooperators indicated that knowledge of the subject and interest in it was largely undeveloped in Latín America because most people erwe uninformed ooncerning it. Whether this applied to most landowners is not certain. The cooperators' own philosophies toward species introduction varied in the usual way. A few persons tended toward what might be termed_ the "practica!" view, that species which had evident qualities of poss1ble benefit to man certainly should be imported. On the opposition side, �178 Pul>l. Biol. Imt. Inv. Ci.ent., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 there was a "purist" attitude that exotic introductions should not be allowed to invade native biotas. In addition, there was a "moderate" position between the extremes, which suggested that care should be taken not to import species which might prove to be harmful. The difficulty with the "moderate'' outlook is its uncertainty. As observecl by the IUCN report (Petrides, 1968), there is é!- danger~us "uncertaínty of prior appraisal of a species proposed for mtr~1;1ction. M~y harmful introductions have been made by persons unqual1f1ed to ant1c1• pate the often complex ecological inúeractions which may ~nsue. Tbe margin of risk can be much reduced through thoughtful plannmg by co~ petent ecologists. But, nevertheless, it must be recogmzed that expenrnents in the habitat of origin of the species to be translocated cam:ot _be absolutely guarant-eed to give reliable answers about the effects of 1ts m· troduction into a new environment". Guidel4tes for the Future For species introductions in general and for ungula~e importation ~ particular, it seems that several general truths are ava1lable to serve as guiding principles: No. 7 Petri&3s: Imported Ungulat;es in Latin America 179 A policy of caution obviously is requirro. The public must be made awó.l'e of the dan~-ers of careless importations and releases. And governments must cons1der the promulgation of legal restrictions against the unappr,?ved translocation of wild organisms (both plants and animals). Argent_m?- l}as a law bearing on this subject (Varela). To avoid economíc harm, 1t 1s 1mportant for all nations, and for ali int~rnational bodies that speci-es importati_on policies be thoroughly reviewed and that steps ~ taken promptly to msure that the practioe is regularect under adequate legislation by competent ecologists. LITERATURE ClTED ANSELL, W. F. H. 1968. Preliminary ide?tification manual for African mammals: Artiodactyla ( excluding the genus Gazella). Smithsonian Inst. 8 207 pp. ' BAKER, ROLLIN H . and J. KEEVER GREER 1962. Mffil?1llals_ of the Mexican state of Durango. Michigan State Univers1ty B10logical Ser. 2 (2), 154 pp. D0UROJEANNI, MARC J. 1972. Posibilidades de cr~ ~ coto de C!3-Za en las zonas media y alta de la cuenca del R10 Ch1cama (CaJamarca) . Univ. Nac. Agraria, Dept. Man. For., multi., 30 pp. 1. A species introduoed intn a new environment tends eitJ?er. to fail or to flourish. It is unlikely to be merely as abundant m 1ts new environment as in its former habitat. 2. For exotic ungulates held under normal livestock fencing, eventual escape to the wild is almost inevitable. 3. Successful introduced species tend to spread into ali suita~ areas often far beyond the locality planned for its occupatiOII and frequently across international borders. ~LINEBURGER (JONAS BROTHERS) ,973. International hunting report. Seattle, Spring, 16 pp. 4. Exotic species are capa~le of _inflic~ing damage in a new area : a greater extent than 1n the1r n:3-t1ve ranges and th~ nature that damage and its full extent 1s seldom fully pred1ctable. M0NDOLFI, EDGARDO 1970. Problemas inherentes a la int roducción de especies exóticas medidas de regulación. Venebuela Aso. Nac. Def. Nat., multi, 8 pp. 5. Though a successful introduced species 1!1ªY eventualiy beCoroe established as an integral component of 1ts new ecosystem, f<t long-lived species (including mo~t un~at~) many year:s be required for a normal dynam1c eqmhbrmm to be ach1ev r;! 6. The study of a species in its native environmen.t prior to undef· taking to translocate it is an essentia! precaut!on. ~ut suc~ an investigation does not insure that the mtroduct1on will be eitbet' successful or beneficial. GENTRY, A. W. 1968. Preliminary identification manual for African mammals: Artiodactyla, Genus Gazella. Smithsonian Inst. 9, 20 pp. N0GUIERO-NETO, PAULO 1970. Animais alienígenas, gado tropical, areas naturais. Sao Paulo, 256 pp. PETRIDES, GEORGE A. 1968. Problems in species introductions. IUCN Bull. 2 (7) : 70-71. IVODZISKY, K. A. 1 950. Introduced mammals of New 7.ealand. Pgst. Sci Ind Res Bull 98 255 pp. . . . . ' �No. 7 Ocmtrera.s: Oamhios en Oomunidmies de Peces 181 CAMBIOS DE COMPOSICION DE ESPECIES EN COMUNIDADES DE PECES EN ZONAS SEMIARIDAS DE MEXICO Sal'IJ<Ulm OO't1/lreras-Baldera.s ,,¡ l • 1 RESUMEN. Nueve localidades mexicanas han presentado cambios de composición de especies de peces en los últimos 70 años o menos; generalmente es~os cambios son de reducción y signifioan ca mbios ambientales degenerativos, que están afectando especies y subespecies endémicas, amenazándolt0s de extinción en un número de casos. las localidades son : laguna Saúz o Encinillas, Lag una Bustillos y Río Santa ls,::ibel en Chihuahua, Santiago Papasquioro, Presa Peña del Aguila y Río Tunal en Durango, San Juan y Montemorelos en Nuevo león, y San Juan del Río en Querétaro. Para todas ellos se presentan tablas can la lista de especies y camb ios cronológicos regis·t11ados. Las causas más frecuentes, en o~en, son: perturbacione s agrícolas, introducción de peces exóticos, conta• minación i'ndustrial, y citadina, presas, canales, y bv:Jja de caudal. Se considera necesario efectuar una vigi\::incia de las comunidades de peces por su riqueza potencial y valor científico y cultural, para beneficio del humano . 1 Nine mexia::in localites have registered fish species community changes in the last 70 years or less, usually these changes ore r'ed\Jctions and signify degenerative environmental changes, af,fecting endemic species and subspecies, causing them to be endangered in a number of instances. The locolites are: lag una Saúz or Encinillas, ltoguna Bustillos and Rio Santa Isabel in Chihuahua; Santiago Papasquioro, Presa Peña del Aguila and Rio liunal in Durango; San Juan ond Montemorelos in Nuevo León; and San Juan del Rio in Quer~ aro . Tab!es with the list of species and, chronological changes registered are presented for ali localities. lJie more frequet causes are, irr descending order: agricultura( disturbances, exotic fish introduction, industrial pollution, sewage, dams, channels, ancf. reduc.ed flow. lt is necessary to monitor the fish communitbs due to their impor?ance os potencial resources and for their scientific and cultural values, for the human benefit. SUMMA~Y. Contribución No. 15. Labwatorio de Vertebrados, U. A. N. L., Monterrey, México. Fecha de Recepción : Enero 24, 1974. Facultsd de Ciencias Biológicas; NOTA: Ponenc ia n o incluid-a en el programa, presentada como comen tari'Os a l fi na l de le. sesión. �182 Publ. Biol. lnst. lnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 Recientemente se han mencionado los cambios de oomposición de especies en las comunidades biológicas como indicadores de cambios 8.J'l'l· bientales, que se pueden interpretar como debidos a factores degeneratit1tr (CWQ. 1973), frecuentemente causados por el hombre. Tales camhir1 raunístioos han sido documentados en peces en localidades de los Estao.:-~ Unidos oor Miller (1961) y más recientemente por Mincklev v Deacnn (1968). En México no hay antecedentes de estudios similares, por lo que se_consideró importante dar a corrooer les datos obtenidos en 9 localidades mexicanas marginales a las zonas áridas, en exploraciones realizadas desde 1960 a la fecha, comparando los resultados con el conocimiento y desarrollo histórico de la fauna a partir de Meek (1902, 1904} que representan las primeras referencias ictiológicas. Un análisis de 7 localidades más está en preparación (Oontreras, MS) . LAGUNA DE ENCINILLAS O SAUZ, CIDHUAHUA La comunidad de peces de esta localidad fue reconocida inicialmenre en 1901 por Meek (1902), quien obtuvo un total de 4 especies; en 1964 se encontraron 3 y en 1968 se aumrotó un nuevo registro del género Gila, que con el. Cyprinodon local resultó raro. Dichas formas y k)s representantes locales de Nl>tropis lu;trensis y G a ~ son novedadm taxonómicas endémicas, todavía en estudio. Aunque la cuenca ha sido objeto de intenso uso agropecuario y existen varias presas pequeñas, estas altera· ciones ecológicas no han podido ser vinculadas diJ1eCtamente con los cambios de especies, si bien no se elimina la posibilidad de que sean la causa más probable. Di~hos cambios de especies se señalan en la Tabla l. Se considera a esta fauna como amenazada. LAGUNA BUSTILLO, CD. CUAUHTEMOC, CIDHUAHUA En 1901 Meek (1902) colectó 1 especie en esta laguna endorreica, que en· la actualidad se considera indescrita. En 1964. no se encontró nin· gún pez en la laguna, mientras que 3 especies exóticas se colectaron en un manantial lateral de la misma (Tabla 2). La comunidad nativa, com· puesta de 5 especies, sobrevive en los afluentes. La localidad fue comentada anteriormente (Contreras, 1969) como un área donde una fábrica de celulosa vierte sus aguas residuales, probable causa de la desaparición de la fauna lacustre, que tampoco pudo sobrevivir en el manantial por la introducción de los exóticos. RIO SANTA ISABEL, GENERAL TRIAS (SAN ANDRES), CHIHUAHUA En 1901, se hizo la primera colecta de este río. proporcionando 11 especies (Meek 1902), en 1964 tres de ellas habían desaparecido, pero se aumentaron 2 ,egpecies en el registro (Tabla 3) . Las especies desap~ cidas son de fondo, mientras que las invasoras recientes son de media agua. La agricultura que se practica en los alrededores no parece haber No. 7 Contreras: Cambios en Cmnunidades de Peces 183 aumentado la cantidad de sediment-os 1 , de las especies de fondo no se ha podi/n el r~o, por lo ql_le la desaparición O Las dos especies de Ethx3ostmna está re ª~dIOnard con nmguna alteración. n consi era as como amenazadas. RIO NAZAS, SANTIAGO PAPASQUIARO, DURANGO De ocho especies conocidas e 190 (M de las especies había desaparecido n Y cbs3 , ~k, l904), Y para 1964 una €Specie de Ethe.ostoma puede ' .d ' mas ueron raras, (Tabla 4). La indescrita El área está ba. d00ns1 erarse _amenazada, Y es una forma loc~izar factores específicdsº d~1~~~n!fa~~<?la,dpel:ro no se han podido empieza. ~b ion e a fauna, que apenas RIO MEZQUITAL, PRESA PEÑA DEL AGUILA, DURANGO En 1963, Barbour y Contrer • •t charal nativo, Ch. jordani rob~l::isi aron esta P~esa, ~o1ectando el berse encontrado presentes' lisí como d':te dos_ especieS ~as deben halas colectas del autor a ' aron es~i~ mtrod~c1das. En 1964, en 1968, el mismo hizo~ registr':ª c:~~náf~~uc~da . al, ~degist~o; sp. Y a1 matal>Jte Moxostoma sp com 1 tand0 1 . c1pnm o Gila nativas conocidas al mismo tiern" Pe , 1a hsta de tres especies cado blanco todavía no identificar◊ ~~! ~ carpa d?~ada y un pes~ta localidad pertenece a la misma áDe le auna exot1ca (Tabl?- 5). c!on, ql!e originalmente poseía por lo me~os q~~ se trat~ a con~muativada mtensamente y l na ivos. El arf>a esta culnotorias. con a presa son las alter aciones ecolólticas más t~eg~ l \oª RIO DEL TUNAL, DURANGO El río Tunal y sus afluentes dr 1 Du:rango, donde en 1903 se conocí~n;::an~s alrededores de 1~ ciudad de fueron coJectadas inicialmente por Meek ~6pec3ies, las que · n , Barbour y Contreras colectaron 7 km al sur d.o. 1 . d truyendo un puente Y la di~ru ión "erª c1u ad!. cuando se estaba consfabí~ bajado a siete esped~ (~bla 6 pero 1~ _fauna né!,tiva ocal1dad Y se encontró una presa term: d , se. volv10 a la misma canales en la región; el agua había pasad~~/c1~ arnba .Y una serie de :n~iivrsª~t10ª vegetación habí~ sp., todavía indescrito. El re:_p1t::z,~ !f1mp}~ ~el ciprínido Gila ~ Carpa común, de Israel y Japonesa la moj~a ~~for lelas exótiUf'opterU8. De los peces nativos tr ' . r v " ~ .Y robalo al igual que una subespecie lo qu , especies permanecen sm describir mas endémicas, que sob~;iven t~~1: ! n~t~~sd~~el~m~~~!i~~~- 09~¡)osEfº t ~1i6~ ::~i: ~f: i:8 d:s:p:~I&?/~!º~º ~ .. SAN JUAN, RIO SAN JUAN, NUEVO LEON En 1903, se conocieron catorce especies ol R' al pueblo de San Juan, Nuevo León cu~k Juan, junto u= , 19en04•)..,, Y io proSban ablernente una �184 Puhl. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cwnt., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 más estaba presente. En 1961 se agregó el registro de la décimoquinta especie, a~que prob!3-blemente 7 más estaban presentes. En 1964, habían desaparecido 6 espec1,es, pero se agregaron 3 nuevos registros y 4 especies fueron raras, mismas que junto con otras 4 desaparecieron para 1968 (Tabla 7) . Las especies desaparecidas requieren áreas caudalosas (Lepisosteus osseus, Carpiodes carpio, Ictiobus b-ubalus, Notrapis buchanani) y exceptuando el primero son formas que prefieren nadar cerca del fondo (incluyendo Ictalurus punctatus, Hyl;opsis,Gichl,asoma, Campostoma) o aguas claras ( Di/Onda, Campostoma). El bajo volumen de aguas por el uso excesivo la turbidez por la erosión agrícola, el calentamient,o por el menor caudal, y la contaminación causada por las descargas de la ciudad de Monterrey y otros poblados ribereños son las causas probables de la desaparición de la fauna nativa de peces. RIO MORELOS, MONTEMORELOS, NUEVO LEON En esta localidad, la primera oolecta fue por Meek en 1903 (Meek, 1904), quien obtuvo un total de 10 especk:s, más de cuatro probablemente presentes. En 1960 se colectaron 6 ampliando con un nuevo registro. En 1964 se agregaron 6 nuevos registros, elevando la fauna conocida a un total de catorce. Sin embargo, para 1969 las colectas sólo d1eri0n 9 especies, de las cuales 2 fueron raras (Tabla 8). Durante la última colecta se observaron gran cantidad de naranjas podridas tanto en el agua como en las riberas, oon agua blanquecina y malolienre, incluso aguas arriba de la basura de naranjas, por lo quei es probable que hubiera otros tiraderos que no pudieron ser localizados. El área es fuertemente agrícola y por tanto está muy alterada. Las especies desapara!idas localmente son de aguas limpias y frías, con hábitos de fondo generalmente. RIO SAN JUAN, SAN JUAN DEL RIO, QUERETARO Esta área fue oolectada en 1901 por M,8€1k (1902), obteniendo 3 especieS. En 1964 se volvieron a colectar las mismas especies, pero dos Se consideraron raras, más dos especies introducidas. Para 1973 no quedaba nin· guna de las especies nativas ni introducidas (Tabla 9). En 1964 se notó la fuerte contaminación del río, que se agudizó en 1973. Las especies en· démicas Notropis mexicanus y Goodl3a gracilis y la población local de Algansea affinis se consideran amenazadas de extinción y se tiene la esperanza de que sobrevivan en partes más altas de la cuenca. Los lugareños informaron de la .existencia de varias fábricas que viemn sus aguas residuales en el río, así como la presencia de aguas negras. CONCLUSIONES Es necesario observar los cambios faunísticos o:>mo los descritos, así como ampliar las áreas de observación y establecer programas de vigilan· cia, con el fin de detectar éste tipo de cambios, localizar las causas y eli· minar hasta donde sea posible, anres de que se pierda una riqueza poten· ~º· Contreras: Cambios en Comunidades de Peces 7 185 c1al que participa de valores , . . . dependen de su uso adecuado ~~~omI<:os, este~ioos y científicos, que dependen de que se manten Y _onal, pa~ bienestar ~l hombre que la supervivencia de los orgJifsg:~/!~~~~ calidad de aguas 9ue_permita os Y por ende de s1 mismo. LITERATURA CITADA OONTRERAS-BALDERAS SALVADOR 1969. P~pectivas de la Ictiofauna en 1 . Mex1co. Mem. Primer Simp Intern~Zonas Andas del Norte de z. A., ICASALS Publ., 3:293-304." umento de la Prod. Alimentos MS. Specjation Aspects and Man Made Co . . . ges in Chihuahuan Desert Fishes. mmuruty Compos1tion Chan- c. w. Q. 1973. Water Quality Criúeria 1972 N . tional Academy of Engineering~tiinal_ Academy of Sciences/ NaCommittee on Water Quality Crite . nviEPronmental Studies Board, na A Publ., R3-73-033:l-594. MEEK~ SETH E. 1902. A Contribution to the Ichthyology Publ., 65:63-128. of Me.xico. Field. Col. Mus. 1904. The Fresh Water Fishes of Miexico Tehuantepec. Id., 93:i-lxiii, 1_254 _ , North of the Isthmus of MILLER, ROBERT RUSH .:o~. 1961. M?11 and the Changing Fish Faun M1ch. Acad. Sci., 46 (1960) :365 f h . t e American Southwest. Pap. MINCKLEY, W. L., and J. E. DEACON 1968. So!Jthwestiern Fishes and the Eni Sc1ence, 159 (3822) :1424-1432. gma of "Endangered Species". �T A B L .A ~ en 1 PECES DE LA LAGUNA SAUZ O ENCINILLAS, EDO. DE CHIHUAHUA, MEX., ENTRE 1903 y 1968 Especies 1903 1964 1968 "tj s.,... t,j ~·,... l,;. Clase: NATIVAS: 1 Pantosteus pkbeius Q A4 X Notropis Zutrensis ssp. X X X A2 Gambusia cf. senilis X X X A4 Cyprinodc,n cf. eximius X X R A4 Gila sp. indet. = = R A4 I ..: ~ ?:-- :e: ~ ..: ~-.... ~ ~ e C 1 a v e : X Registro reresentado por ejemplares, R Rar,o al momento de la colecta, = Presencia asumida1; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Especie, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población Local, 4 Taxonomía <: no definida. ¡2.. 1-' T A B L A ~ 2 ~ PECES DE LA LAG. BUSTILLOS, CUAUHTEMOC, EDO. CHIHUAHUA, MEXICO ENTRE 1901 y 1964 Especies 1901 1964 Clase: ~ g- ..j ~ NATIVA: Gi'fa sp. i.... X A4 Lepomis megalotis Micwpterus 8filmoide8 ~ Q INTRODUCIDAS: Lepomis macrochirus ~ 1 ... ~ X X X ~ t ~ ~ <:':> ~ Clave: X Registro representado por ejemplares, R Raro al momento de la oo1ecta, = Priesencia asumida; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Especire, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población Local, 4 Taxonomía no definida. f,-1 00 ~ �T A B L A ..... 3 ~ PECES DEL RIO SANTA ISABEL EN GENERAL TRIAS (SAN ANDRES), CHIHUAHUA, MEXICO ENTRE 1904 Y 1964 ¡ bj 1901 Especies 1964 o· Clase: ~ l ~ 1 NATIVAS: Q Parnvosteus plebeius CyprirliOdcm eximius X X Eth,eostoma pottsi Notropis lutrensis ssp. X X X N otro¡Jis chihwahua X X X X X X Codnma ornata Pimephal.es '[YromeZas Campostoma arnatum X X Gfla pulchra Gamousia senilis s :i:,. ~ t-< ..; X X X X X Etheostoma australe Di.onda episcopa ssp. N otropis indet. C 1a v e : Al ~.... ..; ~ ~§' Al X X X X Registro representado por ejemplares, R Raro al momento de la colecta, = Presencia asu- < ¡;?.. mida; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Especie, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población Local, 4 Taxonomía n o definida. T A B L A 4 ...... ~ ._;¡ PECES DEL RIO NAZAS EN SANTIAGO PAPASQUIARO, DURANGO, MEXICO ENTRE 1903 Y 1964 Especies 1903 1964 Clase: ~ f i .. NATIVAS: Notro-pis lutrensis garmani Astyana.x mexicanus Codioma ornata N otropi.s nazas Campostom,a ornatum Gila ccm.s~·sa P.antosteus p"lebeius Etheostoma sp. C 1a v e : 5· X CI) ~ X R X X X X X X ~ X X ~ X X X R r [ A ~ ¡ A4 X Registro representado por ejemplares, R Raro al momento de la colecta, ~ Presencia asumida; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Especie, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población Local, 4 Taxonomía r.o d efinida. ~~ f--l 00 <.O �~ CD T A B L A o 5 - ¡ PECES DEL RIO MEZQUITAL EN PE~A DEL AGUILA, ESTADO DE DURAN GO, MEXICO, ENTRE 1963 Y 1968 -- ----- bj 1964 1963 Especies 1968 Clase: o· ;--i ¡ ;!' NATIVAS: = = Gil a sp. M 00>0stoma austrinum milleri Chimsvoma jordani X X R R X 4 l Q ~~ <-1-- -: ~ :r,.. INTRODUCIDAS ~ ? X X X X ? X X Cyprinus carpio M icropterus salmoides Lepomis rnac'IX>Chfrus Carassius auratus Chirostoma sp. indet. = X t" -: ~ (1), ~- 8 º C 1 a v e : X Registro repr,esentado por ejemplares, R Raro al momento de la colecta, = Priesencia asumida; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Especie, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población Local, 4 Taxonomía no definida. T A B L A <! f2.. ~ 6 zp -.¡ PECES DEL RIO TUNAL Y/ 0 DURANGO, ESTADO DE DURANGO, MEXICO, ENTRE 1903 Y 1968 Q Especies M cxostoma austrinum millieri Cyprincdon sp. Chirostorna jordani Dionda e,pisccpa ssp. Cod<:YYna ornata Pantost:eu.s plebeius I ctali¿rus pricei Characodon garmani Etl'/JeostO'nW, sp. Gila sp. 1903 X X X X X X X X X X 1963 1968 ~ Clase: j ~ ~ .... o e,- Al X X X X X X X R A2 A3 A 3 A3 Al Al Al INTRODUCIDAS Carassius auratus Cyprinus carpio Lepomis macrochirus M icropterus salmoides .,.¡. "' ~ Q ~~ ' ~ ~ X X X X C 1 a v e : X Registro representado por ejemplares, R Raro al momento de la colecta, Presencia asumida; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Esp::cie, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población Local, 4 Taxonomía no definidr-... ~ ~ "' ~ CD ~ �T A B L A 1-' e.o t-.:) 7 PECES DEL RIO SAN JUAN EN SAN JUAN, ESTADO DE NUEVO LEON, MEXICO, ENTRE 1903 Y 1968 1903 Esp,ecies 1968 1964 1961 Clase: l ~ tXj e· ~ NATIVAS Lepisosteus osseus Carpiodes oarpio elongatus Di()'Yl,.(W, episoopa ssp. NotiYYpis amabilis Anguill,a, rostrata Campostoma anomalitm pullwm Notror>is bmytoni Hybopsis aestivalis sterletus Cichl,a,soma cyanoguttatwm Gambusia af finis specíosa Dorosoma cepedianum N ot1·opis buchanani Ictiobus bubalus Mo:rostoma congestum albidum 1 X X X A 3 X = = X X = ~ X R :e: t-< R R = X X X X ..; X X X X X = X = _ _ _ _ ________ X X ~- s X X Q ..;""'" R = X Poecilia mexicana X X = X Astyant.:tx mexicanus Micropterus salmoides N otropis jemezanus Lepomis macrochi1-us Lepomis megaZotis l,,... X X Ict<ilurus pwnctatus ~ X X X X X (1), ~- H º X _ _x_______ < X Registro representado por ejemplares, R Raro al momento de la colecta, = Presencia asumida; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Especie, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población L ocal, 4 Taxonomía C 1a v e : ~ 1-' no d efinida. T A B L A z 8 9 -.J PECES DEL RIO MORELOS EN MONTEMORELOS, ESTADO DE NUEVO LEON, MEXICO, ENTRE 1903 Y 1973 ---- -- -- ~ -- Especies 1903 1960 1964 1969 ~ ~ ~ ~ NATIVAS: Carp1,odes carpio e'/;ongatus Diond,a, episcopa Rhinichtlvys cataractae Cichlasoma cyanoguttatus cyanoguttatus 1ctiobus bubalus N otropis braytoni N otropis lutrensis lutrensis Astyaoox fasciatus rnexicanus Campostor,:a anomalum pullum Mox08toma ongestum albidum l ctalurus punct:atus Micropterus salmoides Poecilia mexicana N otropis p?'Oserpinus Clave: - - --- = = = X X X X = X X X X X X = X X X X X X X X - = - X X - -= X - = -- t.... ? X X X X? X ~ X X - ~ ~ Q R R X X X X X X X X Registro representado por ejemplares, R Raro al momento de la colecta = Presencia asumida; A Amenazada, E Extinta; 1 Especie, 2 Subespecie, 3 Población LÓcal, 4 Taxonomía no definida. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i 1-' (.J:J w �194 Publ. Biol. Jnst. Jnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 No. 7 T<YW"/e: Caribbean Natimull Parks 195 "NATIONAL PARKS IN THE CARIBBEAN AREA'' ~ 1 :: 1 rn u Dr. Ed'UXlrd L. T<YWle INTRODUCTION Exactly twenty years ago, the eminent Dutch scientist, Professor J. H. Westermann, published his superbly researched and very valuable book, Nature Preseroaticm in the Caribbecm: A Review of Literature on the Destructian and Preservatian of Flora and Fauna in the Caribbean Area. At that time, he noted, in his final chapter, that although "most territories in the Caribbean have fauna and game protection ordinanc.es ... " only a " . .. relatively few nature reserves have been created". Furthermore, he remarked, "It would srem to be a wise measure to adopt for the Carlbbean as a whole the basic pattern for a scheme of national parks and nature reserves ... " as laid down in the "Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Protectión in the Western Hemisphere" then recently drafted and being circulated among the American Republics for signature.1 Since, in 1973, there are only five true national park systems in the Caribbean (Guadeloupe, U. S. Virgin Islands, Netherlands Antilles, Puerto Rico, and Jamaica), out of a possible two dooen or so countries or territ,ories, it would appear that Westerman's recommendation went more or less unheeded. But a closer inspection of the Caribbean conservationpreservation scene sugests that the reverse is true and that most of the countries and island governments in the region have wpoded with slightly different approaches to the problem and the pattern of park development, West Indian style, reflects the diversity of the island systems and their biotypes, political status, siz.e, linguistic roots, and disparate levels of development. In the light of Westerman's published inventories of conservation needs and bis assessments of West Indian species, floral and faunal habitats, natural features, forests, and even historie sites, especially as supplemented by Carlozzi's 1968 study Oonserootian and Oaribbean Regional Progress,2 updating Westermann in the Eastern Caribbean, there is Dirección del Autor: Presidenl, Island Resources Foundation and President, Caribbe:m Conservation Associ.ation St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Iskulds. F echa de Recepción: Enero 24, 1974. 1.-p. 98 Publications No. 9, Found.-<i,tion fer ScientHic Res~u-ch in Surinam and ttie Netberland Antilles. The Bague, 1953. C1> > (Ó 1 Ü 2.-Carl, Atice Carl07lli, Conservation and Caribbean Regional Progress. Yellow Springs; Ohio, 1958. �196 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 • wing what could or should 11. . no need, at this _juncture, fot~ :Impits;!~~~ in any particular country be incorporated mto any na wn . • t tus eport on the local and regioWhat fo}1:ows, in this paper, is a s ª nd~ ered species and _hab_itats nal conservabon efforts to protect .:e :r,ietyg~f altiemativ,e inst1tut1onal of threatened natural areas by a w1 ~ t of reasons Caribbean protecmechanisms and approaches. For a van~6e "national, park f,ormat", at tion patterns have not, as Y~~ado~~n aggregate response, nevertheless least on any large s~alE:, but, en appear to be functionmg well. d lo ment has clearly been acc~ West Indian park and preserve e~it~tes an intermediate step m Ierated in the past half _decade, ~~ms One might say that the West the direction of true nati~nalJ'ftiei/ own highly individualized "c'!l1ypso Indian islands have deve op As ou will see from the ev1dence version" of the national park co?cit. hec? list at the end of this paper, 1 which follows and from ~h_e º~as/ characterized by diverse local leit appears to .be .ª ~ans1t1on .P ent~tion in wildlife and landscape progislative and 1nstI?,1t1onal _expe~~m educational potential in the m~tter of tection, and offermg c~ns1dera e nt rocess with a conservat1on and infusing the often frenlZt de;~~P1;i:ra1fstic institutional. and. methodoresource management e ic. s providing an mtenm measulogical approach is, with_ reason~b~s~1~ources until more comprehenre of protection for a w1~e s~ rdevelopment efforts can be funded, stasive national park planmlnocallgan and regionally as appropriate. ffed and mounted, both Y . ific cases and the next section is But it is time to get do';f ~~ island status report, current park designed to refl~t? ~Y ~ broa is ~bean development act1V1t1es m the Car . f~ r:! }º STATUS REPORT . . . nt has not yet begun to tbm!< m l. Anguilla Wh1le the girt~l::1ftte past year it has expr:essed mte: terms of parks or preserves, ·+ a ificent reefs and marme resour rest in protective mrasures fr l ~~ ~nd a study of the impact of sand ces. A marine park h~edbee; ~ British government, is underway. dredging on reefs, funu Y . ustomary procedure of addmg .ª 2. Antigua. In contr:!-8t to th:x~ting terrestrial park system, Ant1"marine park or preserve ~ l~ion establishing a marine areas preserd gua has recently enacted legis ou h it has not yet developed a_ny lan vation and enhancementdactth~t~ct gregulations are currently bemg prebased park system.3 Un er I , Act bypasses the pr('VÍO~sly but thl' Marine Areas Protection places the protect.ed aress u.nder 3.- For local ~J~~ Antigu3 National Trust and ofs Agriculture and Fisheries. =~!!¡: No. 7 T<nvle: Caribbean Naticnwl, Parks 197 pared for the protection of Boone Reef, northwest of Antigua, and Pallaster Reef, south of Barbuda. The impetus for this effort is derived largely from the tourism sector. The establishment of a new National Trust, along with a museum and historie sit.e restoration project, clearly have improved the climate for the subsequent development of a natural resources cx:mservation master planning venture and, ultimately, a national park system. 3. Bonaire arui the Netherl,ands Antilles. Based in Curacao and drawing upon a long and impressive sequenoe of natural resources studies on the flora and fauna of the Netherlands Antilles (espedally Curacao, Aruba, and Bonaire), the Netherlands Antilles National Parks Foundation operates a modest, but expanding, park system, one notable benefit of which has been the protection of the Pekelmeer feeding and breetling si tes of the Bonaire flamingo (Phoenicapterus ruber ). Attempts are being made by Dr. Ingvar Krisknsen of the National Parks Foundation to acquire the Slagbasi Plantation, bordering the Washington National Park on Bonaire.4 Little progress has been made, however, in St. Eustatius and Saba, in the Leeward Island group. 4. Baroodos. The combined efforts of a Parks and Beaches Commission, a National Trust, and an active government forestry management group have placed Barbados in an excell,ent position vis a vis its inventory of protected and managed sites to move in the direction of a linking up of the separate sites into a true national park system. For the time being, however, the division of effort and responsibility is working extremely well although numerous additional sites should be brought under protection by acquisition. 5. Cayman Jsl,ands. The establishment of a new local Conservation Society, the government sponsorship of two conservation needs and environmental studies (by Dr. J. H. Wickstead and D. R. Stoddard) ,5 calling for a conservation management plan for the Cayman Islands, will undoubtedly be followed by a park and preserve development program. 6. Dominica. The 306 square mile, rugged, volcanic island of Dominica, with severa! forest-covered peal{s rising over 4,000 feet above sea-leve!, receives an annual rainfall of between 200 to 400 inches. Large areas of practically undisturbed tropical rain forests still exist. Of the 70,000 acres proposed for Forest Reserves, less than 2,000 acres have been I.egally declared as National Forest Reserves. 4.- Personal corresponden.ce from Ingvar Krist-Rnsen, 25 jan.; 1973. 5.-Dr. J. H. Wickstead. "Rep0rt on a Visit to thl' Cayman Islands"; Overseas D evelop-ment Administration, For('ign and Commonwee.lth Office: U.K.; 1971; also D. R. St.oddart, D epartment o( Goography; Cambridge University; "Conservation Problems on Grand Cayman lsland, West lndies"; 10 june 1912. �198 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 There is a great diversity of bird life, including two endemic species of parrots which are endangered, the imperial parrot ( Amazona imperialis) and the red-necked parrot ( Amazona arausiaca). Animal life 1s relatively poor other than the famous wood frog (Leptodactylus fallax) or "mountain chicken", the opossum and the agouti. Approximately 20,000 acres in the southern in~rior of the island have been proposed for a National Park, and the government is currently preparing appropriate legislation. The recommended park site includes sorne of the outstanding physical features such as mountains, lakes and falls, as well as large tracts of undisturbed rain forest and elfin woodland. In addition, the government has called for the development of a master conservation and environmental management plan for the entire state. The Caribbean Conservation Association is currently lending technical planning assistance and is arranging for additional support from the Canadian National Park system, the Canadian Nature Federation, and the Canadian International Development Agency. 7. Gumlelau:pe and Martinique. In the case of the two major French islands in the Caribbean, considerable progress has been made in recent years toward developing a true national park system. Guadeloupe, t he largest French island in the Lesser Antilles, is an immensely diverse island and saw a major natural park system launched in 1971, covering five different areas and totalling n.early 90,000 hectares.6 In Martinique, a Regional Natural Park, including superior natural sites, historical buildings, severa! offshore islands (avían reserves), and an underwater park, will be established this year.7 8. Puerto Rico. With a land area of 3,435 square miles, Puerto Rico has 60,000 acres (93.75 square miles) under 14 separate forest unites owned by the Commonwealth Government. Legally these Forest Reser· ves have also been declared as Wildlife Refuges and are managed for multiple use by the Puerto Rican Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of ForestrY, Fish and Widllife. The Caribbean National Forest with an area of 28,000 acres (45 square miles) established by presidential proclamation is administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Institute of Tropical Forestry. As the only tropical forest in the National Forest S_ystem of the United States, it is the largest single area of natural, intens1vely managed forest in Puerto Riro. 6.-Personal Correspondence, G. Werter; President; Association des Amis du Pare Narturel de Guadeloupe, l\tarch 29; 1973; aJso 1\1. Piercy; ''Le Pare Naturel de Guad&loupe", Nature Loisins et Foret; Paris; Franco (M.arch; 1972); pp. 225-232. 7.-Personal corresp::ndence, J. Guntzberger; o/o Pare Naturel Regional de la Mart-inique, Marigot; april 27; 1973. No. 7 Toufle: Caribbean National Parles 199 The area receives as much 240 . . . as 240_tree species. Four distinc as mches of ~ru~all, with as many CO_!l1Pf1Se the Caribbean NationJ of for€Sts md1genous to the area as1de to preserve these in v1·rcn ordE:St~ and 21,000 acres have been set o•n con 1 10n. rpes The rain forest occurs in the lower sl . ball elow 2,000 feet elevation. The montan tf the Luqmllo mountains v ers and slopes above 2 000 feet el c ~t forest is found in the to R1can parrot which hM bee eva ion. It_ is the refuge of the PuerForest occurs at high elevatio~ th1Ja:iened w1th extinction. The Palm he~thpeaks and ridges are trees oFthe aº!i;tfreamt clourses. On the higores , ess than 12 feet in h eig t. f ~hf The Forests are managed d . usand acres are utilized on a s~~~~ ª po~icy of r:nwtiple use. Fifteen tho~~ty-one thousand acres set asid e<¡_ yield basis for timber production. v!rg1p co_ndi_tion, are to be' used onl; pre~~. the fo~r forest types in c1es of ~l<;llife enjoy complete protectioor. sc~~nttc stud1es. Endemic speOpfX)rtunities for recreation Tw f n ~n e orests. The forests offers Ele Yunque Recreation area· in tie º~::.t,r~ay~ trave~ the forest. The O ommonwealth Public Parks a d • e orest 1s operated by the shelters and foot trails are rovi~ ~reation. A~nistration. , Picnic the fores~s, provide domesti¿ wate~~~1ihtdrmalJor 1:1vers, which rise in Y oe ectric power for eastern P uerto Rico. f° The U. S. National Park s · . . Juan, but, otherwise, maintainse~i~~ ~~Wi!~ns two historie forts in San 9. St. Kitts (St. Christo'pher and N . . rest preserve and 2,500 acres of s eciall evis. W1th 10,000 acres of fovernment has rec~ntly moved to de~elo Y protect€d ~oyst':ms, the gor,equested the ass1stance of the Caribb~~ Caster co~rvation plan and that effort. One aspect of the stud involv on~rvahon ~sociation in ~eserves, and a management plan f¿r w· .es recomm~ndations for parks, in turn, will probably lead to the dev;fdhfe and hab1tat protection. This, system for the state. The two colonies ment of a park and preserve are of special interest and will receive prot~-rr~. monkeys (C. sabaeus) ~f • A_ key feature of any St. Kitts ark 5 5te histor1c fortress of Brimstone Hill p Y m would be the ancient venlli!'e _of government, a local :~~ghoincg rystoration as a joint ' e anbbean Conservation Assoc1ation. sÓc~~; 10. St. Lucia. The sa!ond largest f th ( . . St. Lucia, with an area of 233 square ~ilese hBrit1sh) Associated_States, 40,000 acres (62.5 square miles) as National Fas r~Rrved approx1mately state-owned tropical rain forest w·th ores eserves, which are lation enacted in 1945 gives total ¿rot::P:n feas of virgin forest. o areas above the oneLegisthou- �200 Puhl. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 ·. " t diversity of tropical flora _and sand foot contour line: There 18 "' gread alms grow in great luxunanfauna. Numerous orch1ds, tree ferns dan o~ti as well as the endangered ce. Wildlife includes the opossu1!1 an ag ' st. Lucia parrot, Amazona versioolor. . . St Lucia which are, at p~nt, mt Unique geological ~ea~es thn Sulphur Springs and the Pit~ns.9T6ht protected or developed m u e e re-ac uired by the state m 1 · former approximately 20 acres, were fo~t covered. Rising abruptly The Pitons, approximately 500 acresd are isual appeal. Gros Piton could from the sea they present a tremen ous v be developed' as a Wildlife Sanctuary. . . tl b the state and Rodney Bay De~elopPigeon Island,. <?wned Jom Y . Y w linked to the mainlanc_i wlth a ment, Ltd., compnsu~g 40 acres, is sf° al station and the principal base causeway. Formerly It seryed as during the naval battlE:s ~tof Admiral Rodney's fleet _m the. ar1 inated in the Battle of Samts m ween the French and En~ t~hi~t;:ment of a national park to prt 1782. The state has pr~p . f e tures of the area and develop the bea~ tect the natural and h1stor1c ~ Efforts are being made to broaden ~ e and adjoining reefs for recre~b~. other sites and a master conservation national park concept to me u planning program. f St Vincent one of the (British) 11. St. Vincent. The land ar~ o A. roximátely 40,000 acres (41 Associated States, . is 150 squ~e m1~. troiXca1 forest, from the Central per cent) predommantly sta own tected above the 1000 foot contour Forest R~rve, which is t~tally pro hich led to the establishment of line. One of the prime cons1dera~ons rhe climate, soil and water resnurthe reserve was t!1e value of f?rttl~~~n The potential of the reserve as an agnc ·. ed 1.ch. weretilmked dtotourism ces awfhor is st1ll untapp • are recrea on an C ·fbean ldest in the western hemisphere, was The Botanical Gardens,. the o imatd 30 acres and serves as_ on_e established in 1765. It occupies ap~~~ fin ~ollection of exotic and 1~d1of the main tourist attractions, w1 rname~tal and medicinal plants, t1mgenous flowering trees _and shrualsbs, ~rves as a sanctuary for several speber and fruit trees. Th1s area o cies of birds. t t St Vincent plans to deAs part of its tourism developme~~ s ra egy, marine park An active velop the Toba~o Cays dii!1 t~ets ~~!~t;~e~;J ~erging as a ~onstructive 1s expan ng . Na ti.o~al hTrust and natural area protection. force m a b·tat I • one of the last ~t;j_•viving, relati12. Venezuela ( Aves 1s1,ang,~ia mydilS) nesting areas in the E~vely undisturbed green turtle ( d islet became the subject of a series tern Caribbean, ~is smft~f t:~ing expeditions sponsored by the Ca· of ecological studles an :1 No. 7 Touile: Caribbean Nati<Yncil Parks 201 ribbean Conservation Association and the Island Resouroes Foundation, and carried out in cooperation with the Venezuelan Goverrunent and the Instituto de Tecnología y Ciencias Marinas (INTECAMAR) of the lJniversidad Simon Bolívar, Caracas. As a consequenee of these rese-arch efforts, the Goverrunent of Venezuela, on 23 August, 1972, declared the island a formally protected faunal preserve. This truly international undertaking can serve as a model for other similar efforts to protect specific habitats of regional importance within the Caribbean. 13. Turks and Caicos Islands. The Turks and Caicos Islands south of the Ba~amas with a Jand area of 166 square miles, are made up of seven large 1slands and numerous smallers cays and islets. The islands are rich in marine rewurces, and it has been proposed to establish parks re-serves and sanctuaries to protect and develop these for the resident' population and for tourism. As a consequence of a parks and conservation survey, prepared at the invitation of governrnent by Dr. Carleton Ray and Alexander Sprunt, a series of marine preserves and parks was recommended, but no action has yet: been taken. 14. Trinidad ana Tobago. Trinidad and Tobago, at the southern end of the Caribbean archipelago, with a total land area of 1.267 million acres (1,977 square miles), have over a period of six decades legally set aside sorne 336,500 acres (514.02 square miles) as Forest Reserves (35), Wildlife Sanctuaries (13), and Nature Reserves (11) primarily for the protection of these resources. Goverrunent's forest policy underscores the need for permanent forest reserves to provide forest cover, preserve water supplies, prevent crosion and flooding, produce timber and other forest produce. Although still in the planning stage, there has been a concerted effort directed toward the conservation of the forest and wildlife resources through a system of National Parks. Five National Parks are propooed as a first step. These include Chaguaramas, Caroni Swamp, Navet Dam, Hollis Reservoir, and Buccoo Reef. 15. Virgin Islands (British). The establishment of a National Park Trust in 1961, which now administers five sites, set the stage for a current marine park development effort sponsored jointly by government and the local tourist association. Principal concern is for the magnificent reef complex of Anegada on the northeast of the Virgin Islands platform. PATTERNS OF PARK AND PRESERVE DEVELOPMENT The rapid expansion of tourism as a leading sector in the economic development of the Caribbean region, especially where ill-planned, as in the case of St. Thomas, Puerto Rico, St. Maarten, and, to a degree, Jamaica, has result.ed in considerable pressures upon natural a.reas, habitats �202 Publ. Biol. lnst. Inv. Cient.) U. A. N. L.) México Vol. 1 and eoosystems. The impact of this pressure has been an object of con~ern and study for several years. For a variety of reasons, the tourism mdustry has gradually begun to sce that it has a major stake in Pnvironmental quality, diversity and institutionalized natural areas such as national parl9,, wildlife preserves, sanctuaries, and marine parks and preserves. This change of attitude, which is by no means universal, has led, in the experience of several Caribbean islands, to a marked increase in the interest of governments in the pro1:ection of natural a.reas and wildlife by the various means at hand. Unfortunately, the national park concept is as yet not generally viewed as the proper island-wide institutional vehicle by which optimum management control of the resource can be exercísed. In the Caribbean, the national park concept perhaps is best seen as a catalytic device for thc proper consolidation of previously developed, decentralii.ed natural area managernent efforts and organizations. For obvious reasons, circumstances differ immensely in each island and any atte mpt to force the national park concept upon an already well functioning system could be pe1 judicial to the cause of conservation. The present enthusiasm for marine parks and preserves warrants comment for it has, in many places, emerged in the absence of any existing local park tradition or administrative organization. Under these conditions, sorne marine parks are being developed under the aegis of agriculture and fisheries departments, others by beach commissions, and by resource ministers. While the experimental approach has sorne value, and at least provides some measure of immediate protection for a previously unmanaged segment of the marine ecosystem, it renders the ultimate development of regional standards and of local national park systems more difficult. The enonnous increase in Caribbean island government interest in and commitment to the protection of natural ar.eas and historie sites has seriously taxed the small national park, preserve and museu□, historie site advisory service offered to member states by the Caribbean Conservation Association and its research arm, the Island Resources Foundation. The lack of a local, tropical, island-oriented park technician and management training program is a particularly difficult stumbling block as park training offered elsewhere is often inappropriate, if not irrelevant to the special probl,ems and 11€eds of small islands with limited land a.reas. What is needed and recommended is a regionally based internationally sponsored training center, located at one of the Caribbean's functioning, multi-purpose national park facilities. Lastly, the disparate, diverse, unintegrated, multi-institutional pa- ttern of Caribbean park, preserve, and natural area management has not, as yet, drawn significantly upon well established national park systems elsewhere for that expertise required to optimize the resource manage- No. 7 Towl.e: Caribbean NatimllJl, Parles 203 ment practices and to ins 11 th t . . . ~itat and wildlife protecti~ne ar a sc1en}1f1bc ~nd_ qualitative aspects of hative facets of park developmente prdoper Y u1lt mto the more administraan management. 1. . The national park concept i th C . . . time has not quite yet come b~t e az:ibbean, is st1ll an idea whose we shall, one day even see the ~ta~l~owmg nearer every day. Perhaps of Caribbean parks. is ment of an international system �~ i 1 .\\ X •·o:) ,1,.lUUH(d .l,>.IHO:-.J.t '¡s¡lfo¡o.1..1 pu0<I llH~ 'lS!~0\018 ,lJIIPl1.'\ l(l!S (llll0lillll,IJ)llj S,ll(!lllV 'll,hl(lllJl{>tllll JU)H C\l sam1uv spua¡,1a4¡,>:s¡ •;i,1¡uuog ¡oct,,p a:111.m IS 1,10d Ull1J(0,I ¡Jd pas •DUO.Id JO ).>l!dlU! (l!IUJWU0,IIAU3 ( !l (upnq,mg 'J,1JH ,l.l\S8(Bd 11!11li\lU V '_¡JJH JUDCi:! l ¡uawtlo¡,HJO >t,tud au¡.,ew '€ l ~ (\;) . ti:, ~ IUJWd0¡.).\,lQ \sll.l.L (P.UOJl8;( 1ti • '-=l"-Hl?l,),lds )t,tl?d ,lu¡.tnt"! l<'I Js!(UJJJ<ls wna,mw .tm1s14 ¡u.1111u~ ( L1 uonu.101sa.1 pue 1s1llo1oau4,1.m •'l!s .11101,11 ¡ 1¡:1 ,IJUUP.ld )(,ll!d 1 ll ;,).JJ:nO~ -).1 lplqs1J l ~a.,1L:,1.1v pun wnasn1~ !El , uo11n11nsuo.> ¡u.1,nh'l!) 11 1 )s¡lf0J0!8 ,lll!,IHW ·1.,0~) ')t,)(" ,m<lc( p~~~ sllll!Pl!l18 os¡H ,1}.tOl"'!H :s,~!,t.~q,q~•l pun ..),tllltll,11,t%1V !º .,.q,¡u !JX 'os¡u :J.m 1(11.) t!m? q nn,ll l ·uo¡ ll!Jnp:!1 JO \,JISllllt,\I lll1l1!1UV JO ' )A0!) J'l U01\H,10)Sc)'li \u,:¡wdo¡aAaa >t,IHd s¡4ll1JJI AJ(,1!4S 1Tl (upnqJug pue) unllnuv ·i $º f a1pn¡ ',w¡sqc¡ JO I0J)U0J puu UO!l,ll)0,ld l\;I s 1uuwdo¡a.,,1p wsuno1 .101 sau¡¡.ip¡nll ¡uJ1l!op.1:~ ci1 umnlluv JO ),\0~ ".li>JllSHiLIJ. ·t:1.m;) p.ieuoa7 ;) saJ.mo~aM lll,tnlllN JO ÁaA.tnS ( [) .L;)3f0Hd 30 3dl.J. .L.)V.L:S:O;) O3HI:lb3M 3;)~V.LSISSV 30 3d,\J, ~ Q pUt! ÁIJ\J0S U0l\l!A,laSU0;) l!u¡4s11q111,~1 ( ti - :'" (ZI '8lllnl!uv t J.HJ.NnO::> ?-~ r ~-g· ~ (U0JlJll ÍIUJl!ll,\\ll a:>URl~!S><ll l'81JUllU!J pue J!J!)Ua¡JS '1n,11u4Jal .10¡ s¡s.:,nbaJ \llWJ0J a.,ll~ll pul! sparo.1d IUuJ.111;)1 lt/V'/:IOO'l:Id J,N3l'ld073,\3a [IJJ,/S :mJOJ,SIH ¡nw J,SfllJJ, ')lVd 1VNO/J,VN 'NO/J,VAH[IJSNOD 7VNOI03'8 NOIJ.VGNC\O"1 S3::)c1.'1OS31i G!'JV'lSI • NOJJ.VI::>OSSV NOlJ.V AH3SN0;) NV388IHV::> < ¡2-1-' z ? -.J COUNTRY 4. TYPE OF PROJECT CONTACT (1) Marine park dcvelopment Barbados ( 1 l Govt. of Bat'bados, Mlnlstry of Home Aflu!rs, Parks, and Be a e h es Commission (2) Cave Biology TYPE OF ASSISTANCE REQUIRED (1) Technlcal asslstancc wlth development of underwater park 121 Special cave survey and plannlng team i ( 2) l\linister of Tourism 5. Cayman Islands Conservatlon asp,•cts of turtle marlculture projcct t 1) ~Iarlculture, Ltd. (1) Wildlife Blologlst (2) Ecologlcal guidelines for coral 121 Gov1. of Cayman !stands 12) Coral Red Ecologist Publlcotions Progrnm, <1nviron• mental educ,1tion, relating to national park development Mario Boza presiden! :S:atiJnal l'arks Fo,md:i• 11011, Costa Rica (]) Financia! assistance Govt. of nominica, Ministrv of Education ar.rl Hcalth. nnd Minislry of Agriculturc ancl Lan<ls 11) Contlnuln¡z: servlces of museum speclallst (1) hun·csting 6. Costa Rica • (1) 7. Dominica • (l) :S:aturnl History Museum • (2) Natlonal Park 13) Master En\'ironmental Plnn and Ecological Guidelines for OPvelopment 8. Dominlcan (1) 1 National Park T. Scanlon (2) Park ptannlng tcam (3J Ecologists ar>d rcsource planning team (1 J Technlcal and financia! ass!stance ~ -,¡ .... C' f l [ ¡ Republlc ~ 1 otJ1 �206 Vol. 1 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México ~ .... .... !==> ~ ~ C) Cl .,:::s ., Q. ~ !'> ':!! ~ ~ :i ¡; .. .; 8e: 5' o ¡,¡ ~ 5 w ;: o:: ~ ,, e: 'g e: O' >< o:: ¡,¡ v z < ------..., .... -;,o .,.... -::. 'O"' ~:¿e :::s'"' s =-~ ;:: ;:: ~~z ::J,, !ii . 'llg Q) o.,:::s :::s 32 .. - ¡; ., * º" ~~ - "' -...- .... -e: :::S:::, (fl e: ;g- ~ '< g~ s. E.~ ::r i~ ,..,, "'"'., .. !e g"'.: 3,. ~ a:e: ¡;:" '<: ? ,.,:::s "'o n!; ¡¡; ª- ¡; §.~ <:,, :i: 'O ~- r., o:::s §: g e" ... ,.,:::s'- .,o (fl 7. 01 -:,- ;o ~ -uo.:::: ::-g p;;nv.· :,o2. :: § g¡ e: 3 ~,.. 2. o ;; -¡; ~ g c,-o-lcir3;,o'.ll ~:: ~~-~i S. -O"O ~ 'J .:.> )> 7.0> E: .., C)::s - ~r;:¡ "' ngo; ~~~f:; a "2:. ~O.g2'.l ·. .-: :::a.:::~~..,. . g- ,-i ;l~::. ,.,- :r~~ !!l;; ::cg·-. ~-. :,-_ u ª-~()~i ==~ ~ : ;·8' _,,, e: :::s "º ?. ~ }~;.·~~~~ - g =-~~ --c.:s 5-;~ e. -;4 ::s g .,, o.. ~ "'::s Q. ~ 3 !! o::s -- -... - - Qm =-~ g ~g3 ;:¡ á ~re~ ., "' ., -l ~~ :, < ;;, g ,.3 a~ ~'O " ? E. E o:::s ,.,. ,. o :::s "::s '""' .,3., r, 'O .. :i Q e:,.. o ~ ., :i e: 1 "..,. ":::s ';' Q. o ,.,- ~.., "' (") "' 'O "':¡ "' "' ~ 1 t.. o w c.. ...¡ >< 'O :,.. tri :;:o."'~>Z (OtO ►-~~ lC):r.a~[ [g-~:g-g~ ti < ~ ...¡ > Q [ o/. ::, !Ji .e (; "' -¡; ::, ..J o -> ,¡¡ o o t: 1 tiw g ;l'~.'5:0 .., oo:: •• 1 > rn §: e:" ::. E'-" :;¡ o :::s ~ ~ --- .,. -~ C) e .; o o.,, ..f .. c."' E <-.C: :... ·::;:;, n i::, ~~ ,-tt) ¡:;· 'E ~e::"' ~ l i"' e: ¡.. z u Q :::s "' E. [ ., ::r" e: 3 3 rn o .. ~ "~ . z "e: .; ~ .,> ~ e:, E l:'1 --.... ,.e: .. o... ~"'io ' 7. :e "O .,e N 1 :l;,3~ go· c. (; 'O o~s-r--~~ '.'1C:s~ ri~ Pª-~§ ~g ~ "',,c. ;o ., -... - ¡.. o.,, "'~ n) () ..., ül rn < "'3 "'"' 207 o ., '< Towle: Caribbean Naticmal Parks .. e: e: No. 7 c. t.. ...¡ -< 'O l:'1 o w c.. :,.. E'- te: .; e: .2 -;;; c. '-' -É r:a "' E f7. -" ~6: e:- o.,. _;!; o.e. ::: rn ~ > z () l:'1 ;o l:'1 ~ :ii l:'1 o >< E'- z ou::> .,. 'O o: "' -¡; ::, "., u e e: .,E "' 'O ., o 'O e -o.= "'C"-... -><c.. ,._ ..l :> ii, ül 1/) ¡-.¡-. f-,U ~ ..,. .,; "'... ~ ... = 5 rl "O " ' E~ ... o u¡~ :;¡,: �208 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N . L., México .... !)O -< !Jl- ,.< ,,.,... _,,, ..i ~ [ 1 g, "',..e: .... t3 ;::: -> ... ..,,.i o .. :s: ~gi l§ e: ,.:, " ...s. "'a: "= ;;·~ -ºº o ,,.,, ~:, ,. 3 ... !!?. "'" '[~ ....... ª .. ... ... <1) ~ ., :e:e !'Ji ~:, -,.. .. u, ,,!..~ - ~ § ;::: 1 C) C) ~ ;s. ~ o ;:;"" e. e. a... .."O...,.. o 9:1 9:1 -o z.., ➔- ~i >;.. ::O:, "og ..l!:... o.... ,,, .,_ 2. 9:1 :::!"' :::!"' :::... .... ... .,3'.... .,,..., -o., l?,, :s:e ~::: 3 :, !:¡-O -·cr ,,".. ...,.. .,::, '2. .. ::, :i cr°' '< ;;¡ ~~~ li:::: ;-C'D C'D ~g e 3 ,, ::::o i ,.~s. ... .,,o _,, _., ~~ ., 3 a3 ::, " 2.:::s :..,... o.:, ..... _,. :i a.e. º'" U> ~~ ....,. .. "'~1 :4 3 o._ .. "!!?. ¡; 3 lG ~ :,- <~ :;· u, go 3 "=;s "''P :, ,,"'... .. :i "' ::E ~~ ¡¡;<'> ~t'1 o"l > ~-~ (/l !iig: 2- ~ .,::, "' .,,.." '8 ;¡ .. :i .. ~:::s' ,.:1 e. ~ > ~ < ¡;; ~ :, oo z➔ C) § -< ➔ Asimismo, es necesario manifestar mi sincero agradecimiento por la amable invitación formulada por el Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología de México y la Asociación Americana para el Avanee de las Ciencias, de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica, y extenderlos a todos los coiegas y amigos de diferentes países de América del Sur, por los valiosos datos y referencias que me hicieran llegar para la preparación de mi exposición . ('l<-, C) 1 ,:; INTRODUCCION. No por repetido deja de tener actualidad, aquello, que la historia de Ja conservación de los recursos naturales de América, es la historia misma de América, de la forma en que se ha hecho uso de sus tierras, sus bosques, sus cursos de aguas, sus animales salvajes, sus minerales, etc. c ... 3 o:s: o., Q .......e lG e ,:: 3 :l 3::, o .... ¡¡; ::i: a o. "O ;o <~ ~➔ ~ :, o"l .. 2. ;(/l (') ¡¡; ¡;; l'l -c.:s goo o s... '< ¡. "O :1:0 o. Por: !te.lo N. Constantino ➔ >< ~"1- ~¡j ~:, :,"' ~ .., ~= g '00>¡( t') ,. 209 Deseo expresar, en primer lugar, la satisfacción de poder participar en una reunión de tanta importancia, promovida para un mejor y mayor conocimientos de los diferentes aspectos y problemas que se relacionan con los parques nacionales de América del Sur. . . § Ccmstantino: Parques en América del Sur :, ~ ¡;;:, e No. 7 LOS PARQUES NACIONALES DE AMERICA DEL SUR .... !" Vol. 1 ::, ñ ~ > z g ;o M &) e ;;; l'l o Los primeros colonizadores que llegaron al Nuevo Mundo, encontraron sus tierras vírgenes, riquezas intactas, que la naturaleza a través de miles y miles de años había ido creando, de tantas magnitudes que sus habitantes indígenas de ninguna manera podrían disminuir. Con la presencia del hombre civilizado y sus descendientes comienza la destrucción, lenta al principio para alcanzar tanta significación, que ha determinado la necesidad de que los estudios::>s y científicos de todos los países del mundo, se reúnan periódicament2 a los efectcs de considerar y discutir la c.volución que en materia de conservación se viene realizando en los diferentes continentes, de manera tal de no solo conocer las acciones positivas, a fin de aplaudirlas e imitarlas, sino también aquellas negativas, para evidenciarlas y tratar de señalarlas al consenso público, para que formando conciencia y educación resulte posible ofrecer a la humanidad un próspera bienestar social, económico y cultural. Los países de Sud América, al igual que los restantes de América, ofrecieron a los primeros colonizadoreS y a todas las generaciones que le precedieron, regiones maravillosas. por la exuberancia de sus recursos naturales renovables y, por supuesto. también por sus valiosos recursos naturales no renovablEs, que se manifestaban en riquezas que por las inmensas extensiones que las mismas abarcaban hacían pensar en la imposibilidad de que llegasen algún día a agotarse o extinguirse. �m . U. A . N . L. México Publ Biol. Jnst. Jnv. Cient., . No. 7 Vol l w~ci~~ae uso en todos los tiempos Y en espec O tar serias medidas la po~la~fZn: ~\a llegado al pr~n~r~reii: ~rfo~ ªr~~rsos naturales del conservacionistas. para, ~a:~~ia de aquellos. hombre, si no a este por a Yt ANTECEDENTES: lt "Los Parques .. arse sobre e ema . Al aceptar la re~ponsab1hd~d de icupen la seguridad de que pod1a ~~ Nacionales de Amén~a del Sur ~ón J~ehaber estado ligaoo a ello\~n~11!s fE:rirdme S?sbrede e112~ñ~~c~li~ii:esidente d~l ~omFitoéred~:iªL~11~:a~~ricana ves e ma , . de la Com1s1on c t · Lay Vida Silvestre depend1eniice Presidente Y Presid~ente ddel d~~~d~a de desde 1964 como hasta el ano PP o. ...., F AO) <. Y. de Parques Nacionales que.. (IUCN) Y tmoamer1cano . 1 la Conservac10n de la Naturaleza • la Unión Interna~i-::ma Pªf~rma independiente. actualmente funciona en los .. Nacional Yellowston~, en 1872 po~oviCon la creac10n del Pa~q_ue 1·nicia o mejor dicho nace un. . de . d Norteamenca, se • d 1 preservac1on E~tados Umt>~ epredipuesto y en~usiasta e!1f Pf~cio~esª de la Naturaleza. miento mun I , t· cularizan distintas mam es erosistemas que par l . d'ferentes a tales inqui-e1 Los p~e: !e ~bé:j~~c?: d~u;u~~r~i~~~c~!luJ!1fis e;i~~~~~ó;rinf tudbelas ':/. pey en consecuencia reducido fuso m ~tableciendo parques nac1·:::ipo c1on . s tarde otros, ueron l fl ra fauna y gca algunos de ello~ 1 y 1!1~s or el deseo de preserva_r_ a o éstar j¡r luidos nales, n? so1o ~~uJ?rere~tes regiones, sin_o ~mb~~lSí~r; áre;s naturri'.es superlativa e . s del munoo que, consc1en es, l futuras generac10nes dentro de los pa1se aterial para legarlas a as prístinas, de. !ºd~ u~a~raleza 'intocada por el hombre. como expres1on e 1 Parques Nacio01l2s en ~ ~~fi~~i~: Larg~ risulta~!!shJ:ti~a~:lr1~:r~~l~~do::n~J:r : : cada uno_ e os pa i os y colegas de cada uno e si ·bien es posible obtan gentilmente ~-~ ~e esta exposición y en V€~?adde nuevos parques napara la preparac10 esos tanto en la creac1on ellos aún persisservar alentadores pr3grinistración Y desarrol~o de to~~ones Ysobre todo cional_e~ com~ en laci~~s deficiencias que exigen re~!~s seleccionadas !ª ten d1f1c~Jtades y didas que aseguren a. todadosesa! definición Y filosofia la adopc1on e me .d continente aJusta a a ).ntcgridad de conte~1 ·º Y 'd s n d1stmgu1 a • por la que f uero . . xiste .en cada uno de material bibliograflco que e tos de la conserP~se al abut:d~nte el Sur, relacionados co~ !º~ asp~ no decir imp~silos pa1ses de Amenc~sdnaturales renovables, d1flc1l, ché> la feliz iniciativa vación de losodrecu~~dicar a cuál de ellos clorres~o~os aún con que fines. ble, resulta P. er eserva de áreas natura es Y de crear la primera r . Constantino: Parques en América del Sur 211 No sucede lo mismo en lo que se refiere a la creación del primer parque nacional, que con orgullo y perdóneseme la inmodestia, correspondió a mi país, Argentina, cuando en 1903 el Dr. Francisco P. Moreno con acendrado patriotismo donó a la Nación tres leguas cuadradas, ubicadas en la cordillera patagónica, para ser destinadas a la creación de un parque nacional, haciendo resaltar, al ofrecerlo, la concepción filosófica que diera motivo al origen de la idea de tales reservas, al decir: "Emito el deseo de que la fisonomía actual del perímetro que abarca no sea alterado y que no se hagan más obras que aquellas que faciliten las comodidades para el visitante culto ... " A partir de entonces, no sok> Argentina continúa creando nuevos parques nacionales, también los restantes países de América del Sur comienzan a preocuparse e interesarse en tales propósitos y así observamos como hoy día todos ellos han creado l,os suyos integrándose al consenso internacional en lo que hace a la selección de ecosistemas preservados para los altos fines que se persiguen con tales áreas naturales. Los países americanos tuvieron oportunidad de expresar su preocupación en materia conservacionista cuando se reunieron en 1940 en la recordada Convención de Wáshington para la Protección de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las Bellezas Escénicas Naturales, de la que la mayoría de los países de América del Sur son signatarios. De ahí en mas, numerosas .otras reuniones, conferencias, congresos y jornadas se han venido llevando a cabo en distintos lugares y países de Sudamérica. En la primera Conferencia Internacional sobre Parques Nacionales, celebrada en 1962 en la ciudad de Seattle (USA) en la que participaron numerosos Delegados de países Sudamericanos, se aprobó la recomendación No. 26 oon la siguiente rroacción: "La Primera Conferencia Mundial de Parques Nacionales recomienda a los países americanos que no lo hayan hecho, la inmediata ratificación y ejecución de la Convención para la Protección de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las Bellezas Escénicas de los Países de América y la formación de un Comité Latinoamericano de la IUCN el cual debe trabajar en estrecha cooperación oon organizaciones internacionales ya existentes". El Comité Latinoamericano de Parques Nacionales se constituyó en la ciudad de Quito el 5 de mayo de 1964, dependiendo hasta octubre de 1972 de la IUCN y continuando, desde entonces, como entidad privada e independiente. La acción desplegada por el CLAPN desde su creación a la fecha, resultaría sin lugar a dudas un tema especial de exposición y no es precisamente ese el propósito que anima al orador, pero si, valga la circuns- �Vol. 1 Publ. Biol. Inst. Inv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México 212 tancia para señalar la influencia que ha tenido dicho Comité en el despertar del quehacer coru:ervacionista de casi todos los países de América del Sur, a quienes ha ayudado y alentado no solo en materia de parques nacionales sino también en otros aspectos que hacen a la defensa de los recursos naturales renovables. Recordemos la Conferencia Especializada Interamericana para tratar Problemas Relacionados con Recursos Naturales Renovables, celebrada en 1965 en Mar del Plata, Argentina; la Conferencia Latinoamericana sobre Conservación de Recursos Naturales Renovables, organizada por la IUCN y llevada a cabo en 1968 en San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina; las Jornadas Latinoamericanas sobre Parques Nacionales, realizadas en Venezuela (1967), Chile (1969), Ecuador (1970) y Colombia (1971), etc., etc. En 1962, durante la VIII Reunión de la Comisión Forestal Latinoamericana dependiente de la F AO, llevada a cabo en Chile, se aprobó por unanimidad la creación de un Comité de Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre la que ha celebraco hasta el presente tres reuniones, en las cuales se aprobaron numerosas recomendaciones, constituyendo uno de los principales documentos el referente a una "Declaración de Principios". Todos los antecedentes, informaciones y datos reunidos en esos dos comités, han permitido desarrollar las observaciones que ocuparán los siguientes conceptos de mi exposición. ANALISIS Y OBSERVACIONES: Si activa ha sido la acción desplegada por los distintos países de América del Sur en la creación de parques nacionales, en particular después ~ el confusionismo y errores comenaos en la selección y administración de 1940 a consecuencia de la Convención de Wáshin~ron, también grande de esas reservas, en muchos casos de significativa demostración del querer clasificar como tales a áreas naturales carentes de los mínimos atributos y condiciones intrínsecas que exige cualquiera de las definiciones aprobadas al respecto. Pese al tiempo transcurrido son válidos los puntos de vista que expusiera en la segunda reunión del Comité de Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre, celebrada en Puerto España (Trinidad-Tobago) en diciembre de 1967. Resulta evidente que algunos países no poseen y si lo tienen no lo practican, claro concepto de lo que se define y entiende por Parque Nacional. Se constata, por ejemplo la existencia, en algunos c'le ellos, de áreas destinadas a esos fines que abarcan superficies de 3, 100, 500 hectáreas lo que indica que no hay claridad de concepto en cuanto a lo que debe ser y es un parque nacional en el sentido estricto de su único propósito, el de preservar uno o más rovsist.emas. No. 7 U Const;antirw: Parques en Amér" ,:,~ ica w:;l Sur 213 cional~o, es de el losde conc~tos bienseestablecid . evitar que v ·t os en el sistema de Parques Na naturales (~ora, con manifestaciones d; cando una mi~~~ºo· difc_hta norm_a _existie~d¿ J:t~oasdpectllo ciertos ~o• n 1 ogeográfica. e e os abar- fa~~~~/:se:;~s ~~~~~~ni~n 'má~ Otro tópico realment.e . sean creados por le unP?rtante es el de que los . no se cumple yes, solo as1 se les asegura su deb. larques nacionales tiendo los crea~~una grdan mayoría de los países en p_rdotecc_i?n. Esto por ecretos o simples resoluciones ns1 eracion, exis- le; En muchos de los . · ción de los Parques N pruses los servicios encargad d 1 aªsf de Institutos de dxpend~n de Servicios 0 e a repartición que administra ro;nas o de Obras Públicas y en recursos naturales renovables ~~:s ~~f ◊;, r:St!i!~~nii3tr_a­ p~~ , Se determina también . · ao con centros blad ' que ~ientras algunos se e . . La proximidad ~ pobfaci~~~ alestán a miles. de kilómet~~ed:rl~ mliryutangroso pues s "nfl . parque nacional 1 ismos. sión ;ecreaci~n~ uencia se hace sentir, especia1m::n1 ta sum~ente peliprimitivas de loo ~o cual paulatinamente va incidie~Oen unla mtensa preomponentes del área natural en as oondiciones preservada Los . por el cuilu~1~nc~entran muy alejados, tampoco res cia, atención Y usi ear:a,,_ al carecer de infraestructurfº~~etn al propósito lugar a d d ' quizas esos denominados , . as de vigilansificados ~~ s~~n~tes magníficos de n~fu~~na~I~~ales, que sin a integrar el sistema ~ atural~s, Vírgenes, etc., seg(m c~ron ser cla'-<ll~? que sea factible d 0 port;fidad d~ poder ser utilizad ' para pasar cac1on turística, como 1:~fa-°n ahrac1endo, s~s areas colindant.es coC: uncomol~~. Argentina P amf1' Venezuela a etc A las críticas expuestas od ' · portante, ya que haee 1 P . e!llos agregar una qu Es evidente el poco Y e~ admirustración nacional deec~alsqlll'!1amente imga a cada . gunos casos nulo a f . mera reserva. responsabl~q~ r;::~10~al Y en consecuencia~oci;~~c1ero que se otor- !J /J:;~f~1~ mas exigencias de co~~~a~~~~~~\~~teypara _cf~~~~eco~ P1am icac1on Pero no solo se ·de · · nados, sino qu evi ncia_ los escasos recursos . sonal t. . e es palpable asimismo la falta para los fmes menc1·0ecmco administ t · , en muchos de 11 posible desarrollar los ~t¿v¿JJ gu~daparques, de modo u e os, de ~rel asesoramiento y todo Jo que ra~n:nJ~• la vigilancia cir~es~~<ife~~a coITecta admi"ni·strac1on. .. ' A . ~eguemos a todo lo e Les, as1 denominados se man'ifestt0 , que muchos de los parques . ' es an conteniendo propiedades privadas, n~c1ona- �214 Piwl. Bwl. Jnst. Jnv. Cient., V. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 . , f tales villas o poblados, cotos de pastoreo, explotac!~mes agncof1:JS Yf, oresypur~a que debe caracterizarlos. caza, etc., todo remdo con 1a i1oso ia · . ara asegurar uniformidad en Para evitar confusiones de conceptos Y P · ales el Secretario Genela preservacióp de los. verdader?8t par~ J:~iconsejo Económico Y Soral de las Naciones Urud~, por m e.rr_nie O la Conservación de la Nacial encomendó a la Umon Internacwnal P:::ra una lista de los Parques tur~eza y sus Recursos (Ul~N), q~ I?:epse publicó en dos partes (1961Nacionales del mundlo. La lprundeeI~ici~~i~ de las Convenciones de Londres 62) usándose para e caso as (1933) Y la de Wáshington (1940). d t ·nó que la lista debía excluir El Secretario- General de las N. i~~b:Oe~ protección d.e una sol~ e!y todas aquellas reservalas que sete~i'ant solo el propósito de proteger obJetos · animal O veget o que . . al ~~óricos o bosques usados para fmes comerci es. . . 1 ecOmendaciones aprobadas en la PnCon tales directivas Y. con as r ues Nacionales celebrada en Seamera Conferencia Internacrnnal d~ rar~gunda Edición' de la Lista de las ttle (EE.UU.) en 1962, se prep~o !, .Reservas Equivalentes) en 1971, 1 Naciones Umd~ (Parqduef~ ~~~ ºi~ Parqyues Nacionales aprobada en Nueusando en la misma la e m1c1on va Dehli en 1969. rficies O áreas incluídas en la Del estudio ere cada una de las ~~ras de ellas responden claramente mencionada lista, se constata 9-ue m tras en cambio necesitan ser recona la definición de Parqu~ Nacion~i~as aspectos que disminuyen o dessideradas a fin de ~cl~!r de last 1 · y también existen otras que ~?'r sus califican su de~rnunac1on c<;>m~, es ser incluídas en tal nominac1on. características no pueden ni P an turales podrian ser clasificadas Estas últimas, por sus exprnent~efigios de vida silvestre, rese!'78:5 1 como Parq~es ~rban~, rtrfi~~ ~numentos históricos, reservas mdípara invest1gaciones cien ' genas, etc. ludida definición de parques naCabe recordar qu~, al ser pues!a 1a a del ados presentes en Nueva cionales a consideracion de los senores la m1sma debería ser más geneDelhi, aiguoos de ellos. exl?resaron que aís a ue de lo contrario de ser ralizada y dejad~ al critteri~ dgunec~d!sfuría ~n %ondiciones de poseer una tan estricta, posiblemen e nm . , reserva a J·ustada a esa concepcion. . . . . definición clara Y precisa, que Otros en cambi?, msistieron en un-r:entando qüe de 1::> contrario, de diera una' posición b~en ortodoxa~r~~~ la existencia de infinida.des de no existir una meta ideal, se p.-eg tales tergiversando no solo el e;r1gen de parques nacionales qufeilno ;~1~ino el propósito que tienen esas areas nala idea, pureza de su oso ia, No. 7 Ccmstamtino: Po:rques en América del Sur 215 turales reservadas por sus valores científicos, educativos, recreativos y patrióticos. PROPOSICIONES Y SUGERENCIAS: . A ~ al~ura de exposición, res~ta claro que no puede admitirse la existencia de areas naturales, denominadas parques nacionales que no lo son Y no lo podrán ser por carecer de los atributos que determinan tal concepto. La defi,nición de Parque Nacional aprobada en la X Asamblea General de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza y sus Recursos, en Nueva Delhi (India) en 1969, ofrece una excelente claridad de concepto e idea para que la administración de las áreas que existen y se declaren en un futuro, ajusten su manejo de forma tal que cuandi::> dos personas se refieran a esas áreas preservadas, lo hagan con precisión sin equívocos, es decir que hablen de una misma cosa. ' Para que ello resulte posible es indispensable que cada país de Sudamérica analice sus actuales parques nacionales y si alguno de ellos se contradice con la definición antes mencionada, lo ajuste tratando de excluir todo aquello que no responde a la filosofía (explotaciones pobladores, pastoreo, caza, propiedades privadas, etc.), y trate de desar~ollar una infraestructura turística en la parte exterior de los mismos preocupándose asimismo y decididamente, a que las :restantes áreas naturales renovables que administran otros organismos (nacionales provinciales estatales, municipales) se encuentren manejadas racion~ente con' bases conservacionistas. ' La gran espectacularidad de muchos de los actuales Parques Nacionales, el alto valor que cada uno de ellos involucra, hacen olvidar a otras ~eas naturales renovables de gran significación e importancia. Los gobiernos establecen el apoyo }7 desar~~llo de un determinado parque nacional de acuerdo a la afluencia de visitantes; cuanto mayor es el número mayor es la preocupación por la infraestructura que facilite las comodidades de los concurrentes. Olvidan que el propósito de cada una de esas reservas es preservar aspectos particulares de la Naturaleza para que sirvan de observatorios para la investigación, educación, cultura inspiración, deleite y disfrute de todas las generaciones. ' .Es fácil entender que ese propósito no será posible lograr, si la presenc!a de g~andes contmge~tes de pers~>nas, mayor_ que la capacidad receptiva del area, va produciendo paulatmamente danos y deterioros a los componentes naturales que caracteriza y particulariza a cada una de ellas. A fin de evitar mayores confusiones es necesario que el organismo o servicio que tiene a su cargo la administración de los Parques Nacionales limite su responsabilidad, ,ocupándose solamente de esas reservas y no in~ �216 Publ. Biol. lnst. lnv. Cient., U. A. N. L., México Vol. 1 . udiendo ser de gran inte~és c01~cluya bajo su maneJo otras ar~ª-i qu~Jtas marinas, ríos, lagos, areas tiservar, competen ~ otros proposi tos h"stóricos etc.). De esta forma se picamente recreativas, mom.11:1en os i ' ialmente en países que ~ contribuirá grandemente a evitar errores,_ ~~ al comparar la diferencia cién inician la creación de una c ara conci_e al y otras reservas naturales. de manejo que existe entre un parque nacion . . . f un país no satisface sus necePero también_ es_ necesario msis ir que de ocuparse de sus parques sidades conservaciorustas, con solo . h~~ como los provinciales, e_stanacionales. Los bOSques, ~to ~ nacHd alto valor para ser promovidos tales y municipales, constituy~n _areas eor lo tanto integrarán lugares dentro del concepto de ~odmúltip~1 ~s¿ material para el fomento de la ideales además del deriva o por . . ) , , . . (pesca, caza, camping, picmc, etc. . recreac10n . ede ser declaradas parques nacionaHay áreas naturales,_que no pu ~a la rotección de los animales les, en cambio_ resultan impfr\an: lofesor tain, en una excelente exsalvajes (mamíferos, aves, e c. · r, Administración de Parques _N~posición efectuada durEqan~\!1 ct~~s(l~¡5 ) en Big Meadows, Lurag, Virgicionales y Reservas wv en ar ues nacionales, monumentos natu~a.!es, nia expresó que no bastan ~os p q . bien abarcan extensas superficies, bosques nacionales y refugios, que si tos de la naturaleza que interesan no alcanzan a s~ti~fac~r. t°f<>:5 lr ~~e un sistema conservacionista _pea cada país, sugme~do_ me mr . en rimitivo Y natural, tal como arrec~fes queñas áreas del paisaJe salva:ie, p. s dunas lagunas saladas, estuan_os, de coral, e~nsiones de play~s~~~~ªtipos de 'bosques.. Dado su_ retlucido lagos pequenos, p~n~os Y lotación agropecuaria, esas tierras revalor, por no ser ut1_les parala lf exp los jóvenes conocimientos sobre as0 sultan altamente valiosas, recedr ª esas pequeñas áreas reservadas pectos particulares y poder apren er que n también su belleza natural. posee . nal o de cualquier área natural deEl uso público_ d~ un parq~e naci1as actividades que resulten compabe ser ajustado y !UJntado a cºu!?~! dispuso la reserva. Es P01; ello que tibles con el yroposito para e inistradores de tan importantes , ~ . no la responsabilidad de los ad1? . d usos que demanda el pubhco. Anestá solo en satisfacer las exigen3~n~n a todos los lugares de un parque chas Y extensas carreteras, ¡{e 1 pretenden ciertos sectores de usuanacional o áreas naturales, t corro d~alificación de las mismas. ríos llevaría, de así aceptarse, a a . al ' pueden cammar o ese ar N O hay duda que exisren ~~1b3:ce~ue;~0 ello no puede, de nín~n o que por comodidad no lo q_me am·nistrador deba acceder a const~r modo significar, qu~ ~- organ~~~~ e~ la modificación casi total del area caminos que en defm1bva se que se pretende preservar. _ disfrutan manejando lanchas, botes 8: mo Hay muchas personas quet. ndo sky acuático haciendo campmg 0 tor fuera de borda otros prac ica ' f1 r No. 7 Constantirw: Parques en América del Sur 217 pic-nic, cabalgando, pero ello no obliga a que se permita llevarlas a cabo en todos los lagos y lugar.es del área preservada. Hay también muchas otras que desearían disfrutar viendo al bosque, la selva, las caídas de aguas, ríos, etc., desde el ve-ntanal de un hot.el construido en la mejor ubicación posible del cual pueda satisfacer ese d€seo; sabemos bien, en la actualidad, cuantos problemas y daños ocasionan esas comodidades pre-tendidas y muchas veces llevadas a cabo dentro de un parque nacional y, qué conveniente I'€Sulta que esas obras se efectúen en su exterior, en áreas adyacentes, en donde deberr.os tratar que se realice el desarrollo de ia infraestructura que reciba el mayor impacto turístico. Algunos administradores de áreas naturales (Parque Nacional, Reserva Vírgenes, Monumentos naturales, etc.) olvidan que tienen la responsabilidad de salvaguardar verdaderos exponentes de la naturaleza, que abarcan uno o más ecosistemas y que por lo tanto su actuación debe estar basada en principios E:Cológicos. Es necesario que ellos entiendan bien la interrelación entre plantas y animales, y estos a su vez, con el contorno físico, de esa forma es seguro que adoptarán decisiones firmes y realiza1 án una correcta administración. Pero no solo deben conocer tales aspectos, sino que deberán trasmitirlos, haciendo sobresalir, no únicamente los atributos de los componentes del wea sino informando sobre los problemas que hacen a la conservación y manejo de los recursos naturales en ellos comprendidos. No olvidemos que si difícil y costoso resulta establecer un parque nacional o una reserva natural de otro significado, más difícil aún resulta luego protegerlo de deterioros,, destrucciones y presiones de intereses materiales. Rcordemos lo ya expuestp tantas veces, "la lucha del conservacionismo comienza, primero para obtener una determinada reserva natural, continúa una vez obtenida para poder llevar adelante el propósito por el cual se la reservó y, prosigue día a día, pues siempre existen intereses mezquinos dispuestos a utilizar esas áreas en forma totalmente contraria para lo cual fueron separadas"; esa lucha dejará de ser una preocupación cuando alcancemos a inculcar, a educar a los habitantes de todos los países de América del Sur en materia conservacionista. Esa es nuestra principal tarea act4al y la de todas las futuras generaciones. En el desarrollo y evolución futura de los Parques Nacionales de cualquier país y continente que sea, se debe tener en cuenta y recordar constantmente tres faces, que fueron consideradas precisamente al crearse el Parque Nacional Yellowstone. La primera, que debe ser, para uso y usufructo del público. Que de ninguna manera deberán ser creados, aislados. La segunda, como resultante de no ser una propiedad privada, aparece la preservación versus el control privado y la explotación comercial. Aquellos que concibieron la idea de los Parques Nacionales nunca se hubiesen imaginado que podrían �Publ. Biol. Inst. I rw. Cwnt., U. A. N. L., México 218 Vol. 1 estar en peligro, precisament€, por el uso público que se les asignaba, y que la preservación llegaría a constituirse en el medio eficaz para evitar el uso excesivo, uso inadecuado, desarrollo avasallador, etc. Estos son los mayores problemas que ·hoy día tienen los parques nacionales de América del Sur y podríamo~ asegurar los de todo el mundo y que ocuparán a no dudar la atención constante de sus administradores. Finalmente, la tercera faz corresponde a que la preocupación por el área preservada no se limita a solo uno o más componentes de la misma, sino que comprende íntegramente a toda la superficie, con sus espectaculares escenas y paisajes, es decir que lo que se pretende es preservar uno o más ecosistemas, en la forma más inviolable posible. De esto se desprende que debemos bregar por el respeto de la filosofía original, que dio lugar a la inwortante concepción y cruzada por los parques nacionales. No es posible admitir que por el hecho de una mayor afluencia de visitantes, la que debe ser controlada, tengamos que evolucionar la idea original. Insistimos que el principio básico de un parque nacional (investigación, cultura, inspiración y recreación) se proporciona solo y exclusivamente por medio del paisaje natural, indemne e intacto, cualquiera alteración al mismo destruye una parte de su valor intrínseco. "La preservación no es una finalidad sino un medi&0 para defender la calidad y cualidad del placer y usufructo que un parque nacional debe ofrecer, porque para ello fue creado". El problema que nos preocupa hoy no es1lá dado por el enfrentamiento de la idea de preservación por una parte y el uso por la otra (* ). "El problema lo tenemos solamente por el uso". Entonces vale aún este interrogante: ¿Cuál es el uso apropiado, que no ds1,ñe o afecte al parque nacional?, la respuesta es concluyente, clara y precisa, el uso apropiado es el que puede hacer un visitante respetando las- normas vigentes para cada caso en particular, ,de manera tal que de ninguna manera se llegue a perturbar el propásito de preservación. Otra pregunta es aquella referente a si ¿ puede un parque nacional resistir los embates de todas las presiones de una economía en expansión? y a esta corresponde una respuesta afirmativa, "siempre y cuando el parque nacional contribuya a afrontar esas demandas, a través de los beneficios del uso sabio de su paisaje natural intacto". CONCLUSION: América del Sur, posee exponentes de la Naturaleza que aún permiten ser seleccionados y apartados para integrar el sistema de Parques Nacionales del mundo. (*} National Parks and Conservation Asscciation - Preserving V/úlderness In Our National Parks. Wáshington C. C. 1971. No. 7 Constantioo: P<rrque8 en América del Sur 219 ge Para ello solo es indispensabl rados, se haga un estudio detenidoe qre, l<:>5 hasta la fecha así decíase ha ~doptado para esas reservas a In e aJustarl~s a la defínición que c~ntemdo t~o lo que atenre contr~~tando de ex~lmr ~e su continente y miento a la idea de preservar part· u1ª correct~ fdosof1a que diera nac11c ares ecosistemas. la creación sarseAsimismo, en profundos estudiosdeecnul~v?s parqu~ nacional-es, tendrá que baillotessofrecerán al sistema, tenieid~g~itt;Jal1~ddo la significación que en como aquellos que s ro cm a o de que tanto los exissupuestarios suficientes p~f u~~ngan, palosean !os medios humanos y prenorm Y eficaz administración. d Por otra parte, es indudable d que se efectúen en favor del desaci-~t n~da valdrán todos los esfuerzos o en pro de la creación de otros si alo _e os ~ctuales parques nacionales Y for~a conciencia en todos los habi~~smo( tiempo no se ínculca, educa proposito que se persigue con esas áreas es pueblo Y gobierno) sobre el ~!111to en el que es necesario insistí preservadas, Y es en este último mo de todos los elementos formai actuando PE:n_nanentemente por :rñ.ed~ esa educación y concienc1a. que sean eficientes en la formación �In Memoriam La Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, la Dirección General de Investigación Cien1Ífica, la Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas y estas ?ublicaciones Biológicas 1-:::imentan el sentido deceso de su distinguido colaborador Dr. Eduardo Caballero y Caballero acaecido en la Ciudad de México, el día 30 de diciembre de 1974. Fue un digno parasitólogo y _maestro que supo honrar a México y a la más alta tradición científica. DESCANSE EN PAZ los Editores �CUADERNOS DEL INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTIFICAS l . Efectos de la Octoprcsina en Vejiga, d<' Sapo y Piel de Rana. Por G. Molina, R. Moreira y L. A. Ga.rza, pp. 1-15 (Ma~o, 1963). 2. Protozoarios Ciliados de Méxirn. VI. Algunos aspl'etos del Ciclo Vital de 1'lultif asciculatum alegans (Protcr¿e,:1: Suctorida.J, Por K Lópe-¿ Ochotercna, pp. 1-13 (Noviembre, 1963). 3. Tr.1tamiento Proposicional del Algl'bra de Clases. Por llugo Padilla, pp, 1-17 (Mayo, 1964). 4. Optimización en un Proyecto para <•l Control de Avenidas de un Río. Por Eladio Sáenz Quiroga, pp, 1-14 <Junio, 1964). 5. Tres Nuevas Especies ele Trematoda Ruddphi, 1808, que Parasitan a Murciélagos (Chiropt era Blumenbach, 1774) d<' AmPrica Latma. Por Eduardo Cabillero y C., pp. 1-34 (Julio, 1964). 6. Datas Biológicos Preliminares de las Coc:hinilbs de los Jarclinl's, Prinl'ipalmentc> Porcelllo laevis Latreille, 1904, en Monterrey, N. L. Por M. Ortiz y J. J. Ortiz H., pp, 1-17 (Abril, 1965). 7. La acción de los Grupos Sulfhidrilos y Disulfuro Unidos a bs Proteínas en l'i Mecanismo de Acción de la Hormona AntidiurNira. Por Gilberto Molina, A. Farah y R. Kruse, pp. 1-30 (Mayo, 1965). 8. Características Químicas Farmacológicas y Anatomo Patológicas del Principio Ac tivo de la Karwi.nNkia humboldtdiana. Por l. N. Martínez C., H . Menchaca S., S. de la Garza y G. Molin:i, pp. 1-26 (Diciembre, 1965). 9. Estudio de la Polimerizaci,in del Estireno c-n Pre-senda de Pindina. Por M. Saloma T. y H. Menchaea S., pp. 1-34 (Marzo, 1966). 10. Hipc>rtrofia Uterina. Por Salvador Martine-L Cárdenas y J. Guerra Medina, pp. 1-24 (Noviembre, 1966). 11. Lista de Peces del Estaci'O de Nuevo Leún. Por Salvador Contreras Balderas, pp. 1-12 (Abril, 1967). 12. La Hormona Antidiurética y la Furosemida en e¡ Trnnsporte de Sodio. Por G. Molina B., J. O. González H. y U. G. Orozco V., pp: 1- 19 (Enero, 1967). 13. La Hormona Antidiurétiea ) la Furosc>mida en el Transporte el<' Sodio G. Molina B., J. O. González y J. G. Ormco, pp. 1 18 (Abril, 1967). (II). Por 14. Datos Botánicos de los Cañonc>s Orientnles d<• la Sierra de Anáhuac-, al Sur de Monterrey, N. L., Méxic-o. Por Jorge S. Marroquin, 1 SO (Diciemhre 4, 1968). 15. Berberidáceas de México l. Por Jorge S. M<1.rnquin, pp. 1-22 (Frbrero 28, 1972). 16. A~onostomtis montfooln ( Bancroft): Primer Rc>gistrn cl1• b Famifri l\fu¡:,ili,L,e <n Nuevo León, MéxiC'O. Por Salvador ContrC'ras Ealdera.s, pp, 1-5 (Septwmbrc 28, 1972). 17. Tremátodos Digéneos de Peces Dulceacuíc-oL1s de Nuevo León, México I. Dos Nuevas Especies y un Registro Nuevo en el Cará<'ido A.-.tyan:ix fa.,;ciatus m exican us (F ilippi). Por Fernando Jiménez G., pp. 1-19 (Mayo 11, 1973). �Cambio de Título Los Cuadm'1ws pasan a llanwrse Publicaciones JI se separan por disciplinas, de las cuales la pl'imcra es Publicaciones Biológicas con otras series en prepataci&n. 1 (1). Tres Nuevos Registros de Aves para el F.stado de Nuevo LC'Ón, México. Por Armando Jesus Contrcr-.i..~ Bahler,1s, pp. 1-8 <At:osto lo., 1973). 1 (2). Xotropis aguirrt'()e,(tu.ei1oi, Especie Nue\ 1 Endémica del Río Soto la Marina, Tama.ulipas, M<'Xico (Pisces. Cyprirudad. Por Salvador Contrt:ras-B. y Raúl Ri\'C'ra-T., pp. 9-23 (Octubre 5, 1973). 1 (3). Suppressions and oth, r Taxom1e ch;,m;,:es in th<' Protozoan Subphylum Opalinida, Paul R. Earl, pp. 25-32 (DíCH•mbre 17, 1973). 1 (4). Contribueión al ConOC'imienlo ck los Nemátodrs de P<'Ces de los Litorales de México. III. Dos Nuevas Formas, Guíllern11na Ci.uall<'ro H. pp. 33-4-0 (Enero 12, 1974). 1 (5>. Estudio Flvrislico Ecológi('O dP 1.-,.,, M .le~ s tn la. Rc·~11•n Citricol:t rle Nuevo León, M<'xiro. Por <.ilufiro J. Alanis Fl res. pp. 41-f>4 11\,byo 20, 19741. 1 (6). I. Tremátodos Digéneos de Peces Dulceacuíc, bs d.- Nuevo Leún, México II. Cr:w;icutis hm\'°™' n. sp. de la. mojarra CichlaM>ma cyano~uttatu.-; c)~Ulo~uttatus (B:lird el Gírann. 1''ernando Jim,;nez G. y Eduardo C-iba.llero y Caballern, pp. 65---77 (Agosto 8, 1974). 11. Lachffiilla dh·idifol'(',erws n. sp., un Nucv1:> I'~ocoptero MC'xic-ano (Ps.:coptcra: Lachcsillidae). Alfonso Neri Garda Aldretc, pp. 79 85 (Ago·;to 8, 19';'4). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Publicaciones Biológicas del Instituto de investigaciones Científicas Description An account of the resource Publicación del Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas de la Universidad de Nuevo León. Serie destinada principalmente a presentar resultados de investigaciones originales realizadas en la Facultad de Biología. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Título Uniforme Publicaciones Biológicas del Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas Año de publicación El año cuando se publico 1975 Volumen Volumen de la revista 1 Número Número de la revista 7 Mes de publicación Mes cuando se publicó Julio Día Día del mes de la publicación 1 Periodicidad La periodicidad de la publicación (diaria, semanal, mensual, anual) Irregular Relación OPAC https://www.codice.uanl.mx/RegistroBibliografico/InformacionBibliografica?from=BusquedaAvanzada&bibId=1822127&biblioteca=0&fb=20000&fm=6&isbn= Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Publicaciones Biológicas del Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas, 1975, Vol 1, No 7, Julio 1 Subject The topic of the resource Biología Investigación Ciencias biológicas Ciencia Tesis Publicaciones periódicas Description An account of the resource Publicación del Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas de la Universidad de Nuevo León. Serie destinada principalmente a presentar resultados de investigaciones originales realizadas en la Facultad de Biología. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas, Facultad de Ciencias Biólogicas Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Contreras Balderas, Salvador, Editor Briseño, Carlos H., Jefe Editor Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 01/07/1975 Type The nature or genre of the resource Revista Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource tex/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 2016430 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Fondo Universitario Language A language of the resource spa Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Monterrey, N.L., (México) Access Rights Information about who can access the resource or an indication of its security status. Access Rights may include information regarding access or restrictions based on privacy, security, or other policies. Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. El diseño y los contenidos de La hemeroteca Digital UANL están protegidos por la Ley de derechos de autor, Cap. III. De dominio público. Art. 152. Las obras del dominio público pueden ser libremente utilizadas por cualquier persona, con la sola restricción de respetar los derechos morales de los respectivos autores Aves acuáticas Aves semiacuáticas Bramocharax caballeroi Ornitofauna Peces Río Álamo