The Recent Mammals Of Tamaulipas, Mexico Part 3

_Spermophilus spilosoma oricolus_ Alvarez

Matamoros

_Cryptotis parva berlandieri_ (Baird) _Lasiurus intermedius intermedius_ (H. Allen) _Dasypus novemcinctus mexica.n.u.s_ Peters (by restriction) _Cratogeomys castanops tamaulipensis_ Nelson and Goldman _Felis yagouaroundi cacomitli_ Berlandier

Matamoros, 88 mi. S, 10 mi. W of

_Lepus californicus curti_ Hall _Dipodomys ordii parvabullatus_ Hall _Sigmodon hispidus solus_ Hall

Mier

_Canis latrans microdon_ Merriam

Miquihuana

_Idionycteris mexica.n.u.s_ Anthony (_Plecotus phyllotis_) _Cratogeomys castanops planifrons_ Nelson and Goldman _Onychomys torridus subrufus_ Hollister _Neotoma albigula subsolana_ Alvarez _Odocoileus virginia.n.u.s miquihuanensis_ Goldman and Kellogg

Rancho del Cielo, 5 mi. NW Gomez Farias

_Cryptotis mexicana madrea_ Goodwin _Reithrodontomys megalotis hooperi_ Goodwin

Rancho Santa Ana, about 8 mi. SW Padilla

_Oryzomys melanotis carrorum_ Lawrence

Sierra de Tamaulipas, 10 mi. W, 2 mi. S Piedra

_Myotis keenii auriculus_ Baker and Stains

Sierra San Carlos, 12 mi. NW San Carlos

_Peromyscus pectoralis collinus_ Hooper

CONSERVATION

A relatively large number of the species of Mexican big game occurs in Tamaulipas because its geographic position permits it to have species from the tropics and those from the northern plains and mountains.

Eight of the 11 Mexican species that are considered as Big Game are recorded from the state. Until this century Tamaulipas was not densely populated by man either in the pre-colonial period or thereafter.

Therefore many species of game are still relatively abundant.

Of the eight species that originally lived in Tamaulipas, the mule deer, brocket, and black bear never have been abundant there and now are in danger of extirpation. The p.r.o.nghorn was also rare in the state and now has been extirpated as it has been in many other parts of Mexico. The white-tailed deer, javalin, jaguar, and puma are still abundant in suitable habitats. The white-tailed deer is found almost everywhere in the state; in some areas it damages cornfields, and for this reason is killed by natives who eat the meat and sell the skins.

The price of skins is low; in 1959 at Ciudad Mante tanners paid natives less than one dollar (10.00 Mexican pesos) per hide. Some idea of the abundance of deer in Tamaulipas is provided by our having found in one tanner's shop, in 1959 at Ciudad Mante, about 500 deer skins. Besides these, we found about 65 skins of other species--jaguar, bear, ocelot, puma, margay, and racc.o.o.n. Additionally there was a large number of coati skins. Considering that Mexico has no professional trappers and that commerce in skins of wild animals is illegal, it is felt that the number of skins found in the tanner's shop indicated a relative large population of game mammals.

The number of species of small game also is large. Some species are killed by natives for food, but most are killed in order to protect the cultivated crops, which are injured mainly by rabbits and squirrels.

Baker (1958) pointed out that the future of the game species in the northern part of Mexico was not encouraging. He gave valid reasons for his view. In Tamaulipas, however, in some respects the outlook is more encouraging because there are many areas in which with a minimum of effort the authorities can save a good number of species.

As Baker (_op. cit._) remarked, the fauna in Mexico is declining mainly because many areas recently have been cultivated for the first time.

Also, better roads have enabled hunters to reach areas that formerly were natural refuges for wild animals. Many times it has been said that the populations of wild animals were declining in Mexico because the number of game wardens is too small to protect game in all parts of the country. In some ways this is true but it seems that the problem is really one of education. The people do not realize that the animals are part of nature and therefore have the same right to live that man has.

Most people see only the bad side of the animals' activities and never consider the benefit that wild mammals provide for man. A typical case is that of the coyote, which is oftentimes killed only because it is a coyote. Sometimes individual coyotes do kill domestic animals, but the people seem never to understand that the coyote destroys a large number of mice, rabbits, and insects as has been shown by studies of the contents of coyote stomachs.

The Mexican Government at this time is making a concentrated effort to provide schools in all parts of the country and is formulating new programs of education. In this official program some lectures in conservation are needed with reference to the animal life. I know that some education now is given to people with respect to conservation of the water, soil, and forest, but gather that there is little that covers also conservation of animals.

I do not deny the necessity for some natives to kill wild animals.

People need to eat fresh meat and for some it is almost impossible to obtain meat in any other way than by killing wild animals. Some natives cannot afford to purchase meat in the markets or they live too far from any village or city to do so. Also, natives need to protect their cultivated areas; some of them have only four to six acres of land, on which corn is the only crop. When one deer in a night can destroy part of the corn, and in some areas not only one deer but several invade a field, and when one considers that besides deer there are rabbits, squirrels, racc.o.o.ns, and coati, to name only some animals that feed on the corn, we find that the small cornfield at the end of the season may not contain any corn to harvest. It is understandable, therefore, that the natives kill the animals. In this way they protect their cultivated fields, obtain food and sometimes money for the skins. Many natives, however, destroy the wildlife only for pleasure or to obtain money for skins and meat, which sometimes is sold to restaurants.

Probably the best solution for the problem of conservation of wild animals is the establishment of wildlife refuges. In Tamaulipas, at least three refuges are needed in order to preserve the mammalian wildlife. These areas would serve also as a refuge for game birds and other vertebrates. A large area with suitable habitat for white-tailed deer, brocket, jaguar, puma, javalin, and fox could be established in the Sierra de Tamaulipas, which presents favorable habitat for all of the species named. A second area that does not need to be so large as the first could be established in the Sierra Madre Oriental, probably including some part of Nuevo Leon, where the black bear and the mule deer find suitable habitat. Probably the beaver can be introduced in the streams of the high mountains; beaver live in the same Sierra a little farther north in Nuevo Leon. The three species mentioned are in imminent danger of disappearing from Tamaulipas, if they have not already disappeared. The third refuge could be in some area of the northern part of the state near the Rio Grande. This refuge should give protection to the beaver--a rare animal in Mexico and in danger of extirpation over all the country. The p.r.o.nghorn also would find suitable habitat in this area, but would have to be reintroduced there.

With the establishment of these three refuges and with good management the fauna of Tamaulipas could be saved from extinction, would provide some recreation for sportsmen, and especially for the people in general who wish to study, photograph, or merely observe the native animal life.

The time is excellent for the establishment of the wildlife refuges in Tamaulipas because large areas are still in Federal owners.h.i.+p and because a considerable number of animals remain. Other favorable factors are that roads are not yet good in the areas proposed for refuges, the human population is low, and agriculture consequently is not practiced. But, with the rapid increase in population in Mexico, these favorable conditions will change in a few years and it will be almost impossible to establish the refuges then.

METHODS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The families, genera, and species recorded in this report are arranged following Hall and Kelson (1959). Subspecies are in alphabetical order under the species. Remarks are given on natural history in each species account, if information is available. Discussion of subspecies known from the state is included. Under each subspecies, the citation to the original description is given with mention of type locality. Next is the citation to the first usage of the current name-combination. Then, synonyms are listed if there be such in the sense that original descriptions of the alleged species or subspecies had type localities in Tamaulipas.

Measurements, unless otherwise noted, are of adults and are given in millimeters. External measurements are in the following order: total length; length of tail vertebrae; length of hind foot; length of ear from notch. Capitalized color terms are those of Ridgway, Color Standards and Color Nomenclature, Was.h.i.+ngton, D. C., 1912. Capital letters designate teeth in the upper jaws and lower case letters designate teeth in the lower jaws; for example, M2 refers to the second upper molar and m2 refers to the second lower molar.

The localities of specimens examined and additional records are listed from north to south and their geographic positions can be found in the gazetteer and on the map (Fig. 4).

Most of the specimens examined are in the Museum of Natural History of the University of Kansas. Unless otherwise indicated, catalogue numbers relate to that collection. A few specimens from other collections were seen. Abbreviations identifying those collections are: UMMZ, the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology; AMNH, the American Museum of Natural History; and GMS, George M. Sutton collection (University of Oklahoma).

I am grateful to Prof. E. Raymond Hall and Dr. J. Knox Jones, Jr., for their advice and kind help that have enabled me to complete this work.

I thank Dr. William E. Duellman for his advice concerning Zoogeography and Biologist Gaston Guzman for help with the names of plants. For the loan of specimens I am grateful to Dr. George M. Sutton of the University of Oklahoma, to Dr. David H. Johnson and Dr. Richard H.

Manville of the United States National Museum, to Drs. William H. Burt and Emmet T. Hooper of the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, and to Dr. Richard Van Gelder of the American Museum of Natural History. I thank, also, Dr. William Z. Lid.i.c.ker, Jr., for information about the locality called Lulu, and the collectors from the Museum of Natural History, especially Gerd H. Heinrich, William J. Schaldach, Percy L. Clifton, and John H. Bodley. I am grateful also to Charles A.

Long and to several other persons, not named here, who helped me in some way to complete my study of the mammals of Tamaulipas.

Most of the field work was financed by the Kansas University Endowment a.s.sociation. Some laboratory work was done when the author was half-time Research a.s.sistant under Grant No. 56 G 103 from the National Science Foundation.

GAZETTEER

The specimens examined and additional records are listed with reference to the following place names. The geographic position of each was taken from the maps of the American Geographical Society of New York, scale 1:1,000,000, and the Atlas Geografico de la Republica Mexicana, scale 1:500,000.

Acuna.--2326', 9825'.

Agua Linda.--2305', 9914'.

Aldama.--2255', 9804'.

Alta Cima.--2305', 9911'.

Altamira.--2223', 9756'.

Antiguo Morelos.--2233', 9905'.