South American Camelids in Argentina

Transcription

1 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health

2 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health Servicio Nacional de Sanidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria Av. Paseo Colón 367, C1063ACD Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires República Argentina Tel. (054) (011) The author, Dr. Daniel A. de Lamo, is member of the ad hoc Committee on Camelids Health of the World Animal Health Organization (OIE). In 1976, he obtained the Veterinarian degree, granted by the University of Buenos Aires. He attended post-graduate studies at Illinois University (Urbana-Champaign), USA. He earned his Master of Science degree in 1985 and a PhD in 1990, at said University. Since 1980, when he was admitted as a research fellow in Conicet, he began to study wild fauna species of Patagonia, especially the ecology and physiology of the guanaco (Lama guanicoe). He has published over 30 technical papers in specialized magazines and has participated as lecturer at conferences and symposiums. At present, he works as regular associate professor in General Physiology and Compared Animal Ecophysiology Chairs at the School of Natural Sciences, National University of Patagonia San Juan Bosco, at Puerto Madryn. 2

3 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires January 2011

4 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health 4

5 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids Table of Contents Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids 7 Nomenclature 7 Origin and Evolution of Camelids 8 Wild South American Camelids 10 The Guanaco (Lama guanicoe) 10 The Vicuña (Vicugna vicugna) 13 Domesticated South American Camelids 14 The Llama (Lama glama) 14 The Alpaca (Lama pacos Linnaeus, 1758; Vicugna pacos Linnaeus, 1758) 16 References 18 Chapter II: History of the Use and Preservation of South American Camelids 19 Vicuña 19 Guanaco 23 References 28 Chapter III: Animal Health in South American Camelids 30 Zoonoses 30 Infectious Diseases 30 Bacterial Diseases 30 Viral Diseases 33 Parasitic Diseases 37 Internal Parasites 37 External Parasites 41 References 42 5

6 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health 6

7 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids Chapter I Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids Nomenclature There are currently four species of South American Camelids (SAC). Two of them are wild: the guanaco and the vicuña, while the other two are domesticated: the llama and the alpaca. SACs are classified with the Old World camels in the order Artiodactyla, suborder Tylopoda, within the Camelidae family, subdivided into the Lamini and Camelini tribes. The Camelidae have some typical distinctive features, namely: absence of horns; true canine teeth, separated from the premolars by a gap called diastema, in both the upper lower jaws; the anatomic structure of the rear limbs allows them to bend their legs beneath the body; the presence of a toenail on each phalange (instead of a hoof) on each foot and a footpad on each foot, among other features (Wheeler 1995). Like ruminants, they do not have teeth (incisors) in the upper jaw, which is covered by connective tissue (dental pad). From the viewpoint of digestive anatomy, the Tylopoda evolved independently from what are known as true ruminants of the suborder Pecora. They feature differences in the number of chambers and the disposition of pre-stomachs as against the Bovidae; however, they use similar mechanisms concerning the ability to regurgitate the cud and obtain energy from the volatile fatty acids resulting from fermentation in the rumen or main fermentation chamber. A summary of the systematic classification of the four species is shown in the Table below (after Wheeler 1995): Order: Artiodactyla owen, 1848 Suborder: Tylopoda illiger, 1811 Family: Camelidae gray, 1821 Tribe: Lamini webb,

8 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health Lama glama (Linnaeus, 1758). Common name: Llama Lama pacos (Linnaeus, 1758). Common name: Alpaca Lama guanicoe (Müller, 1776). Common name: Guanaco Vicugna vicugna (Molina, 1782). Common name: Vicuña. In addition, SACs share common features between all four species, such as the presence of metatarsal glands, a cleft lip, use of communal dung heaps, polygamous social organization, absence of pronounced sexual dimorphism, induced ovulation producing only one young per birthing or breeding season (Wheeler 1991). The chromosome analysis of the four species shows a similar value for all of them 2n = 74 (Marín et al. 2007). Origin and Evolution of Camelids Camelids appeared in the late Eocene and were amongst the first families of modern artiodactyls, followed by pigs, peccaries, and deer in the Oligocene, and by giraffes, antelopes, and cattle in the Miocene. Camels, both South American and Asian/African, first appeared in the central area of North America, where they spent 40 million years of their evolutionary history. Dispersal to other continents took place only 2-3 million years ago. The withers height of the earliest camel (Protylopus petersoni) was only 30 cm, resembling a miniature of the current guanaco, but it featured a stronger musacle structure. This species, that existed 40 million years ago (Upper Eocene) had four toes on each foot and 44 teeth with no gap between them. A desacendant from the Protylopus was the so-called ancestral camel or Poebrotherium wilsoni from Middle Oligocene (25-30 million years) which looked like a small guanaco, with the height of modern sheep, and already featured a gap between incisors and canines. Furthermore, this camel had only 2 toes on each foot and its premolars and molars had very low crowns which showed good adaptation to folivory. Ancestral camels seemed to be good runners, much more efficient in that task than modern ruminants. They already featured long legs and a long neck and had strong musacular development. In the Lower Miocene (12 25 million years), camelids split into four branches. In that epoch, there were many changes in morphology, especially in the locomotor system and food habits. There was an increase in body size (Gauthier-Pilthers and Dagg 1981) and brain matter, and footpads started showing under each limb (Webb 1972). Also in this period, upper incisors disappeared, one of them turning into a canine, and a great de- 8

9 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids pression in the facial part of the maxilla developed to contain a complex musacle structure in the lips (Webb 1965), which provided those organs with greater mobility. In addition, the molars crown became higher, which shows adaptation to process abrasive plants, a morphological adaptation that goes hand in hand with a change in food habits from browser to grazer. During the Miocene, camelids featured a clear development in locomotion; movement was fast, taking long steps, a typical characteristic of long-legged species, which arises as an adaptation to wide and plain environments (Franklin 1982). From this ancestral Miocene form, the evolution in North America resulted in two large groups of much more advanced camelids. In the Late Miocene (5-10 million years), the genus Pliauchenia evolved into a form that had very similar features to the current llama. In the Late Pliocene (3 million years), camelids emigrated to Asia through the Bering land bridge. When they arrived in Europe, they SACattered rapidly throughout Eurasia, reaching the Mediterranean area to the South and China to the East, through the Gobi desert. These Old World camels split into the two currently living species of the genus Camelus, from the Miolabis, going through the Procamelus and Titanotylopus in the Late Pliocene. As early as the Pleistocene, the Paracamelus resulted in the modern camels: the two-humped or Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus) in the steppes and mountains of Mongolia and the Dromedary or Arabian camel (Camelus dromedarius) of Southeast Asia and the North of African deserts (Gauthier-Pilthers and Dagg 1981). Meanwhile, the Hemiauchenia (with very long legs) diversified in North America and colonized South America with the opening of the Isthmus of Panama together with other species in what was called the Great American Interchange (Marshall et al. 1982) in the early Pleistocene. In South America, camelids might have had a common ancestor in the Middle Pleistocen. The Paleolama (with short legs), now extinct, was thought to be the ancestor of the current genus Lama; nowadays, however, it is not considered to be an ancestor of the genera Lama or Vicugna (Wheeler 1995), which are the evolutionary lineage of the Hemiauchenia (López Aranguren 1930; Cabrera 1932; Webb 1972). The core of the evolutionary origin of the genus Lama would be the Andes mountain range, where short-legged animals could move around more easily and be able to maneuver in sloping and steep soils. The genus Lama SACattered rapidly throughout South America, even in places where Hemiauchenia were present, thus overlapping their distribution range. 9

10 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health Towards the end of the Policene, 10 to years ago, the great llamas of the genera Paleolama and Hemiauchenia became extinct, and the only surviving genera were the Lama and Vicugna at the end of the Pleistocene (Wheeler 1995), these being the last representatives of the two wild species of South American Camelids (SAC). Wild South American Camelids The Guanaco (Lama guanicoe) Subspecies While four geographical guanaco subspecies have been desacribed, the studies performed do not meet the required criteria to make a final classification. These subspecies were desacribed based on body measures, skin color, skull size and proportions, among other variables (González et al. 2006). In the early 20 th century, the following subspecies were identified: L. g. cacsilensis; L. g. voglii; L. g. huanacus, and L. g. guanicoe. The L. g. cacsilensis lives in the high Andes of Peru, while the L. g. huanacus can only be found in Chile, according to Molina (1782), the L. g. voglii on the eastern side of the Argentine Andes, and the L. g. guanicoe from south Peru to Tierra del Fuego. However, some molecular studies based on the cytochrome b of the mitochondrial DNA recognize only two subspecies: L. g. cacsilensis and L. g. guanicoe, while the remainder populations are grouped in a clade known as L. g. guanicoe (González et al. 2006). The most renowned and better desacribed subspecies is the 10

11 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids Lama guanicoe guanicoe Müller, 1776; therefore, this will be the reference subspecies to desacribe the most relevant details of its biological cycle, social structure, and behavior. General Features The guanaco (Lama guanicoe) is the largest wild artiodactyle in South America. Its distribution is the widest of all SACs, ranging from 8 to 55 south latitude, in Tierra del Fuego. Some members of this species can be found in altitudes that go from sea level to 5,200 meters above it. Even though the presence of this species in some areas of Paraguay is a matter of debate, it can be found in the territories of Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, and Peru, which shows great adaptation to a wide range of environments and weathers. The pelage coloration of this species is quite similar among the different populations and subspecies, varying from reddish brown in the south to clay yellow tones in the north of Peru. The chest, the belly, and the insides of the legs are white, while the head features different shades of gray, with lighter areas around the eyes and the edges of the ears. As already stated, there is no pronounced sexual dimorphism, and no significant differences were observed in the growth curves of animals in captivity (De Lamo 1995). The weight of a wild adult can reach kg, although most wild guanacos sheared rarely exceed 100 kg. Some authors believe that the guanacos from North Peru feature a lower live weight, reaching up to 96 kg (Kostritsky & Vilchez 1974). Withers height varies from 100 to 120 cm, while body length from the tip of the nose to the base of the tail ranges from 167 to 210 cm (MacDonagh 1949; Raedeke 1979; Dennler de la Tour 1954). The social organization of this species has been defined in several ways: depending on the authors, it can be divided into 3 or more types of groups, although the common criterion among all of them is that of Family Groups. These groups are composed of a leading male that shares its territory with a given number of females, which may vary from 5 to 15, with their young (Puig and Videla 1995), even though this relation can vary in different years and types of environment; for instance, in the province of Chubut, the average family group showed a ratio of 4 females per each male (Garrido et al. 1980). This overt variability in the number of females that make up this type of groups in the species range of distribution is attributable to the type of resource-defense polygyny (Franklin 1983), where one male defends an area that has food, water, and 11

12 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health shelter, including esacape paths (del Valle et al. 1986). The other social groups can be further divided but, in general, they are composed of a large number of males (groups of males of different age) and can reach 200 members in high-density areas. Females reach their breeding age at 2, while males reach that age at three, although such condition does not guarantee the formation of a family group. If an adult male cannot form a family group, it generally becomes part of the so-called bachelor groups, where non-breeding females can also be found (Saba 1987). Females have copulation-induced ovulation and give birth to only one young per year, after a gestation period of around 345 days. The young stays with the mother throughout the whole year or until the birth of the next young, although weaning usually occurs during late fall, when the young has already developed its adult digestive system (De Lamo 1995). The birthing season varies according to the geographical location of the population. In Peru, the birthing season ranges from April to June (Franklin 1975), while in Argentina and Chile it starts in September and moves towards the south and the west until October and November. In the provinces of Chubut and Santa Cruz, the first birthing peak takes place between November and December (De Lamo et al. 1982), while in Tierra del Fuego it can go from December to February (Raedeke 1979). In the south of Chubut, there can be a second birthing peak from February to March; females that are born in this period and survive the first year of age reach puberty at the age of three because they fail to achieve the weight or minimum development to breed in the breeding season of 2-year-old females (De Lamo 1995). The weight of a newly-born young varies from 8 to 12 kg (Raedeke 1979; De Lamo and Saba 1993). Most births occur during the early hours of the day and the young can rapidly stand on their feet (Franklin & Johnson 1994, De Lamo and Saba 1993, Sarasqueta and De Lamo 1995). The dispersal or expulsion of the young or juvenile members from family groups by territorial males results from competition over resources, especially food, within the areas where family groups settle. From the feeding point of view, the guanaco can be classified as an intermediary or opportunistic herbivore (Hofmann 1989), since it consumes a wide variety of plants. A comprehensive summary of the feeding ecology of this species has been compiled by González et al (2006). 12

13 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids The Vicuña (Vicugna vicugna) Subspecies It is the smallest wild SAC and two geographical subspecies have been desacribed: Vicugna vicugna vicugna Molina, 1872 and V.v. mensalis Thomas, The former distributes throughout the southern sector, in Peru, Bolivia and Argentina. The latter (V.v. mensalis) does so in the northern sector of its distribution area. General Features The typical pelage of the vicuña is that of the V.v. mensalis, which is cinnamon-brown in the dorsal surface and on the sides of the body, the neck and on the back of the head. The chest, the belly, the inside of the legs and the lower portion of the head are white, as well as the base and the ventral surface of the tail. This subspecies features long chest hair which can reach almost 20 cm. The coloration of the Vicugna vicugna is a little lighter and white covers a greater portion of the body, rising from the belly to the ribs and covering the anterior portion of the rear legs; it lacks the long chest hair of the other subspecies. There is no significant sexual dimorphism (same as guanacos) and the live weight of males reaches approximately 36 kg, while the weight of females amounts to 33 kg for the V.v. mensalis (Paucar et al. 1984), although some authors report weights exceeding 45 kg (Gilmore 1950). 13

14 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health The social organization of this species shows a similar pattern to that of the guanaco, that is, they are organized in family groups, small droves of males and, according to Franklin (1982; 1983), solitary male groups. The territory marked by the male has a sleeping area in the highest sector and a feeding and water supply area in a lower sector (Franklin 1983). The male controls the size of the family group according to resource availability and drives away any vicuña alien to his territory and the young (whether male or female) before the beginning of birthing in February. The gestation period ranges from 330 to 350 days, the birthing peak being in March, at least in Peru (Franklin 1982). Contrary to what happens with guanacos, the vicuña is almost exclusively a grazer. It prefers perennial grasses, selecting the most succulent. It is worthy of note that territorial and feeding stability result from the stable ecosystems where the vicuña lives. These environments rarely suffer from weather swings; that fact, coupled with the regular provision of food, derives in a sedentary life or a life in fixed territories throughout the year. Apart from getting liquid out of succulent plants, vicuñas drink water on a daily basis (Koford 1957), which distinguishes them from the guanaco, which can drink water sporadically in times of drought. Domesticated South American Camelids The Llama (Lama glama) The llama is the largest domesticated camelid and resembles in many morphological and behavioral respects its wild ancestor, the guanaco. Like the wild species, the llama has a wide 14

15 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids range of geographical distribution, although it is considered to be currently narrower than the range prior to the European colonization. Nowadays, the llama spreads from Colombia, going through Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Argentina, to the center of Chile (Wheeler 1991); however, since it is a domesticated animal, there are herds in Tierra del Fuego and Santa Cruz (Argentina), as well as in countries such as the United States of America, New Zeland, and some European countries. Two phenotype varieties can be found; most are Q ara or nonwoolly, with little fiber development in the body and no fibers in the face and legs. The other type, called Chaku or woolly, features more fibers in the body that cover the forehead and grow from inside the ears, but do not cover the legs (Wheeler 1991). A while ago, Cardozo (1954) proposed another classification dividing llamas into brachymorphic, with abundant fiber, and dolichomorphic, which show an elongated profile. Despite these classifications, native shepherds distinguish their animals between those producing good-quality fiber and those producing low-quality fibers; therefore, no reference to Andean types can be made in connection to llamas; although most llamas are Q ara, they have been traditionally important in economic terms as pack animals, not fiber-producers (Wheeler 1991). The pelage of the llama varies from white to black and brown, going through all shades of in-between colors, and can usually feature spots of several colors in a single animal. Size and body measurements are very similar to those of the guanaco, exceeding in many cases 130 kg of live weight, as a result of the selection of llamas as pack animals. Despite domestication, the social organization of this species resembles that of guanacos. A flock is composed of a leading breeding male with his females and young. The male marks a territory with sleeping sectors in the highest areas and feeding sectors in the lower areas; it also drives away male young before they reach one year of age. This differential feature as against the guanaco allows for the growth of domesticated animals flocks. Trophic features resemble those of the guanaco, being able to adapt to a great diversity of environments and plant types, and go through times of drought (San Martín 1987). 15

16 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health The Alpaca (Lama pacos Linnaeus, 1758; Vicugna pacos Linnaeus, 1758) It is the smallest species of domesticated camelids and shares many features with its wild ancestor, the vicuña (Marín et al. 2007). Current distribution results from domestication 6,000 years ago in the central puna territories of Peru (Wheeler 1984), covering a strip that goes from the north of Peru to the south of Bolivia, with very few members in the north of Chile and the northwest of Argentina (Wheeler 1995). There are two known phenotypes called Huacaya and Suri. The Huacaya variety is more numerous. The body is entirely covered by very thick fibers that also cover the legs, forehead and cheeks, and even form a quiff that may cover the eyes. The fiber is curly, which gives a sponge-like appearance. The Suri variety is covered by silky, straight, and longer fibers and, because of their structure, they fall from the spine down to the sides of the body. The coloration of the alpaca s pelage is much more uniform that the llama s, since the alpaca was artificially selected to produce fiber. Coloration varies from white to black, brown, and extends through many shades of in-between colors; however, pelage is generally uniform; selection has mostly been towards white, so many colors of the native Andean populations of Peru have been eliminated (Wheeler 1991). In addition, selection has led alpaca to share the thinness of its fiber with that of the vicuña. 16

17 Chapter I: Origin and Evolution of South American Camelids Despite domestication, the social aspects of the alpaca are similar to those of the vicuña. There are males and females in flocks, where the former are leaders with the same polygamous features of the other SACs. The gestation period of the alpaca varies from 342 to 345 days, contrary to the vicuña, which can reach up to 350 days. While from a trophic viewpoint, the alpaca is a selective and opportunistic herbivore, in this case, it shows preference for herbaceous plants and it only browses when in extreme need and it must drink water every day (San Martín 1991.) References Cabrera, A Sobre los camélidos fósiles y actuales de la América austral. Revista del Museo de la Plata 33: Cardozo, A Los Auquénidos. Editorial Centenario. La Paz, Bolivia. De Lamo, D.A.; Garrido, J.L. and Kovacs, Z Población y parámetros reproductivos del guanaco (Lama guanicoe, Camelidae, Mammalia). Centro Nac. Patagónico, Contribución 64:1-11. De Lamo, D Aspectos Ecofisiológicos. In: Técnicas para el manejo del guanaco. Puig, S (ed). UICN. Cap. 6: De Lamo, D.A. and Saba, S Características del parto normal en el guanaco (Lama guani coe). Vet. Arg. X(91): Del Valle, H.F.; De Lamo, D.A. & Gagliardini, D.A Environmental affinity of the guanaco (Lama guanicoe Muller, Camelidae) in two selected areas of Central Patagonia supported by ERS-1 SAR data. Earth Observation Quarterly 55: Dennler de la Tour, G The guanaco. Oryx 2: Franklin, W.L Guanacos in Peru. Oryx 13(2): Franklin, W.L Biology, ecology and relationship to man of the South American Camelids. In: Mammalian Biology in South America. Mares, M.A. & Genoways, H.H. (ed) Pymatuning Lab. of Ecology. Special Pub Nº 6: Franklin, W.L Contrasting socioecologies of South America s wild camelids: the vicuña and the guanaco. In: Advances in the study of mammalian behavior. Eisemberg, J.F. and Kleiman, D.G. (ed). Special Pub. No 7. American Soc. of Mammalogists. 753 pp. Franklin, W.L. & Johnson, W Hand capture of new-born open habitat ungulate: the South American guanaco. Wildlife Society Bulletin 22: Garrido, J.L., Amaya, J.N. and Kovacs, Z Relevamiento de una población de guanacos de la provincia de Chubut. Resultados de tres años de recuentos. CENPAT. Contribución 47:1-13. Gauthier-Pilthers, H. and Dagg, A.I The Camel: its evolution, ecology, behavior, and relationship to man. University of Chicago Press. USA. 208 PP. Gilmore, R Fauna and ethnozoology of South America. Bureau of American Ethnography Bulletin 143. Smithsonian Institution. González, B.A., Palma, R.E., Zapata, B. and Marín, J.C Taxonomic and biogeographical status of guanaco Lama guanicoe (Artiodactyla, Camelidae). Mammal Review 36(2):

18 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health Hofmann, R.R Evolutionary steps of ecophysiological adaptation and diversification of ruminants: a comparative view of their digestive system. Oecologia, 78: Koford, C.B The Vicuña and the Puna. Ecological Monographs 27(2): Kostritsky, B & Vilchez, S Informe, proyecto Santuario Nacional del Guanaco, Calipuy. Dir. Gral. de Foresta y Caza, Ministerio de Agricultura. Lima, Perú. López Aranguren, D.J Camélidos fósiles argentinos. Anales de la Sociedad Científica Argentina. 109: MacDonagh, E.J Los guanacos de Curamalal. Notas del Museo de La Plata, Zoología 14 (129): Marín, J.C., Zapata, B., González, B.A., Bonacic, C., Wheeler, J.C., Casey, C., Bruford, M., Palma, E., Poulin, E., Alliende, M.A., and Spotorno, A.E Sistemática, taxonomía y domesticación de alpacas y llamas: nueva evidencia cromosómica y molecular. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 80: Marshall, L.G., Webb, S.D., Sepkoski, J.J. and Raup, L Mammalian evolution and the great American interchange. Science, 215: Molina, J.I Saggio sulle storia naturale del Chile. Bologna. Paucar, A., Téllez, J., Neyra, L. and Rodríguez, J Estudio tecnológico del beneficio de vicuñas. In: F. Villiger, compilador. La Vicuña, pp Editorial Los Pinos. Puig, S. and Videla, F Comportamiento y organización social del guanaco. In: Técnicas para el manejo del guanaco. Puig, S (ed). UICN. Cap. 7: Raedeke, K.J Population dynamics and socioecology of the guanaco (Lama guanicoe) of Magallanes, Chile. An Arbor, Michigan, University Microfilms International. Saba, S.L Biología reproductiva del guanaco (Lama guanicoe M). Tesis Doctoral. Univ. Nac. De La Plata, Argentina. San Martín, F.A Comparative forage selectivity and nutrition of South American Camelids and Sheep. Ann Arbor, Univ. Microfilms International. San Martín, F.A Alimentación y Nutrición. Capítulo VII ( ). In: Fernández-Baca, S. (ed) Avances y perspectivas del conocimiento de los Camélidos Sudamericanos. FAO. Santiago, Chile. 429 pp. Sarasqueta, D. and De Lamo, D Manejo en semicautiverio. Capitulo 13. In: Técnicas para el manejo del guanaco. Puig, S (ed). UICN. Pp Webb, S.D The osteology of Camelops. Bull of Los Angeles County Museum. 1:1-54. Webb, S.D Locomotor evolution in camels. Forma et Functio. 5: Wheeler, J.C La domesticación de la alpaca (Lama pacos L.) y la llama (Lama glama L.) y el desarrollo temprano de la ganadería autóctona en los Andes Centrales. Boletín de Lima 36: Wheeler, J.C Origen, evolución y status actual. In: Fernández-Baca, S. (ed) Avances y perspectivas del conocimiento de los Camélidos Sudamericanos. FAO. Santiago, Chile. 429 pp. Wheeler, J.C Evolution and present situation of the South American Camelidae. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 54:

19 Chapter II: History of the Use and Preservation of South American Camelids Chapter II History of the Use and Preservation of South American Camelids Vicuña South American Camelids (SAC) have been a strategic resource for mankind in terms of supplying products such as meat, fur, wool, or as pack or transportation animals. With the arrival of man to South America 10 to 20,000 years ago, wild camelids served as a source of products with great availability for use, including forms of life that are now extinct: Paleolama and Hemiauchenia (Franklin 1982). Some archeological studies claim that pre-pottery societies, as hunter-gatherers, depended on camelids to obtain food and other resources. Probably, the social organization of the vicuña, stable throughout the year, provided these prehistoric hunters with a permanent sustenance and marked the beginning of a sedentary culture in the high Andes (Rick 1980). According to Gade (1969), nomadic pastoralism, which was common in other arid regions of the world, could never fully settle in the high Andes, and such difference would stem from the fact that camelids were not the only food source. However, seasonal herding was identified in the Puna of Junín 3,000 years B.C. (Novoa and Wheeler 1982), and Browman (1974) reported semi-nomadic pastoralism in the center of Peru between the years 2,000 and 500 before today. The most ancient camelid hunting technique consisted in herding a group of animals towards a confined site or natural enclosure, where hunters would sacrifice their prey with lances, especially vicuñas (Neira 1968); the bow and arrow were used later on, as an advanced capture or hunting means. The vicuña s domestication process might have begun 6,000-8,000 years ago at the Lake Titicaca basin, giving rise, through selection, to the domesticated species Vicugna (Lama) pacos or alpaca (Novoa and Wheeler 1982). It seems that the different races or varieties of alpacas were specially used for a given purpose to produce fine wool or meat (Wheeler 1984). Pastoralism arose with the domestication of animals; however, the hunting of wild animals remained, which was an importance source of proteins, in terms of meat as well as horns and fibers (Laker et al. 2006). With the expansion of the Inca empire, the use of the vicuña 19

20 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health became somewhat regulated, since the animals belonged to the Inca and they decided the type of capture to be implemented. One means of capture was the Chaku Real, which was guided by the Inca themselves, while the other were the chaku or qayqus guided by the native authorities of each location (Laker et al. 2006). The chaku or real hunting consisted in very large herds involving a great number of people, ranging from 4,000 to 50,000 individuals. Logically, the territory covered depended on the number of individuals involved and the number of captured animals could vary from 300/400 to 30,000/40,000 vicuñas. This tradition remained in modern times, although the number of people involved decreased. There are reports that estimate captures of around 30 and 40,000 vicuñas by the 15th century in Peru (Flores-Ochoa 1994). The situation of the vicuña started to worsen with the arrival of Spanish conquerors. Despite the fact that belief systems persisted in the native peasant communities, no cultural restriction for the killing of vicuñas to get their fur was recognized. Already in the 16th century, there are reports that show concern on the dramatic demographic decrease, reporting killings of up to 80,000 dead animals per year in Peru and the north of Chile (Chebez 1994). The empire court issued a decree in 1777 whereby it considered the killing of a vicuña an illegal act and urged for the need of control by a court. It was the first law enacted to protect the species. During the same period, an important fur exchange to new textile factories in Spain developed. From the setting of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata in 1776, an amount equivalent to the fur of 20,000 animals was exported through the port of Buenos Aires. This exchange continued through 1810 and during most of the 19th century; within a period of 190 years ( ), an amount equivalent to 1,572,000 vicuñas was exported from the port of Buenos Aires to European markets (Laker et al. 2006). Until the second decade of the 20th century, the Chaku method remained in the Argentine Northwest and likely in the other Andean countries, although not in the same gigantic proportions as in the Inca times. Around 1920, the spread of fire guns and the transformation experienced by traditional society, changed the hunting method: the collective chaku was left behind and solitary hunters or small armed groups joined by dogs arose. A Peruvian supreme decree of 1920 prohibited the exchange of vicuña products and similar measures were attempted in Argentina, where a law of 1926 prohibited the killing of animals and the trading of vicuña fiber and other products made with vicuña 20

21 Chapter II: History of the Use and Preservation of South American Camelids fiber. The measures had limited impact on hunting levels, which became a clandestine activity. In 1933, the state relaxed control and started granting export licenses in parallel to an increase in international demand for vicuña and a dramatic decrease in population. Data from an English textile company show that around the 1950s, a single buyer was responsible for the import of 1,270 kilograms in average equivalent to 5,500-6,500 individuals. Thus, the vicuña population went from 400,000 animals in the 1950s down to 10,000 animals in 1967 (Wheeler and Hoces 1997). Trading continued despite the danger posed to the species, until hunting was prohibited by international restrictions and measures introduced in the first Vicuña Convention signed between Bolivia and Peru in 1969, and later ratified by Argentina (1971), Chile (1972) and Ecuador (1979). In 1975, all vicuña populations were included in CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) Appendix I which forbade the international trade of the vicuña fiber. This decision led to a marked recovery of populations and, in many cases, the areas where local extinctions had occurred were recolonized. Many of these measures had a high level of acceptance and observance by rural communities (Cajal et al. 1998). With the recovery of several populations in Chile and Peru, such populations became part of the CITES Appendix II, which recognizes that the species is not endangered but trade must be controlled to avoid that the species becomes once again endangered. By 1995, all populations of Peru and the north of Chile were incorporated to Appendix II. In Argentina, the vicuñas in captivity and the wild populations of Jujuy became part of such Appendix in 1997, and those from Catamarca in 2002, when all vicuña populations of Bolivia were also included. Currently, the species is regaining its distribution range and some increase in demographic density can be identified, after years of indiscriminate extraction and irrational management. The vicuña is a key species in the high-andean system and in the areas with a favorable environment for their development, its potential as a provider of special fibers under a model of sustainable use must be considered. According to some reports of the Vicuña Convention, by 2005 there was an estimate total of 285,041 vicuñas in the natural distribution range of South America. This information fails to consider the data contributed by the census carried out in Argentina in 2006/7. In Argentina, the results of the last census carried out in the 21

22 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health north of the Colorado River, shows figures that, depending on the sampling method, vary from 72,678 to 127,072 animals, the lowest estimated amount assessed being 15,234 vicuñas (Bureau of Wild Fauna [Dirección de Fauna Silvestre] 2008). The current use of this species is based on shearing animals, both wild and domesticated, under the coverage provided by Appendix II of the CITES. One of the rational use programs was implemented in Jujuy at the Experimental High-Altitude Field [Campo Experimental de Altura] of the National Institute of Agricultural Technology [INTA] in Abra Pampa. A population core or breeding ground was settled there, where many studies were performed on breeding physiology and methodologies on immobilization and shearing were implemented. The program consisted in the delivery of original vicuñas from that field to private producers. The purpose was to incorporate the species to a rational use system, giving small producers the possibility to benefit from the trading of the fiber. Since the initial investment in infrastructure was high, in most cases debt had to be undertaken (whether public or private) which was difficult to amortize. Out of the 28 breeding grounds initially registered, 13 went out of business and from the remainder very few reached the expected ecological and economic sustainability. In 2005, this pilot experience was deemed concluded and, currently, the INTA EEA Abra Pampa is working on research lines to gain more insight on the impact of handling this species to adjust protocols with methodologies and techniques to be applied in the future. However, animals are still sheared, from which nearly 85 kg of hair are obtained a year. Another experience was implemented in Jujuy with Los Pioneros producer association from Cieneguillas, where vicuñas were captured, sheared and released in private fields. Even though this experience was enriching because of its low impact on vicuñas, the impact and benefits for the general community are unknown, since the fiber has not yet been sold (Romero 2009). In the province of Catamarca (under Appendix II since 2002), wild animals continue being captured periodically in provincial Reservoirs. Animals are sheared in community called official shearing. From the herding and enclosing in the Laguna Blanca and Cerro Pabellón Reserve, nearly 50 kg of fiber a year are obtained. There are also private ventures in that province where animals are captured and sheared through different methods and they add up to a total production of nearly 400 kg a year resulting from the different use and management methods. 22

23 Chapter II: History of the Use and Preservation of South American Camelids Guanaco The domestication of the guanaco dates back to 4,200 years B.C., according to Yacobaccio (2004), and it might have derived in the domesticated form: the Llama. It is possible to state that 2,500 years B.P., in the first settlements called formative (with a productive economic basis) there is already presence of camelid fossils comparable to the current llamas (Elkin et al. 1991). As already described in the previous chapter, the distribution of the guanaco is very extensive from the geographical viewpoint and domestication led to having virtually no control over wild populations in the north of the distribution area, which resulted in the indiscriminate and virtually lethal use of the species. The native peoples of what is currently the south of Argentina and Chile depended on this species as a resource used in a more natural fashion, which avoided artificial selection and the creation of new species. Within continental Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego, the guanaco was a fundamental resource for hunter-gatherer groups that lived in those regions during most of the Holocene. Historically, the guanaco was a resource of utmost importance in the economy of Patagonian native hunters (Casamiquela 1983). For them, the guanaco was not only a meat source. Fur was used to make huts, coats, laces and straps, wool for knitting, tendons to make thread, and bones to build different kinds of instruments (Musters 1871; Moreno 1879; Mengoni 1995). For the hunter-gatherers of Patagonia, it was of the essence to have an alternative source of calories which would offset the lack of carbohydrates available; therefore, a possible strategy was the intensive exploitation of meat and animal fat sources (Claraz 1988). Apart from obtaining nutrients out of them, long bones were broken to remove the bone marrow which was mixed with mineral pigments to make paint. The splinters of some long bones (metapodial bones) were shaped and transformed into shaping tools (retocadores), which were used to make stone instruments, and awls to make holes on soft materials such as leather (Mengoni 1995). The native population of guanacos spread throughout South America and before the European conquest there were around 30 or 50 million animals, according to density figures obtained from census carried out in Patagonia (Raedeke 1979). Although these values were never confirmed scientifically, it is possible that because of the availability of forage, water and the lack of many natural predators, population densities were high and on the verge of the carrying capacity of many natural systems. 23

24 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health It is also likely that there were high mortality levels as a result of intense frost cycles and long snows as described in connection with the island of Tierra del Fuego 10 years ago (Montes et al. 2000). Likewise, the populations must have suffered strong changes because of generalized drought cycles or lack of water, where there is a reduction in the recruitment rate or a decrease in fertility caused by a lack of energy. During European colonization, populations might have decreased dramatically (Franklin and Fritz 1991). Estimates show that in the late 19 th century, the total population of guanacos was nearly 7 million animals (Cabrera and Yepes 1960; Torres 1985). Currently, the species covers only 40% of its original distribution and is divided into small and relatively isolated populations (Puig 1995; Franklin et al. 1997; Puig 1992), especially in the north of the Colorado River and in the provinces of Salta, with Catamarca, and La Rioja/San Juan with Mendoza (Bureau of Wild Fauna, 2008). Large guanaco concentrations are still found in Patagonia, especially in the provinces of Río Negro, Chubut, and Santa Cruz (Amaya et al. 2001), where nearly one million animals can be estimated, although no census has been carried out which makes it possible to obtain more precise figures and define estimation errors. From the European colonization onwards, in what is known today as Argentina, livestock was introduced, while fences, roads and other communication ways were built, which contributed to the retraction of guanaco populations. In Patagonia, basic livestock production is, since its inception, extensive and especially focused on sheep breeding (Barbería 1995). Also, the guanaco was an alternative resource for rural settlers with the capture of chulengos (local name for the young guanaco, generally used up to the first year of age, a denomination that can be extended until they reach breeding age) and the hunting of adults (De Lamo 1999). The leather of chulengos was used to make quillangos (a sewed guanaco-fur blanket, preferably made with chulengo fur, used as a cape); adult meat was used to feed shepherd dogs, while adult leather was used to make craft thongs and laces. According to the first official records, from the 1950s to the mid 1970s, guanaco-fur exports from Argentina amounted to 70,000 items per year on average (García Fernández 1993). The legal hunting of chulengos for fur export was an important economic activity. Between 1972 and 1979, 443,655 chulengo furs were legally exported, that is, an average of 63,000, with a peak of 86,000 furs exported during 1979, which were equivalent to an amount of 3.6 million dollars (Ojeda and Mares 24

25 Chapter II: History of the Use and Preservation of South American Camelids 1982). This activity continued during the following decade. In the province of Chubut, a hunting limit of over 118,000 guanacos was set between 1984 and The annual hunting limit for chulengos was usually higher than that of adults and ranged from 1,500 to 16,000 animals for the whole province depending on the season (Ribeiro and Lizurume 1995). In addition, between 1988 and 1993, interprovincial transit permits for 25,767 chulengo leathers and 10,949 guanaco leathers from Chubut were granted (Ribeiro and Lizurume 1995). The criterion followed to grant hunting permits was traditionally based on a statement of abundance made by the owners and managers of farms, who considered the guanaco to be a competitor of sheep over pastures and, therefore, used to overestimate the number of guanacos to obtain more permits (Baldi et al. 1997). As a result of the CITES recommendation in 1993, which proposed the suspension of guanaco imports from Argentina, exports were prohibited by the national Environmental Authority and the collapse of the business activity followed. Currently, Resolution No. 220/98 issued by the former Argentine Department of Natural Resources and Sustainable Development (SRNyDS) and Resolution No. 82/03 issued by the Argentine Department of the Environment and Sustainable Development (SAyDS) set management guidelines governing export activities, interprovincial transit, and trading at the federal level of guanaco products and by-products. These regulations allow the use of guanaco fiber from live animals only. On August 12, 1978, at the request of the Republic of Peru, the guanaco was included in Appendix II of the CITES Convention; therefore, the guanaco can only be used and traded under some restrictions and regulations. Even though guanaco exploitation was intense and trading was significant, Argentina ratified the CITES Treaty in Due to the export of high volumes of guanaco leather from Argentina, including chulengos, in 1992, the CITES Fauna Committee required Argentina to report the biological bases it uses to exploit such species as well as export control procedures. The CITES Administrative Authority of Argentina, after consulting with the provinces involved, failed to provide such information and, therefore, at the 29 th Meeting of the Standing Committee (March 1993), the suspension of guanaco imports from Argentina was recommended until an adequate management plan was submitted. In turn, the Standing Committee approved a study project proposal to assess the situation of the guanaco in Argentina and set a guanaco management plan for economic use, submitted by the CITES Administrative Authority of Argentina. In July, 1995 a research project was submitted which was approved by the CITES 25

26 South American Camelids in Argentina History, Use, and Animal Health in consultation with the Fauna Committee (CITES S-045). Afterwards, in the Patagonian region, different activities were carried out promoted by the Patagonian Regional Wild Fauna Advisor Council [Consejo Asesor Regional Patagónico de la Fauna Silvestre] (CARPFS), with a view to coordinating tasks and criteria to design the plan. Thus, in 1996, a Patagonian Meeting for the Management of Guanaco Populations was held in Puerto Madryn, province of Chubut. A series of agreements on the coordination of activities by provincial governments and some technical aspects to be considered in the final drafting of the Management Plan resulted from such meeting. A year later, in parallel to the Exotic Species Workshop, held in Bariloche, progress was made on agreements concerning working methods and the harmonization of legislation among provinces. When Resolution No. 220/98, issued by the former SRNyDS, entered into force, there was a recess in regional activities until 2000, when a meeting of authorities was held in Allen, Río Negro. In such meeting, agreement was reached on holding a technical forum in the context of the CARPFS to outline methodologies, marking systems, and minimum contents for management plans at breeding grounds. In November 2000, several agreements were reached and specific recommendations were made to carry out population assessments which were embodied in Annex I to Resolution No. 82/03. Meanwhile, in Chubut, a Provision (52/2000, DFyFS) was issued whereby a Registry of Evaluators was created at the provincial level. In 2002, a Workshop on Guanaco Fiber was held, followed by a Technical Meeting where information was given on the progress made in management types, and agreement was reached to draft another regulation which replaced Resolution No. 220/98. Also in 2002, the meeting continued in Buenos Aires, where the criteria to make a final draft of such regulation were agreed on. Finally, in 2004, scientific and technical experts, as well as provincial and national authorities, were called to work together on the preparation and final drafting of a Management Plan that governed the different aspects of guanaco protection, preservation, and management. In this context, two workshops were held (in Buenos Aires and Trelew) in 2004, where technical grounds were discussed and the legal aspects that the Management Plan ought to include were analyzed. A drafting Committee was selected, composed of representatives from the different sectors, which was entrusted with the preparation of a document that embodied all the conclusions reached by the working commissions during the workshops. By means of Resolution No. 477 of the Argentine Department of the Environment and Sustainable Development, the Guanaco 26