Semblanzas Ictiológicas: José Ignacio Fernandino

A través de esta serie intentaremos conocer diferentes facetas personales de los integrantes de nuestra “comunidad”. El cuestionario, además de su principal objetivo, con sus respuestas quizás nos ayude a encontrar entre nosotros puntos en común que vayan más allá de nuestros temas de trabajo y sea un aporte a futuros estudios históricos. Esperamos que esta iniciativa pueda ser otro nexo entre los ictiólogos de la región, ya que consideramos que el resultado general trascendería nuestras fronteras.

Semblanzas Ictiológicas Iberoamericanas: Ignacio Doadrio Villarejo.

A través de esta nueva serie tratamos de conocer diferentes aspectos personales de los integrantes de la comunidad ictiológica iberoamericana. Esta iniciativa, comparte el espíritu y objetivo de las semblanzas nacionales buscando informalmente, otro punto de unión en la “comunidad de ictiólogos iberoamericanos”. Quizás esté equivocado en mi apreciación, pero creo que vale la pena este intento, ya que, con la colaboración generosa e insoslayable de los integrantes de este “universo”, señalaremos un registro en el tiempo de la Ictiología Neotropical.

Cetaceans of Venezuela: Their distribution and conservation status.

Sighting, stranding, and capture records of whales and dolphins for Venezuela were assembled and analyzed to document the Venezuelan cetacean fauna and its distribution in the eastern Caribbean. An attempt was made to confirm species identification for each of the records, yielding 443 that encompass 21 species of cetaceans now confirmed to occur in Venezuelan marine, estuarine, and freshwater habitats. For each species, we report its global and local distribution, conservation status and threats, and the common names used, along with our proposal for a Spanish common name. Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) is the most commonly reported mysticete. The long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis) is the most frequent of the odontocetes in marine waters. The boto or tonina (Inia geoffrensis) was found to be ubiquitous in the Orinoco watershed. The distribution of marine records is consistent with the pattern of productivity of Venezuelan marine waters, i.e., a concentration at 63°07′W through 65°26′W with records declining to the east and to the west. An examination of the records for all cetaceans in the Caribbean leads us to conclude that seven additional species may be present in Venezuelan waters. (PDF file contains 61 pages.)

Nineteenth-century Ship-based Catches of Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the Eastern North Pacific

The 19th century commercial ship-based fishery for gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the eastern North Pacific began in 1846 and continued until the mid 1870’s in southern areas and the 1880’s in the north. Henderson identified three periods in the southern part of the fishery: Initial, 1846–1854; Bonanza, 1855–1865; and Declining, 1866–1874. The largest catches were made by “lagoon whaling” in or immediately outside the whale population’s main wintering areas in Mexico—Magdalena Bay, Scammon’s Lagoon, and San Ignacio Lagoon. Large catches were also made by “coastal” or “alongshore” whaling where the whalers attacked animals as they migrated along the coast. Gray whales were also hunted to a limited extent on their feeding grounds in the Bering and Chukchi Seas in summer. Using all available sources, we identified 657 visits by whaling vessels to the Mexican whaling grounds during the gray whale breeding and calving seasons between 1846 and 1874. We then estimated the total number of such visits in which the whalers engaged in gray whaling. We also read logbooks from a sample of known visits to estimate catch per visit and the rate at which struck animals were lost. This resulted in an overall estimate of 5,269 gray whales (SE = 223.4) landed by the ship-based fleet (including both American and foreign vessels) in the Mexican whaling grounds from 1846 to 1874. Our “best” estimate of the number of gray whales removed from the eastern North Pacific (i.e. catch plus hunting loss) lies somewhere between 6,124 and 8,021, depending on assumptions about survival of struck-but-lost whales. Our estimates can be compared to those by Henderson (1984), who estimated that 5,542–5,507 gray whales were secured and processed by ship-based whalers between 1846 and 1874; Scammon (1874), who believed the total kill over the same period (of eastern gray whales by all whalers in all areas) did not exceed 10,800; and Best (1987), who estimated the total landed catch of gray whales (eastern and western) by American ship-based whalers at 2,665 or 3,013 (method-dependent) from 1850 to 1879. Our new estimates are not high enough to resolve apparent inconsistencies between the catch history and estimates of historical abundance based on genetic variability. We suggest several lines of further research that may help resolve these inconsistencies.