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 pronghorn 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 raccoon. 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, raccoons, 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 pronghorn 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 ownership 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.