NOAA Technical Report NMFS 151 A Technical Report of the Fishery Bulletin Cetaceans of Venezuela: Their Distribution and Conservation Status Aldemaro Romero A. Ignacio Agudo Steven M. Green Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara January 2001 U.S. Department of Commerce Seattle, Washington 1 Abstract.–Sighting, stranding, and cap­ Cetaceans of Venezuela: Their Distribution and ture records of whales and dolphins for Venezuela were assembled and analyzed Conservation Status to document the Venezuelan cetacean fauna and its distribution in the eastern Caribbean. An attempt was made to con­ Aldemaro Romero firm species identification for each of the Macalester College records, yielding 443 that encompass 21 Environmental Studies Program and Department of Biology species of cetaceans now confirmed to 1600 Grand Ave. occur in Venezuelan marine, estuarine, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55105-1899 and freshwater habitats. For each species, E-mail address: [email protected] we report its global and local distribu­ tion, conservation status and threats, and the common names used, along with our A. Ignacio Agudo proposal for a Spanish common name. Fundacetacea, Fundación Sudamericana Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) is the “Saida Josefina Blondell de Agudo” most commonly reported mysticete. The para la Conservación de Mamíferos Acuáticos long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus P. O. Box 010, 88010-970 capensis) is the most frequent of the odon­ Florianópolis, Santa Catarina-SC, Brazil tocetes in marine waters. The boto or tonina (Inia geoffrensis) was found to be ubiquitous in the Orinoco watershed. The Steven M. Green distribution of marine records is consis­ Department of Biology tent with the pattern of productivity of University of Miami Venezuelan marine waters, i.e., a concen­ P.O. Box 249118 ′ ′ tration at 63°07 W through 65°26 W with Coral Gables, Florida 33124 records declining to the east and to the west. An examination of the records for all cetaceans in the Caribbean leads us Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara to conclude that seven additional species Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute may be present in Venezuelan waters. 1700 South Shore Rd. San Diego, California 92109 Present address: Tethys Research Institute viale G.B. Gadio 2, I-20121 Milano, Italy Introduction species in the southern Caribbean and estimated that an additional four The cetaceans inhabiting the Carib­ would eventually be found. Casinos bean are poorly known (Jefferson and (1986) reported 24 confirmed species Lynn, 1994). A few taxonomic papers and predicted one more for the south­ on the Windward Islands region east Caribbean. Mignucci-Giannoni1 (largely summarized in Caldwell et reported 24 species for Puerto Rico al., 1971a) were a consequence of and the Virgin Islands. Cuervo Díaz studying whaling in the area (Price, et al. (1986) cited eight confirmed 1985). Most of the other publications species and 15 expected for the Co­ have focused on a particular species lombian Caribbean and two species or on sightings or strandings at a par­ for the Colombian rivers. Prieto Ro­ ticular locality. dríguez (1988) cited nine confirmed Surveys have been limited in scope species for that same region. Vidal and duration. Erdman et al. (1973) (1990) expanded the list to 15 ma­ first surveyed the area’s cetacean fau­ na, concentrating on the northeast­ 1 Mignucci-Giannoni, A. A. 1996. Marine ern Caribbean. They identified seven mammals strandings in Puerto Rico and the species and noted the presence of United States and British Virgin Islands. Department of Marine Sciences, University twenty more that were not identified. of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, 247 p., unpubl. Later van Bree (1975) confirmed 21 doctoral dissertation. 2 NOAA Technical Report NMFS 151 rine species and predicted that at least one more would Data compilation be found. Debrot et al. (1998) reviewed the records for the Leeward Dutch Antilles and confirmed 13 re­ Data were compiled from both scientific and nontech­ cords for those islands. Examination of the distribution­ nical literature, from collections of museums and sim­ al records of some species has led many investigators ilar institutions, and from unpublished sightings by to predict that others are present in the Caribbean al­ reliable observers, including those using photographs though they remain unreported (Caldwell et al., 1971a; or videotape recordings (Table 2). These embrace, but van Bree, 1975; Cuervo Díaz et al., 1986; Perrin and are not limited to, records of stranded, accidentally Gilpatrick, 1994; Perrin and Hohn, 1994; Perrin et al., caught, and intentionally captured animals (see Romero 1994a; Perrin et al., 1994c). et al., 1997b). We include in this compilation only Although there have been some systematic aerial sur­ those reports from scientific publications and popular veys of the area (e.g., Meade and Koehnken, 1991; No­ accounts that provide sufficient information, such as tarbartolo di Sciara2), they have been of limited du­ clear descriptions, drawings, or photographs, to permit ration. Other sources of knowledge about Venezuela’s unambiguous species identification. Recognizing the cetacean fauna are sparse in comparison to some other problems of using sighting records for species identifi­ regions of the world because of two major factors: ab­ cation (Evans, 1980), we include only those by quali­ sence of an organized whaling industry and lack of in­ fied observers reporting very distinctive species such as terest by local naturalists. Foreigners have generated humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), killer whales most of the information on cetaceans in Venezuela (Ta­ (Orcinus orca), and sperm whales (Physeter macrocepha­ ble 1). Romero et al. (1991) attempted the first com­ lus). Original sources were used wherever possible; sec­ prehensive compilation of records of Venezuelan ceta­ ondary sources are noted in brackets. All unpublished ceans, documenting 17 species. Later, Romero et al. material has been deposited in the libraries of the (1997b) showed that cetacean utilization by Venezue­ International Whaling Commission (IWC, Cambridge, lan fishermen was much more extensive than previously United Kingdom) and the University of Miami (Coral known, thus providing a basis for evaluating threats to Gables, Florida). the conservation status of Venezuelan species. We tried to independently verify the identification of This paper summarizes all the records that we could every specimen in Venezuelan collections. Appendix 1 locate or were made available to us regarding cetaceans shows the list of institutions from which specimens were in Venezuelan marine and freshwater environments. We studied, their abbreviations and locations. We are aware present 443 records comprising reports of about 5,000 there may be additional information at some institu­ individual animals spanning 21 confirmed species. We tions that was not made available to us [e.g., the unveri­ interpret them, where possible, to suggest the conserva­ fied preliminary findings from the Caribbean Stranding tion status of these species. This report updates and sup­ Network (P.R.) reported by Díaz et al. (1995)]. plants Romero et al. (1991) and we therefore encour­ age referring to and citing this document rather than Taxonomic arrangement the earlier one. We follow the most recent cetacean species list and tax­ onomic order recognized by the IWC Scientific Com­ Materials and methods mittee (Perrin et al., 1994b) except for the position of the family Physeteridae where we follow Heyning Area of coverage (1995). Taxonomic ranks above the genus level follow Barnes et al. (1985). For the genus Stenella, we follow Venezuelan coastal localities include both Caribbean Perrin et al. (1987). Discussion of taxonomic status of and North Atlantic waters. We include all inland waters species is included only when relevant to the nomen­ within Venezuela and marine waters within the terri­ clature used in this paper. Taxonomic names of species torial sea, namely the 670,000 km2 of maritime space follow Rice (1998) and the conventions of nomencla­ (Territorial Sea + Contiguous Zone + Inner Waters + ture and format are as recommended by the Interna­ Continental Margin + Continental Shelf + Exclusive tional Commission for Zoological Nomenclature. Economic Zone) as defined by the Law of the Sea (cf. Romero, 1990). Common or vernacular names English names follow standard nomenclature (Perrin et al., 1994b). Spanish names are given in alphabetical 2 Notarbartolo di Sciara, G. 1979. Progress report July and August 1979. Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute, 1700 South Shore Rd., order for each species. Those names that are used in San Diego, California 92109, 2 p. Venezuela are preceded by an asterisk. For names used Romero et al.: Cetaceans of Venezuela: Their Distribution and Conservation Status 3 Table 1 History of major developments in Venezuelan cetology. Date Development Source 6,000–2,000 ybp Utilization of cetaceans by aboriginals Sanoja, 1989 1498 First cetacean sighting by a European. C. Columbus names the Paria Gulf as Columbus, 1498 “Golfo de la Ballena” (“Whale’s Gulf”), a feeding ground for whales. 1647 First written description of a cetacean (Inia geoffrensis). de Carvajal, 1648 1755 First scientific description of I. geoffrensis, by P. Löfling. Manuscript remains Romero et al., 1997a unpublished to date. 1782 First publication of a description of a Venezuelan cetacean (I. geoffrensis), Gilij, 1782 by S. Gilij. 1814 Publication of von Humboldt’s encounter with I. geoffrensis, and possibly von Humboldt, 1814 Sotalia