Animals

The vicar of Rio Douro names rabbits, hares, partridges, wolves, foxes and badgers when describing the mountains in 1758. Adds mountain pigs of passage and places the partridges only in some parts. These language differences are part of the testimony and deserve to be preserved.

The report describes cold, windy and snowy mountains in winter. It brings animals and landscape closer, but does not present counts, observation methods or a scientific inventory. It does not allow to conclude that all the mentioned species continue in the same places today.

The vicar of Bucos mentions partridges, rabbits, wolves, foxes and wild boars, which he describes as sparsely plentiful. He points out carqueja, heather and tojo on the hills. It is the landscape that recorded at that time, not a current inventory nor a promise to spot these animals.

The memory also mentions goats as the most abundant cattle and some large cattle. Thus, the same document gathers farm animals and fauna that the vicar describes as hunting. Separating the two groups helps to read the rural life of the period.

The expression of little abundance is an appreciation of the author, without method of counting presented. It does not allow directly to compare 1758 with a census of current fauna. The interest of the report is also in what you choose to observe: animals, forests, terrain and uses of the mountains appear together.

Javali, deer, deer and mountain goat are the main natural prey of the wolf presented by the platform for Portugal. This national list does not mean that all occur in Cabeceiras. Knowing a predator implies also understanding its prey. The platform explains that the recovery of wild prey depends on both natural expansion and reintroductions. These stories have different scales and origins: recovering one species in one region does not demonstrate its presence in another.

The page includes a photograph whose legend identifies a wild boar predatored by wolves in Serra da Cabreira, in Cabeceiras de Basto, with credit to Ismael Cunha. The legend establishes a local link, but does not indicate the date or allows calculating the frequency of predation. The photograph was not reproduced here.

There is another useful distinction when looking at animals in the mountains: a domestic breed created in freedom, like Garrano, does not become a wild species. The landscape can gather animals with different stories. This comparison does not show that a concrete animal is trapped from the wolf or that all the species mentioned share the same mountain section.

Trouts, bogas and scallops are the names registered by the vicar of Rio Douro in 1758. It highlights trout as more numerous and distinguishes winter fishing from summer. They are assessments of the report, without counting that allow to measure abundance.

The testimony brings fauna closer to the uses of water and the lives of villages. Ancient common names do not equal complete scientific identifications; the practices described also do not establish the current rules of fishing.

In the memory of Santa Senhorinha of 1758, the abbot mentions trouts, echelons and bogas in the river he describes. The text combines observation of water and appreciation of fish as food. These common names are a historical clue: they do not accurately identify all species or prove their current presence. The old reference to fishing also does not define today's rules.

In the memory of Alvite, the parish priest described weak pastures in the Orada, used throughout the year by oxen, beasts, sheep, and goats. He also mentioned rabbits and partridges in the context of hunting. It is a testimony of 1758, not a current inventory of fauna or indication of hunting sites.

To study a river, it is interesting to know which organisms live in it and in what abundance. The Portuguese Environment Agency includes benthic invertebrates among the elements used in biological evaluation, together with other groups, such as fish and plants.

The evaluation also considers chemical, physicochemical and hydromorphological aspects. It is necessary to combine observations, sampling and analysis: transparent water or a single animal is not enough to classify a river. This explanation does not attribute a current state to watercourses of Cabeceiras.