Talk:Vicuña

message: the Genetic_bottleneck part maynot be completely true, it's implied from the current situations though. If anyone wishes to contest it, they can delete it if and only if there is absolutely no proof or if there is definite proof. Vincent Gray 05:33, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Should any difference be noted between vicugna vicugna, lama vicugna, and camelus vicugna?  I'm not sure of the differences, does anyone know? DBishop1984 15:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe different scientists often have different ideas about how to classify animals, and those names come out of different schemes to classify them, rather than different animals. I have no idea how to choose among different classification schemes, but the article in its current form reflects what I know about how the various camelids are probably related.—MiguelMunoz (talk) 22:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The three species you list all refer to the Vicuña (Vicugna vicugna), the problem lies in determining whether different species belong in separate groups, and which ones. So the answer is they are all the same thing, but since WP:MAM follows MSW3 we recognise Vicugna vicugna as correct. Jack (talk) 18:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Created Vicugna, didn't add anything from this article though. Jack (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Since all these animals can breed together with minor fertility problems, they are barely different species, let alone genera.  One genus name (either Lama or Vicugna) will eventually need to be chosen, and the species glama, guanicoe, vicugna and pacos will classified under it.  Correctrix (talk) 03:23, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Species?

message: "Today, the vicuña have recovered to about 125,000 but organizations such as the IUCN and the U.S. Department of the Interior still consider it endangered." Yet the species is listed as Least Concern by the IUCN? Jack (talk) 01:04, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reference we can examine? —MiguelMunoz (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  is the reference contradicting the statement. Cheers, Jack (talk) 18:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

text:  Thanks. That's a useful site. From what I can tell, the claim about it's endangered status in Wikipedia dates back to at least 2006 (that's as far back as I looked), but the IUCN reassessed its status in 2008, so the article needs to be updated. I should note that the IUCN feels that an active conservation program is still needed to protect the species. Whatever we say should reflect this. I have no idea what the Department of the Interior's current view is, but we should probably find out before rewriting this. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 04:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

text:  I just found this link on the Fish & Wildlife web site. They still have it as endangered. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 04:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

text:  Okay, the FWS lists Equador's population as endangered, but elsewhere has reduced its status to threatened. So encapsulating that info in a simple sentence will be tricky. Here's what I'm thinking: The third paragraph of the "Vicuña fiber" section should be placed in its own section called "Conservation Status," placed before the "Vicuña fiber" section, and revised to make it current. Then the sentence in the opening paragraph can be revised to this: Today, the vicuña have recovered to about 125,000, and while conservation organizations have reduced its level of threat, they still call for conservation programs. (Does the phrase "level of threat" work for you?) —MiguelMunoz (talk) 09:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Conservation status" could be used instead of "level of threat", I've rearranged the section headings with conservation at the end. That section needs updating, as does the last paragraph in the lead. When you reference the FWS make sure it goes within  tags as an inline reference. Cheers, Jack (talk) 12:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I rewrote the last sentence of the Conservation status section. I'm not sure what you mean by inline reference, but please feel free to tinker with the reference if you're not happy with it. Also, I'm moving the section up, since the Vicuña Fiber section refers to its conservation status. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 20:49, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

text: I rearranged a few things and rewrote the opening paragraph. I'm reasonably happy with the article, at least regarding vicuña's conservation status and lineage.—MiguelMunoz (talk) 21:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Actually, I'm still not quite happy with "level of threat," but I didn't change it to conservation status because the phrase "reduced its conservation status" doesn't make sense. A level may be reduced, and a status may be changed. Feel free to tinker.—MiguelMunoz (talk) 21:18, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endangered? 

message: I don't understand how something annual was only done every four years.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.181.205 (talk) 04:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  annually? 

message: Should this content be shortened and added?
Loro Piana Italian uses vicuna wool -- the Incas called it "the fiber of the gods" -- for its best products. Suits made from vicuna cost $23,000, compared with $4,400 for those made from merino, which comes from sheep.
Loro Piana buys about 60% to 70% of Peru's supply of vicuna fleece. A couple of years ago, a Loro Piana consortium bought 100% through a contract with the government. As products made with vicuna proliferate, Loro Piana may find itself banking on a material of diminishing exclusivity, exactly the problem it was looking to avoid.
In 1994, Loro Piana formed a consortium that included Condortips, a textile producer from the southern Peruvian city of Arequipa, and Lanerie Agnona SpA, a northern Italian producer of knitwear. The consortium agreed to pay around $400 a kilogram of vicuna fleece -- at the time, about 14 times the price of cashmere, Loro Piana says. It also pledged to finance an association of vicuna herders to help improve breeding and conservation techniques.
However, Loro Piana's 1994 deal with the Peruvian government expired in 2005, prompting the influx of competitors into the Andean high plains.
The arrangement fueled a comeback for Peru's vicunas. With sales of fleece generating income for farmers,
the herds became a valuable resource, prompting the Peruvian government to send troops into the Pampa
Galeras to defend the animals from guerrillas. About 180,000 vicunas now roam the Andean highlands --
more than double the number when the trade ban was relaxed. Mr. Loro Piana thinks the herd could top one
million within a decade.
"A large, large part of the increase in numbers is a result of the [economic] incentive," says Jane Wheeler, a
researcher with Conopa, a Lima research institute that monitors Peru's vicuna populations. "People were
suddenly more interested in having them alive than killing them for their pelts."
Bringing the vicuna back to the market, however, turned out to be as tricky as restoring the herds. It's hard to
pitch a product to a generation of consumers unaware of its existence, let alone its exclusivity. Vicuna's status
as an animal in danger of extinction also created regulatory hurdles.
Peru had cleared the fleece for export, but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service kept a trade ban in place until
2002. "Fifty percent of our market was lost. So I was really discouraged for a while," Mr. Loro Piana recalls.Source: Fashion firm seeks edge with rare animal --- Loro Piana has lock on soft vicuna wool, but new rivals
loom
By Stacy Meichtry
1,893 words
22 February 2007
The Wall Street Journal Asia
BeeBrinks (talk) 07:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Passage: Modern usage of Vicuna fleece 

message: I have observed and photographed vicuna up to 5500m in the Cordillera Vilcanota. I think the altitude range cited here is not correct.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgekwatson (talk • contribs) 18:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Altitude range 

message: The article should say what the vicuña's natural predators are. Also why did people hunt them? Were they hunted primarily for their meat or their pelts, or both, or something else? The article should say. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 22:38, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Predators 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Vicuña. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110304004355/http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se:80/artspec_information.asp?thingid=42654 to http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se/artspec_information.asp?thingid=42654
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090201171201/http://ecos.fws.gov:80/speciesProfile/SpeciesReport.do?spcode=A02L to http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/SpeciesReport.do?spcode=A02L
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lightandshadow.tv/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=61&Itemid=87&lang=en
*Added  tag to http://web.mac.com/epasquel/iWeb/Website%20de%20Enrique%20Pasquel/publicaciones_files/Privaticemos%20las%20vicu
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is it worth a mention that Sherman Adams one of the most powerful men in Washington in his time
had his career torpedoed for accepting a Vicuna coat and oriental rug from a boston
merchant?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Adams#Scandal
--Patbahn (talk) 01:00, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vicuna Coat as Political Scandal 

message: The first spelling occurs once, the second one twice - which is correct?213.127.210.95 (talk) 16:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  chaccu/chacu?