48 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 
Series 4, Volume 65, Supplement II 
More distributional data are needed to test and define Angolan zoogeographie zones with more 
preeision, as the eurrently available information may be insuffieient for statistieally sound model¬ 
ing and analysis. Also, due to the uneetainty regarding the phylogenetie and phylogeographie 
affinities among many taxa, even a priori expert elassifieation of given taxa as representatives of 
“northern” or “southern” lineages, beeomes a diffieult task. Although it is appears evident that 
herpetofaunal data support both Boeage’s original idea (and its subsequent iterations by Monard, 
Frade, and Crawford-Cabral) of a north-south separation with further, sometimes interdigitating 
subdivisions, and the signifieanee of the Angolan Esearpment as a eenter of endemism as well as 
a eorridor and refugium for West/Central Afriean taxa as proposed by Hall (1960), Crawford- 
Cabral (1991), and Clark et al. (2011), more data are needed to better understand Angola 
zoogeography. 
Conservation 
The laek of modem data on the distribution of Angolan biodiversity is a serious issue for 
eonservation planning. Currently, there is no Red List for Angolan vertebrate speeies and, aside 
from a few ieonie animals sueh as the Angolan Giant Sable {Hippotragus niger variani Thomas, 
1916) or marine turtles, no animals are the foeus of major eonservation programs in the eountry. 
However, new programs are eurrently in preparation by MinAmb and other national and interna¬ 
tional institutions. The vast majority of the amphibian speeies oeeurring in Angola have been eval¬ 
uated by lUCN and 91 speeies (78% of the speeies diversity) are eonsidered Least Coneem. In 
addition, 22 amphibian speeies (approximately 20% of the speeies diversity), in whieh are inelud- 
ed all the endemie speeies, remain elassified as Data Defieient. For reptiles (exeluding marine 
turtles), 217 speeies, representing 78% of the speeies diversity, have not been evaluated by lUCN, 
whereas 7 speeies are eonsidered Data Defieient, 40 are Least Coneem, three are Vulnerable, and 
another is Critieally Endangered. For turtles and tortoises (exeluding marine turtles), a group 
partieularly affeeted by habitat loss and human eonsumption, only three speeies have been assigned 
a risk assessment and another has been determined as Data Defieient. Croeodilians range from low 
risk eategories — Least Coneem for the eommon Nile Croeodile, Crocodylus niloticus (Crocody- 
lus suchus, not yet assessed by the lUCN, may also oeeur in Angola) to medium (the Afriean Dwarf 
Croeodile, Osteolaemus tetraspis; Vulnerable) and high risk {Mecistops catraphractus; Critieally 
Endangered). These last two are known only from the Cabinda enelave. A total of 107 speeies of 
lizards (Squamata, exeluding snakes) that oeeur in Angola have not been evaluated by the lUCN, 
whereas three speeies are eonsidered Data Defieient (Nucras scalaris, Panaspis cabindae, and 
Trachylepis bayonii). The remaining taxa are eonsidered Least Coneem. The situation is similar in 
snakes with 107 taxa that have not been evaluated, three taxa eonsidered as Data Defieient (Namib- 
iana rostrata, Atractaspis reticulata heterochilus, and Lycophidion hellmichi), and 18 taxa elassi¬ 
fied as Least Coneem (see Fig. 30 for a graphie summary). 
Due to the seareity of data regarding eertain taxa, the majority of the Angolan herpetofauna 
remain “Not Evaluated” aeeording to the lUCN elassifieations. The partieularly high number of 
“Not Evaluated” and “Data Defieienf ’ taxa poses a potentially serious problem, as it remains 
unelear what eonservation and management measures might best sustain these speeies and popula¬ 
tions. Aeeording to the lUCN guidelines, “Not Evaluated” (as well as “Data Defieient”) is not a 
eategory of threat, although until sueh time as an assessment is made, taxa listed in these eategories 
should not be treated as if they were non-threatened, and it may even be appropriate to give them 
the same degree of attention as threatened taxa (lUCN 2001). Most “Data Defieienf’ amphibians 
and reptiles are listed as sueh beeause either distributions are inadequately known or beeause there 
are taxonomie issues that preelude eorreetly evaluating any of the eriteria. Distributional informa- 
