THE ITALIAN DELEGATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR GAME AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
APENNINE CHAMOIS Project
Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata 2023
Layout and graphics: Elisa Bossotto Printed in Italy at Tipolitografia Botalla s.r.l. - Gaglianico (BI) Photografic contribution: Giorgio Boscarol, Stefano Franceschetti, Vittorio Fusinato, Marco Pantanella ISBN 9791280561435 © 2023 The CIC Italian Delegation All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of both the copyright owner and the below publisher of this book. This includes the next, measurement criteria and images set out in this Handbook wich may not be reproduced in any form without the prior written consent of the CIC Italian Delegation. Unauthorised reproduction and use will result in legal proceedings.
INDEX Foreword by Nicolò Amosso, Head of the CIC Italian Delegation........................... pag. 7 Preface by Tony Dalby-Welsh, Co-Chair of the CIC ITEB........................................pag. 9 Foreword by Prof. Sandro Lovari..............................................................................pag. 11 Technical report....................................................................................................... pag. 17 Measurement sheets................................................................................................ pag. 27
5
Preface by Nicolò Amosso Head of the CIC Italian Delegation
One of the objectives the Italian Delegation of International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) has pursued, and pursues during my mandate as Head of Delegation, is the deepening of the knowledge of the endemic Italian species of ungulates. In particular, in 2022, a study was published on the Sardinian deer, Cervus elaphus corsicanus, and now it is the turn of the Apennine chamois, Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata. The latter involved the evaluation of trophies of this species in the context of two official measurements, in 2010 and 2018, in Pescasseroli at the Naturalistic Collections of the Natural Park of Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise. On that occasion, it was confirmed that the horns of this species were considerably longer and more spread apart than those of the alpine chamois, as well as totally lacking of horn deposit in them. In light of the research done for the first time, the Italian proposal to assign a specific score to this species was accepted, during the International Trophy Evaluation Board (ITEB), held in 2018 in Bassano del Grappa. I extend my heartfelt thanks to Professor Sandro Lovari, who has contributed decisively to the knowledge of this species with numerous contributions and publications, and for his authoritative preface. I express my deepest gratitude to the CIC Certified Measurers (CCM), in particular, Giorgio Boscarol, who drew up the final report presented to the International Trophy Evaluation Board (ITEB) and carried out a valuable work of coordination. I also thank the National Park of Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise for having made available the study material and for their diligent collaboration. A special thanks to my friend Enzo Berzieri who supported me with his patient and active collaboration.
7
8
Preface by Tony Dalby-Welsh Co-Chair of the CIC International Trophy Evaluation Board
As a Co-Chair of the CIC International Trophy Evaluation Board, one of the major challenges that we face is to elicit the support of national boards in pursuit of ensuring that our data, processes and formulae reflect the changing world in which we operate. One country from whom such support is always forthcoming is Italy and its delegation, whose enthusiasm, eye for detail and mastery of the written word provides a shining example to others. And so it is with this latest treatise on Rupicara pyrenaica ornata; an important piece of work for which my sincere thanks go out to the Italian delegation and to Nicolo Amosso and Enzo Berzieri in particular, whose sense of purpose and will to see through such changes keep the CIC and its TES at the forefront of International Trophy Evaluation.
Tony Dalby-Welsh 18 October 2023
9
APENNINE CHAMOIS Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata NEUMANN, 1899 Foreword by Prof. Sandro Lovari
The Apennine chamois, also called Abruzzo chamois as in historical times it was saved from extinction on only a few mountains in the Abruzzo region, is a subspecies of the Southern chamois Rupicapra pyrenaica (Bonaparte, 1845), distinct from the Pyrenean and Cantabrian chamois subspecies because of biometric, genetical and behavioural differences, which however are not considered strong enough to guarantee their status as a separate full species. However, it is considered a subspecies well differentiated from the other two. Most likely, the chamois of the Apennines and those of the Pyrenean-Cantabrian complex separated relatively recently (12,00010,000 years ago), as suggested by their modest genetic differentiation. Presumably widespread throughout the central-southern Apennines during the Holocene, fossils have been found from the Papasidero cave (Pollino, Cosenza) to the Ripa Grande site on the Sibillini Mountains, in the Marche. In addition to the nucleus that survived on the mountains of the Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park (PNALM), at the end of the 19th century these chamois were still present on the Gran Sasso: in 1890, the last individual of which we have news was being chased by two local hunters when it ran into a group of Farindola mountaineers, who drove it into a ravine to be killed and then eaten. The chamois of the current PNALM escaped extinction above all (or perhaps only) thanks to the then Royal Hunting Reserve, which in 1922 was changed into a National Park to save the last chamois and bears of the Apennines. After two strong numerical reductions leaving just a few dozen individuals, which occurred approximately in the years of the two world wars due to the resulting poaching, the PNALM chamois rapidly increased in number, localized on just a few mountains in the park. At the beginning of the 1990s, translocations of these chamois began from the nucleus in the PNALM, which amounted to a few hundred individuals, into other Apennine parks that met the environmental standards required by this magnificent animal. About fifteen individuals were released in the newly established Gran Sasso-Monti della Laga National Park and in the Majella National Park; later on, further releases were also made in the Sibillini Mountains National Park and in the Sirente-Velino Regional Park. Presently, thirty years after the first releases, a total population size of around three thousand Apennine chamois is estimated. Morphologically, the southern chamois is easily recognizable from the northern one, because it shows a very different winter coat. While the northern species has a black/dark brown coat with small whitish spots on the muzzle, throat and rump, the southern one, in addition to the creamcoloured parts of the muzzle, has a large, very light-coloured triangular area from the throat to the sternum while other large whitish spots cover the shoulders and rump. The summer coat, however, is comparable to that of the northern chamois, only more hazel-reddish. In the southern chamois the bony axes of the horns are implanted with a slightly obtuse angle on the frontals of the skull, unlike the northern chamois where the angle is almost straight. The ethmoidal fissures on the rostrum of the skull are almost always closed, unlike those of the northern species where they are almost always open. Overall, if we take in account the morphological, biometric, behavioural and even genetic differences - the latter worthy of further study - there is no doubt that northern and southern chamois cannot be ascribed to the same species.
11
Of course, differences are much smaller between subspecies than between the two chamois species. The Apennine one is on average just a little larger in size than both that of the Pyrenees Rupicapra pyrenaica pyrenaica and that of the Cantabrics Rupicapra pyrenaica parva (both with a body mass of 22-30 kg in relation to sex: in fact the females are just a few kilograms lighter). In autumn, the average weight of an adult male of the Apennine subspecies is just over 30 kg, with very long horns, up to 28-30 cm, in some cases even reaching 31 cm. Adult females have an average body mass of 26-27 kg, with slightly thinner horns than males’, but still 25 cm in length and often even more, up to 30 cm. The development of the horns of the Apennine chamois is remarkable in all individuals and in both sexes: much greater than that of the two Franco-Iberian subspecies. For example, the horns of the subspecies R.p. parva (the one with the smallest horns) are on average half as long as those of the Apennine subspecies, with intermediate measures in the Pyrenean subspecies. The reasons for this reduction of horns from East to West are not known, yet. Potential explanations could be a genetic origin of this character, or an environmental origin. The second hypothesis is perhaps the most probable one. Palaeontological and genetic data suggest that the southern chamois populated Europe already during the Riss glaciations (from around 347,000 to 128,000 years ago), while the northern chamois would arrive during the Würm glaciations (from around 115,000 to 11,600 years ago) from the East or North-East, probably entering and interrupting the geographical distribution of the southern chamois at the level of the Western Alps, with some hybridization events that have left traces in the genotypes of the chamois of the Chartreuse Rupicapra rupicapra cartusiana and of some western Alpine populations R.r. rupicapra. The last southern chamois, which survived in the Apennines, the Pyrenees and the Cantabrics, would therefore have been separated into two or three subpopulations, which then differentiated in the current subspecies. A recent study has shown the importance of the nature of the geological substrate, i.e. the nature of the soil, on the juvenile growth of horns in chamois: calcareous or predominantly calcareous soils would promote a greater growth than siliceous soils through associated variables such as richness and quality of pasture vegetation. However, other ecological factors have also been assessed as important, for example, the persistence of snow coverage and the southern aspect of slopes. The Apennines are almost completely limestone mountains and this could explain the strong cornual growth in the first 4-5 years of life of chamois, but so are the Pyrenees and the Cantabrics. There must be other reasons, then. We know relatively little about the ecology of chamois on these mountains, but it is possible that local conditions are less rich or at least less favourable than those of the Apennines. In general, body growth is not uniform in all anatomical parts. There are tissues with high growth priority and others with secondary growth priority, in relation to the richness of local natural resources. The former are fundamental for the survival of individuals, for example the brain and the skull, while the latter are not essential, for example horns, antlers and even the cerebral cortex. In suboptimal environmental contexts, secondary growth tissues are reduced to save the energy necessary for their production, to the advantage of those with greater priority growth. If the environment of the Cantabrians and the Pyrenees were somehow of “lower quality” for chamois than the Apennines, the puzzling strong diversity in terms of horn growth, but not in terms of body mass, could be explained. The ongoing meteorological change, which in recent decades has determined a considerable increase of about one and a half degrees (°C) in spring temperatures in the central Apennines, is eliciting an altitudinal change of plant associations in alpine grasslands - especially, but not only, in secondary ones - raising the limit of forest vegetation and moving cryophilous (i.e. which depends on prolonged snow coverage) vegetation higher. Furthermore, at elevations below 2000 meters above sea level plant associations have anticipated the green up season by about one month and are slowly moving to refuge areas at higher altitudes, 12
or to slopes where they still find suitable snow conditions. Among these plant associations, the Festuco-Trifolietum thalii is of particular importance both for lactating female chamois and, in partcular, for the weaning of the young, which are born from the early days of May to mid-June. In fact, chamois kids need a rich diet in the summer months to grow adequately before facing the rigours of the following winter and the clover/fescue plant community is the most nutritious pasture on the Apennines. However, if the mountain does not reach a sufficient elevation to allow the colonization of the higher altitudes by cryophilous vegetation, this gradually decreases until it disappears, replaced by more thermophilic, fibrous and less nutritious vegetation. The mountains of the Apennines are not high, reaching just under 3000 meters only on the Majella and Gran Sasso massifs: in the PNALM, for example, they are just over 2000 meters above sea level; furthermore, at higher altitudes the terrain is on average rockier and poorer, less suitable for vegetation. The effects of climate change therefore determine an early green-up at the lower altitudes by about one month, which translates into an early decrease in quality due to the summer dry-out of pasture: the kids who continue to be born at the end of spring - are therefore weaned on low quality vegetation, thus not reaching the appropriate physical conditions which would allow them to survive the winter, year after year inducing a gradual population decline. This event has not only been verified in the Apennines, but also in the Rocky Mountains and in the Alps, involving Rocky mountain goats, bighorn and Alpine ibex. However, the peaks of these mountains are much higher than those of the Apennines. Therefore the effects of what has been described above have so far been less severe, with exceptions. Furthermore, on the Apennines, the potentially invasive presence of red deer Cervus elaphus contributes to the summer impoverishment of these important criophylous grasslands, thus accelerating the process triggered by the ongoing meteorological change, thus worsening the winter mortality of chamois kids. The greatest risk lies in the duration and evolution of the climatic change: if the increase of spring-summer temperatures persists, even the higher elevations will be affected, leading to a gradual decrease in the total number of chamois because many areas which presently are still suitable for this herbivore will no longer be so. The future of this particular subspecies therefore appears at least grey, if not black, despite the numerical increase it has had in recently introduced areas, such as Majella and Gran Sasso, where the peaks are higher than those in the PNALM. However, in recent years, even in these new sub-populations the population size shows signs of being close to local saturation. Further numerical “bottlenecks” would contribute to erode the already low genetic variability of the Apennine chamois which - let’s not forget it – may have lived for a few centuries (or even longer) at low density, with recent decreases to just several tens in the periods of World War 1 and 2. Namely, Apennine chamois may not afford the “luxury” of a further loss of genetic variability through inbreeding. Currently, the Apennine chamois is considered “vulnerable to extinction” by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), as well as being listed amongst the “particularly protected species” by Italian law n° 157, and being mentioned in Appendix 2 of the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES 1973). A downlisting primed by its current abundance and range increase would appear premature and should take into consideration the particular risks that this herbivore is going to run in the coming decades, if – as it is most likely - the current meteorological change will continue or worsen, turning into an actual climatic change. As a glacial relic, which depends to a large extent for its survival on rare and extra-zonal vegetation (also a glacial relic in the Apennines), the progressive warming up of climate could hardly benefit it. The future of these chamois will depend on wise and far-sighted management, taking into account the effects of climate by projecting them over time: the specter of extinction has by no means been removed forever from Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata. 13
Comment on biometric measures and CIC assessment
Surprisingly, a list of biometric measurements, including horns, of the Apennine chamois is missing in scientific literature, with two exceptions: the data published by M. Couturier in his impressive volume Le chamois (Arthaud, Grenoble 1938), taken from Camerano (1916), and the data presented in this file of data sheets on skull and horn materials provided by the Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park officials to the CIC measurement operators. The statistical evaluation of the data reported by M. Couturier can be found in Lovari and Scala (1980). Although for a few decades measurements have been taken from chamois darted in the PNALM, their publication is still missing. What is reported in this preface on the body mass and horn measurements of R.p.ornata was taken from Lovari and Bruno (2003). The work conducted by the C.I.C. therefore qualifies as an important contribution to the biometric knowledge of this chamois. Unfortunately, several skulls were damaged and therefore measurements were incomplete. It would be very useful to expand data collection to skeletal material and body mass of R.p. ornata not only from the PNALM, but also from the sub-populations now present in the other Apennine parks where it was translocated, to evaluate the effects of different pasture, elevation and local climatic factors on differences in skeletal development, including horns.
Main bibliography
Camerano L (1916) Ricerche intorno ai camosci. Part III. Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences of Turin (Class of Physical, Mathematical and Natural Sciences) 65: 1–82. Chirichella R., Ciuti S., Grignolio S., Rocca M., Apollonio M. (2012) The role of geological substrate for horn growth in ungulates: a case study on Alpine chamois. Evolutionary Ecology DOI 10.1007/ s10682-012-9583-1 Corlatti L., Lorenzini R., Lovari S. (2011) The conservation of the chamois Rupicapra spp. Mammal Review 41: 163-174. Ferrari C., Rossi G., Cavani, C. (1988). Summer food habits and quality of female, kid and subadult Apennine chamois, Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata Neumann, 1899 (Artiodactyla, Bovidae). Z. Sauegetierk. 53:170–177. Ferretti F., Corazza M., Campana I., Pietrocini V., Brunetti C., Scornavacca D., Lovari S. (2015) Competition between wild herbivores: reintroduced red deer and Apennine chamois. Behavioral Ecology 26: 550-559. Gottfried M, Pauli H, Futschik A, Akhalkatsi M, Barančok P, Alonso JLB et al (2012) Continent-wide response of mountain vegetation to climate change. Nature Clim Change 2:111–115. Lovari S., Bruno E. (2003) Rupicapra pyrenaica (Bonaparte, 1845). In Boitani L., Lovari S., Vigna Taglianti A. (ed.s) Fauna d’Italia: MAMMALIA III. Carnivora – Artiodactyla, pp. 403-412. Calderini Editore, Bologna. Lovari S., Ferretti F., Corazza M., Minder I., Troiani N., Ferrari C., Saddi A. (2014) Unexpected consequences of reintroductions: competition between increasing red deer and threatened Apennine chamois. Animal Conservation 17: 359-370.
14
Lovari S., Franceschi S., Chiatante G., Fattorini L., Fattorini N., Ferretti F. (2020) Climatic changes and the fate of mountain herbivores. Climate Change 162: 2319–2337. Lovari S., Scala C. (1980) Revision of Rupicapra genus. I. A statistical re-evaluation of Couturier’s data on the morphometry of six subspecies of chamois. Bollettino di Zoologia 47: 113-124. Nascetti G., Lovari S., Lanfranchi P., Berducou C., Mattiucci S., Rossi L., Bullini L. (1985) Revision of Rupicapra Genus. III. Electrophoretic studies demonstrating species distinction of chamois populations of the Alps from those of the Apennines and Pyrenees. in Lovari S. (ed.). The biology and management of mountain ungulates, pp. 56-62. Croom-Helm, London. Pérez-Barbería, F. J., García-González, R., Palacios, B. (2010). Rebeco – Rupicapra pyrenaica. In Salvador A., Cassinello S.A.J. (ed.s). Virtual Encyclopedia of Spanish Vertebrados, pp. 1-64. Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid. Scala C., Lovari S. 1984. Revision of Rupicapra Genus. II. A skull and horn statistical comparison of Rupicapra rupicapra ornata and Rupicapra rupicapra pyrenaica chamois. Bollettino di Zoologia 51: 43-52.
Biography
Sandro Lovari, now retired, has been a researcher at the universities of Cambridge, Groningen, Stockholm, Žilina and Beijing and full professor of Animal Behaviour at the University of Siena and other Italian universities, where he taught behavioural ecology, ethology, vertebrate zoology and conservation biology. He is currently professor emeritus at the Natural History Museum of Maremma (Grosseto). Glaxo Award for Science Dissemination (1984) and “Personality of the Year” Prize awarded by the Conseil International de la Chasse (1999), he has also been awarded the CIC Certificate of Excellence in 2022. He has been on the steering boards of several National and Regional parks and has collaborated for over 35 years with the International Union for Conservation of Nature, chairing the IUCN Caprinae Specialist Group for 19 years. He has published more than 260 scientific articles, including 65 on the biology of chamois, and ten books on the behaviour and ecology of large mammals in their natural environment in Europe, Asia, Africa and North America. Since 2020 he has chaired the steering committee of the Snow Leopard Network.
15
Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata Project TECHNICAL REPORT
CIC QA Commission 2010. Measurers: Giorgio Boscarol, Nicola Salvi, Franco Recchia, Sandro Lovari.
17
The International Council for Game and the Wildlife Conservation, since the great exhibition in Berlin, which took place in 1937, has been interested, with regard to typically European wild animals, in searching for “rules” that would allow a comparative evaluation of hunting trophies. These rules became formulas during the sixth sessions of the CIC held in Madrid in 1952 and were applied to the evaluation of certain trophies to evaluate their beauty and importance. The need to express a “value” that was a term of comparison between the trophies of the different species was translated into a numerical result, called CIC score, capable of establishing the excellence of a trophy compared to any other. Today, the CIC score does not only express the beauty of a trophy, but, above all, scientific data on the state of conservation and health of the environment that hosts that particular population. It is precisely this certainty that justifies the application of CIC formulas to antlers, horns and skulls of protected and naturally deceased animals. This gives the measurement of trophies according to the CIC method and undisputed scientific value at the service of protected areas. These areas could take advantage of the voluntary work of the CIC measurers as an indicator of their commitment to safeguarding and protecting the environment and the fauna it hosts, introducing tourism developmental objectives into their management system, demonstrating that the hunting and environmental worlds can work together to produce a result that cannot be achieved individually. Precisely thanks to this synergy it has been possible to measure Apennine chamois trophies Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata found within the protected area and preserved in the Osteological collection of the Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park, thus creating a project that for some time, the entire Italian Delegation of the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) has had at heart: assigning a CIC score to the endemic Apennine subspecies had never been attempted before. The Apennine chamois is one of the most localised Italian faunal entities, included as a priority species in Annex II and IV of the Habitat Directive 92/43/EEC and in other community regulations; it’s worth is such that it has been registered as a subspecies vulnerable to extinction in the red list of mammals drawn up by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature - IUCN-1996) and of particular protection by Italian legislation.
Adult male in autumn coat
18
The same institution of the National Park of Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise has made it possible to manage the Apennine chamois more carefully, determining the growth of the population of the “most beautiful chamois in the world”, as defined by the former park director, Prof. Franco Tassi. The measurement of the trophy with the CIC method represents an important support for the scientific analysis of the evolution and state of ungulate populations in a certain area and over a certain period of time as trophies are excellent and long-lasting indicators of the quality of the game and of its territories. The documentation collected by CIC certified measurers (CCM) has considerable importance for the knowledge of Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata. It was the German zoologist, Oscar Neumann, who first described the Apennine chamois as a separate species from the Alpine one by observing a stuffed specimen preserved in the Genoa Natural History Museum in 1899. The Apennine chamois differs from the Alpine one above all for its winter coat. During the summer months it has a reddish color with the ventral parts and head fading into yellowish. During the winter, however, the coat is longer, thicker and blackish-brown in color on the back, tail, belly and legs, while the hindquarters, muzzle, forehead and the area from the cheeks to the shoulders are yellowish in colour.
Adult male in winter coat
In the winter season, the characteristic pattern of dark fur that covers the eyes like a mask is particularly marked, as it is a light spot on the throat that extends down to the chest, accompanied by two brown stripes placed on the sides of the neck down to the shoulders: these characters are exclusive to the Southern chamois.
19
In the central area of the Park, the Camosciara, the Val di Rose, the Iannanghera Valley and all the peaks immediately behind them, the greatest density of the Apennine chamois has been found up to one decade ago. An important and comforting fact is the presence of increasingly large nuclei, both in the Mainarde and on the Lazio side of the Park, albeit to a lesser extent. Other nuclei are present on the Majella and on the Gran Sasso-Laga (Monte Camicia and Monte Prena) National Parks, as well as in other Apennine areas where it has been translocated.
Distribution of the Apennine chamois in Italy (2016)
20
First evaluation Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata On 12 June 2010, for the first time, an official CIC Commission (AQ 2010) appointed by the President of the Italian Exhibitions and Trophies Commission with the precious support of Professor Sandro Lovari, met in Pescasseroli (AQ) at the Library and Naturalistic Collections office of the National Park of Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise, carried out a measurement with the CIC method of Apennine chamois trophies found in the territory of the National Park and subsequently preserved in the offices of the Park Authority itself. Many of the skulls found and preserved in the National Park’s osteological collection were not in such a condition as to allow the correct application of the CIC method for measurements. Therefore, on that occasion only nine Apennine chamois trophies were measured, but this was enough to stimulate, in the Park Authority technicians, a great scientific curiosity for this splendid ungulate which led them to an immediate comparison with the Alpine chamois Rupicapra rupicapra.
CIC QA Commission 2010
21
Second evaluation Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata On 23 June 2018 an official ABIF Commission (AQ 01-2018), appointed ad hoc, met again in Pescasseroli at the Library and Naturalistic Collections office of the Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park where, following several inspections carried out by official CIC measurers, it was possible to measure another eight Apennine chamois trophies belonging to the osteological collection of the Park Authority and preserved in the homologous collection of the National Park. On the occasion of the two aforementioned evaluations, the notable difference in the horns of the Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata compared to the Alpine species was confirmed. First of all, their horns are very developed: for example, in adult males, they can reach 27/28 cm in length with cases of 30/31 cm and 20/22 cm in height (Camerano 1916). It is in fact known that the growth of the trophy Alpine chamois is not constant throughout its life, that its development is notable up to the third year, decreases in the fourth and fifth (on average 5 millimeters) and then settles on average at growths of 2 -3 millimeters in each subsequent year. Through observation of the cases of the Apennine chamois, it emerges that the growth of the horns continues significantly beyond the third year of life, with a remarkable growth in both sexes even in the fifth year. The beauty rings are very marked, located at regular intervals and often reach up to the top curve. The hook in the Alpine chamois is more pronounced in the male than in the female, while in the Apennine chamois this difference between the sexes appears less marked. Also noteworthy is a greater horn spread compared to Rupicapra rupicapra. Another peculiarity that distinguishes the Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata is the length of the bony cores which are clearly superior to the Alpine ones, implanted, not perpendicular to the skull, but slightly obtuse. It follows that the horns do not grow perpendicularly, but slightly bent backwards. Another feature of Apennine chamois trophies compared to Alpine ones is the complete absence of horn deposit, evidently linked to the different habitat. The craniometric measurements do not differ significantly from the Alpine one except that they are slightly smaller than those of the Alps. Below are some explanatory images of trophies.
22
23
Decision of the Trophy Evaluation Board of the CIC The International Trophy Evaluation Board (ITEB) held in Bassano del Grappa on 27-28 August 2018 accepted the proposal of the Italian Senior International Trophy Judges (STJ) to increase the threshold of two points for each medal level for both sexes, compared to the score expected for the Alpine chamois, thus confirming the absolute excellence of our subspecies.
Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata Medal
Female
Male
Bronze
97
102
Silver
102
107
Gold
107
112
24
25
MEASUREMENT SHEETS according to CIC Trophy Evaluation System
27
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x
x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
24,80
24,80
24,80
1,50
37,20
18,70
1,00
18,70
cm
7,50
4,00
30,00
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
8,20
1,00
8,20
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
7,00
0-3
1,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
Punti Finali
95,10
#
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
Peso
Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 7,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo 24/09/08
Cognome e nome 2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta Canneto
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
28
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 1203
Nazione X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
⁄ CCM ⁄
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione Comm. N°
ITALIA
1
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x
x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
22,60
23,10
22,85
1,50
34,28
16,50
1,00
16,50
cm
7,00
4,00
28,00
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
5,10
1,00
5,10
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
4,00
0-3
0,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
83,88
Punti Finali #
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
Peso
Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 4,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo 14/08/09
Cognome e nome 2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta M.Amaro (ODI)
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 1204
Nazione
X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
⁄ CCM ⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione
1
ITALIA
Comm. N°
29
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
x ♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
28,50
28,60
28,55
1,50
42,83
17,50
1,00
17,50
cm
9,00
4,00
36,00
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
11,30
1,00
11,30
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
4,00
0-3
0,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
Punti Finali
107,63
#
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
Peso
Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 4,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo 18/02/10
Cognome e nome 2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta Canneto
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
30
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 1206
Nazione X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
⁄ CCM ⁄
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione Comm. N°
ITALIA
1
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
x ♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
27,40
27,30
27,35
1,50
41,03
18,60
1,00
18,60
cm
9,10
4,00
36,40
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
11,40
1,00
11,40
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
4,00
0-3
0,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
107,43
Punti Finali #
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
Usura dentaria
m
1
Peso
Data del prelievo Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 4,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo
Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
24/09/08 Cognome e nome
2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 1209
Nazione X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
⁄ CCM ⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione
1
ITALIA
Comm. N°
31
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
X ♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
18,40
18,30
18,35
1,50
27,53
11,00
1,00
11,00
cm
7,60
4,00
30,40
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
6,10
1,00
6,10
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
1,00
0-3
0,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
Punti Finali
75,03
#
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
Peso
Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 1,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo 05/11/04
Cognome e nome 2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta Area Faunistica (OPI)
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
32
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 1210
Nazione
X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
⁄ CCM ⁄
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione Comm. N°
ITALIA
1
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x
x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
28,90
29,40
29,15
1,50
43,73
19,00
1,00
19,00
cm
9,40
4,00
37,60
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
11,50
1,00
11,50
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
8,00
0-3
1,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
Punti Finali
112,83
#
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
Peso
Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 8,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo 23/09/91
Cognome e nome 2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 13
Nazione X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
⁄ CCM ⁄
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione
1
ITALIA
Comm. N°
33
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
X ♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
28,30
26,40
27,35
1,50
41,03
17,60
1,00
17,60
cm
9,00
4,00
36,00
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
13,00
1,00
13,00
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
8,00
0-3
1,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
Punti Finali
108,63
#
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
kg Note eviscerato kg 8,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo Peso
23/09/91 Cognome e nome
2
Proprietario
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9 34
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 13
Nazione X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
⁄ CCM ⁄
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione Comm. N°
ITALIA
1
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
X ♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
26,90
26,80
26,85
1,50
40,28
17,20
1,00
17,20
cm
9,40
4,00
37,60
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
10,80
1,00
10,80
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
5,00
0-3
0,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
Punti Finali
105,88
#
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
Peso
Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 5,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo 21/03/79
Cognome e nome 2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta Camociara
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 22
Nazione X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
⁄ CCM ⁄
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione
1
ITALIA
Comm. N°
35
ACCADEMIA BIOMETRICA FAUNISTICA ITALIANA
riconosciuta dal CIC codice CIC
CA01
m2
M1
Argento
Oro
X ♂ Camoscio Appenninico
T
E
B
♂ Camoscio Alpino ♀ Rupicapra r. rupicapra
100 95
105 100
110 105
M3
Bronzo
CAMOSCIO
terreno libero da recinto
x ritrovato Fenotipo inserire una x ♀ Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata
#
Parametri
1
Lunghezza del corno
2
Altezza delle corna
cm
3
Circonferenza maggiore del corno più grosso
4
Sinistro
Destro
Media
Moltipl.
Punti
28,10
28,20
28,15
1,50
42,23
18,60
1,00
18,60
cm
9,20
4,00
36,80
Ampiezza (non superiore all'altezza delle corna (2))
cm
13,00
1,00
13,00
5
Aggiunte per l'età
aa
6,00
0-3
1,00
6
Detrazione per resina
0-5
0,00
cm
C.mag.s.res.
Cìr. mag.= #3
C.Res.
Punti Finali
111,63
#
Informazioni supplementari
a
Massima lunghezza del cranio
cm
b
Massima larghezza del cranio
cm
g
Massima divaricazione
cm
t
Divaricazione da apice ad apice
cm
m
Usura dentaria Età Sezione dentale stimata stima di un esperto
1
Data del prelievo
Peso
Proprietario
kg
Note eviscerato kg 6,00 Età minima raccomadata prelievo capo maturo anno 1980
Cognome e nome 2
pieno
gg/mm/anno
Parco Nazionale Abruzzo Lazio Molise
Cellulare E-mail
3
Proprietà del terreno di caccia
4
Ente gestore del prelievo
5
Dettagliata informazione sul luogo
6
Il DNA è stato analizzato?
Stato
Privato
N° fascetta
2014-CCM-124-16-01 STJ -004-16-03
2014CMI 178
i Misuratori CMI partecipano a tutti gli effetti ma non firmano i trofei per il CIC Internazionale
8 9
36
Luogo della valutazione Data della valutazione
n° 240
Nazione X No Note
Si
N° progressivo scheda Firmano i Valutatori STJ, CCM, CMI es.
X Altro
Codice identificativo
1) GIORGIO BOSCAROL
2014
⁄ CCM ⁄
2) NICOLA SALVI
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
3) FRANCO RECCHIA
C.E.&T. ⁄
ABIF
N° progr.
033
10 ⁄
⁄
121
⁄
⁄
118
⁄
4)
⁄
⁄
⁄
5)
⁄
⁄
⁄
PESCASSEROLI 12/06/10
gg/mm/anno
Nazione Comm. N°
ITALIA
1
0 ,0 id 20 pa € VAT