Endangered, Threaten, Etc - IUCN Red List Categories

Slippertalk Orchid Forum

Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:

Mark Sullivan

*****istrator of 1%FOC
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Location
San Francisco, CA
Here are the IUCN Red List Categories and definitions of Endangered. I don't know if anyone at Slippertalk is interesting in categorizing slipper orchid. WE can definitely incorporate what the Red List already has. Maybe a possibility of cloud sourcing what is threaten and endangered? There has got to be a better way than the anemic IUCN Red List or CITES lumping. Any ideas?

EXTINCT (EX)
A taxon is Extinct when there is no reasonable doubt that the last individual has died. A taxon is presumed Extinct when exhaustive surveys in known and/or expected habitat, at appropriate times (diurnal, seasonal, annual), throughout its historic range have failed to record an individual. Surveys should be over a time frame appropriate to the taxon’s life cycle and life form.

EXTINCT IN THE WILD (EW)
A taxon is Extinct in the Wild when it is known only to survive in cultivation, in captivity or as a naturalized population (or populations) well outside the past range. A taxon is presumed Extinct in the Wild when exhaustive surveys in known and/or expected habitat, at appropriate times (diurnal, seasonal, annual), throughout its historic range have failed to record an individual. Surveys should be over a time frame appropriate to the taxon’s life cycle and life form.

CRITICALLY ENDANGERED (CR)
A taxon is Critically Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria A to E for Critically Endangered (see Section V), and it is therefore considered to be facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild.

ENDANGERED (EN)
A taxon is Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria A to E for Endangered (see Section V), and it is therefore considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild.

VULNERABLE (VU)
A taxon is Vulnerable when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria A to E for Vulnerable (see Section V), and it is therefore considered to be facing a high risk of extinction in the wild.

NEAR THREATENED (NT)
A taxon is Near Threatened when it has been evaluated against the criteria but does not qualify for Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable now, but is close to qualifying for or is likely to qualify for a threatened category in the near future.

LEAST CONCERN (LC)
A taxon is Least Concern when it has been evaluated against the criteria and does not qualify for Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened. Widespread and abundant taxa are included in this category.

DATA DEFICIENT (DD)
A taxon is Data Deficient when there is inadequate information to make a direct,or indirect, assessment of its risk of extinction based on its distribution and/or population status. A taxon in this category may be well studied, and its biology well known, but appropriate data on abundance and/or distribution are lacking.
Data Deficient is therefore not a category of threat. Listing of taxa in this
category indicates that more information is required and acknowledges the
possibility that future research will show that threatened classification is
appropriate. It is important to make positive use of whatever data are available.
In many cases great care should be exercised in choosing between DD and a
threatened status. If the range of a taxon is suspected to be relatively circumscribed, and a considerable period of time has elapsed since the last record of the taxon, threatened status may well be justified.

NOT EVALUATED (NE)
A taxon is Not Evaluated when it is has not yet been evaluated against the criteria.

endangeredstuctureofcategories.jpg
 

Mark Sullivan

*****istrator of 1%FOC
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Location
San Francisco, CA
Cloud Sourcing

The most well known example of cloud sourcing is Wikipedia. Building an encyclopedia from the contribution of many people. It changes as new information comes forth.

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is science based but the list is anemic and only list 9 Paphiopedilums, 11 Cypripediums, and 0 Phragmipediums. http://www.iucnredlist.org/

Most of us in this forum know by looking at just the numbers above that that isn't quite right. Especially if you consider that they have the categories post above. Now if you were to read the criteria and research needed for categorizing species for the Red List you would realize the bottleneck. There is nothing wrong for scientist needing to do the research determine population decline of a species. Research is needed, but most species will be extinct, including us probably, at the rate they are going. With about 25,000 orchid species let alone all other species they don't have a chance.

A cloud sourced red list would have its pitfalls but would more quickly access species population status and threats. It will not be as accurate as ten year studies done by scientists for the IUCN Red List, but more species that are endangered would pop out sooner. With people around the world reporting on their locals over time the picture should sharpen.

Can it happen? It may have to get worse before it gets better. The world is shrinking as far as communications and organization are concerned (internet). So pulling off a cloud sourced Red List is only a matter of people wanting to do it.
 

SlipperFan

Addicted
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
43,287
Reaction score
35
Location
Michigan, USA
Interesting idea. But since the information would be only as good as it's source, and anyone, if I understand this correctly, could contribute. Could the information be trusted?
 

dave b

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Location
Dayton, Ohio
Interesting idea. But since the information would be only as good as it's source, and anyone, if I understand this correctly, could contribute. Could the information be trusted?

Good point, and it brings more questions to mind. It seems the only way it could be trusted is to have the actual data (populations and locations) available to someone (or a governing body) for confirmation. Follow up studies would have to be made to monitor the populations and habitat. If the data were made available on a site (cloud sourced) or otherwise, what would the ramifications be? If unprotected, would these locations be stripped bare by collectors / poachers?

If the data is not made publicly available, then who or what is the governing body to collect, process, and verify the data?

The ability to then estabolish protective areas (Reserves) seems the only way to offer protection once the most threatened species and areas are found.
 
Last edited:

Mark Sullivan

*****istrator of 1%FOC
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Location
San Francisco, CA
Wikapedia runs into the same problems reliability especially in the beginning. As the number of people involved increased erroneous entries are quickly deleted. There are background forums for each entry where things are debated.
The objective is to classify species health as best as a group of people around the world can. It wouldn’t ever be definitive as species conservation is a moving target. I suspect it will be shaky at first and improve over time.
Your other option is to wait for scientist to continually collect data and you get what is currently the UNIC Red List. You can read the full document of how species get on the Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/categories-and-criteria a pdf.

Or another option is another idea, got one?

While we think about the decimation of collecting, the number one reason for species extinction including orchids is habitat destruction- logging, agriculture, road, city expansion, and water diversion.
There are collecting pressures on many orchids, Phrag kovachii is an example of habitats having been wiped out of plants. Most collecting is done by locals or by people hiring the locals to take them to find the plants. The locals don’t need the internet to find orchids.

Some governments are corrupt, so habitat protection is not a high priority. So governments are not always the best to verify things. But if a list is developed governments and non profits maybe interested into looking into various habitats and species. What is the governing body to collect, process, and verify the data of Wikipedia?

I wasn’t thinking of specific locations and populations on the internet more. Listing orchids by various categories and countries or regions. The categories would be determined by consensus of people – based on their own estimates or in case of studies actual data. There could be a verification test of interest and background to participate but it would not be scientist only. What I think would eventually be built is a red list of not only species but habitat.

Ultimately the goal is to protect species and their habitats.

Got a better idea?
 

dave b

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Location
Dayton, Ohio
Orchid conservation is in dire need of a good list of orchid species that are threaten with extinction, endangered, and such.
How would you rate various slipper orchid species endangered status? or change CITES classification of slipper species?
Can we come up with a list conservation list of slipper species through the forums knowledge or research?
This thread I guess is for general comment on the question. Feel free to start new threads on specific genus or even species level.

Im not questioning the foundation of your efforts. In the back of my mind were the above statements in your other post. Questions or comments i make are only an attempt to converse and better understand. Id rather participate in discussions such as this, as opposed to threads titled 'favorite movie', 'Whatcha listenen too?', or the like. Not that those are not great threads;)
 

Mark Sullivan

*****istrator of 1%FOC
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Location
San Francisco, CA
Orchid conservation is in dire need of a good list of orchid species that are threaten with extinction, endangered, and such.
How would you rate various slipper orchid species endangered status? or change CITES classification of slipper species?
Can we come up with a list conservation list of slipper species through the forums knowledge or research?
This thread I guess is for general comment on the question. Feel free to start new threads on specific genus or even species level.

Im not questioning the foundation of your efforts. In the back of my mind were the above statements in your other post. Questions or comments i make are only an attempt to converse and better understand. Id rather participate in discussions such as this, as opposed to threads titled 'favorite movie', 'Whatcha listenen too?', or the like. Not that those are not great threads;)

No worries, I didn't think you were questioning the foundation of my efforts. I understand and want people to question ideas. I am not sold on this idea yet and always hoping for better. Ideas only get stronger if people give them vigorous questioning. I am dubious that this idea will fly.

1) People have to want to do it. There doesn't seem to be that much interest in just tackling slipper orchids and getting a general sense of what slippers are endangered, threatened, and such.

2) Maybe a list already exists for orchids or slippers. I haven't looked around that much.

3) Maybe IUCN Red List will get to plants and orchids and are working on it now.

From: http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/species/red_list/about_the_red_list/

"The IUCN Red List System was first conceived in 1963 and set a standard for species listing and conservation assessment efforts. For more than 30 years the Species Survival Commission has been evaluating the conservation status of species and subspecies on a global scale - highlighting those threatened with extinction and promoting their conservation.

Over time, however, IUCN recognised that a more objective and scientific system for determining threat status was needed, one that drew on advances in the science of conservation biology and other disciplines. There was also a need for a more accurate system for use at the national and regional level. The IUCN Red List Categories evolved over a four-year period through extensive consultation and testing with more than 800 SSC members, and the wider scientific community. The more precise and quantitative Red List Categories and Criteria were adopted by IUCN in 1994.

In 1988 all bird species were evaluated, and in the 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals the conservation status of every mammal species in the world was assessed for the first time. These were major milestones in conservation because not only was the overall status of mammals and birds determined, but a baseline was established from which to monitor future trends. For the 1996 list 5,205 species were evaluated resulting in 25% of all mammals and 11% of all birds being listed as threatened."


They seem to have stalled after 1996 and not gotten around to plants or orchids, fish, and other species.

The overall aim of the Red List is to convey the urgency and scale of conservation problems to the public and policy makers, and to motivate the global community to try to reduce species extinctions.

I do not think they are doing a good job "conveying the urgency and scale of conservation problems to the public and policy makers, and to motivate the global community to try to reduce species extinctions" because they don't involve the public. You got to have the public have some skin in the game instead of something raining down from on high that most of the public has never heard of.

With cloud sourcing a red list you can get people involved including scientist. A wiki red list would be a shotgun approach to putting a red list together messy at first than get refined. Sort of like how Celera sped up the sequencing of the human genome.

Anyway just kicking the idea around. I realize it sounds crazy, but then personal computers on every desk sounded crazy to IBM in the 80's and they lost out on that growth. Lots of crazy ideas make it and don't seem crazy to us now. Many also go down in flames.
 

Mark Sullivan

*****istrator of 1%FOC
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Location
San Francisco, CA
There's only one way to see if it will work, and that's to try it.

True but it is good to kick the can around a bit. Other people may have better ideas, improve on your idea, or maybe it has already been done (successful or failed). Then there is that pesky thing call time, only so much in a day.
 

Latest posts

Top