Interesting article here from Matt Walker, Editor of BBC Earth News on a revised phylogeny of the carnivores. The research suggests two main branches among the Carnivora – doglike and catlike – but also a number of species that are really tough to classify, e.g., the Red Panda of Asia. The article also describes the importance of specific forms that are genetically distinct, like the walrus, that should be especially high priorities for conservation.

Phil Berardelli (ScienceNOW Daily News) has published a neat story here on the benefits of a specific configuration of vertical-axis wind turbines (VAWTs; example here).

VAWTS, arranged in a pattern that mimics schooling fish, can provide a similar energy output to traditional, horizontal axis wind turbines (HAWTs) on approximately 1/100th of the land area. Thus, VAWTs, already a preferred design for conservationists because they appear to present a far lesser threat for bird collisions, could also provide a substantial benefit in terms of land use conversion. That is, of course, unless greedy developers simply take this information to mean that they can reap 100X the power output from the same enormous land area they want to develop . . .

Other cool VAWT links:

Greenestchoices

greenterrafirma

Raros, indescritíveis, e ameaçados pela perda de habitat, o Gato-vermelho-de-Bornéu é uma das espécies menos estudadas do mundo dos gatos selvagens. Exemplares do gato foram coletados nos séculos 19 e 20, mas um gato vivo não foi nem sequer fotografado até 1998. Agora, investigadores em Sabah, no Bornéu malaio, conseguiram capturar o primeiro filme do animal. Com duração de sete segundos, o vídeo (veja abaixo) mostra claramente o gato de cor marrom-avermelhada em seu habitat natural.

Durante três anos, o Programa Global Canopy tem procurado os gatos selvagens de Bornéu com câmeras escondidas. Entre outras espécies, incluem o leopardo nublado Sunda, o gato marmoreado e o gato de cabeça chata. Mas o Gato-vermelho-de-Bornéu é a única espécie inteiramente de Bornéu. Assim como a gravação do primeiro vídeo do gato, as primeiras fotos do animal também foram tiradas em Sabah.

Devido à perda de habitat e ao desmatamento, em função da expansão das plantações de óleo de palma na região, o Gato-vermelho-de-Bornéu está listado como ameaçado pela Lista Vermelha da IUCN, e sua população está em declínio. Se as taxas de desmatamento continuarem como é esperado, os pesquisadores estimam que a população já pequena de gatos vai cair mais 20% na próxima década.

O Gato-vermelho-de-Bornéu não está sozinho em seu sofrimento. Quatro das cinco espécies de gatos selvagens de Bornéu são classificados pela IUCN como ameaçados de extinção devido ao desmatamento contínuo.

“Nenhum outro lugar tem uma percentagem maior de gatos selvagens ameaçados”, explica Jim Sanderson, um especialista em gatos pequenos do mundo. Salientando que 80% dos gatos de Bornéu estão em risco de extinção, Sanderson acrescenta que “não existe um destes gatos selvagens que constituam uma ameaça direta para os seres humanos”.

Tão pouco é conhecido sobre o Gato-vermelho-de-Bornéu que até mesmo a sua dieta permanece um grande mistério.

Para ler a matéria original, clique aqui

Abaixo, o único vídeo existente do Gato-vermelho-de-Bornéu:

© 2009 ATWA Brasil

Great example of a conservation success story:

Brown Pelican Populations Recovered, Removed from Endangered Species List

Salazar: Brown Pelican Recovery is “an Amazing Success Story”

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, Assistant
Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Tom Strickland and U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service Director Sam Hamilton today announced that the
brown pelican, a species once decimated by the pesticide DDT, has
recovered and is being removed from the list of threatened and
endangered species under the Endangered Species Act.

“At a time when so many species of wildlife are threatened, we once in a
while have an opportunity to celebrate an amazing success story,”
Salazar said. “Today is such a day. The brown pelican is back!”

The brown pelican was first declared endangered in 1970 under the
Endangered Species Preservation Act, a precursor to the current
Endangered Species Act. Since then, thanks to a ban on DDT and efforts
by states, conservation organizations, private citizens and many other
partners, the bird has recovered. There are now more than 650,000 brown
pelicans found across Florida and the Gulf and Pacific Coasts, as well
as in the Caribbean and Latin America.

The Fish and Wildlife Service removed the brown pelican population in
Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and northward along the Atlantic Coast states
from the list of endangered species in 1985. Today’s action removes the
remaining population from the list.

“After being hunted for its feathers, facing devastating effects from
the pesticide DDT and suffering from widespread coastal habitat loss,
the pelican has made a remarkable recovery,” Strickland said at a press
conference in New Orleans to announce the delisting. “We once again see
healthy flocks of pelicans in the air over our shores.”

The pelican’s recovery is largely due to the federal ban on the general
use of the pesticide DDT in 1972. This action was taken after former
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Rachel Carson published Silent
Spring and alerted the nation to the widespread dangers associated with
unrestricted pesticide use.

Hamilton praised the Gulf and Pacific Coast states for their constant
efforts to restore this iconic coastal species. “Brown pelicans could
not have recovered without a strong and continuing support network of
partnerships among federal and state government agencies, tribes,
conservation organizations, and individual citizens,” said Hamilton.
“This is truly a success story that the whole nation can celebrate.”

In the southwest, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, The Nature
Conservancy and numerous other conservation organizations helped
purchase important nesting sites and developed monitoring programs to
ensure pelican rookeries were thriving.

Louisiana, long known as the “pelican state,” and the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission jointly implemented a restoration project. A
total of 1,276 young pelicans were captured in Florida and released at
three sites in southeastern Louisiana during the 13 years of the project.

Past efforts to protect the brown pelican actually led to the birth of
the National Wildlife Refuge System more than a century ago in central
Florida. German immigrant Paul Kroegel, appalled by the indiscriminate
slaughter of pelicans for their feathers, approached President Theodore
Roosevelt. This led Roosevelt to create the first National Wildlife
Refuge at Pelican Island in 1903, when Kroegel was named the first
refuge manager. Today, the system has grown to 550 national wildlife
refuges, many of which have played key roles in the recovery of the
brown pelican.

With removal of the brown pelican from the list of threatened and
endangered species, federal agencies will no longer be required to
consult with the Service to ensure any action they authorize, fund, or
carry out will not harm the species. However, additional federal laws,
such as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Lacey Act, will continue
to protect the brown pelican, its nests and its eggs.

The Service has developed a Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan, designed to
monitor and verify that the recovered, delisted population remains
secure from the risk of extinction once the protections of the ESA are
removed. The Service can relist the brown pelican if future monitoring
or other information shows it is necessary to prevent a significant risk
to the brown pelican.

The monitoring will be done in cooperation with the State resource
agencies, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Mexico,
other federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, and individuals.
Further, the Service is working with state natural resource agencies
where the brown pelican occurs to develop cooperative management
agreements to ensure that the species continues to be monitored.

The final rule removing the bird from the list of threatened and
endangered species will be published in the Federal Register and will
take effect 30 days after publication.

Check out the Environment for the Americas to learn about plans for the 2010 International Migratory Bird Day celebration!

Young Professionals and some of histories greatest conservationists gather at the Piedradeagua Hotel in Merida, Mexico, to enjoy some fine dining and discussions of how to conserve our planet. (Photo/Morgan Heim)

WILD9, thrusts you into a different world. Standing among so many of your heroes, legendary conservationists like Jane Goodall, and many of the world’s most renown conservation photographers can be an overwhelming experience, especially for a young professional. Everyone comes from a different background, science, conservation, communication, policy and business. Throw into that mix the intermingling of culture all around us, and it’s hard to know where to focus. And as any photographer can tell you, not knowing where to focus makes us just a little bit nervous.

But as the days pass, a transformation happens, and you start relating to each other as fellow human-beings with a common purpose. We are holding different parts of the puzzle and bringing it all together. We are participants. And after a few days, the mayhem begins to settle until you flow between roles and people and conversations.

Sasha, a young professional from Kamchatka, Russia jumps into a doorway to avoid streets flooded from the rains that hit Merida most likely in connection with Hurricane Ida.

I’ve been lucky. Much of this congress has focused on the role of conservation’s next generation. Of which, I am a part. I’ve had the opportunity to participate on panels, giving talks about how to use new media to further conservation messages. And work with the other young professionals on their media training day. It’s quite clear that we are here for a reason.

Last Tuesday night, many of the young professionals attended a special dinner in the ivy-walled gardens of the Piedradeagua Hotel in Merida. Fellow iLCP emerging league photographer Joe Riis was there, along with young professionals with veterinary backgrounds, community planning, and nature conservation management. And we found ourselves dining with the likes of Dr. Kenneth Miller, former Director General of the IUCN. To me this symbolized the culmination of our partnerships and the importance of meetings like the WILD9 World Wilderness Congress – a community of conservationists, each using a different toolbox, and spanning generations, but working together for the future.

The North American Bird Conservation Initiative recently published its 10th anniversary newsletter. Enjoy.

bulletinfall09

The Conservation Scholars series highlights leaders in conservation science and includes a small biography, a list of major scientific publications and a Q & A on each person’s particular area of expertise.

Our fifteenth Conservation Scholar is a real stalwart in conservation science and its applications – Georgina Mace. She is famous for many things, although one thing in particular stands out – the IUCN Red List. We’re really lucky to have someone of Georgina’s calibre, highly demanding schedule and international reputation to  agree to be highlighted on ConservationBytes.com, so I hope you enjoy this post as much as I did.

Biography

Georgina Mace was born and grew up in London, UK. After an undergraduate degree in Zoology at the University of Liverpool, she moved to do a PhD at the University of Sussex, working with Paul Harvey on comparative ecology in small mammals. After postdoctoral appointments in Washington DC and in Newcastle-upon-Type, she moved back to London where she has worked ever since. From 1986, she was a research fellow at the Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London and was involved in the earliest scientifically based conservation breeding programmes for rare species, based around genetic and demographic principles from population biology. It was this work that ultimately led to her leading the process to develop, test and document criteria for listing species on IUCN’s Red List of threatened species. This work started in the early 1990s, a first set of criteria were approved in 1994 and, following review and testing, a slightly different set were approved in 2000. These criteria are now used routinely be IUCN and have been increasingly adopted at national level. Subsequently, she was involved in the biodiversity elements of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, in the development of measures for the Convention on Biological Diversity 2010 target, and is now working on the UK National Ecosystem Assessment. Her research has interwoven with these processes, involving testing the traits that contribute to threatened status in mammals, examining the impact of different species concepts on conservation planning, devising methods for testing the effectiveness of conservation projects, and most recently, developing trait-based approaches to assessing species vulnerability to climate change.

During the 1990s her work was supported by the Pew Scholars Program (1991-1994) and by a NERC Advanced Fellowship (1995-1999). In 2000 Georgina was appointed Director or Science at the Zoological Society of London where she led the 70+ researchers in the Institute of Zoology. In 2006 she moved to Imperial College London, first as Director of the NERC Centre for Population Biology and later as Associate Head of the Division of Biology. She was awarded an OBE in 1998 and a CBE in 2007; elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society in 2002, and was the 2007 winner of the international Cosmos prize. She has served in a number of scientific societies having been Vice President of the British Ecological Society (2001-2004), President of the Society for Conservation Biology (2007-2009) and Vice Chair of the international programme on biodiversity science DIVERSITAS (2007-2010).

Georgina is married to Rod Evans and they have three children (Ben, Emma and Kate), all of whom have a healthy respect for the environment and commitment to working towards a better world, but seem to think that doing science is a hard way to go about it!

Major Publications

• Cardillo M, Mace GM, Gittleman JL, Purvis A. (2006). Latent extinction risk and the future battlegrounds of mammal conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 103, 4157-4161
• Cardillo M, Mace GM, Jones KE, Bielby J, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Sechrest W, Orme CDL, Purvis A. (2005). Multiple causes of high extinction risk in large mammal species. Science 309, 1239-1241
• Mace GM, Balmford A, Ginsberg JR. (eds.) (1998). Conservation in a Changing World. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
• Mace GM, Collar NJ, Gaston KJ, Hilton-Taylor C, Akçakaya HR, Leader-Williams N, Milner-Gulland EJ, Stuart SN. (2008). Quantification of extinction risk: IUCN’s system for classifying threatened species. Conservation Biology 22, 1424-1442
• Mace GM. (1994). Classifying threatened species – means and ends. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 344, 91-97

Questions and Answers

1. You were the architect for the IUCN’s Red List of Threatened Species. This is clearly the world’s authority on threatened species listings. Can you explain how the Red List came about and describe the major challenges along the way?

The Red List had been around for a long time – since the mid 1960s at least. Initially it was a list of species nominated by experts as being at risk. In this way it raised the profile of the growing risks to species, but the way it was compiled meant that the species included were rather subjectively assessed, and species that were not on the list were not necessarily secure. As the Red List started to be used in both legislation and for conservation planning it became important that the listing process was more systematic and objective. This was when I became involved in around 1989. There were many challenges in getting the criteria established and that is why it took us over 10 years before there was a system that was approved by IUCN Council and used consistently for producing the IUCN Red List. I think one of the hardest things to deal with is that this is never going to be a perfect system – we wanted a process that was simple, could be applied even when we know rather little about a species, and would deal fairly with everything from mosses to elephants. Inevitably, some people feel the system gives the wrong answer for their species. All I can say is that we tried really hard to minimise the risk of wrong answers that would be damaging for species conservation. While acknowledging that the system will never be perfect, we think it is effective at sorting the species most likely to be at high risk from those that are not.

2. How do you define ‘biodiversity’, and what should we be focussing on in biodiversity assessments?

I like to use generic definitions for ‘biodiversity’ such as that adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity: the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part. This includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. I like this because it emphasises the scope of biodiversity and the importance of interactions which gets missed out in some narrower definitions. Of course if you try to use this kind of definitions for assessment it becomes impossible. This is why we have ended up with long, long lists of indicators for the 2010 assessments. My personal preference would be to select a smaller number of measures that reflect what we really care about in biodiversity and use these as the core of our assessments.

3. What, in your opinion, is the biggest research gap in climate change research for biodiversity conservation?

I think that to a large degree the biology is missing! Many approaches to assessing the impacts of climate change tend to treat species and ecosystems as if they were just response variables in an environmental model. Yet we know that populations and communities have their own processes and internal dynamics that will determine how they respond to a changing environment and also make it quite difficult to generalise across systems and species. I fear we are over-estimating some risks, under-estimating others, but most of all forgetting about the biological processes that will allow biological adaptation (or maybe won’t allow it). Another important gap is a recognition in climate models that the biosphere plays a key role in the climate system – one that is not well represented at the moment and that could offer cheap, low-risk techniques for both mitigation and adaptation.

4. How do you mesh the quantification of ecosystem services with biodiversity assessments? Should we be reducing our emphasis on the latter and investing more effort in characterising the former?

I’m sure we have to do both ecosystem services and biodiversity. I don’t think that ecosystem services and biodiversity assessment are the same thing – there are ecosystem services that we need that rely hardly at all on biodiversity, and there are components of biodiversity that we should care about that do not clearly provide ecosystem services. I see ecosystem services at the end of a delivery chain to people from ecosystems and those ecosystems and their features and processes are intimately linked to biodiversity. But it becomes impossible hard and confusing if we don’t separate them out and think about both.

5. Given humanity’s appalling conservation track record to date, do you have an optimistic outlook for the future of biodiversity on which we depend?

Generally it is hard to be optimistic – we are not yet even embarking on doing the right things for the planet. And, as I think the negotiations to Copenhagen show, governments are simply not able to take the bold steps that are necessary. However, all the evidence to date is that when societies put their mind to solving a problem, they can generally do it. People are ingenious and determined and form a creative, problem-solving community, and so I believe that the means exist to solve even some very hard problems. I think the challenge is to break the problems down into manageable chunks and solve them – being careful not to set aside the difficult and important ones, and remembering that ultimately the benefits need to flow to all people and societies.

CJA Bradshaw

Its that time of year again when the International Union for Conservation of Nature does its yearly survey to check on the status of plant and animal species in the world. Every year, they survey the planet to determine which species are extinct, or going extinct, and which ones have improved on the population size front. This information is then put into what is called the Red List. The Red List provides information on the taxonomy of each species listed along with their conservation status.

This year, more than 17000 species of plants and animals have been identified as extinct or going extinct. About 47677 species were surveyed across the globe, of which 17291 species in the “endangered” category are at the risk of extinction. There are many more species that are yet to be surveyed, so there is a strong possibility that there are more species that are at the risk of being lost for good. This year’s survey included 2800 more species than last year, and it has been estimated that one on five of all known mammals, about 70% of all known plant species and about a quarter of all reptiles are under threat. 37% of freshwater fish, 35% of invertebrates and about 12% of all known birds are also looking at extinction.

A species of tree frog (Rabb’s fringe-toed tree frog) in Panama that was discovered only 4 years ago is on the list, as is a rodent from Madagascar and two lizards found only in the Philippines (Panay monitor lizard and the sail-fin water lizard). Both lizards are hunted for food. 1147 fresh water fish, out of a total of 3120 surveyed, are threatened with extinction, one of which is the brown mudfish in New Zealand, whose wetland habitat has virtually been destroyed due to drainage, irrigation and land development. The Kihansi spray toad of Tanzania is now considered extinct in the wild due to a dam construction on the Kihansi river and fungal infections.

And to think these numbers are only the tip of the iceberg. Who knows how many more species are yet to be classified as being under the threat of extinction.

Wie jedes Jahr im November hat auch in diesem Jahr die IUCN (internat. Naturschutzunion) die erneuerte Version der Roten Liste der gefährdeten Tier- und Pflanzenarten in Gland in der Schweiz veröffentlicht. Die Zahlen sind wie in jedem Jahr bedrückend: 17 291 Arten sind derzeit in den verschiedenen Gefährdungskategorien aufgeführt.

Ganz besonders stark betroffen sind die Amphibien: Aus dieser Tiergruppe sind 30 % gefährdet! Eine von diesen Arten ist die Kihansi-Gischtkröte (Nectophrynoides asperginis): Diese kleine Krötenart lebte einst in einer Schlucht des Kihansi-Flusses in Tansania. Da für ein Wasserkraftwerk ein Großteil des Wassers umgeleitet wurde, trocknete der Lebensraum dieser Amphibie weitgehend aus. Bemühungen, diesen mit Sprinkleranlagen künstlich feucht zu halten, scheiterten. Heute ist diese Art nur noch in einigen Zoos in den USA zu finden, in Freiheit gilt sie als ausgestorben. „Extict in the Wild“ nennt sich der Gefährdungsstatus und wurde dieses Jahr der erst 1999 beschriebenen Krötenart zugewiesen. Dabei ist die Kihansi-Gischtkröte nur eine von 1.895 Amphibienarten die alle in eine der verschiedenen nGefährdungskategorie eingeordnet sind. Die Gründe für die Gefährdung dieser kleinen Krötenart aus Tansania stehen beispielhaft für die Bedrohung aller Amphibien. Es sind die Veränderungen ihres Lebensraumes und sich ausbreitende Pilzerkrankungen.

Auch bei den anderen Organismen sieht es nicht viel besser aus. So sind 21 % aller Säugetierarten und 12 % aller Vögel mit einer der Gefährdungskategorien “gefährdet”, “stark gefährdet”, “vom Aussterben bedroht” oder “ausgestorben”  aufgeführt. Weiterhin wurden 28 % der Reptilien, 37 % der Süßwasserfische, 70 % der Pflanzenarten und 35 % der Wirbellosen, welche bisher von Experten des IUCN auf ihre Gefährdung hin untersucht wurden, einer Gefährdungskategorie zugeordnet.

Nach Angaben des IUCN ist dies jedoch nur die Spitze des Eisbergs, da von 1,8 Millionen beschrieben Arten nur ein ganz kleiner Teil überhaupt auf eine Gefährdung hin untersucht werden konnte. Und die beschriebenen Arten sind nur ein kleiner Teil der tatsächlich vorhandenen Arten, Schätzungen reichen diesbezüglich bis hin zu 30 Millionen Arten, wobei 5 bis 10 Millionen im Bereich des Realistischen liegen dürften.

Es gibt jedoch auch wenige gute Nachrichten: So konnte eine australische Fischart , der Australische Grayling (Prototroctes maraena), welche im Vorjahr noch als „Gefährdet“ in der Roten Liste aufgeführt wurde, in die Vorwarnliste heruntergestuft, da der Bestand durch Fischtreppen, Renaturierung von Flussufern, und Fangquoten gesichert werden konnte.

Link zur Seite des IUCN

Die Goldkröte ist einer der ausgestorbenen Arten bei XTINCT

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that wind power actually was as “green” as developers and lobbyists would have us believe – a big stretch, but bear with me. It would make good energy sense to erect towers and transmission lines anywhere we had favorable winds, right? But I suspect there are some example of places that – again for the sake of argument – were windy enough for development to make sense but were otherwise so important to us that we wouldn’t actually want the spot developed for wind power. Here are a few examples:

Ellis Island?

Fenway Park?

The Rose Bowl?

Arlington National Cemetery?

Gettysburg National Park?

Colonial Williamsburg?

Disneyland?

Old Faithful?

Mount Rushmore?

Yosemite National Park?

The Hollywood sign?

Surely it’s only the truly deluded (or simply the biggest jerks) who would ever consider drastically altering the character and quality of these special places by establishing wind turbines and transmission lines through them. Why, then, can’t we also agree that the biggest expanses of open grassland in the American West – places that are especially valuable for their ability to support prairie wildlife that generally avoid any kind of human development – are also off limits? Why can’t we recognize that Appalachian ridges should not be sullied with tubines – turbines that are lethal obstacles to thousands of migrating raptors each fall and spring?

We must, as a progressive society, recognize that the free-for-all attitude of wind development has to stop. In its place, we need serious attention given to identifying those places and those resources that we do not want encroached by tubines and transmission lines.

Don’t panic – this post isn’t as profound as the title might suggest!

Weedy Seadragon (image from BBC)

The other night I watched the repeat of the BBC Natural History Unit’s latest offering, Life. I think I’ve pointed out in another post that I’m easily susceptible to becoming overcome with emotion – and the Beeb did it to me last night.  I’m not sure whether it’s a specific emotion that conjures up the tears or just the overwhelming beauty leaping out of the television.

Last Boxing day I visited the Sydney aquarium.  The underwater world is a fascinating place, and there was one creature in particular that caught my attention. The seadragon.  When someone asked me to describe what it looked like, the logical explanation was, funnily enough, ‘like a dragon’! A fictional creature, the image of which is embedded in my mind from having read/seen various books whilst growing up.  I never expected to see a real life one, and especially one so small and fragile-looking at that.

All hail the BBC and their HD cameras. The pictures of these stunning creatures are absolutely breathtaking and I challenge anyone not to be enchanted by these twig-like angels.

The natural world never ceases to amaze me. Whether it’s the intense beauty or the bizarre behaviour that species demonstrate. Take the mud skipper for example – on the surface perhaps not one of the most exciting or attractive creatures on the planet, but they have evolved in the most incredible ways. I’m tempted to carry on and describe what they do, but I don’t think that would do it justice – follow the link.  This is just one of many species from the series which have left me agape and tearful at their wonder  – and if you haven’t already allowed Life to grace your television set, I would highly recommend you allow it to.

Extinct

Watching this incredible piece of filmmaking I couldn’t help but think about the news this week. The IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) released its annual Red List detailing the population status of 47,677 assessed species. An alarming 17,291 of these species are now threatened with extinction.  188 mammals are now classified as critically endangered and one amphibian, the Kihansi Spray Toad, has moved from critically endangered to extinct in the wild.  This species, only known from the Kihansi Falls in Tanzania, had a formerly abundant population of at least 17,000.  Its decline is largely due to human activities – the construction of a dam upstream.

Habitat loss and overhunting are just some of the reasons affecting populations and the increase of species being classified as endangered. And for plants the change of temperatures, due to climate change, is one of the greatest threats.  Once again man has left his fingerprints all over the crime scene.

The Weedy and Leafy Sea Dragons, last formerly assessed by the IUCN in 2006, are classified as ‘near threatened’ – one step away from vulnerable.

© ABC 2009

Yesterday I was asked to do a quick interview on ABC television (Midday Report) about the release of the 2009 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. I’ve blogged about the importance of the Red List before, but believe we have a lot more to do with species assessments and getting prioritisation right with respect to minimum viable population size. Have a listen to the interview itself, and read the IUCN’s media release reproduced below.

My basic stance is that we’ve only just started to assess the number of species on the planet (under 50000), yet there are many millions of species still largely under-studied and/or under-described (e.g., extant species richness = > 4 million protists, 16600 protozoa, 75000-300000 helminth parasites, 1.5 million fungi, 320000 plants, 4-6 million arthropods, > 6500 amphibians, 10000 birds and > 5000 mammals – see Bradshaw & Brook 2009 J Cosmol for references). What we’re looking at here is a refinement of knowledge (albeit a small one). We are indeed in the midst of the Anthropocene mass extinction event – there is nothing ‘looming’ about it. We are essentially losing species faster than we can assess them. I believe it’s important to make this clearer to those not working directly in the field of biodiversity conservation.

CJA Bradshaw

Extinction crisis continues apace – IUCN

Gland, Switzerland, 3 November, 2009 (IUCN) – The latest update of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ shows that 17,291 species out of the 47,677 assessed species are threatened with extinction.

The results reveal 21 percent of all known mammals, 30 percent of all known amphibians, 12 percent of all known birds, and 28 percent of reptiles, 37 percent of freshwater fishes, 70 percent of plants, 35 percent of invertebrates assessed so far are under threat.

“The scientific evidence of a serious extinction crisis is mounting,” says Jane Smart, Director of IUCN’s Biodiversity Conservation Group. “January sees the launch of the International Year of Biodiversity. The latest analysis of the IUCN Red List shows the 2010 target to reduce biodiversity loss will not be met. It’s time for governments to start getting serious about saving species and make sure it’s high on their agendas for next year, as we’re rapidly running out of time.”

Of the world’s 5,490 mammals, 79 are Extinct or Extinct in the Wild, with 188 Critically Endangered, 449 Endangered and 505 Vulnerable. The Eastern Voalavo (Voalavo antsahabensis) appears on the IUCN Red List for the first time in the Endangered category. This rodent, endemic to Madagascar, is confined to montane tropical forest and is under threat from slash-and-burn farming.

There are now 1,677 reptiles on the IUCN Red List, with 293 added this year. In total, 469 are threatened with extinction and 22 are already Extinct or Extinct in the Wild. The 165 endemic Philippine species new to the IUCN Red List include the Panay Monitor Lizard (Varanus mabitang), which is Endangered. This highly-specialized monitor lizard is threatened by habitat loss due to agriculture and logging and is hunted by humans for food. The Sail-fin Water Lizard (Hydrosaurus pustulatus) enters in the Vulnerable category and is also threatened by habitat loss. Hatchlings are heavily collected both for the pet trade and for local consumption.

“The world’s reptiles are undoubtedly suffering, but the picture may be much worse than it currently looks,” says Simon Stuart, Chair of IUCN’s Species Survival Commission. “We need an assessment of all reptiles to understand the severity of the situation but we don’t have the $2-3 million to carry it out.”

The IUCN Red List shows that 1,895 of the planet’s 6,285 amphibians are in danger of extinction, making them the most threatened group of species known to date. Of these, 39 are already Extinct or Extinct in the Wild, 484 are Critically Endangered, 754 are Endangered and 657 are Vulnerable.

The Kihansi Spray Toad (Nectophrynoides asperginis) has moved from Critically Endangered to Extinct in the Wild. The species was only known from the Kihansi Falls in Tanzania, where it was formerly abundant with a population of at least 17,000. Its decline is due to the construction of a dam upstream of the Kihansi Falls that removed 90 percent of the original water flow to the gorge. The fungal disease chytridiomycosis was probably responsible for the toad’s final population crash.

The fungus also affected the Rabb’s Fringe-limbed Treefrog (Ecnomiohyla rabborum), which enters the Red List as Critically Endangered. It is known only from central Panama. In 2006, the chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) was reported in its habitat and only a single male has been heard calling since. This species has been collected for captive breeding efforts but all attempts have so far failed.

Of the 12,151 plants on the IUCN Red List, 8,500 are threatened with extinction, with 114 already Extinct or Extinct in the Wild. The Queen of the Andes (Puya raimondii) has been reassessed and remains in the Endangered category. Found in the Andes of Peru and Bolivia, it only produces seeds once in 80 years before dying. Climate change may already be impairing its ability to flower and cattle roam freely among many colonies, trampling or eating young plants.

There are now 7,615 invertebrates on the IUCN Red List this year, 2,639 of which are threatened with extinction. Scientists added 1,360 dragonflies and damselflies, bringing the total to 1,989, of which 261 are threatened. The Giant Jewel (Chlorocypha centripunctata), classed as Vulnerable, is found in southeast Nigeria and southwest Cameroon and is threatened by forest destruction.

Scientists also added 94 molluscs, bringing the total number assessed to 2,306, of which 1,036 are threatened. Seven freshwater snails from Lake Dianchi in Yunnan Province, China, are new to the IUCN Red List and all are threatened. These join 13 freshwater fishes from the same area, 12 of which are threatened. The main threats are pollution, introduced fish species and overharvesting.

There are now 3,120 freshwater fishes on the IUCN Red List, up 510 species from last year. Although there is still a long way to go before the status all the world’s freshwater fishes is known, 1,147 of those assessed so far are threatened with extinction. The Brown Mudfish (Neochanna apoda), found only in New Zealand, has been moved from Near Threatened to Vulnerable as it has disappeared from many areas in its range. Approximately 85-90 percent of New Zealand’s wetlands have been lost or degraded through drainage schemes, irrigation and land development.

“Creatures living in freshwater have long been neglected. This year we have again added a large number of them to the IUCN Red List and are confirming the high levels of threat to many freshwater animals and plants. This reflects the state of our precious water resources. There is now an urgency to pursue our effort but most importantly to start using this information to move towards a wise use of water resources,” says Jean-Christophe Vié, Deputy Head of the IUCN Species Programme.

“This year’s IUCN Red List makes for sobering reading,” says Craig Hilton-Taylor, Manager of the IUCN Red List Unit. “These results are just the tip of the iceberg. We have only managed to assess 47,663 species so far; there are many more millions out there which could be under serious threat. We do, however, know from experience that conservation action works so let’s not wait until it’s too late and start saving our species now.”

The status of the Australian Grayling (Prototroctes maraena), a freshwater fish, has improved as a result of conservation efforts. Now classed as Near Threatened as opposed to Vulnerable, the population has recovered thanks to fish ladders which have been constructed over dams to allow migration, enhanced riverside vegetation and the education of fishermen, who now face heavy penalties if found with this species.

De acuerdo a estos datos, en la “lista roja” actualizada un total de 17.291 especies están amenazadas de extinción de entre las 47.677 conocidas en todo el mundo.

Están en peligro el 21 por ciento de los mamíferos, el 30 por ciento de los anfibios, el 12 por ciento de las aves, el 28 por ciento de los reptiles, el 35 por ciento de los invertebrados, el 37 por ciento de los peces de agua dulce y el 70 por ciento de las plantas, consignó el diario español El Mundo.

“Las pruebas científicas de una grave crisis de extinción de especies van en aumento”, dijo la directora del Grupo de Conservación de la Biodiversidad de la IUCN, Jane Smart.

Entre los 5.490 mamíferos del mundo, 79 están extinguidos o extinguidos en estado silvestre, 188 especies permanecen en situación crítica, 449 están amenazadas y 505 son vulnerables.

El voalavo oriental (voalabo antsahabensis) aparece en la “lista roja” de la UICN por primera vez en la categoría de en peligro. Este roedor endémico de Madagascar está confinado en el bosque tropical montañoso y se encuentra amenazado por la agricultura de corta y quema.

Este año se incluyeron 293 nuevos tipos de reptiles en la Lista Roja del IUCN, con lo que aumentaron hasta 1.677 especies de este tipo que sufren algún tipo de amenaza. De esta categoría, 469 están en peligro de extinción y 22 están extinguidas o extinguidas en el estado silvestre.

“Los reptiles están sufriendo en todo el mundo, pero la situación puede ser mucho peor de lo que actualmente parece”, dijo el presidente de la Comisión de la Supervivencia de Especies, Simon Stuart.

Entre los anfibios, 1.895 especies de las 6.285 conocidas en el mundo están en peligro de extinción: 39 ya están extinguidos o extinguidos en la vida salvaje, 484 están en situación crítica, 754 están amenazados y 657 son vulnerables.

En relación a 12.151 especies de plantas, la IUCN señaló que 8.500 están en peligro de extinción y 114 ya se extinguieron o están extinguidas en la vida salvaje. Este año la “lista roja” de la UICN contiene 7.615 invertebrados, 2.639 de los cuales están en peligro de extinción.

Los científicos también añadieron 94 moluscos, aumentando el número total de moluscos evaluados a 2.306, de los cuales 1.036 están amenazados. Siete caracoles de agua dulce del Lago Dianchi en la provincia de Yunnan (China) figuran como amenazados. Éstos se suman a 13 peces de agua dulce de la misma región, 12 de ellos amenazados.

Actualmente hay 3.120 peces de agua dulce en la “lista roja” de la UICN, lo que supone un aumento de 510 especies respecto del año pasado.

“Durante mucho tiempo no se prestó atención a las criaturas que viven en aguas dulces. Este año hemos añadido muchas de ellas a la Lista Roja de la UICN y estamos confirmando los altos niveles de amenaza para numerosos animales y plantas de agua dulce, lo que refleja el estado de estos valiosos recursos”, dijo Jean-Christophe Vié, jefe adjunto del Programa de Especies de la IUCN.

“Estos resultados son sólo la punta del iceberg. Hasta ahora sólo hemos podido evaluar 47.663 especies, pero varios millones más podrían estar seriamente amenazadas”, lamentó el director de la unidad encargada de la “lista roja” de la UICN, Craig Hilton-Taylor.

“Sabemos por experiencia que las acciones de conservación funcionan, así que no esperemos a que sea demasiado tarde para empezar a salvar a nuestras especies”, agregó.

Rabb's fringe-limbed tree frog. Photo: Brad Wilson.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has just released its 2009 Red List, and it includes over 17,000 species that are currently threatened by extinctin. The Red List is a comprehensive, global approach for evaluating the conservation status of animal and plant species. This method of evaluation began in 1994, and forthcoming Red List workshops will now include the Amphibian Ark’s Conservation Needs Assessment process to evaluate and prioritize amphibians for the specific conservation needs.

The 2009 list contains 1,895 amphibian species that are threatened due to deforestation, climate change, disease and other factors.

The Kihansi spray toad of southern Tanzania is now thought to be extinct in the wild. A dam upstream of Kihansi Falls has dried up the gorge where it lived, and an aggressive fungal disease known as chytridiomycosis appears to have pushed the toad population over the edge, the group said.

The same fate could soon befall the unusually large Rabb’s fringe-limbed tree frog, which glides through the forest using its big webbed feet to steer safely to the ground. It is the only known frog species where the tadpoles feed off skin shed by the male while he guards the young.

The chytrid fungus that causes chytridiomycosis reached central Panama in 2006, a year after scientists first discovered the tree frog. Since then the fungus — believed to be spread by international trade and global warming — has virtually wiped out the wild frog population.

Click here for the full article about the 2009 Red List update.

The monitor lizard is under threat due to habitat loss and hunting by humans for food. All images: IUCN.

The latest update to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is in and if you were expecting good news prepared to be disappointed. Of the more than 47,000 species surveyed, about 17,000 are at serious risk — of those 21% of the world’s mammal species, 12% of birds, 28% of reptiles, 30% of amphibians, 35% of invertebrates, 37% of freshwater fish and 70% of plants:

January sees the launch of the International Year of Biodiversity. The latest analysis of the IUCN Red List shows the 2010 target to reduce biodiversity loss will not be met. It’s time for governments to start getting serious about saving species and make sure it’s high on their agendas for next year, as we’re rapidly running out of time.

- Jane Smart, Director, IUCN Biodiversity Conservation Group

One species which has entered the ranks of the extinct in the wild is the Kihansi Spray Toad, pictured above. At one time it had a population about at least 17,000 at the Kihansi Falls in Tanzania. However a dam upstream of the falls reduced water flow downstream by 90%, reducing habitat. It is suspected that a fungal disease finally doomed these amphibians.

Het gaat niet goed met de biodiversiteit. De IUCN, een internationale organisatie die zich bezighoudt met duurzame ontwikkeling, publiceert de gezaghebbende Rode Lijst, waarin de beschermingsstatus van soorten wereldwijd wordt geëvalueerd. De lijst werd onlangs opnieuw geactualiseerd, en daaruit blijkt opnieuw dat het er niet goed uitziet.

Onderstaande figuur toont de harde cijfers. Van de 47 677 onderzochte soorten kreeg slechts 40 procent de status “veilig”. Acht procent werd als “gevoelig” bestempeld. Niet minder dan 38 procent is “kwetsbaar” of erger (met inbegrip van “uitgestorven”). Voor 14 procent van de soorten waren er onvoldoende gegevens om de status te kunnen beoordelen.

Onder de bedreigde soorten vinden we 21 procent van alle bekende zoogdieren, 30 percent van alle bekende amfibieën, 12 procent van alle bekende vogels, en 28 procent van de onderzochte reptielen, 37 procent van de onderzochte zoetwatervissen, 70 procent van de onderzochte planten, en 35 procent van de onderzochte ongewervelden.

Bij de reptielen is de Filipijnse zeilhagedis, Hydrosaurus pustulatus (foto: Mark Wheeler), een van de soorten die naar de categorie “kwetsbaar” verhuist. De belangrijkste bedreigingen voor deze soort zijn verlies van habitat en jacht voor consumptie en verkoop als huisdier.

Jane Smart, directeur van de Biodiversity Conservation Group van IUCN, roept regeringen op tot actie:

January sees the launch of the International Year of Biodiversity. The latest analysis of the IUCN Red List shows the 2010 target to reduce biodiversity loss will not be met. It’s time for Governments to start getting serious about saving species and make sure it’s high on their agendas for next year, as we’re rapidly running out of time.

Maar niet alleen regeringen moeten bijdragen tot een ommekeer. Ook als burger kan je iets doen. Duurzaam consumeren, verenigingen steunen die zich inzetten voor natuurbehoud, alle beetjes helpen. Want het is nog niet (helemaal) te laat.

Bron:
Jean-Christophe Vié, Craig Hilton-Taylor & Simon N. Stuart (eds.) (2009). Wildlife in a changing world. An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™. IUCN, Gland, Zwitserland.

We can talk about numbers – more birds are killed by windows than anything else – so the number of birds killed by wind turbines is generally thought to be an acceptable amount of “collateral damage.” But what about seeing it as it happens? Is watching a majestic, soaring bird violently ripped from the air by the sweep of a wind turbine’s rotor blade enough to steer our national conversation on wind power toward greater attention in sustainability and the identification of absolute “no build” areas? See for yourself here.

Much credit is due billionaire T. Boone Pickens for his effort to promote wind power as an alternative energy strategy, but the simple fact is that the most productive areas for development frequently overlap areas of great importance to native wildlife. Michael Fry’s opinion piece in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times points out the problem well.

It’s time we started talking seriously about whether or not it truly is a good idea to erect and operate tens of thousands of new wind turbines. So far, media attention has focused on nothing other than wind’s “green” image, but that image is not quite so green when you look at it more closely.

David Cassuto

I’m currently in China having all kinds of interesting experiences.  For example, it was only in Shanghai a few days ago that I saw my first wheelchair-accessible urinal.  I’ve also seen more pictures of Chairman Mao in the last 2 days than I had seen in the previous . . .  well, ever.   I’m here for a series of meetings.  Presently, I’m in Wuhan attending the Colloquium of the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law – an annual meeting of an organization dedicated to the teaching of environmental law around the world.

I did not speak about animals at this Colloquium.   Neither has anyone else.  In fact, today’s lunch speaker presented some data about the research interests of the membership and animal law merited mention only as one the disciplines least often listed as a primary research interest.  Indeed, I’m one of only 6 academy members who did list it.

But not for long, by jiminy.  I’ve noted before that I have begun a campaign to get the larger IUCN to recognize animal rights/welfare as part of its mission.  Toward that end, I recently joined the Ethics Specialist Group of the IUCN Committee on Environmental Law.  The IUCN Congress occurs quadrennially and I fully intend to have this issue before the body by the next Congress in 2012.

The Academy is much smaller and meets annually.  I have decided to stand for election to the Teaching and Capacity Building Committee, which is drafting an environmental law curriculum for law academics in countries without developed environmental legal regimes.  If elected, I will attempt to insert the animal agenda into the foundation of environmental law pedagogy worldwide.  Otherwise, I’ll do it some other way.

This crusade has nothing to do with hope; I’m not hopeful.  This rather involves pure instrumentalism in the face of inertia.  The more people who teach animal law in more places, the more likely there will someday be some animal law worth teaching.  When that occurs – if it occurs – that will be a good day.  In the meantime, we do what we can.

 More than 1,000 freshwater fish species are threatened with extinction, reflecting the strain on global water resources, an updated global “Red List” of endangered species showed Tuesday.

The list by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) is the most respected inventory of biodiversity covering more than 47,000 of the world’s species.

A International Union for Conservation of Nature photo of a Kihansi Spray Toad (Nectophrynoides asperginis) which once numbered at least 17,000 at the Kihansi Falls in Tanzania, and has now joined the list of creatures which are extinct in the wild.

Scientists looked at 3,120 freshwater fish this year, 510 more than a year ago. They found that 1,147, or a third, are now threatened with extinction.

“Creatures living in freshwater have long been neglected,” said Jean-Christophe Vie, deputy head of species programme at the IUCN.

“This year we have again added a large number of them to the IUCN Red List and are confirming the high levels of threat to many freshwater animals and plants.

“This reflects the state of our previous water resources. There is now an urgency to pursue our effort but more importantly, to start using this information to move towards a wise use of water resources.”

The scientists also added 1,360 species of dragonflies and damselflies to the Red List, and found that out of 1,989 in all, 261 were at risk of disappearing.

Dragonflies provided a good gauge of the state of freshwater ecosystems as “many are very sensitive” to changes, said Vie.

“We found that they are highly threatened wherever we looked,” he said, noting that water resources were under strain due to pollution and intensive usage.

Meanwhile, the tiny Kihansi Spray Toad, which once numbered at least 17,000 at the Kihansi Falls in Tanzania, joined the list of creatures which are now extinct in the wild.

“Its decline is due to the construction of a dam upstream of the Kihansi Falls that removed 90 percent of the original water flow to the gorge,” said the IUCN in a statement.

Overall, this year’s survey found that over a third, or 17,291 species out of 47,677 assessed are now threatened with extinction.

Last year, the Red List examined 44,838 species and found that a similar proportion (16,298 species) were close to becoming extinct.

“What we haven’t got this year is good news,” said Vie.

The overall situation may be worse than reflected according to the IUCN, since data was lacking for 14 percent of the species surveyed.

In addition, the survey only covers a fraction of the world’s species.

“These results are just the tip of the iceberg. We have only managed to assess 47,663 species so far; there are many more millions out there which could be under serious threat,” said Craig Hilton-Taylor, manager of the IUCN Red List unit.

The environmental group WWF also urged action, saying the latest Red List update “should cause alarm over the continuing unprecedented loss of species and the failure so far of mechanisms to arrest biodiversity loss.”

“As crucial climate talks in Copenhagen draw near and with the International Year of Biodiversity around the corner, this is a wake-up call for world leaders,” said Amanda Nickson, Director of the WWF International Species Programme.

Bookmark & Share