Establishing IUCN Red List Criteria for Threatened Ecosystems

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Establishing IUCN Red List Criteria for Threatened Ecosystems Essay Establishing IUCN Red List Criteria for Threatened Ecosystems JON PAUL RODR´IGUEZ,∗†¶¶¶ KATHRYN M. RODR´IGUEZ-CLARK,∗¶¶¶ JONATHAN E. M. BAILLIE,‡ NEVILLE ASH,§ JOHN BENSON,¶ TIMOTHY BOUCHER,# CLAIRE BROWN,∗∗ NEIL D. BURGESS,†† BEN COLLEN,‡ MICHAEL JENNINGS,‡‡ DAVID A. KEITH,§§ EMILY NICHOLSON,¶¶ CARMEN REVENGA,# BELINDA REYERS,## MATHIEU ROUGET,∗∗∗### TAMMY SMITH,∗∗∗ MARK SPALDING,††† ANDREW TABER,‡‡‡ MATT WALPOLE,∗∗ IRENE ZAGER,† AND TARA ZAMIN§§§ ∗Centro de Ecolog´ıa, Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cient´ıficas, Apdo. 20632, Caracas 1020-A, Venezuela †Provita, Apdo. 47552, Caracas 1041-A, Venezuela ‡Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY, United Kingdom §IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature, 28 Rue Mauverney, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland ¶Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust, Mrs. Macquaries Road, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia #The Nature Conservancy, 4245 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 100, Arlington, VA 22203-1606, U.S.A. ∗∗United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, United Kingdom ††Conservation Science Program, WWF-US, 1250 24th Street NW, Washington, D.C; Conservation Science Group, Zoology Department, Cambridge University, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, United Kingdom; Centre for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Biology Department, Universitetsparken 15, Copenhagen, Denmark ‡‡Department of Geography, McClure Hall 203, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83844-3021, U.S.A. §§Biodiversity and Research Division, New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1967, Hurstville, NSW 2220, Australia ¶¶Imperial College London, Division of Biology, Silwood Park Campus, Buckhurst Road, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7PY, United Kingdom ##Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, P.O. Box 320, Stellenbosch 7599, South Africa ∗∗∗South African National Biodiversity Institute, P/Bag X101, Pretoria 0001, South Africa †††The Nature Conservancy and University of Cambridge, 93 Centre Drive, Newmarket CB8 8AW, United Kingdom ‡‡‡Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), P.O. Box 0113 BOCBD, Bogor 16000, Indonesia §§§Department of Biology, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada Abstract: The potential for conservation of individual species has been greatly advanced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) development of objective, repeatable, and transparent criteria for assessing extinction risk that explicitly separate risk assessment from priority setting. At the IV World Conservation Congress in 2008, the process began to develop and implement comparable global standards for ecosystems. A working group established by the IUCN has begun formulating a system of quantitative categories and criteria, analogous to those used for species, for assigning levels of threat to ecosystems at local, regional, and global levels. A final system will require definitions of ecosystems; quantification of ecosystem status; identification of the stages of degradation and loss of ecosystems; proxy measures of risk (criteria); classification thresholds for these criteria; and standardized methods for performing assessments. The system will need to reflect the degree and rate of change in an ecosystem’s extent, composition, structure, and function, and have its conceptual roots in ecological theory and empirical research. On the basis of these requirements and the hypothesis that ecosystem risk is a function of the risk of its component species, we propose a set of four criteria: recent declines in distribution or ecological function, historical total loss in distribution or ecological function, small distribution combined with decline, or very small distribution. Most work has focused on ¶¶¶Address correspondence to J. P. Rodriguez, email [email protected], or K. M. Rodriguez-Clark, email [email protected] ###Current address: Department of Plant Science, University of Pretoria, Lynwood Road, Pretoria 0002, South Africa Re-use of this article is permitted in accordance with the Terms and Conditions set out at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/onlineopen# OnlineOpen_Terms Paper submitted September 19, 2009; revised manuscript accepted April 29, 2010. [Correction added after publication 5 November 2010: Errors in author affiliation and correspondence details were amended.] 21 Conservation Biology, Volume 25, No. 1, 21–29 C 2010 Society for Conservation Biology DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01598.x 22 IUCN Red List Criteria for Ecosystems terrestrial ecosystems, but comparable thresholds and criteria for freshwater and marine ecosystems are also needed. These are the first steps in an international consultation process that will lead to a unified proposal to be presented at the next World Conservation Congress in 2012. Keywords: ecosystem threat status, endangered ecosystems, IUCN categories and criteria, IUCN Red List, threatened ecosystems. Establecimiento de Criterios para la Lista Roja de UICN de Ecosistemas Amenazados Resumen: El potencial para la conservacion´ de muchas especies ha avanzado enormemente porque la Union´ Internacional para la Conservacion´ de la Naturaleza (UICN) ha desarrollado criterios objetivos, repetibles y transparentes para evaluar el riesgo de extincion´ que expl´ıcitamente separa la evaluacion´ de riesgo de la definicion´ de prioridades. En el IV Congreso Mundial de Conservacion´ en 2008, el proceso comenzo´ a desarrollar e implementar estandares´ globales comparables para ecosistemas. Un grupo de tra- bajo establecido por la UICN ha formulado un sistema inicial de categor´ıas y criterios cuantitativos, analogos´ a los utilizados para especies, para asignar niveles de amenaza a ecosistemas a niveles local, regional y global. Un sistema final requerira´ de definiciones de ecosistemas; cuantificacion´ del estatus de ecosistemas; identifi- cacion´ de las etapas de degradacion´ y p´erdida de los ecosistemas; medidas de riesgo (criterios) alternativas; umbrales de clasificacion´ para esos criterios y m´etodos estandarizados para la realizacion´ de evaluaciones. El sistema debera´ reflejar el nivel y tasa de cambio en la extension,´ composicion,´ estructura y funcionamiento de un ecosistema, y tener sus ra´ıces conceptuales en la teor´ıa ecologica´ y la investigacion´ emp´ırica. Sobre la base de esos requerimientos y la hipotesis´ de que el riesgo del ecosistema es una funciondelriesgodelas´ especies que lo componen, proponemos un conjunto de 4 criterios: declinaciones recientes en la distribucion´ o funcionamiento ecologica,´ p´erdida total historica´ en la distribucion´ o funcionamiento ecologico,´ distribucion´ pequena˜ combinada con declinacion,´ o distribucion´ muy pequena.˜ La mayor parte del trabajo se ha concen- trado en ecosistemas terrestres, pero tambi´en se requieren umbrales y criterios comparables para ecosistemas dulceacu´ıcolas y marinos. Estos son los primeros pasos de un proceso de consulta internacional que llevara´ a una propuesta unificada que sera´ presentada en el proximo´ Congreso Mundial de Conservacion´ en 2012. Palabras Clave: categor´ıas y criterios IUCN, ecosistemas amenazados, ecosistemas en peligro, estatus de ame- naza a ecosistemas, Lista Roja de la UICN Introduction ological diversity (Butchart et al. 2004, 2007), which are being used to track progress toward international con- In the last 50 years, humans have altered the world’s servation targets (Millennium Development Goals 2009; ecosystems more than during any other time span in his- Walpole et al. 2009). At national scales, species red lists tory. Twenty to seventy percent of the area of 11 of the inform policy and action in more than 100 countries and 13 terrestrial biomes evaluated in the Millennium Ecosys- provide ample data for other conservation applications tem Assessment (2005a) has been converted to human (IUCN 2010a; Zamin et al. 2010). use. Although informed and effective policy may slow Ecosystem red lists have the potential to complement land conversion (Watson 2005), there is no consistent, the policy successes of species red lists in several ways. widely accepted scientific framework for tracking the Ecosystems may more effectively represent biological status of Earth’s ecosystems and identifying those with a diversity as a whole than do individual species (Noss high probability of loss or degradation (Nicholson et al. 1996; Cowling et al. 2004), especially given the taxo- 2009). Recognizing this gap, the fourth IUCN (Interna- nomic bias of the current IUCN Red List (Vie´ et al. 2009; tional Union for Conservation of Nature) World Conser- Stuart et al. 2010). Moreover, they include fundamental vation Congress launched a process to develop criteria for abiotic components that are only indirectly included in assessing the status of and establishing a global red list species assessments (e.g., riverine ecosystems; Beechie of ecosystems (IV World Conservation Congress 2008). et al. 2010). Declines in ecosystem status may also be We use the term ecosystem as an assemblage of organ- more apparent than extirpations or extinctions of indi- isms that occur together in space and time and interact vidual species; society often perceives loss of biological with each other and their physical environment (Odum diversity in terms of loss of benefits such as clean wa- 1971). The IUCN uses quantitative and qualitative criteria ter, food, timber, and fuel (Millennium Ecosystem As- to classify species by their probability of extinction (i.e., sessment 2005a). Ecosystem-level assessments
Recommended publications
  • Critically Endangered - Wikipedia
    Critically endangered - Wikipedia Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history Critically endangered From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Main page Contents This article is about the conservation designation itself. For lists of critically endangered species, see Lists of IUCN Red List Critically Endangered Featured content species. Current events A critically endangered (CR) species is one which has been categorized by the International Union for Random article Conservation status Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild.[1] Donate to Wikipedia by IUCN Red List category Wikipedia store As of 2014, there are 2464 animal and 2104 plant species with this assessment, compared with 1998 levels of 854 and 909, respectively.[2] Interaction Help As the IUCN Red List does not consider a species extinct until extensive, targeted surveys have been About Wikipedia conducted, species which are possibly extinct are still listed as critically endangered. IUCN maintains a list[3] Community portal of "possibly extinct" CR(PE) and "possibly extinct in the wild" CR(PEW) species, modelled on categories used Recent changes by BirdLife International to categorize these taxa. Contact page Contents Tools Extinct 1 International Union for Conservation of Nature definition What links here Extinct (EX) (list) 2 See also Related changes Extinct in the Wild (EW) (list) 3 Notes Upload file Threatened Special pages 4 References Critically Endangered (CR) (list) Permanent
    [Show full text]
  • US Fish & Wildlife Service Seabird Conservation Plan—Pacific Region
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Seabird Conservation Plan Conservation Seabird Pacific Region U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Seabird Conservation Plan—Pacific Region 120 0’0"E 140 0’0"E 160 0’0"E 180 0’0" 160 0’0"W 140 0’0"W 120 0’0"W 100 0’0"W RUSSIA CANADA 0’0"N 0’0"N 50 50 WA CHINA US Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Region OR ID AN NV JAP CA H A 0’0"N I W 0’0"N 30 S A 30 N L I ort I Main Hawaiian Islands Commonwealth of the hwe A stern A (see inset below) Northern Mariana Islands Haw N aiian Isla D N nds S P a c i f i c Wake Atoll S ND ANA O c e a n LA RI IS Johnston Atoll MA Guam L I 0’0"N 0’0"N N 10 10 Kingman Reef E Palmyra Atoll I S 160 0’0"W 158 0’0"W 156 0’0"W L Howland Island Equator A M a i n H a w a i i a n I s l a n d s Baker Island Jarvis N P H O E N I X D IN D Island Kauai S 0’0"N ONE 0’0"N I S L A N D S 22 SI 22 A PAPUA NEW Niihau Oahu GUINEA Molokai Maui 0’0"S Lanai 0’0"S 10 AMERICAN P a c i f i c 10 Kahoolawe SAMOA O c e a n Hawaii 0’0"N 0’0"N 20 FIJI 20 AUSTRALIA 0 200 Miles 0 2,000 ES - OTS/FR Miles September 2003 160 0’0"W 158 0’0"W 156 0’0"W (800) 244-WILD http://www.fws.gov Information U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunnison Sage Grouse Biological Opinion
    United States Department of Agriculture December 22, 2014 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 Programmatic Consultation for the Gunnison Sage-Grouse Attached is the regionally developed Biological Opinion for the Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus) in the States of Colorado and Utah. This Opinion takes effect concurrent with the effective date of the grouse’s listing as a threatened species on December 22nd, 2014. This Opinion replaces the 2010 SGI Conference Report for the Gunnison sage-grouse. Continue to use the 2010 SGI Conference Report for the Greater sage-grouse. Section 1.2 describes the Conversion of the Conference Report to a Biological Opinion. Document expires on 07/30/2040. Citation: DOI, 2014. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Biological Opinion for the Natural Resources Conservation Services’ USDA Farm Bill programs, including the Sage Grouse Initiative, and associated procedures, conservation practices, and conservation measures for the Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus). Denver, Colorado. Contact Chanda Pettie, State Biologist, at 720-544-2804 or [email protected] for information regarding the content of this notice. FOTG, Section II NRCS, CO SEC, T&E December 2014 BIOLOGICAL OPINION 1.0 INTRODUCTION In accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. [ESA],), and the Interagency Cooperation Regulations (50 CFR 402), this document transmits the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Biological Opinion (Opinion) for the Natural Resources Conservation Services’ (NRCS) USDA Farm Bill programs, including the Sage Grouse Initiative (SGI), and associated procedures, conservation practices, and conservation measures for the Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus).
    [Show full text]
  • IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ to Identify the Level of Threat to Plants
    Ex-Situ Conservation at Scott Arboretum Public gardens and arboreta are more than just pretty places. They serve as an insurance policy for the future through their well managed ex situ collections. Ex situ conservation focuses on safeguarding species by keeping them in places such as seed banks or living collections. In situ means "on site", so in situ conservation is the conservation of species diversity within normal and natural habitats and ecosystems. The Scott Arboretum is a member of Botanical Gardens Conservation International (BGCI), which works with botanic gardens around the world and other conservation partners to secure plant diversity for the benefit of people and the planet. The aim of BGCI is to ensure that threatened species are secure in botanic garden collections as an insurance policy against loss in the wild. Their work encompasses supporting botanic garden development where this is needed and addressing capacity building needs. They support ex situ conservation for priority species, with a focus on linking ex situ conservation with species conservation in natural habitats and they work with botanic gardens on the development and implementation of habitat restoration and education projects. BGCI uses the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ to identify the level of threat to plants. In-depth analyses of the data contained in the IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, Red List are published periodically (usually at least once every four years). The results from the analysis of the data contained in the 2008 update of the IUCN Red List are published in The 2008 Review of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species; see www.iucn.org/redlist for further details.
    [Show full text]
  • Species at Risk Act
    Consultation on Amending the List of Species under the Species at Risk Act Terrestrial Species November 2011 Information contained in this publication or product may be reproduced, in part or in whole, and by any means, for personal or public non-commercial purposes, without charge or further permission, unless otherwise specified. You are asked to: Exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced; Indicate both the complete title of the materials reproduced, as well as the author organization; and Indicate that the reproduction is a copy of an official work that is published by the Government of Canada and that the reproduction has not been produced in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Government of Canada. Commercial reproduction and distribution is prohibited except with written permission from the Government of Canada’s copyright administrator, Public Works and Government Services of Canada (PWGSC). For more information, please contact PWGSC at 613-996-6886 or at [email protected]. Cover photo credits: Olive Clubtail © Jim Johnson Peacock Vinyl Lichen © Timothy B. Wheeler Cerulean Warbler © Carl Savignac Title page photo credits: Background photo: Dune Tachinid Fly habitat © Sydney Cannings Foreground, large photo: Dwarf Lake Iris © Jessie M. Harris Small photos, left to right: Butler’s Gartersnake © Daniel W.A. Noble Hungerford’s Crawling Water Beetle © Steve Marshall Barn Swallow © Gordon Court Spring Salamander © David Green Available also on the Internet. ISSN: 1710-3029 Cat. no.: EN1-36/2011E-PDF © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2011 Consultation on Amending the List of Species under the Species at Risk Act Terrestrial Species November 2011 Please submit your comments by February 8, 2012, for terrestrial species undergoing normal consultations and by November 8, 2012, for terrestrial species undergoing extended consultations.
    [Show full text]
  • Cop16 Inf. 32 (English Only / Únicamente En Inglés / Seulement En Anglais)
    CoP16 Inf. 32 (English only / Únicamente en inglés / Seulement en anglais) CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA ____________________ Sixteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties Bangkok (Thailand), 3-14 March 2013 CITES TRADE: RECENT TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN APPENDIX II-LISTED SPECIES (1996-2010) The attached document* has been submitted by the Secretariat in relation to agenda item 21 on Capacity building. * The geographical designations employed in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the CITES Secretariat or the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The responsibility for the contents of the document rests exclusively with its author. CoP16 Inf. 32 – p. 1 CITES Trade: recent trends in international trade in Appendix II‐listed species (1996‐2010) CITES Project No. S‐383 Prepared for the CITES Secretariat by United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre December 2012 PREPARED FOR CITES Secretariat, Geneva, Switzerland. This report was made possible as a result of the generous CITATION financial support by the European Commission. CITES Secretariat (2012). CITES Trade: recent trends in international trade in Appendix II‐listed species This publication may be reproduced for educational (1996‐2010). Prepared by UNEP‐WCMC, Cambridge. or non‐profit purposes without special permission, provided acknowledgement to the source is made. Reuse of any figures is subject to permission from the original rights holders. No use of this publication © Copyright: 2012, CITES Secretariat may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose without permission in writing from CITES.
    [Show full text]
  • Least-Concern Species
    Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history Least-concern species From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Main page Contents Featured content A least concern (LC) species is one which has been categorized by the International Union for Conservation of Nature as Current events evaluated but not qualified for any other category. As such they do not qualify as threatened, near threatened, or (before 2001) Random article conservation dependent. Donate to Wikipedia Wikipedia store Species cannot be assigned the Least Concern category unless they have had their population status evaluated. That is, adequate information is needed to make a direct, or indirect, assessment of its risk of extinction based on its distribution or population status. Interaction Since 2001 the category has had the abbreviation "LC", following the IUCN 2001 Categories & Criteria (version 3.1).[1] However, Help around 20% of least concern taxa (3261 of 15636) in the IUCN database use the code "LR/lc", which indicates they have not been About Wikipedia Community portal re-evaluated since 2000. Prior to 2001 "least concern" was a subcategory of the "Lower Risk" category and assigned the code Recent changes "LR/lc" or (lc). Contact page While "least concern" is not considered a red listed category by the IUCN, the 2006 Red List still assigns the category to 15636 Tools taxa. The number of animal species listed in this category totals 14033 (which includes several undescribed species such as a frog [2] What links here from the genus Philautus ). There are also 101 animal subspecies listed and 1500 plant taxa (1410 species, 55 subspecies, and Related changes 35 varieties).
    [Show full text]
  • Salvia Pratensis Occurs
    Glossary links done & added to Big Glossary. IUCN table dSalviaone. pratensis Meadow clary, Clari’r maes LAMIACEAE SYN.: none Status: Schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Status in Europe: Not threatened Countryside Act 1981 Red Data Book: Lower risk - Nationally 38 (20 native or possibly native) / 233 10-km Scarce squares post 1987 Contents Status:...............................................................................................................1 1 Morphology, Identification, Taxonomy & Genetics................................................2 1.1 Morphology & Identification ........................................................................2 1.2 Taxonomic considerations ..........................................................................2 1.3 Genetic studies .........................................................................................2 2 Distribution and current status .........................................................................3 2.1 World ......................................................................................................4 2.2 Europe ....................................................................................................4 2.3 United Kingdom ........................................................................................6 2.3.1. England......................................................................................... 11 2.3.2. Scotland........................................................................................ 12 2.3.3. Northern Ireland............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • F&C BIODIVERSITY Report A-W-G
    Is biodiversity a material risk for companies? An assessment of the exposure of FTSE sectors to biodiversity risk September 2004 This report was originally published by ISIS Asset Management which merged with F&C Management Ltd to create F&C Asset Management plc in October 2004 ISIS Asset Management ISIS Asset Management is a UK-based asset manager with £62.6 billion of funds under management (as at 31-08-04). As an investor, we believe that companies that manage their social, environmental and ethical risks effectively are protecting shareholder value. ISIS regularly publishes research studies with a view to encouraging more socially responsible behaviour by companies, as we believe that active participation in such debates by investors can help lead to better risk management by companies. This report forms part of ISIS’s on-going Biodiversity Programme. With effect from October 2004, ISIS will merge with F&C Management Ltd to create the UK’s fourth largest fund manager. The combined company will operate under the name F&C Asset Management Plc. Acknowledgements Earthwatch Institute (Europe) The research for this report has been undertaken by Earthwatch Institute (Europe) and ISIS Asset Management. Earthwatch is an international environmental organisation. Its mission is to engage people worldwide in scientific field research and education to promote the understanding and action necessary for a sustainable environment. Earthwatch works closely with the private sector on a range of programmes designed to enable Earthwatch to deliver this mission. A number of these are focused on biodiversity and this report is an important contribution to this work programme.
    [Show full text]
  • IUCN Red List
    IUCN Red List The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (also known as the IUCN Red List or The IUCN Red List of Red Data List), founded in 1964, is the world's most comprehensive inventory of Threatened Species the global conservation status of biological species. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) is the world's main authority on the conservation status of species. A series of Regional Red Lists are produced by countries or organizations, which assess the risk of extinction to species within a political management unit. The IUCN Red List is set upon precise criteria to evaluate the extinction risk of thousands of species and subspecies. These criteria are relevant to all species and all regions of the world. The aim is to convey the urgency of conservation issues to the public and policy makers, as well as help the international community to try to reduce species extinction. According to IUCN (1996), the formally stated goals of the Red List are (1) to provide scientifically based information on the status of Headquarters United Kingdom species and subspecies at a global level, (2) to draw attention to the magnitude and Region International importance of threatened biodiversity, (3) to influence national and international served policy and decision-making, and (4) to provide information to guide actions to Official English conserve biological diversity.[1] language Parent International Union Major species assessors include BirdLife International, the Institute of Zoology (the organization for Conservation of research division of the Zoological Society of London), the World Conservation Nature Monitoring Centre, and many Specialist Groups within the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC).
    [Show full text]
  • Panthera Onca, Jaguar Errata Version Assessment By: Quigley, H., Foster, R., Petracca, L., Payan, E., Salom, R
    The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ ISSN 2307-8235 (online) IUCN 2008: T15953A123791436 Scope: Global Language: English Panthera onca, Jaguar Errata version Assessment by: Quigley, H., Foster, R., Petracca, L., Payan, E., Salom, R. & Harmsen, B. View on www.iucnredlist.org Citation: Quigley, H., Foster, R., Petracca, L., Payan, E., Salom, R. & Harmsen, B. 2017. Panthera onca (errata version published in 2018). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T15953A123791436. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-3.RLTS.T15953A50658693.en Copyright: © 2018 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale, reposting or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission from the copyright holder. For further details see Terms of Use. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species Programme, the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership. The IUCN Red List Partners are: Arizona State University; BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International; Conservation International; NatureServe; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; and Zoological Society of London. If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown in this document, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided. THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™ Taxonomy Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Animalia Chordata Mammalia Carnivora Felidae Taxon Name: Panthera onca (Linnaeus, 1758) Synonym(s): • Felis onca Linnaeus, 1758 Common Name(s): • English: Jaguar • Spanish: Otorongo, Tigre, Tigre Americano, Tigre mariposo, Tigre Real, Yaguar, Yaguareté Taxonomic Notes: The status of the subspecies is unclear.
    [Show full text]
  • WILDLIFE in a CHANGING WORLD an Analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™
    WILDLIFE IN A CHANGING WORLD An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ Edited by Jean-Christophe Vié, Craig Hilton-Taylor and Simon N. Stuart coberta.indd 1 07/07/2009 9:02:47 WILDLIFE IN A CHANGING WORLD An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ first_pages.indd I 13/07/2009 11:27:01 first_pages.indd II 13/07/2009 11:27:07 WILDLIFE IN A CHANGING WORLD An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ Edited by Jean-Christophe Vié, Craig Hilton-Taylor and Simon N. Stuart first_pages.indd III 13/07/2009 11:27:07 The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily refl ect those of IUCN. This publication has been made possible in part by funding from the French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs. Published by: IUCN, Gland, Switzerland Red List logo: © 2008 Copyright: © 2009 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Citation: Vié, J.-C., Hilton-Taylor, C.
    [Show full text]