Skip to main content

Who decides they are extinct?


This question might pop up in your mind. If not there is no harm in thinking for once. Who in the whole world decides that a certain species is endangered or extinct? It vexed me.

After some research and it was evident that there are many local agencies authorized by the local governing bodies to conduct research and surveys to find the population density and frequency of sightings and so on of species in a particular location.


But there exists an International body whose responsibility is to keep a track of the conservation status of species and subspecies including plants and animals. This is known as International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). As one of the oldest and also the largest environment network, IUCN has over 1000 professionals, 11,000 volunteer scientists, 60 offices and numerous partners across the world. Like many other record keeping organizations and keepers of numbers, metrics and NGOs, IUCN is located near Geneva, Switzerland.

IUCN has a list called 'IUCN Red List'. This list is a comprehensive inventory of the status of plants and animal species globally. This list is a sort of a reference guide and supposedly very accurate picture of the status of the species and sub-species. The list is updated every 5 or 10 years with the help of contributions from numerous assigned local bodies. The list is updated using a 'peer-review' method of collating and substantiating data. For the interested, you can get more info on the red list and its assessment technique here.

The List has the following categories:

  • Extinct (EX)
  • Extinct in the Wild (EW)
  • Critically Endangered (CR)
  • Endangered (EN)
  • Vulnerable (VU)
  • Near Threatened (NT)
  • Least Concern (LC)
  • Data Deficient (DD)
  • Not Evaluated (NE)
Finally the onus is on the local bodies and area specialists who are actively involved in gathering and collating data. What beats me is how the local bodies must be working on this?

Do they sit and watch birds, animals and plants in an area all day, 365 days a year? What decides if they are endangered or not? What if the bird or animal is an 'elusive or shy' type and does not allow itself to be seen? How many sightings over a period of time is it required to classify a bird or animal into a particular category? What if the local authority kept missing the sightings due to body odor or noises that scared the species away?Anyone out there has some answers?

Also take a look at a form (PDF) for enlisting a species as endangered.

Comments

BillyWarhol said…
Interesting Post*

I suppose it also has to do with population Size in order to continue the Species*

;)) Peace*
August 26, 2008 at 11:58 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Random tip of the Day # 133

"Always remember to close the other nostril, when you blow your nose." This way the fluid goes out and not IN to your sinuses. Thank me when you don't die of pneumonia.
4 comments
Read more

Random Babble: Bore

The word 'Bore' has a lot of connotations. All connotations can be found in a dictionary. So why am I doing it here? Because I can and I am plain bored. Bore: To be a bore. Someone who has the ability to spread boredom. This should not be mistaken for a superpower. It is more common than you can imagine. Illustration: The author finds some of his posts a bore . Bore : Bore is used to define the diameter of a tube or tunnel or anything circular. Its associated more to a hole. Gun barrels also are identified using the bore. No Calibre is different, this is more related to the barrel. Illustration: The bore of the barrel of the gun pointed at your face is directly related to your ability to hold your bladder. Bore : Bore is also a sort of digging term related to the process of digging into something. It perhaps obvious since Bore seems to like tunnels and holes. Its only natural to associate itself to the process of digging too. Illustration: The termite bore holes in my book...
1 comment
Read more

Why Science isn't helping?

A lot of you may immediately raise your voices arguing over this. I can already hear some of them...'What do you mean Science isn't helping?'....'Its ridiculous to think science isn't helping'... 'Then what about all the advancements around us thanks to science'. I hear you. But let me tell you why Science isn't helping us the way it should. It is true we have made a lot of advancements in the different fields of science & technology. We have nuclear power, bio-genetics, space flights and more. But if you look closer you will realize that any field where humans have tried to use science to replace a part of nature, it has resulted in catastrophe. Science has mostly derived its inspiration from nature. Let it be the Libelle G-suit used by modern combat pilots (which is inspired by the humble dragonfly) or Artificial Intelligence which tries to mimic the brain. This inspired development also known as Biomimetics has helped science make tremendous l...
Post a Comment
Read more