Using the IUCN Red List Categories & Criteria at Regional Levels

1. Using the IUCN Red List Categories & Criteria at Regional Levels

2. IUCN RED LIST CATEGORIES AND CRITERIA The IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria were developed for use at the global level. They can also be used at regional and national levels, provided the Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional Levelsare followed. Free download from the IUCN Red List web site (www.iucnredlist.org).

3. Africa Lower Mekong River basin area VIET NAM LAO PDR THAILAND USA states CAMBODIA East African countries Afghanistan provinces From Global to Sub-global • Continents • Countries • States • Provinces • Biogeographical or ecological areas

4. summer summer winter • The regional population may range across political borders • The region may hold a very small proportion of the global population • The taxon may be highly mobile and individuals may move between populations within and outside the region • The survival of the regional population may depend on immigration from outside the region (i.e. the regional population is a sink) • The taxon may be a non-breeding seasonal visitor to the region • Introduced taxa? • Regionally Extinct taxa?

5. Two additional categories are included for regional assessments: • NOT APPLICABLE (NA) - Taxa that have not been assessed because they are unsuitable for inclusion in the regional Red List. • REGIONALLY EXTINCT (RE) - Taxa that are considered extinct within the region but populations still exist elsewhere in the world. Therefore, at the regional level there are eleven categories

6. Extinct (EX) Extinct in the Wild (EW) Regionally Extinct (RE) Critically Endangered (CR) (Threatened) Endangered (EN) Vulnerable (VU) (Evaluated) Near Threatened (NT) Least Concern (LC) Data Deficient (DD) Not Applicable (NA) Not Evaluated (NE) Categories at regional level

7. Extinct versus Regionally Extinct • Regionally Extinct(RE) applies to the regional population only. A RE taxon is known to still exist elsewhere and may re-colonize or be reintroduced into the region. • Extinct(EX) applies to the global population. An EX is not known to exist either within or outside the region.

8. “Regionally Extinct in the Wild” There is no such category as “Regionally Extinct in the Wild”. If wild populations have been lost and the taxon now only exists within the region in captivity, but wild populations still exist outside the region, the assessment should be Regionally Extinct (RE).

9. conservation priority setting (includes other factors) Regional assessment essentially a three-step process: Step one – Identifying NA taxa Decide which taxa are Not Applicable (NA) for the regional Red List Step two – Preliminary assessment Apply Red List criteria to the population occurring within the region only (exclude populations outside the region) Step three – Final regional assessment Evaluate potential rescue effects from populations outside the region and consider up- or down-listing accordingly.

10. Introduced taxa(not indigenous to the region and introduced for reasons other than conservation) Step one – identifying NA taxa Taxa not eligible for regional assessments (NA) • Vagrant taxa(not indigenous to the region but occurs occasionally and irregularly)

11. Step one – identifying NA taxa Taxa eligible for regional assessments • Assess taxa that are native to the region • Indigenous taxa breeding within the region. • Naturally re-colonizing taxa (formerly Regionally Extinct). • Reintroduced taxa (formerly Regionally Extinct). • Marginal taxa(small proportion of global range/population within the region). • Visiting non-breeding taxa(not breeding there, but using essential resources)

12. summer summer Optional filter winter Step one – identifying NA taxa • Marginal taxa • Visiting non-breeding taxa A threshold may be set to determine which are included and which are Not Applicable (NA). e.g. <1% of the global population is present/using resources within the region If a filter is used, it must be clearly stated in the Red List documentation and the taxa filtered out should be assigned the Not Applicable (NA) category.

13. Step one – identifying NA taxa Examples of applying a filter: Sweden & UK Sweden: visiting species Visiting species assessed if Swedish population represents at least 2% of European population. UK birds: breeding vs. visiting populations Winter populations of many breeding birds are supplemented by non-breeding birds arriving from continental Europe and the Arctic • RSPB conducted 2 assessments: • Breeding population • Total population in the non-breeding season • Filter: population size must be at least double in the non-breeding season in order to ensure the assessment reflects the status of the non-breeding population.

14. Leatherback turtle Dermochelyscoriacea: • Winters in temperate waters • Occurs regularly off both east and west coasts of Canada • Spends considerable time feeding in Canadian waters • Pink Sand-verbena Abronia umbellata: • Inhabits coastal sand dunes in western USA • Occasionally washes up and germinates on Vancouver Island (only 2-3 plants recorded in a few different years since early 1900s) • Although a vagrant, is at risk throughout its range Step one – identifying NA taxa Examples of applying a filter: Canada • Regularity of occurrence and whether Canada provides an important resource • Global threat status

15. Step two – preliminary assessment Endemic taxa - No populations outside the region to influence the assessment. The IUCN Categories and Criteria alone can be used. Regional assessment = Global assessment Non-endemic taxa- Non-endemic taxa may be influenced by populations outside the region: • Immigration from outside the region- Movement of individuals between regions will influence the risk of extinction within the region. The IUCN Categories and Criteria alonemay produce a wrong categorization for these populations. • Isolated populations- Behave as endemics. These can be assessed using the IUCN Categories and Criteria alone.

16. Breeding populations: Downlist category from step 2 No unlikely 3b. Is the immigration expected to decrease? Yes / likely Uplist category from step 2 Yes likely Yes / unknown 3c. Is the regional population a sink? No / unknown No / unknown No change from step 2 Visiting populations: 3e. Are the conditions within the region deteriorating? 3f. Can the breeding population rescue the regional population should it decline? Downlist category from step 2 No unlikely No unlikely Yes likely Yes / unknown Yes / unknown No change from step 2 No / unknown Step three – regional adjustment Step 2: Assess the regional populationaccording to the Red List Criteria 3a. Does the regional population experience any significant immigration of propagules likely to reproduce in the region? 3d. Are the conditions outside the region deteriorating?

17. Examples from the Swedish Red List Sandwich tern Sterna sandvicensis 450 breeding pairs in Sweden. 65% decline in Sweden over the last three generations. Preliminary assessment (step 2) Endangered (EN A2ac; C1) Outside the region, there are are good immigration possibilities from the south. For example, there is a large and stable population in Germany and an increasing population in Holland. Therefore, the preliminary regional category is downgraded. Final assessment Vulnerable (VU° A2ac; C1)

18. Examples from the Swedish Red List Caspian tern Sterna caspia 415 breeding pairs in nine colonies and 80 solitary breeding pairs in Sweden. 65% decline in Sweden over the last three generations. Preliminary assessment (step 2) Endangered (EN A2ae; C1+2a(i)) Outside the region, the Caspian tern population in the entire Baltic Sea area (Sweden, Finland, Estonia) has declined by 39% over the last three generations. The nearest population outside of this area is in the Black Sea. Probability of re-colonization from the Black Sea population is very low. Therefore, the preliminary category is left unchanged. Final assessment Endangered (EN A2ae; C1+2a(i))

19. Conflicting regional and global assessments Non-endemics The global assessment may differ from a regional assessment: • A taxon may be globally LC, but threatened within the region because the global population is large, wide-spread and stable, but within the region the population is small and declining. • A taxon may be globally threatened (typically under criterion A) but LC within the region because the population in the region is large and is not declining at the same rate as elsewhere.

20. Vulnerable Critically Endangered Conflicting regional and global assessments Endemics In some cases there may be disagreement between the regional assessment and the current global assessment of an endemic taxon. Contact appropriate global-level Red List Authority via Red List Unit office (redlist@iucn.org)

21. Vulnerable Vulnerable Vulnerable Critically Endangered Endemics Regional and global assessor reach an agreement on most appropriate assessment and global assessment is changed. Regional Red List can include the new global category immediately, even if global Red List has not yet been updated

22. Vulnerable! Vulnerable Critically Endangered Critically Endangered! Endemics Regional and global assessor do not reach an agreement on most appropriate assessment. Regional assessors may submit an appeal to Red List Unit (redlist@iucn.org) for judgement by Red List Standards & Petitions Working Group

23. If an appeal is made and no conclusion has been reached before the regional Red List is finalized, both the regional assessment and the current IUCN global assessment should be included in the regional Red List Where global and regional assessors disagree over the assessment of an endemic taxon, the issues involved must be documented under the listing.

24. Setting priorities for conservation • The compilation of a regional Red List generally precedes the conservation priority setting process. • Limited to data on population size, declines, range area and responses to threats. • Relative estimate of likelihood of extinction. • Used as a tool in the conservation priority setting process.

25. Snake? Dragonfly? Tree Frog? Spider Monkey? Owl? Grouper? Cactus? $ Setting priorities for conservation • Setting conservation priorities normally includes an assessment of extinction risk (e.g. Red List assessment) • Includes factors not considered in the Red List assessment (e.g. ecology, phylogeny, history, culture). • Considers probability of conservation action being successful. • Takes into account availability of funds and personnel. • Considers existing legal frameworks (e.g. inclusion of taxa on CITES, global status and proportion of global population occurring in the region) Shark? Spiny Mouse? Woodpecker? Boxwood? Seahorse? Salamander? Wolf? Ant? Lizard? Vulture? Mussel? Sturgeon? Ebony? Toad? Albatross? Turtle? Limpet? Golden Mole? Spider? Ibis? Fruitbat? Iguana? Fir? Catfish? Wasp?

26. Regional Case Studies: Viet Nam, North Africa & Mediterranean

27. Sarus Crane Grus antigone Viet Nam National Assessment (2003) Range A migrant species that spends the winter months in Viet Nam. Found in 3 disjunct global populations: the Indian subcontinent, Australia & South-east Asia (Cambodia, Viet Nam, Lao PDR, Myanmar; extinct in Thailand & probably China). Occurs in 2 locations in Viet Nam: Tram Chin, where it remains for 3 months/year, and Logo Samat, a stopover point for individuals heading to Cambodia, where it occurs irregularly and stays for 1 week. EOO = 700-900 km². AOO = 400 km². Population >90% population decline in Tram Chin since 1990 (1990: 128 individuals; 2003: 2 individuals). General population decline in Logo Samat (1992: 7 individuals; 1998: 48 individuals, 2003: 0 individuals). Global population is also in decline.

28. Sarus Crane, Grus antigone Habitat & Ecology Southeast Asian populations frequent open and man-made wetlands during the non-breeding season. Threats Main threats are habitat loss and degradation in Tram Chin due to the construction of an irrigation channel, pollution, and fire; habitat loss and degradation in Logo Samat due to encroachment from farmland, human disturbance, and hunting. Conditions in neighbouring Cambodia are uncertain. Conservation Measures CITES Appendix II. Found in Tram Chin National Park.

29. Sarus Crane, Grus antigone • What do we know? • Most individuals found in Tram Chin; irregular in Logo Samat. • Population reduction of >90% in Tram Chin; general decline in Logo Samat. • EOO = 700-900 km² and AOO = 400 km². • 2 locations. • Continuing decline in quality and extent of habitat. • Meets CR A2acd and CR C2a(ii). • Conditions in Cambodia are uncertain, global population is in decline = not up- or downlisted. • CR A2acd; C2a(ii)

30. Photo © Alastair Ross Greater Tussock-sedge Carex paniculata North Africa Regional Assessment Range A Euro-Siberian species. Global distribution: Europe, the Caucasus, Siberia, the Canary Islands and Morocco. Very widespread in the Mediterranean: Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Sicily, former Yugoslavia, Albania, Greece, Bulgaria, Morocco and Algeria; EOO > 4,500,000 km², AOO > 150 km², several locations. Very rare in North Africa, found only in Morocco and Algeria; total EOO > 20,000 km², AOO < 20 km², 4 locations. Population No population size estimates. North African populations are very restricted and severely fragmented. Common in the Mediterranean.

31. Photo © Alastair Ross Greater Tussock-sedge, Carex paniculata Habitat & Ecology A perennial herbaceous plant, inhabiting peaty swamps of plains and mountains. Indifferent to soil type. Flowering starts at the end of winter and lasts until the beginning of summer. It is not utilized. Readily transported (e.g. by ducks). Threats Morocco: drainage, agricultural expansion, water pollution, road infrastructures and urbanization. Algeria: deforestation is the main problem, and the sites where the species is present could easily disappear. A continuing decline in habitat quality and extent in both countries is expected. Conservation Measures None. Classified as LC in the Mediterranean.

32. Photo © Alastair Ross Greater Tussock-sedge, Carex paniculata • What do we know? • No known population estimates or trends. • Populations are very restricted and severely fragmented. • EOO > 20,000 km² and AOO < 20 km². • 4 locations. • Continuing decline in quality and extent of habitat. • Meets EN B2ab(iii) and VU D2. • LC in the Mediterranean. Readily transported, so a rescue effect from European populations is expected = downlisted 1 category. • VU° B2ab(iii)

33. Azure Hawker Aeshna caerulea Mediterranean Regional Assessment Photo © Jeroen Speybroeck Range A Eurasian Alpine species, ranges from Scotland to the Kamchatka Peninsula in the east. Known from 4 locations in the Mediterranean, in France, Italy and Slovenia. In France, EOO = 191 km² and AOO = 33 km². Known from 1 locality in Italy, and may be present in additional unknown localities. Known from just one record (possibly vagrant) in Slovenia. Populations in the Mediterranean are on the western and southern border of the species’ global range. Population Population sizes & trends are unknown. There is a significant population in Switzerland.

34. Photo © Jeroen Speybroeck Azure Hawker, Aeshna caerulea Habitat & Ecology Inhabits Alpine and Arctic moors, heaths and tundra, and breeds in bog pools and sedge swamps above the tree line. Many of its habitats are small, shallow water bodies fed by snowmelt and rainfall that are vulnerable to climatic changes, as they may dry up completely during dry years. Has been observed to have high dispersal power. Threats Drying out of small ponds during some years is currently reported in the Alps, and this is expected to worsen as global warming advances. Climate change is therefore considered its main threat. Conservation Measures None.

35. Photo © Jeroen Speybroeck Azure Hawker, Aeshna caerulea • What do we know? • No known population estimates or trends. • 4 locations. • France: EOO = 191 km², AOO = 33 km². • Total EOO may be quite large; total AOO likely <500 km². • Continuing decline in quality and extent of habitat. • Meets EN B2ab(iii) and VU D2. • High dispersal power, significant populations outside Mediterranean (especially in Switzerland) = downlisted 1 category. • VU° B2ab(iii)

36. Regional Case Studies: Assessments made with little data

37. Redonda bordoni Taxonomy Butterflies of the genus Redonda are endemic to the Andes of Venezuela. This species was not described until 2003. Range Endemic to Venezuela and known only from 2 páramos in the Venezuelan Andes, from 3000-3800m. These 2 páramos and the areas between them make up El Batallón and La Negra National Park, which has an area of 952 km². The total area inhabited by the species (based on the combined area of the 2 páramos at the altitudinal range in which the species occurs) is around 180km².

38. Redonda bordoni Population No information. Anecdotal observations indicate that the species is relatively abundant in the region, especially males; the number of females is difficult to estimate as they remain hidden in low-lying vegetation. Habitat & Ecology Has been found in open páramo and humid páramo in intermontane valleys. Males are active and easily found, but the wings of females are considerably reduced and deformed, so they are highly sedentary and make no attempts to fly. Females also have cryptic wings, and are only visible when showing the silvery uppersides. Females scatter their eggs while crawling.

39. Redonda bordoni Threats Believed to be very fragile and particularly susceptible to environmental threats. Current threats include habitat loss and degradation due to the loss of host plants, trampling by grazing livestock, agriculture, and fire hazards during the dry season. All of these threaten the larvae, and the females are also particularly vulnerable as they are not very mobile. Conservation Measures Present within a national park, though whether the habitat within the park is adequately protected is questionable.

40. Redonda bordoni • What do we know? • No population estimates or trends known. • Effects of threats on habitat not quantified, and R. bordoni’s precise response to those threats unknown = cannot indirectly measure population decline (inference, suspicion, projection). • No quantitative analysis. • Total potential range = 952 km²; known inhabited area = 180 km². • 2 locations. • Continuing decline inferred in habitat quality. • Meets EN B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii) and VU D2. • Endemic, so not up- or downlisted. • EN B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii)

41. Orinoco Softtail Thripophaga cherriei Range Endemic to Venezuela and known only from the type locality: the Caño Capuana area of the upper Orinoco river basin. Possible historic record from Junglaven on the Río Ventuari, but there have been no further records at this site. No other records despite surveys in adjacent areas, but it may occur in adjacent parts of Colombia. It could occur over a much larger area as its habitat appears to be widespread, but if this is true, it is surprising that its loud call has not led to its discovery elsewhere. Population Extremely rare. Known only from specimens, one sighting of 3 individuals in 1999, and one sighting of a presumed pair at the type locality in 2002. Other searches have proved unsuccessful.

42. Orinoco Softtail, Thripophaga cherriei Habitat & Ecology Occurs at c.100 m altitude, in the understory of riverine and humid forest, adjacent to rivers. Other aspects of its ecology are very poorly known. Threats Shifting agriculture may be a threat, but whether this is affecting the species is unknown. A trade and tourist centre is under development in a major town c.150 km to the north of the type-locality. Other related species are known to be especially sensitive to forest deterioration, destruction and fragmentation. Conservation Measures The Sipapo Forest Reserve encompasses its known distribution, but provides little effective protection for riverside habitats.

43. Orinoco Softtail, Thripophaga cherriei • What do we know? • No known population estimates or trends. • No quantitative analysis. • Known only from type locality = 1 location, known range <10 km². • Shifting agriculture & development are potential threats, may negatively affect its habitat in near future. • No evidence of continuing decline in population, habitat or range. • Extreme fluctuations unlikely. • Meets VU D2. • Presence in Colombia unconfirmed, so not up- or downlisted. • VU D2