1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals
IUCN, 1996 - Ecology - 448 pages
The 1994 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals was a major advance on its predecessors in clarity of layout and amount of information presented. This is taken further in the 1996 edition, which is also the first global compilation to use the complete new IUCN Red List category system.
24 Alce USA A2cd Alac Alc+2c Alcd Angola Argentina assessed Atlantic Austria B1+2abcde B1+2c USA Bangladesh Beetle Bermuda Bhutan birds Black Bolivia Brazil Bulgaria Cambodia Cameroon Cave Chile China Class Colombia conservation Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire countries criteria Croatia Czech Republic D2 Australia D2 USA eastern Ecuador Endangered Ethiopia extinction Family Federated France French Polynesia Germany Ghana Greece groups Guyana Hungary India Indian Ocean eastern Indonesia Iran Islands Italy IUCN Japan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea Laos Madagascar Malaysia Mauritius Mexico Mozambique Myanmar Nepal Nigeria northeast northwest Order Pacific Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Partula Peru Philippines Poland population Portugal Red List Risk Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia South Africa South Korea southeast southwest Spain species Sri Lanka Sudan Switzerland Tanzania Thailand threat threatened threatened species Turkey Turtle Uganda Ukraine United USA Hawaiian Venezuela Viet western central Yugoslavia Zaire Zealand
Page 363 - It is important to recognise that taxa that are poorly known can often be assigned a threat category on the basis of background information concerning the deterioration of their habitat and/or other causal factors; therefore the liberal use of 'Data Deficient' is discouraged. 9. Implications of listing Listing in the categories of Not Evaluated and Data Deficient indicates that no assessment of extinction risk has been made, though for different reasons. Until such time as an assessment is made,...
Page 364 - Inference and projection may be based on extrapolation of current or potential threats into the future (including their rate of change), or of factors related to population abundance or distribution (including dependence on other taxa), so long as these can reasonably be supported. Suspected or inferred patterns in...
Page 365 - Gardenfors et al. 2001). When applied at national or regional levels it must be recognised that a global category may not be the same as a national or regional category for a particular taxon. For example, taxa classified as Least Concern globally might be Critically Endangered within a particular region where numbers are very small or declining, perhaps only because they are at the margins of their global range. Conversely, taxa classified as Vulnerable on the basis of their global declines in numbers...
Page 363 - ..an attempt to establish a species, for the purpose of conservation, outside its recorded distribution, but within an appropriate habitat and ecogeographical area"). 2. Nature of the categories All taxa listed as Critically Endangered qualify for Vulnerable and Endangered, and all listed as Endangered qualify for Vulnerable. Together these categories are described as 'threatened'.
Page 2 - Continuing decline, inferred, observed or projected, in any of the following: (a) extent of occurrence (b) area of occupancy (c) area, extent and/or quality of habitat (d) number of locations or subpopulations (e) number of mature individuals.