Wild species 2010: chapter 4

Section 2: Data sources and methods

Working group

This report is the responsibility of the National General Status Working Group (NGSWG), under the direction of the Canadian Wildlife Directors Committee (CWDC), and ultimately under the direction of the Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council (CESCC). The NGSWG is composed of representatives from all provincial and territorial governments in Canada, and three federal agencies: Environment Canada (Canadian Wildlife Service – CWS), Parks Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). In 2009, three ex officio members also joined the working group: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Natural Resources Canada, and NatureServe Canada. To produce the reports of the Wild Species series, the NGSWG established the guidelines for the criteria that would be used to derive general status ranks. The NGSWG also established which taxonomic groups of species were ranked in each report. A list of NGSWG members appears at the end of this report (appendix 1).

General status ranks were created at two scales; regional and national (figure 4). At the regional scale, ranks were created for each province and territory. Since marine species (e.g. whales) are often difficult to associate with a particular province or territory, ranks were also generated in four ocean regions; Pacific Ocean Region, Western Arctic Ocean Region, Eastern Arctic Ocean Region and Atlantic Ocean Region. Provincial and territorial representatives hold the primary responsibility for establishing lists of species that occur in their region, as well as for sourcing, compiling, storing and interpreting the information that informs their region’s ranks for a given species. DFO holds the primary responsibility for establishing lists of species that occur in each oceanic region and compiling ranks for each marine species.

Once regional (i.e. provincial, territorial, and oceanic) general status ranks are completed, the NGSWG is responsible for assigning a Canada General Status Rank (Canada rank); a national rank that interprets the overall state of the species in Canada based on the information provided by each province, territory, or ocean region where the species occurs.

Figure 4. Diagram outlining how regional ranks (i.e. provincial, territorial and ocean region ranks) and Canada ranks are generated.
organizational chart (see long description below)
Long description for Figure 4

Figure 4 shows a diagram outlining how regional ranks (i.e. provincial, territorial and ocean region ranks) and Canada ranks are generated. The image shows a flowchart of how a variety of resources are used to determine the regional and national ranks in Canada. The regional rank for each province, territory and oceanic region are assigned based on information from Aboriginal traditional knowledge, community knowledge, literature, NatureServe Canada, Scientists and specialists, Provincial, territorial and federal wildlife departments as well as COSEWIC status reports and assessments. The National General Status Working Group assigns a Canada General Status Rank for each species based on these regional ranks, as well as COSEWIC status reports and assessments and the input of specialists. These assessments are repeated every 5 years and the results are presented in the “Wild Species” report.

Codes used for the regions

The National General Status Working Group uses codes to represent the studied regions. Table 3 lists the codes used to represent the regions in this report. Figure 5 shows the location of these regions.

Table 3. Codes used to represent the regions in the report Wild Species 2010.
Code Regions
CA Canada
YT Yukon
NT Northwest Territories
NU Nunavut
BC British Columbia
AB Alberta
SK Saskatchewan
MB Manitoba
ON Ontario
QC Quebec
NB New Brunswick
NS Nova Scotia
PE Prince Edward Island
NL Newfoundland and Labrador
PAC Pacific Ocean
WAO Western Arctic Ocean
EAO Eastern Arctic Ocean
ATL Atlantic Ocean

 

Figure 5. Map of Canada, showing the 13 provinces and territories and the four oceans regions for which general status ranks are generated.
Map of Canada (see long description below)
Long description for Figure 5

Figure 5 shows a map of Canada, showing the 13 provinces and territories (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Nunavut, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Yukon) and the four oceans regions (Atlantic, Eastern Arctic, Western Arctic, and Pacific) for which general status ranks are generated. The Pacific Ocean region extends from the most southern part of British Columbia, north to just past Haida Gwaii. The Western Arctic Ocean region extends from Northern Yukon and Northwest Territories. The Eastern Arctic region extends from Northern Nunavut east to northern Quebec, including Hudson’s Bay. The Atlantic Ocean region extends from all Maritime Provinces (Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island) as well as eastern Quebec.

Sources of information

Achieving the most accurate overall impression of a species’ status requires compiling local information to generate regional and then a national picture of a species’ general status. This makes assessing the general status of Canada’s species a complicated and challenging task because there are many species and most are distributed across a vast area. Fortunately, there are many sources of information about Canada’s species, some in published documents, but much in the accumulated knowledge and expertise of people. For example, amateur naturalists, museum specialists, government biologists, and holders of community knowledge or aboriginal traditional knowledge are often key to determining which species occur within a region and assessing their status. The provincial, territorial and federal wildlife departments in Canada collect and maintain this information.

In many provinces, some of this local knowledge is already maintained within the network of Conservation Data Centres (CDCs) and Natural Heritage Information Centres (NHICs) of NatureServe Canada. The member programs of NatureServe Canada have the responsibility to house biodiversity information for their respective jurisdiction, as well as actively collect and verify data on species and ecological communities. Through standardized methodology and data management systems, data is examined by experts, maintained and made available for analyses. Currently, the NatureServe Canada network consists of eight member programs in all provinces (the Atlantic Canada provinces are represented by one regional member program) and in one territory (Yukon). The network of NatureServe Canada belongs to the international network of NatureServe. The General Status process draws upon expertise and data held within NatureServe Canada’s network of Conservation Data Centres and Natural Heritage Information Centres for status information of many taxonomic groups.

Involving a great variety of people with knowledge to share about species ensures that the best and most comprehensive picture of a species’ general status is achieved. An added benefit is that the extensive consultation required to collect data for species’ general status assessments fosters a connection of expertise that is an enduring resource for wildlife management and conservation within each province or territory. This accumulated knowledge results in lists of species in a given region and, in most cases, sufficient information for the province or territory to establish a general status rank for each species. In addition, information gaps identified during the assessment process indicate where investment may be necessary to develop expertise in particular species groups, where additional surveys and research needs to take place, and highlight the need to capture the knowledge currently held by today’s experts in a lasting form.

Criteria underlying general status assessments

The general status of a given species was reached by considering available information relating to a set of seven criteria that collectively reflect the status of a species’ population within specific geographic areas – that is, provinces, territories, ocean regions, and Canada as a whole (National General Status Working Group, 2003). These criteria were based on definitions developed and applied by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2001), the Criteria for Amendment of Appendices I and II (Res. Conf. 9.24) of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and the conservation status assessment criteria developed by NatureServe. Criteria were used as a guide to help determine the appropriate general status category for a species. Where possible, representatives from each province, territory, and federal agency followed the following definitions of the seven criteria:

  • Population size – Defined as the current estimate of the total number of mature individuals capable of reproduction. Where populations are characterized by natural fluctuations, the minimum number should be used. Likewise, if the population is characterized by biased breeding sex ratios, it is appropriate to use lower estimates for the number of mature individuals that will take this into account. For many species, a figure of less than 1000 individuals has been found to be an appropriate guideline of what constitutes a small population. It is likely that different definitions of what constitutes a “small” population will need to be developed for different taxonomic groups.
  • Number of occurrences – Defined as the estimated number of sites where the species currently occurs. A site occurrence is described ecologically as a location representing a habitat that sustains or otherwise contributes to the survival of a population. A site occurrence will be defined differently for different species, depending on its natural history. When a species’ distribution is extremely limited and there are very few site occurrences, the species is very susceptible to any number of disturbances, both predictable and unpredictable. Therefore, when the number of occurrences is few, this criterion is usually the single most important factor influencing overall rank.
  • Geographic distribution – Defined as the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary that can be drawn to encompass all known, inferred, or projected sites of occurrence, excluding outlier occurrences (i.e. chance occurrences, unlikely to be repeated). The area within the imaginary boundary should, however, exclude significant areas where the species does not occur. For migratory species, the geographic distribution is the smallest area essential at any stage for the survival of the species.
  • Trend in population – Defined as an estimate of the change (if any) in the number of mature individuals over time. Where declines are indicated, rapidly declining is defined as a decrease of 50% in the last 10 years or three generations, whichever is longer. Declining is defined as a decrease of 20% in the last 10 years or three generations, whichever is longer. Natural fluctuations will not normally count as part of a decline, but an observed decline should not be considered part of a natural fluctuation unless there is evidence for this interpretation.
  • Trend in distribution – Defined as the change (if any) in the geographic distribution of the species over time. Where declines in distribution are indicated, rapidly declining is defined as a decrease of 50% in the last 20 years or six generations, whichever is longer. Declining is defined as a decrease of 20% in the last 20 years or six generations, whichever is longer.
  • Threats to population – Defined as observed, inferred, or projected direct exploitation, harassment, or ecological interactions with predators, competitors, pathogens, or parasites that may result in population declines. Extreme threats are significant, could affect more than half the population, and are unmitigated. Moderate threats are also serious but affect less than half the population or are mitigated by some level of human protection. Limited threats are less significant to population viability or are being mitigated through protective measures.
  • Threats to habitat – Defined as observed, inferred, or projected habitat alterations (loss, conversion, degradation, or fragmentation) that may result in population declines. Extreme threats are significant, affect more than half the population, and are unmitigated. Moderate threats are also serious but affect less than half the population or are mitigated by some level of human protection. Limited threats are less significant to population viability or are being mitigated through protective measures.

The scores given to the criteria can guide the general status rank for a given species in a province, territory, or ocean region. Each score is a relative assessment based on available data, since for most species, definitive, qualitative data are rare. Therefore, thresholds between scores are not absolute. The amount and type of information (e.g. empirically versus anecdotally based) were used as factors in weighting the contribution of each score to the final overall rank. Thus, each general status rank is not a simple average of component criteria scores but depends on the particular character of the information underlying each criterion.

General status categories

Each species assessed in the Wild Species reports received a rank (often represented by a numerical code) that summarizes its general status. Each general status assessment was based upon a series of criteria (see previous section) that capture information, where available, on population size and distribution, threats to individuals or their habitat and trends (increases or decreases) in these factors. Species received a general status rank in each province, territory, or ocean region in which they are known to be present, as well as an overall Canada General Status Rank (Canada rank).

General status categories are necessarily broad, both because the large number of species covered precludes the detailed and intensive species assessments that would inform a finer scaled system, and because of variation in the amount of information available for different species. The reader should also note that all general status categories refer only to a species’ status in Canada. Where the species also occurs outside of Canada (as most of our species do), the situation for those populations of the species may be different. For example, a species that is abundant elsewhere (e.g. USA, Europe) may exist in Canada in very low numbers. In this case, it could be ranked as May Be At Risk, reflecting the Canadian general status and level of concern for its future here, while being of lesser conservation concern in other parts of its range. Table 4 presents the general status categories used in this report.

Table 4. General status categories used in the Wild Species 2010 report.
Rank General Status Description
0.2 Extinct Species that are extirpated worldwide (i.e., they no longer exist anywhere). This rank partially replaces the rank of Extirpated/Extinct, used in the Wild Species 2000 report.
0.1 Extirpated Species that are no longer present in a given geographic area, but occur in other areas. This rank partially replaces the rank of Extirpated/Extinct, used in the Wild Species 2000 report.
1 At Risk Species for which a formal, detailed risk assessment (COSEWIC status assessment or provincial or territorial equivalent) has been completed and that have been determined to be at risk of extirpation or extinction (i.e. Endangered or Threatened). A COSEWIC designation of Endangered or Threatened automatically results in a Canada General Status Rank (Canada rank) of At Risk. Where a provincial or territorial formal risk assessment finds a species to be Endangered or Threatened in that particular region, then, under the general status program, the species automatically receives a provincial or territorial general status rank of At Risk.
2 May Be At Risk Species that may be at risk of extirpation or extinction and are therefore candidates for a detailed risk assessment by COSEWIC, or provincial or territorial equivalents.
3 Sensitive Species that are not believed to be at risk of immediate extirpation or extinction but may require special attention or protection to prevent them from becoming at risk.
4 Secure Species that are not believed to be at risk of immediate extirpation or extinction but may require special attention or protection to prevent them from becoming at risk.
5 Undetermined Species for which insufficient data, information, or knowledge is available with which to reliably evaluate their general status.
6 Not Assessed Species that are known or believed to be present regularly in the geographic area in Canada to which the rank applies, but have not yet been assessed by the general status program.
7 Exotic Species that have been moved beyond their natural range as a result of human activity. In this report, Exotic species have been purposefully excluded from all other categories.
8 Accidental Species occurring infrequently and unpredictably, outside their usual range.

In some cases, general status ranks were the result of a further weighting of all criteria for which information was available. Another common method for generating general status ranks, is for provinces and territories which have member programs in the NatureServe Canada network to convert their existing subnational conservation status ranks (S ranks), developed by their Conservation Data Centre or Natural Heritage Information Centre, into general status ranks. Botanists and zoologists within the NatureServe Canada network regularly conduct field work for monitoring species and gather data for updating species ranks, as well as participate directly in the general status process for species in their jurisdictions.

Updated general status assessments

In the different reports of the Wild Species series, some changes in the general status of species may have been observed. The first step for provinces and territories was to check for changes to the species list. These could include new species, taxonomic changes and correction of errors. Additional species were assessed using the criteria for new general status assessments, described above. The next step was to compare species that occurred in the different reports of the Wild Species series. For each species, if no major change in abundance, distribution, trends or threats was found to have occurred, or if no new information was available, the species usually retained the rank it was given in the previous report. If major changes were believed to have occurred, or if new information was available (e.g. a new COSEWIC status assessment, or a new survey showing a broader distribution), the species was reassessed using the same criteria as for a new general status assessment.

From regional to national general status assessments

A Canada General Status Rank (Canada rank) was assigned for each species in order to provide a coarse-scale picture of national general status. Canada ranks were assigned by the NGSWG through a review of ranks and associated information from provinces, territories, and ocean regions. In general, where ranks vary across the country, the regional rank that represents the lowest level of risk (excluding ranks of Undetermined, Not Assessed, Exotic or Accidental) was used as the Canada rank. For example, Smooth Greensnake (Opheodrys vernalis) is ranked Undetermined in Prince Edward Island; Sensitive in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Quebec; and Secure in Ontario, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Therefore, Smooth Greensnake received a Canada rank of Secure. However, the geographic distribution of the species was also taken into account so that a region harbouring the majority of a species’ range carried more influence in determining the Canada rank, than did a region in which the species was only marginally represented. For example the Barrenground Shrew (Sorex ugyunak) is ranked Sensitive in the Yukon and Undetermined in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. If the usual guideline was followed, the Canada rank for this species would be Sensitive. However, since only a small portion of this shrew’s range is in the Yukon, the Barrenground Shrew was given a Canada rank of Undetermined.

Finally, for species with restricted breeding range (especially shorebirds), status within the breeding range was particularly important in determining the Canada rank. For example, within Canada, the Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres) breeds primarily on the tundra in northern Nunavut. Here it is ranked Sensitive due to population declines. However, the Ruddy Turnstone is a common migrant in suitable habitat throughout much of southern Canada, and is ranked Secure in every province except Quebec, where it is ranked Sensitive. If the normal procedure of assigning the rank with the lowest level of risk as the Canada rank was followed, the Canada rank would be Secure. However, Ruddy Turnstone received a Canada rank of Sensitive, due to concerns within its breeding range. For more information on this type of exception, please see the taxonomic groups in the results section.

The general status search tool

National and regional general status ranks for each species assessed can be found by using the general status search tool. Information presented includes English and French common names, scientific name, taxonomic group, Canada rank, regional general status ranks, and year of assessment. In addition, a comments section is available which supplies relevant additional information, and links to COSEWIC and IUCN webpages where applicable. The general status search tool can be used to search the general status ranks by common name, scientific name, region, rank, taxonomic group or year. The search tool is available on the Wild Species website.

Further information

Atlas of Canada. (Accessed February 23, 2010).

Canadian Wildlife Service - Nature (Accessed February 23, 2010).

CITES. (Accessed January 4, 2010).

Environment Canada. (Accessed February 23, 2010).

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. (Accessed February 23, 2010).

NatureServe Canada. (Accessed February 23, 2010).

Parks Canada. (Accessed February 23, 2010).

Wild Species, the General Status of Species in Canada. (Accessed December 30, 2009).

References

IUCN. 2001. IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: 30 pp.

National General Status Working Group. 2003. Guidelines for assessing the general status of wild species in Canada, version 2.0. Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council (CESCC): 19 pp.

Page details

Date modified: