In Norway, we still have a species-level red-list; but recently there has also been made a red-list for habitats. This addresses directly what supposedly is the main cause of extinction in insects, namely habitat loss, and I think it is likely to be a more efficient approach for conservation. The trouble then becomes identifying distinct and unique habitat types, and ways of recognizing them…

For a piece of good news, at least as far as assessments, the General Status program in Canada has been systematically reviewing the status of many arthropod groups using NatureServe methodology (http://www.natureserve.org/biodiversity-science/publications/natureserve-conservation-status-assessments-factors-evaluating). It uses similar criteria as IUCN, but the weightings and application are a bit different and enables at least preliminary assessments of many of these “lesser known” groups. As we speak, there are the assessments of approximately 3600 beetles, 188 mosquitoes, 117 ants, 431 bees and yes–the odonates and grasshoppers of BC are waiting for me to review! Last month I waded through spider, Tricohptera, Plecoptera, Mecoptera and Ephemeroptora assessments. The groups that will have more accurate assessments (generally) are those that have had one or a few individuals that have been really keen to document what is out there.

Many will come out “unknown”and many will have a range rank (meaning that it could fall within a number of categories), but it is a start and it does mean that there are lists of species present within a jurisdiction compiled and that some of these species or guilds may get on the radar.

One thing that this has confirmed for me is that I could become (or already have…) absolutely fanatical about all collections being digitized and available for all. Having that information at hand for this type of work is critical. And that collecting and inventory programs continue, but I do realize that I am preaching to the choir on those subjects here!

Prior to the General Status assessments, I stand guilty of spending more time assessing the mega-charismatic invertebrates. In order to provide a credible assessment, good data helps! Here in BC there have been many focused detailed dragonfly and damselfly surveys, plus some hard-core keeners over the years. I probably have more confidence in the resulting Conservation Status Ranks for this group than I do for many of the small mammals! Biases do come from practicality in many cases.

Cheers -and thanks again for doing this analysis.

Leah Ramsay

Program Zoologist
BC Conservation Data Centre

Something you did not cover but I was more than a bit concerned about was the WWF Living Planet report of threats. The number one listed threat is hunting and fishing. This once again shows the vertebrate bias in endangered species study. Unless your interests are fish or mammals, the greatest threats to the majority of animals are habitat change, habitat loss, and climate change.

-8 Lepidoptera (6 butterflies vs 2 moths)
-5 Odonata (5 dragonflies vs 0 damselflies)
-3 Coleoptera
-1 bee

Not the same bias as IUCN (e.g., no orthopterans), but a clear bias toward charismatic insects (butterflies & dragonflies). While beetles dominate global insect diversity, flies reign supreme in Canada (I got this from Terry Wheeler’s website – if you have a citation for Cdn insect sp diversity please let me know). Yet no flies are listed in Ontario. Like you, I suspect this reflects sampling bias and how much people care about species more than their actual conservation status. I’m optimistic that things will change for the better. People care about bees and pollinators far more now than they did even ten years ago. Our challenge is to bridge people’s affection for purdy insects (I’m lookin at you, Monarch) to care for all nature. I’m working on it.