The New York Times had two good articles on endangered species in May. First there was on zoos, which must choose which species to save while letting others in their collections go extinct - a concept relevant to botanical gardens as well, which can only grow so many plants. Then there was an op-ed on endangered ecosystems, which mentioned the IUCN Red List, which at the moment contains nearly 20,000 endangered species. This caught my eye because I've been reading IUCN reports of endangered plants for my work updating a guide to endangered species. I only look at IUCN listings of plants that are also listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, so it's not that many, but what have noticed is that the Red List information is not always current. Many listings date from 1998, which was a long time ago in a world whose human population now adds a billion people every decade. This is NOT to criticize the IUCN, but to suggest that things may be much worse than we know.
It may also to be to express a wish that reports on endangered and rare
species include dates when describing abundance and distribution - it
makes no sense to use the present tense when reporting data that was
gathered in the past and that almost certainly does not describe a
current state of affairs. A claim that "There are currently 15
populations with a total of 150 plants" is senseless if it is based on
censuses done in 1982, 1991, and 1993, with different sites visited at
Our own endangered species list contains some alarming reports. Eragrostis fosbergii,
Fosberg's love grass, has not been seen since 1996. There are no
specific conservation measures currently underway for this species - how
could there be? For the moment it is still considered "in danger of
extinction throughout its range." I'll say. But is it extinct? How can we know?
In this job I got to update the reports on two endangered plants that I know personally, the bunched arrowhead, Sagittaria fasciculata,
and the mountain sweet pitcher-plant, Sarracenia rubra ssp. jonesii.
The depressing thing is that my updates were nothing of the kind. The USFWS has not published 5-year reviews on these species. The most current
information on these two plants comes from Recovery Plans that date
from the 1990s. The Center for Plant Conservation's reports are not much
more recent. Likewise the Nature Conservancy's. I've noticed this about
other Carolina plants, such as Geum radiatum from Roan Mountain.
California and Hawaii have good up-to-date information on their
endangered plants. Our neck of the woods? Not so much.
Anyway, these are nice little plants. Much collected, perhaps
trampled by hogs. Not many left. I'm not saying where they are, but
it's not hard to figure out if you're interested in grabbing
the last ones.