Assessment Results
Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Critically Endangered (CR) | CR (Possible Extinct) |
2 | Possibly extinct | Is there a strong possibility that this species might be extinct in the wild? | Yes / probably | It has still not been recorded since 1990, despite exhaustive searches, thus suggesting that a serious decline has taken place (F. Bolaños pers. comm., Acosta et al. 2019, Costa Rica Red List Workshop September 2019). |
3 | Phylogenetic significance | The taxon’s Evolutionary Distinctiveness (ED) score, as generated by the ZSL EDGE program. (These data are not editable by Assessors). | ED value < 20 | |
4 | Protected habitat | Is a population of at least 50% of the individuals of the taxon included within a well-managed or reliably protected area or areas? | Unknown | This species occurs on the Atlantic slopes of the northern and central portions of the Costa Rican cordilleras. Distribution of the species included BRAULIO CARRILLO, ALBERTO MANUEL BRENES, ARENAL-MONTERVERDE protected areas |
5 | Habitat for reintroduction, conservation translocation or supplementation | Does enough well-managed and reliably protected habitat exist, either within or outside of currently protected areas that is suitable for conservation translocation, including population restoration or conservation introduction? | Yes / probably | BRAULIO CARRILLO, ALBERTO MANUEL BRENES, ARENAL-MONTERVERDE protected areas |
6 | Previous reintroductions | Have reintroduction or translocation attempts been made in the past for this species? | No | |
7 | In situ conservation activities | Are any in situ conservation actions currently in place for this species? (Only required if a Red List Assessment has not been completed, or if new actions have been implemented since the last Red List Assessment. (Information from the Conservation Actions section of the Red List assessment should be reviewed and considered when answering this question.). | ||
8 | In situ conservation activities | Are additional in situ conservation actions required to help conserve this species in the wild (e.g. habitat restoration and/or protection, control of invasive species, national legislation etc.)? | No / unlikely | |
9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Further surveys are urgently needed to relocate this species and determine its current population status. |
10 | Threat mitigation | Are the threats facing the taxon, including any new and emerging threats not considered in the IUCN Red List, potentially reversible? | Threats unknown | This species has disappeared from apparently suitable habitats, with the implication that the major threat is likely to be chytridiomycosis (perhaps in combination with the effects of climate change), leading to a catastrophic population decline, as has occurred in many other montane amphibian species that are associated with streams. Museum specimens of this species have tested positive for Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Cheng et al. 2011, De León et al. 2019). |
11 | Over-collection from the wild | Is the taxon suffering from collection within its natural range, either for food, for the pet trade or for any other reason, which threatens the species’ continued persistence in the wild? | No / unlikely | |
12 | Population recovery | Is the known population of this species in the wild large enough to recover naturally, without ex situ intervention if threats are mitigated? | No / unlikely | It was once common, or at least regularly seen, in Monteverde and San Ramon Reserve, but as of September 2019, it has still not been recorded since 1990, despite exhaustive searches, thus suggesting that a serious decline has taken place (F. Bolaños pers. comm., Acosta et al. 2019, Costa Rica Red List Workshop September 2019). It has also not been seen in Cascajal, San Jose Province, since 1972, despite annual surveys (G. Chaves and H. Zumbado-Ulate pers. comm. 2019), and surveys in 2010 and 2019 in Jardín Bosque Nuboso Nectandra and El Silencio de Los Angeles Cloud Forest Reserve in Alajuela failed to record this species (Rovito et al. 2015, Morera-Chacón and Acosta-Chaves 2019). |
13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | No | |
14 | Biological distinctiveness | Does the taxon exhibit a distinctive reproductive mode, behaviour, aspect of morphology or physiology, within the Order to which it belongs (e.g. Anura, Passeriformes etc.)? | No aspect of biology known to be exceptional | |
15 | Cultural/socio-economic importance | Does the taxon have a special human cultural value (e.g. as a national or regional symbol, in a historic context, featuring in traditional stories) or economic value (e.g. food, traditional medicine, tourism) within its natural range or in a wider global context? | No | |
16 | Scientific importance | Is the species vital to current or planned research other than species-specific ecology/biology/conservation within the Order to which it belongs (e.g. Anura, Passeriformes etc.) e.g. human medicine, climate change, environmental pollutants and conservation science? | No research dependent on this species | |
17 | Ex situ research | Does conserving this species (or closely related species) in situ depend upon research that can be most easily carried out ex situ? | Yes | Any surviving individuals might need to form the basis for the establishment of an ex-situ population. |
18 | Ex situ conservation activities | Is any ex situ research or other ex situ conservation action currently in place for this species? (Information from the Conservation Actions section of the Red List assessment should be reviewed and considered when answering this question.) | No / unlikely | |
19 | Husbandry analog required | If an ex situ rescue program is recommended for this species, would an analog species be required to develop husbandry protocols first? | Yes / probably | Craugastor talamancae |
20 | Husbandry analog | Do the biological and ecological attributes of this species make it suitable for developing husbandry regimes for more threatened related species? i.e. could this species be used in captivity to help to develop husbandry and breeding protocols which could be used for a similar, but more endangered species at a later stage? | No | |
21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Not held in captivity to date | |
22 | Conservation education/ecotourism potential | Is the species especially diurnal, active or colourful, or is there an interesting or unusual aspect of its ecology that make it particularly suitable to be an educational ambassador for conservation of the species in the range country, either in zoos or aquariums or within ecotourism activities? | No | |
23 | Mandate | Is there an existing conservation mandate recommending the ex situ conservation of this taxon? | No | |
24 | Range State approval | If an ex situ initiative was proposed for this species, would it be supported (and approved) by the range State (either within the range State or out-of-country ex situ)? | Yes / probably | |
25 | Founder specimens | Are sufficient animals of the taxon available or potentially available (from wild or captive sources) to initiate an ex situ program, if one was recommended? | No / unlikely | |
26 | Taxonomic status | Has a complete taxonomic analysis of the species in the wild been carried out, to fully understand the functional unit you wish to conserve (i.e. have species limits been determined)? | Yes |
Citation:
AArk/ASG Assessment Workshop. 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Craugastor andi, Costa Rica.
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5110
Accessed 19 May 2024