Data Sources and Methods for the Changes in Wildlife Species Disappearance Risks Indicator

COSEWIC uses a process based on science and Aboriginal and community knowledge to assess wildlife species at risk.^[1] All native mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, arthropods, mollusks, vascular plants, mosses and lichens are included in COSEWIC's current mandate.

In doing its work, COSEWIC develops the prioritized “COSEWIC Candidate List” of wildlife species needing assessment, manages the production of wildlife species status reports, and holds meetings at which wildlife species are assessed and assigned to risk categories. In all of its actions, COSEWIC uses the best available information relevant to assessing a wildlife species' risk of extinction or extirpation, which it may obtain from any credible source of knowledge of the wildlife species and its habitat.

COSEWIC annually commissions status reports for high-priority candidate wildlife species on the COSEWIC Candidate List or for wildlife species that require re-assessment ("update status reports"). A status report is a comprehensive technical document that compiles and analyzes the best available information on a wildlife species' status in Canada. It contains information on the basic biology of a wildlife species, as well as information on a wildlife species' distribution in Canada, population sizes and trends, habitat availability and trends, and threats to the wildlife species.

All status reports (including updated status reports and unsolicited reports) must meet COSEWIC's standards for quality and completeness, and are subject to thorough reviews by the appropriate Species Specialist Subcommittee and the Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge Subcommittee, as well as by jurisdictions that have a responsibility for the wildlife species (including governments of the provinces and territories where the wildlife species occurs, federal departments responsible for the wildlife species, and wildlife management boards). Additional outside experts may also be asked to review status reports. When the reviews are complete and any required revisions have been incorporated, the report is distributed to all COSEWIC members.

COSEWIC members use status reports as a basis for discussion and for status assignment at semi-annual Wildlife Species Assessment Meetings. For each wildlife species considered at a Wildlife Species Assessment Meeting, COSEWIC sequentially considers each of five items to determine a Canadian status designation:

1. Is there sufficient information presented in the report to determine wildlife species eligibility?
2. Given sufficient information, is the wildlife species eligible for assessment?
3. Is the status report adequate and acceptable for assessment purposes?
4. What status is suggested by application of approved COSEWIC quantitative assessment criteria and guidelines?
5. Does the suggested status conform to the COSEWIC definition for the proposed status category?

Wildlife species are assigned to one of seven status categories: Extinct (X), Extirpated (XT), Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Special Concern (SC), Not At Risk (NAR) or Data Deficient (DD). In 2011, 876 wildlife species had status categories. (see Table 1)

Table 1: Status of wildlife species assessed by COSEWIC as of December 2011 

* The sum of species designated as Endangered, Threatened and of Special Concern make up a total of 616 species at risk.^[2]

COSEWIC also groups species that have a status category by “change status” which can be specified if more than one assessment has been done. This is what the indicator in CESI is based on. Those that are “new” have only been assessed once and therefore they are not included in the indicator. (see Table 2)

Table 2: Relationship between COSEWIC status changes and CESI changes in disappearance risk

¹ Wildlife species that are “data deficient” on both dates when an assessment is made are excluded.

² Wildlife species that are reported in the “reassigned” category are examined individually, and, where direction of change can be determined unambiguously, they are placed into the appropriate group. The 59 wildlife species with a status change of “reassigned” were grouped into 31 units whose status could be determined. For example, a wildlife species that was split into two on reassessment would be treated as one unit. If both new units changed in the same direction on reassessment, the group was given a CESI change category. Of the 31 units, 5 were assigned to no-change, 3 to lower-risk, 5 to higher-risk, and the remaining 18 could not be determined. For more information on the allocation of wildlife species with a COSEWIC change status of “Reassigned,” please consult Annex 1.