Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are they

[Balstrome]

Everybody hears/knows that species are dying off at an alarming rate, for whatever cause. My question is which species are they? I mean the ones that have gone extinction in the last say five to ten years, can anyone provide a list of these 100's of species that are no longer on this earth.

And what would also be interesting, is to see how many "new" species have evolved to take the place of the missing species. By extinction I mean of course the species no longer exists and has not just adapted or mutated into another species. Think carrier pigeon and the Dodo, that type of extinction.

Did a wiki whack of extinct mammals from the 1930's to date.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinct_mammals
Marsupials
Toolache Wallaby (1943, Australia)
Desert Bandicoot (1943, Australia)
Lesser Bilby (1950s, Australia)
Pig-footed Bandicoot (1950s, Australia)
Crescent Nailtail Wallaby (1956, Australia)
Red-bellied Gracile Opossum (1962, Argentina)

Rodents
Ilin Island Cloudrunner (1953) Ilin Island) [18]
Little Swan Island hutia (1955, Swan Islands)
Blue-Gray Mouse (1956) Australia) [19]
Pallid Beach Mouse (1959, Florida)
Emperor Rat (1960s, Solomon Islands)

Soricimorphs
Christmas Island Shrew (1985, Christmas Island) (officially critically endangered, but has not been reliably seen since 1985) [22]

Bats
Guam Flying Fox (1968, Guam)
New Zealand Greater Short-tailed Bat (1988, New Zealand)
Lord Howe Long-eared Bat (1996, Australia) [27]
Sturdee's Pipistrelle (2000, Japan) [28]

Cetaceans
Chinese River Dolphin
Baiji (2006, China) (officially listed as functionally extinct; it is possible that a few aging individuals still survive)

Artiodactyls
Queen of Sheba's Gazelle (1951, Yemen) [31]
Pyrenean Ibex (2000, Pyrenees)

Carnivores
Japanese Sea Lion (1950s, Japan)
Caribbean Monk Seal (1952, Jamaica)

Subspecies
Bali Tiger (1940s, Bali) [32]
Japanese Wolf (1930s, Japan)
Mexican grizzly bear (1960s, Mexico)
Caspian Tiger (1970s, Tajikistan) [33]
Javan Tiger (1976, Java) [34]

Not really 100's per year as it claimed is it?

 

[Inferno]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

Well you said it yourself: MAMMALS!
What about Birds, Butterflies, Sponges, Archaeplastida, Fungi, Cnidaria, Chordates, Molluscs, etc. etc. etc.? It'll be closer to the "hundreds" then, won't it?

 

[Aught3]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

So the way these figures are calculated is by working out the number of species per unit area and the average range of a species. Then you look at how much land is deforested per year and work out how many species are likely to be wiped out. It's an estimate not an exact figure.

 

[Balstrome]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

What gets me about this stuff, is that it's supposed to be science, not best guesses based on agendas. If you had to ask just about any "environmentalist" to name the species that have gone extinct they would have a tough time presenting such information.

That facts are that humans are here, and we are at the top of the chain, and in control. There is no way that we will accept a reduction in our live styles without a very good reason, and the extinction of 300 different types of grasses on the Asian steppes does not make a good enough reason, initially. If there is a good reason, it needs to be communicated to humanity, showing the benefits for keeping these grasses alive. And when that is done, the next step of how to actually go about saving this species, without affecting any other species should be explained and carried out.

This whole process should then be carried out for each species on the red list, not just the one's that tug the heart strings or provide a stick to beat another group of people with. The world is going to lose species, that is a given, and we as humans will suffer for this. But we will survive with the loss, because we are able to control our world.

Taking my original question, (name the extinct species) further, what negative effect to humans and or the world, will the loss of these creatures bring about? How bad will these negative effects be on the future of mankind and or the world? And dare I ask for some data to back up these answers?

 

[Aught3]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

What gets me about this stuff, is that it's supposed to be science, not best guesses based on agendas.

It's not just a guess though. All those factors that go into the calculation can be measured. It's not an exact number and there is a certain amount of error but it is a far cry from just guessing.

 

[Squawk]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

General principle seems to be

Cute, fluffy or impressive: Worth saving
Slimy: Meh

Species go extinct all the time with or without man. The issue is that humans are the first species who can actually think about their actions and yet are contributing to levels of extinction.

We can't fuck things up nearly as well as nature can. The difference is, we can think about it while we do it.

 

[Pulsar]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species has classified these species:

• 791 extinct
• 63 extinct in the wild
• 3565 critically endangered
• 5256 endangered
• 9530 vulnerable

In particular, this is their list of extinct species: http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/search.

Those numbers are however a gross underestimate (especially concerning invertebrates), since only 41,000 of the 1.8 million known species have so far been classified in conservation terms.

Read this and this.

 

[Balstrome]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

So does anyone have a workable solution? What would that look like, in terms of cost and duration? Or is everyone just making noise to show that they too care about the problem?

One of my bugbears about this topic, is those folk who tend to put animals ahead of humans. Usually while eating steak and drinking wine. But you will never see them offering to be part of the solution, the most they will do is not have kids, but that is most probably a personality issue.

 

[Ancho]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

One of my bugbears about this topic, is those folk who tend to put animals ahead of humans.

Why?

 

[Aught3]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

Bit of an update: http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/4326/extinction-reports-have-been-greatly-exaggerated?page=0,0

Species extinction rate may be over-estimated by 2.5 times.

 

[Balstrome]

Re: Extinction Levels - Which species, plant or animals are

One of my bugbears about this topic, is those folk who tend to put animals ahead of humans.

Why?

Because they are never willing to limit themselves to save teh animals. One asks for workable solutions to the valid problems that they point out, and they have no clue how to solve them, and usually have never bother to even attempt to develop a workable solution. It's usually that other humans should cease to exist so that animals can have a chance to do things. Sod that. Animals do nothing to improve the future of humanity, only humans have that ability.

Ask almost any tree hugger who wants to put animals first, if they realise that the Giant Panda is in an evolutionary dead end, caused by nature and not humans. Most of them would not know this, yet they feel that they have the right to want to put Pandas before people. Yes, we humans are a major impact on animal extinction, equal to the combination of all other factors, but how many of you are willing to eco-friendly killing yourself to allow the animals to exist.

Lets find a reasonable balance to intelligently solve these problems.