Assessment Results
Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Least Concern (LC) | |
2 | Possibly extinct | Is there a strong possibility that this species might be extinct in the wild? | No / unlikely | |
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 - 50 | |
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 | The species is very common in degraded as well as protected areas, and thus assessing for 50 % of the population is difficult. |
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 | Any natural wetland |
6 | Previous reintroductions | Have reintroduction or translocation attempts been made in the past for this species? | Yes, successfully | The population around Beijing is the result of an un-anticipated and non-controlled translocation (i.e. can be considered invasive) |
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.)? | ||
9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | ||
10 | Threat mitigation | Are the threats facing the taxon, including any new and emerging threats not considered in the IUCN Red List, potentially reversible? | Species is effectively protected | The species is present in numerous protected areas |
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 | The species is common in the pet trade but no over-collection has been reported |
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? | Yes / probably | |
13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | ||
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? | Yes | It is a very common pet, easy to breed, very bold, and a good species to be used for education |
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 | None known so far. |
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? | No | |
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.) | ||
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? | ||
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? | Yes | The species breeds very easily in captivity |
21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Yes, bred to F2 | The species breeds very easily in captivity and is a very common pet |
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? | Yes | The species is a good example to educate young publics. It is bold, does not run away, and can be looked at for extended periods of time without disturbing its behaviour. |
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)? | ||
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? | Yes / probably | |
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)? | No | Research into clades validity needs to be prioritised, with a potentially separated clade in North Korea. |
Citation:
Amaël Borzée. 2017. Conservation Needs Assessment for Bombina orientalis, Korea, Republic of .
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/4272
Accessed 12 Mar 2025