Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:45:06.197Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Species at risk: a guide for Canadian entomologists

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2019

Laura L. Timms Open the ORCID record for Laura L. Timms [Opens in a new window]  and
Rachel R. Rix
Laura L. Timms*
Affiliation:
Credit Valley Conservation, Natural Heritage Management, 1255 Old Derry Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 6R4, Canada
Rachel R. Rix
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Food and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Dalhousie University, P.O. Box 550, Truro, Nova Scotia, B2N 5E3, Canada
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The collection and preservation of insect specimens supply valuable information to entomologists. Collections are foundational to natural history, and paramount to the study of life history, systematics, and evolution. Rising concern over anthropogenic loss of biodiversity, including insect losses, has led to policies, strategies, and procedures being put in place in Canada to ensure the protection of wildlife species at risk. This document outlines necessary information to help researchers ensure that they are in compliance with Canadian legislation when carrying out research involving the collection of insects. We include an overview of the federal Species at Risk Act, and provincial and territorial legislation protecting at-risk wildlife, and how wildlife species in Canada ranked and are assessed as being at risk. We also discuss prohibitions outlined in the federal Species at Risk Act and penalties for violating these prohibitions; providing examples from case histories on convictions under the act.

Type
Forum
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 151 , Issue 4 , August 2019 , pp. 411 - 422
Copyright
© Entomological Society of Canada 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Amanda Roe

References

Catling, P.M., Packer, L., and Goit, M. 2009. COSEWIC insect assessments–processes, achievement and advantages. Newsletter of the Biological Survey of Canada (Terrestrial Arthropods), 28: 66–83.Google Scholar
Cision. 2018. Destruction of critical habitat for threatened spotted gar nets a $7000 fine [online]. Available from www.newswire.ca/news-releases/destruction-of-critical-habitat-for-threatened-spotted-gar-nets-a-7000-fine-701651462.html [accessed 11 March 2019].Google Scholar
Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2016. Species at Risk Act annual report for 2016 [online]. Available from www.canada.ca/content/dam/eccc/documents/pdf/lep-sara/SARAAnnualReport2016-en.pdf [accessed 11 March 2019].Google Scholar
Faber-Langendoen, D., Nichols, J., Master, L., Snow, K., Tomaino, A., Bittman, R., et al. 2012. NatureServe conservation status assessments: methodology for assigning ranks. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. 2016. Species assessed by the conservation committee: Alberta species at risk [online]. Available from https://open.alberta.ca/publications/species-assessed-by-the-conservation-committee-alberta-species-at-risk [accessed 11 March 2019].Google Scholar
Government of Canada. 2002. Species at Risk Act S.C. 2002, c29. An act respecting the protection of wildlife species at risk in Canada [online]. Available from https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/S-15.3/FullText.html [accessed 11 March 2019].Google Scholar
International Union for the Conservation of Nature. 2012. IUCN red list categories and criteria: version 3.1, second edition. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Mason, P., Bennett, A., and Fraleigh, B. 2018. Access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing affects entomology in Canada. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of Canada, 50: 120–126.Google Scholar
Master, L., Faber-Langendoen, D., Bittman, R., Hammerson, G.A., Heidel, B., Ramsay, L., et al. 2012. NatureServe conservation status assessments: factors for evaluating species and ecosystem risk. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.Google Scholar
Nixon, S., Page, D., Pinkus, S., Podolsky, L., and Russell, S. 2012. Failure to protect: grading Canada’s species at risk laws. Ecojustice, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
Northwest Territories Species at Risk Committee. 2018. Draft species status report for western bumble bee, yellow-banded bumble bee, and gypsy cuckoo bumble bee (Bombus occidentalis, Bombus terricola, Bombus bohemicus) in the Northwest Territories [online]. Species at Risk Committee, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, Canada. Available from www.nwtspeciesatrisk.ca/sites/default/files/bumble_bee_status_report_draft_for_6-month_review_aug2918.pdf [accessed 11 March 2019].Google Scholar
Pyke, G. and Ehrlich, P. 2010. Biological collections and ecological/environmental research: a review, some observations and a look to the future. Biological Reviews, 85: 247–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocha, L.A., Aleixo, A., Allen, G., Almeda, F., Baldwin, C.C., Barclay, M.V.L., et al. 2014. Specimen collection: an essential tool. Science, 344: 814–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tewksbury, J.J., Anderson, J.G.T., Bakker, J.D., Billo, T.J., Dunwiddie, P.W., Groom, M.J., et al. 2014. Natural history’s place in science and society. Bioscience, 64: 300–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Timms and Rix supplementary material

Timms and Rix supplementary material 1

Download Timms and Rix supplementary material(File)
File 22.1 KB