Uncategorized Archives | Page 2 of 17 | Endangered Wildlife Trust

Across borders. Across landscapes. Against the odds.

Osvaldo Abrao, senior field officer, Carnivore Conservation Unit

Three months ago, a male lion collared in Gonarezhou, Zimbabwe began moving – leaving the safety of a protected landscape and heading east, across vast stretches of land where people, livestock, and wildlife live side by side.

No one knew how far he would go.

His collar, fitted as part of long-term research in the Gonarezhou landscape, was failing, yet it continued to send signals as he crossed reserves, rivers, roads, and working landscapes, gradually moving toward Mozambique’s Indian Ocean coast. Each step took him further from core protection and deeper into risk.

When his signal appeared in Coutada 5, Mozambique, a game reserve adjacent to Zinave National Park, teams moved quickly to locate him to replace the collar.

What they found was worrying: a wire snare was tightly caught around his neck. It was the kind of injury that, left untreated, would almost certainly have killed him.

The snare was removed in time. The lion was safely re-collared and he continues to survive in the wild.

This intervention didn’t just save one animal – it contributes to years of learning. The data from his journey helps conservation teams understand how lions still move across borders, and how connected these landscapes remain. A pride of lions currently living in Zinave National Park are believed to have followed a similar route.

In Coutada 5, early signs of recovery are already visible, from lions sited with cubs to the return of elephant, buffalo, and other large herbivores, signifying that natural dispersal is still happening across this region. This is what conservation at a landscape scale looks like: animals moving as they always have, corridors holding, and with protection in place, damaged areas beginning to recover.

This outcome was not the work of one organisation. It was made possible through close cooperation between conservation authorities, scientists, veterinarians, and field teams working across Zimbabwe and Mozambique, including Mozambique’s National Administration for Conservation Areas, Gonarezhou Conservation Trust, the Endangered Wildlife Trust, Peace Parks Foundation, Mozambique Wildlife Alliance, and Akashinga.

Newsletter sign up

The Quiet Rise of Trade-Driven Poaching of Africa’s Lions

Dr Samantha Nicholson, EWT Senior Carnivore Scientist, & Dr Peter Lindsey, CEO of the African Lion Recovery Fund

Despite their iconic status, lions are threatened across much of their African range. Today, they occupy only a fraction of their historical distribution, and many populations are in decline. The continuing reduction in both lion numbers and range reflects a combination of recent losses and improved understanding of their status and has been severe enough for lions to be listed as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Expanding human populations have transformed much of Africa’s savannah into farmland, settlements, and infrastructure, shrinking and fragmenting wildlife habitat. As a result, lions increasingly come into contact with people and livestock, heightening the risk of conflict. This is further compounded by prey depletion, as widespread bushmeat hunting reduces the availability of wild prey and pushes lions to target livestock. In response, lions are often killed in retaliation, while many others are inadvertently caught in snares set for other species. These combined pressures continue to threaten populations and remain as key challenges for lion conservation.

In recent years, however, researchers and practitioners have become increasingly concerned about another, less visible threat; one that has the potential to undermine conservation gains if left unaddressed.

An Emerging Threat: Targeted Poaching for Body Parts

Alongside these long-standing pressures, a more targeted form of poaching has begun to occur with increasing frequency in several parts of Africa: the deliberate killing of lions for their body parts for the illegal wildlife trade.

Unlike conflict-related killings or accidental snaring, targeted poaching involves lions being intentionally killed to harvest specific body parts (such as bones, teeth, claws, skins, or fat) for the illegal wildlife trade. These parts are used for a range of purposes, including traditional medicine, spiritual practices, cultural rituals, and, in some cases, personal adornment. Demand originates both within Africa and from international markets, particularly in parts of Asia.

The use of lion body parts is not new. For centuries, lions have held cultural and spiritual significance in many societies. Historically, however, most use relied on opportunistic sources, such as lions that died naturally or were killed during conflict incidents. What is changing is the scale, organisation, and intent behind the trade.

In several countries, lions are now being actively targeted. Poachers may use poisoned carcasses to attract entire prides, killing multiple lions in a single event. In other cases, lions are caught in strategically placed snares or lured to baited sites.

There is also growing evidence that some of this trade is becoming more organised. Seizures of large quantities of lion body parts, sometimes alongside products from other trafficked species such as elephants or pangolins, suggest involvement by criminal networks operating across borders. These networks are often difficult to detect and disrupt, particularly in regions with limited law enforcement capacity.

Importantly, this threat does not replace existing pressures on lions – it compounds them. If targeted poaching becomes entrenched before effective responses are in place, it could spread rapidly across the species’ range and reverse recent conservation gains.

The threat is widespread

Mozambique has emerged as the epicentre of targeted lion poaching in southern Africa, with 426 human-related lion mortalities recorded between 2010 and 2023. Notably, incidents of targeted poaching for body parts increased sharply after 2017, rising from approximately one documented case per year to around seven annually. The involvement of organised criminal networks is underscored by large-scale seizures, including the interception of 300 kg of lion parts in Maputo in 2023 alongside other illicit wildlife products.

This pressure is now spilling across borders, with severe consequences for neighbouring populations. In South Africa’s Kruger National Park, lion numbers in the northern 20% of the park have declined by up to 63% over the past 18 years, largely attributed to targeted poaching for body parts and incidental snaring. Reports describe increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of meat lures and poisoned carcasses to kill and harvest parts from multiple lions simultaneously.

Similarly, in Gonarezhou National Park, targeted lion poaching has become an escalating threat, characterised by poisoning and the selective removal of body parts rather than opportunistic killing. These incidents are particularly alarming because they are occurring within a well-managed transboundary conservation landscape, demonstrating that even flagship protected areas are vulnerable to organised, trade-driven poaching.

Reports of incidents where lions have been targeted for parts are now being shared from across the species African range.

Preventing Entrenchment: Proposed Responses

Recognising the seriousness of this emerging threat, several priority areas for action have been identified. Together, these complementary strategies aim to reduce targeted poaching of lions for body parts and disrupt trade networks along the entire supply chain, from poaching to consumption.

Strengthening Protection and Monitoring on the Ground

Effective lion conservation depends on well-managed, adequately resourced protected areas that can prevent poaching and respond rapidly to emerging threats. Focused monitoring of lion populations, combined with systematic recording of mortalities, enables early detection of emerging hotspots and supports proactive rather than reactive responses. A centralised database, such as the IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group’s African Lion Database (an initiative funded by the Lion Recovery Fund), allows trends to be tracked across landscapes and support evidence-based conservation action.

Working More Closely with Local Communities

Communities living alongside lions play a decisive role in conservation outcomes, particularly where livestock losses and safety concerns are high. Addressing human–lion conflict, sharing benefits, and directly involving communities in conservation efforts reduces incentives for poaching and builds long-term support for lion persistence.

Improving Understanding of the Trade

The trade in lion body parts remains poorly understood, limiting the effectiveness of interventions. Targeted research, including the use of genetic and forensic tools, can help clarify supply chains, identify source populations, and inform more strategic enforcement responses.

Disrupting Trafficking Networks

Intelligence-led law enforcement and improved coordination among agencies are essential for interrupting trafficking routes. Targeting intermediaries and higher-level traffickers reduces profitability and weakens organised trade networks.

Strengthening Legal Frameworks and Justice Systems

Robust legal frameworks, consistently applied, are critical for deterring wildlife crime. Effective investigations, well-prepared prosecutions, and the use of forensic evidence increase the likelihood of successful convictions and meaningful penalties.

Reducing Demand for Lion Body Parts

Ultimately, poaching persists because demand exists. Carefully designed, culturally sensitive demand-reduction initiatives are essential to reduce pressure on wild lion populations and complement enforcement efforts.

Cautious Optimism

Lion conservation has never been simple, and the emergence of targeted poaching for body parts adds another layer of complexity. Yet there are reasons for cautious optimism.

Across Africa, governments, conservation organisations, researchers, and communities have demonstrated that lions can recover when threats are addressed and resources are invested strategically. Large areas of suitable habitat remain, and many protected areas could support substantially larger lion populations than they currently do.

It is imperative to act early and decisively. If targeted poaching is recognised as a serious, yet manageable threat and addressed through coordinated, evidence-based action, there remains a realistic opportunity to prevent it from becoming entrenched. Lions have coexisted with people for millennia, and with informed, collaborative action they can continue to do so, thus securing a resilient future for the species across much of its remaining range.

Lindsey P, Nicholson SK, Coals PG, Taylor WA, Becker MS, Rademeyer K, Briers‐Louw WD, Almeida J, Chase M, Dore A, Henschel P. Increasing Targeted Poaching of Lions for Trade Has the Potential to Pose an Existential Threat to the Species in Africa. Conservation Letters. 2026 Jan;19(1):e70014.Available at: https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/con4.70014

Read the full article

Newsletter sign up

Verra VCU Issuance, Agricultural Resilience and Landscape Conservation

More than 90,000 hectares of irreplaceable Grasslands will now be conserved as part of South Africa’s first large-scale, verified soil carbon project. It is one of the world’s first projects applying Verra’s VM0026 Sustainable Grassland Management methodology at this scale.

This important milestone for long-term, sustainable grasslands conservation, is the product of work undertaken by the International Crane Foundation (ICF), in partnership with the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT), and is underpinned by a joint commitment to saving crane habitat in the Drakensberg region of South Africa.

The project has received 805,971 Verified Carbon Units (VCUs) from Verra, the world’s leading authority for carbon credit certification.

These VCUs are independently audited and confirmed climate benefits, demonstrating exceptional scientific integrity and accuracy in project design, modelling and implementation.

The project, which started in July 2018, covers land in the Drakensberg range, from Mpumalanga in the north to the Eastern Cape in the south. Most of the land is managed through long-term biodiversity stewardship agreements with private landowners The properties were selected for their ecological importance for Wattled, Blue and Grey Crowned Cranes, their potential for soil carbon sequestration and their landowner’s demonstrated commitment to sustainable grazing and fire management.

Using Verra’s VM0026 Sustainable Grassland Management methodology, the project delivers benefits for climate and biodiversity, significantly enhances agricultural resilience by improving soil health, water infiltration, and forage productivity. These are critical factors for long-term farming stability in a region increasingly affected by drought and climate variability. Restoring grassland back to health helps commodity producers maintain a viable operation while enabling better functioning biodiversity, benefitting pollinators, raptors, cranes and numerous grassland-dependent species.

Carbon projects like this do not replace the need to reduce emissions or efforts to secure a pathway to net zero, but rather complement them. Nature-based (NBS) climate solutions are an essential part of rebuilding the ecosystem and creating resilience in the landscape. Financial support, in the form of ongoing payments to farmers for these carbon credits, which in turn support ongoing sustainable land management, enables farmers to engage in landuse activities that retain and capture, as a key strategy to support adaptation and resilience in the face of a changing climate.

The International Crane Foundation and the Endangered Wildlife Trust, in partnership with WeAct, have already started the second monitoring period, which will run to December 31, 2027. This next phase of creates an opportunity for like-minded conservation-oriented landowners to join the project as partners and expand the conservation footprint by 54,000 ha (130,000 acres), as well as strengthen ecological and agricultural outcomes across the region.

All participants have committed to a minimum of a 40-year contract horison. This commitment provides a sustainable financing mechanism to reinvest carbon revenue into conservation, creating real long-term agricultural resilience and rural livelihood improvement. The EWT, ICF, and WeAct remain committed to supporting participating landowners and enhancing future monitoring, expansion, and verification efforts.

What are carbon credits?

Newsletter sign up

Communities and indigenous knowledge key to Wetland conservation

Wetlands not only sustain biodiversity, but also provide critical resources for surrounding communities. These include grazing for livestock, a source of building materials, the use of plants for medicinal purposes and cultural uses.

Alongside communal livelihood-related benefits is the importance of wetlands in the conservation of biodiversity, not only the water resource, but also the unique plants and animals that live in these important, environments.

This year the EWT marked World Wetlands Day, which linked wetlands to traditional knowledge by celebrating cultural heritage, by recognising the important role played by communities in the conservation and protection of wetlands.

These water resources are not only part of South Africa’s natural heritage, but are also part of the country’s cultural heritage. A key example is the iSimangaliso Wetland Park in KwaZulu-Natal, also known as the place of miracle and wonder. This Ramsar Site (wetland of international importance) is not only an area of biodiversity and archaeological significance; it is important to local Zulu communities who have held a deep connection with both the land and sea. The park also serves as a living landscape where local, traditional, and indigenous practices have been incorporated into modern conservation management practices.

Our project at Adam’s Mission in eThekwini is a prime example of the success of working with local communities to ensure the health of a natural habitat that underpins the life of both species and communities.

Since the inception of our monitoring programmes for selected, critical wetland habitats to support the Endangered Pickersgill’s Reed Frog (Hyperolius pickersgilli), we have initiated rehabilitation and monitoring at the Widenham Wetland Protected Environment and the Adams Mission wetland—both home to the Endangered frog species and Critically Endangered vegetation types, including the coastal grasslands, Indian Ocean Coastal Belt Wetlands and Swamp forest wetlands.

Through our Threatened Endemic Species Unit, previously known as the Threatened Amphibian Programme, our team has also focused on alien species clearing to and waste management to improve ecosystem health and associated ecosystem services. This has contributed to growing socio-ecological resilience for both the rich biodiversity and strong communities. It also benefits communities living adjacent to the wetlands through job creation and keeping the environment clean. Fourteen people have been employed as waste collectors and Invasive Alien controllers over a12-month period ending in June 2025.

The success of our education and awareness drive at Adam’s Mission has resulted in a decline in residential development in the buffer zones, agricultural practices and invasive alien plants, as well as a reduction in waste dumping within the wetland zone.

At KwaMkhize in the Drakensberg, the provision of spring water to the community through the EWT/ICF partnership benefits the people the area, ensuring that critical Crane species living in an adjacent wetland are protected.

By helping communities to better support natural resource management helps protect the landscapes in which cranes in South Africa live, primarily wetlands, grasslands and farming landscapes.

Overall, the implementation of the seven spring protection projects has serviced 2 445 individuals across 292 households, two schools and a clinic that services 150 people a day 365 days a year, therefore a total of 54,750 individuals that benefit from potable water at the clinic. This means the community no longer must rely on the rivers and streams flowing into the wetland for household water, or to water their gardens.

In the catchment of Vaal River near Harrismith in the Free State, we are implementing a restoration project to clear invasive alien plants and restore water to the environment for the benefit of people, wetlands and rivers. The project employed 24 previously unemployed people. Thus far 286 hectares of densely invaded wetland and grassland have been cleared releasing 929 megaliters of water back into the environment.

South Africa boasts 30 Ramsar Sites totalling 574 000 ha. Many are valued for their cultural heritage and traditional practices, which are incorporated into wetland conservation through initiatives undertaken by the EWT.

We collaborate with the International Crane Foundation through the African Crane Conservation Programme to conservation wetlands for species such as the Endangered Wattled Crane and Grey Crowned Crane, which are among the species that rely of wetlands as breeding sites. We also work to protect the Critically Endangered Amatola Toad, which is dependent on high altitude wetlands and adjacent moist grasslands.

Habitat transformation and climate change are among the greatest threats to wetlands, elevating the risk of water pollution or eutrophication caused by effluent discharges. In addition, overgrazing or incorrect fire management practices can result in the transformation of wetland ecosystems. This includes the presence of alien invasive species which reduce water availability and cause wetlands to become drier than anticipated. In some areas, wetlands are perceived as wastelands, resulting in their ecological importance being undervalued.

We recognise the importance of working with communities living within wetland catchments, or near to nature’s water purifiers, to safeguard these critical habitats. We will continue to support conservation efforts that will ensure our wetlands are healthy and able to withstand the risks posed by unchecked development and climate change.

Newsletter sign up

Sustainable use of wildlife in Africa is not the problem, it’s the way the term is exploited

By Kishaylin Chetty, Executive: head of Sustainability, The Endangered Wildlife Trust

Sustainable use can be a powerful conservation tool, but only if it is defined. Few terms in conservation generate as much heat, and as little shared understanding, as sustainable use. Across Africa, it is raised by policymakers, conservationists, traditional healers, hunters, traders, communities and commercial interests alike. Yet too often it is used to mean whatever best suits the speaker’s agenda.

As debates intensify around sustainable use frameworks on the continent, we must confront a difficult but necessary truth: sustainable use itself is not the problem. The real risk lies in how loosely the term is defined, selectively applied and, in some cases, deliberately distorted until it becomes broad enough to justify almost anything. If Africa is serious about securing a future where people and nature coexist, then sustainable use must be recovered as a disciplined, evidence-based concept, not a rhetorical shield for overexploitation.

Why sustainable use matters in an African context

Across Africa, biodiversity is not separate from people’s lives. For many indigenous peoples and local communities, nature underpins culture, spirituality, health, identity and livelihoods. Traditional healers rely on plants and animals to practise their craft, often guided by customary rules, seasonal cycles and deep ecological understanding. In some landscapes, regulated hunting has also historically been positioned as a land-use option linked to wildlife retention and rural income. In principle, sustainable use recognises these realities. When grounded in stewardship, restraint and accountability, it can support conservation outcomes while respecting rights and livelihoods. Communities across the continent have long practised forms of use that maintained ecological balance, and their knowledge systems often contain insights that modern conservation science is still rediscovering.

A strong example comes from Namibia’s communal conservancy model, where community custodianship, rights over wildlife and strict governance frameworks have contributed to the recovery of species such as black rhino, elephants and lions. While not without challenges, the model demonstrates that when rights, incentives and ecological limits are aligned, sustainable use can support conservation rather than undermine it. But respect for these systems cannot mean abandoning ecological limits.

Across Africa, biodiversity loss is accelerating due to habitat destruction, climate change, illegal trade and unsustainable offtake. In this context, not all species and not all forms of use can be sustained, even where they are rooted in tradition or framed as conservation tools. Vultures poisoned or harvested for belief-based use, pangolins trafficked under the guise of ancestral practice, cycads removed faster than they can regenerate, and slow-breeding species hunted in already fragmented landscapes are not hypothetical concerns. They are unfolding across the continent in real time. A stark example is the collapse of vulture populations across southern and eastern Africa, driven by infrastructure development, poisoning, belief-based use and illegal trade. Despite cultural significance and historical use, scientific evidence shows that current levels of offtake are incompatible with species survival. In response, some traditional healer associations have partnered with conservation organisations to promote alternatives and awareness, illustrating that adaptation is possible when information and trust are shared. This highlights a critical point: sustainable use is not guaranteed by tradition, legality or intent alone. It must be continually tested against ecological reality.

Nowhere is the misuse of sustainable use more evident than in parts of the hunting debate. Too often, sustainable use is reduced to a simplistic idea: if an animal can be used without disappearing immediately, the use must be sustainable. This is a dangerous oversimplification. Sustainability is not about whether use can continue for a few years, or whether quotas exist on paper. It is about population trends, ecosystem function, governance quality, enforcement capacity, cumulative impacts and long-term resilience, particularly in the face of climate change. In some African contexts, tightly regulated hunting systems have historically contributed to land retention for wildlife and generated revenue for conservation and communities and ignoring this complexity helps no one. The hunting sector has certainly made more concerted efforts to align more closely with long-term conservation goals in recent times, and change is happening. Albeit slowly.

At the same time, evidence from parts of central and west Africa shows how weak governance, poor monitoring and commercial pressure can turn hunting into a driver of decline, even where it is technically legal. When “sustainable use” becomes shorthand for “use that generates income”, without transparent data and independent oversight, it shifts from a conservation tool to a convenient narrative. Sustainable use cannot be defined by use alone. It must be defined by outcomes.

The greatest risk facing Africa today is not disagreement over sustainable use, it is the way the term is increasingly exploited. Under its banner, we have seen attempts to:

Justify the expanded commercialisation of threatened species;
Mask illegal harvesting and trade as cultural or subsistence use;
Promote hunting or breeding operations without demonstrable conservation benefit;
Inflate offtake quotas in data-poor contexts; and
Greenwash extractive activities that degrade ecosystems.
This is not sustainable use. It is the erosion of credibility, and ultimately, of biodiversity.

A different way forward: collaboration, evidence and mutual respect

From the perspective of the Endangered Wildlife Trust, the path forward is not about choosing between conservation and use, or between science and culture. It is about bringing them into honest conversation. A credible sustainable use framework across Africa must include:

Science-based ecological limits, particularly for threatened, slow-breeding and keystone species;
Collaboration and mutual learning between conservationists, traditional healers, hunters and community leaders;
Clear differentiation between subsistence, cultural and commercial use, recognising that commercialisation dramatically increases pressure on species;
Strong governance and enforcement to prevent exploitation and illegal trade; and
Fair benefit-sharing and viable alternatives, reducing pressure on biodiversity rather than intensifying it.

Traditional practitioners and local communities are not obstacles to conservation. They are essential partners. Equally, science is not an imposition on culture, but a tool to safeguard the very resources that culture depends on. Africa’s biodiversity is extraordinary, but it is not infinite. Sustainable use can be a powerful conservation tool, but only if it is defined narrowly enough to mean something and applied cautiously enough to work.

This debate is not about ideology. It is about integrity. About resisting convenient narratives. About recognising that conservation, culture, commercialisation and livelihoods are deeply intertwined yet ultimately constrained by ecological reality.

In the end, sustainable use is not measured by how long exploitation can continue, but by whether species, ecosystems and communities remain resilient long after the use has stopped. If we get that right, sustainable use can support Africa’s future. If we get it wrong, it will simply become another name for loss and Africa cannot afford that.

Join the Conversation

Newsletter sign up

From Red Lists to real action: How science shapes conservation

By Dr Tamanna Patel and Dr Lizanne Roxburgh, Conservation Planning and Science Unit

Conservation does not happen in isolation. Every decision about which species to protect, where to invest limited resources, and how to balance development with biodiversity rests on one critical foundation: evidence. When that evidence is outdated or incomplete, conservation action risks becoming ineffective, or worse, misdirected. In the face of an accelerating biodiversity crisis, acting on yesterday’s data can mean losing species forever.

This is why scientific assessments of species’ statuses, are not merely academic exercises, but essential tools for species survival. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species remains the world’s most authoritative system for assessing extinction risk of animals, fungi, and plants at either a global, regional or a national scale. It classifies species into nine categories, from Least Concern to Extinct, using objective criteria. Beyond labels, Red List assessments provide vital information on threats, habitats, population trends, and conservation needs, shaping policy, land-use planning, environmental impact assessments, and research priorities.

While global assessments provide a big-picture view, conservation action happens locally. This is why national and regional Red Lists are also important. National assessments identify species at risk within a country’s borders, guiding conservation policy, informing development decisions, allocating resources, tracking progress on international biodiversity commitments, and raising public awareness.

But Red Lists are only as powerful as they are current. When assessments lag behind reality, conservation resources, already stretched thin, may fail to reach the species that need urgent intervention. In conservation, timing matters.

This is why the release of the revised 2025 Mammal Red List of South Africa, Eswatini, and Lesotho in mid-January is so significant. Coordinated by the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT) and the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), and informed by the knowledge of 150 mammal experts, the assessments reveal trends that demand attention from policymakers, researchers, and the public alike. They form part of a broader suite of National Red Lists, covering everything from birds and amphibians to spiders and freshwater fishes, which fed into the 2025 National Biodiversity Assessment launched by SANBI in December 2025 – demonstrating how Red Lists translate science into national planning.

The findings are sobering. Of the 336 mammal species assessed, 20% are now threatened with extinction, while a further 12% are classified as Near Threatened, meaning that they are close to meeting the criteria for threatened, and should be monitored closely. Eleven species were uplisted to a higher risk category, signalling declining conservation status, while only three species showed sufficient improvement to be downlisted. The Thick-tailed Bushbaby, once considered secure, has been uplisted from Least Concern to Near Threatened as agriculture, urban expansion, infrastructure development, and climate change increasingly fragment its habitat. In contrast, Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra offers a rare conservation success story, having been downlisted from Vulnerable to Near Threatened thanks to a real increase in population numbers – clear evidence that well-directed conservation can deliver results.

The region’s responsibility is particularly stark when it comes to endemic species. Sixty-seven mammal species occur nowhere else on Earth, and 42% of them are threatened with extinction. If these species are lost here, they are lost forever. Yet protection remains uneven: while around 76% of mammal species are considered well or moderately protected, nearly a quarter are poorly protected or not protected at all. Habitat loss from agriculture and urban expansion remains the dominant threat, compounded by climate change, extreme weather events, over-exploitation, and poaching.

Importantly, this Red List also marks a step forward in how we assess species. For the first time, genetic health and climate change vulnerability were incorporated into all mammal assessments. Climate modelling was conducted for species already flagged as climate-sensitive in the previous assessment, and genetic indicators were evaluated across all mammals. These advances are critical, but they also expose how much we still do not know. Without targeted research on climate vulnerability and stronger genetic data, conservation planning risks being reactive rather than proactive.

The most significant gap remains basic population data, particularly for small mammals and species within protected areas. Many species continue to be under-studied, limiting our understanding of population size, trends, and genetic diversity. Seven percent of assessed species were classified as Data Deficient, meaning that experts were unable to assign them a Red List status due to insufficient information. Dolphins and whales dominate this group, highlighting an urgent need for baseline surveys and long-term monitoring of these marine species.

The IUCN recommends reassessing species every five to ten years. South Africa’s mammal Red List, first published in 1986, revised in 2004, expanded regionally in 2016, and now updated in 2025, shows the value of this commitment. Each revision not only tracks declines and recoveries but also refines the questions we must ask next.

Red Lists do more than tell us which species are in trouble. They reveal where our knowledge is weakest, where research investment is most urgently needed, and where conservation action can make the biggest difference. In a world of limited resources and growing environmental pressures, evidence-based decision-making is not optional, it is the difference between recovery and irreversible loss.

View the Red List

Newsletter sign up

« Older Entries

Next Entries »