A response to the article “Taxonomic errors and inaccuracies in Sri Lanka’s Red List, 2007: a cautionary note”

As members of the team that was involved in the preparation of the ‘2007 Red List of Threatened Fauna and Flora of Sri Lanka’ (IUCN Sri Lanka & the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2007), we have paid careful attention to a recent article published by Bahir & Gabadage (2009) in the Journal of Threatened Taxa, which has attempted to judge or interpret the quality of this publication. After careful review of the article under reference, we have decided to submit a response in order to address erroneous interpretations and misleading statements contained therein, based on reasoned judgment or analysis. The 2007 Red List of Threatened Fauna and Flora of Sri Lanka will be referred to herein, as the 2007 National Red List. The 2007 National Red List was the result of a three-year collaborative project implemented by IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) in Sri Lanka and the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. This project, evaluated the conservation status of selected fauna and flora species in Sri Lanka using IUCN’s Global Red List Categories and Criteria, adapted to a regional level. The project was steered by the National Species Conservation Advisory Group (NSCAG) appointed by the Biodiversity Secretariat of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. As elaborated on page 11 of the 2007 National Red List, the project followed an extensive consultative process, involving a group of expert reviewers appointed by the Biodiversity Secretariat. These reviewers consisted of over 50 researchers, taxonomists and naturalists, within 11 taxonomic groups. It also consulted relevant stakeholders such as protected area managers, and non-governmental environmental organizations in the country. It is evident that Bahir & Gabadage (2009) have not read this section of the document as the statements made in the background as well as conclusions in their article have implied that appropriate specialists have not been consulted in the preparatory process of this national document. Ironically the first author, Mr. Mohomed Bahir was one of the appointed expert reviewers as can be seen from the list contained in page viii. Bahir & Gabadage (2009) have ignored facts, in their effort to point out errors in taxonomy, nomenclature, citations, and data, in the 2007 National Red List. We will address all of their unsubstantiated allegations, with relevant facts, in the following sections. The science of taxonomy is dynamic and fluid, continuously evolving and changing as new data emerges. Taxonomists often find themselves at odds with each other in changes relating to nomenclature. Therefore it is obvious that the taxonomic changes emerging after the publication of the 2007 National Red List could only be be addressed in its future revisions. Bahir & Gabadage (2009) have pointed out nomenclatural issues relating to the amphibians in the 2007 National Red List, without noting the fact that the document has chosen to adopt the list of threatened amphibians from the Global Amphibian Assessment (www.globalamphibians.org). The decision to adopt the threatened amphibians list from the Global Amphibian Assessment was taken in order to avoid duplication of efforts, a decision which was endorsed by the National Species Conservation Advisory Group (NSCAG) of Sri Lanka, as well as the expert reviewers, including the foremost amphibian taxonomists and researchers in the country. This fact is mentioned in the methodology section of the document (page 12). It is to be noted however, that the national list was further supplemented with evaluations of amphibian species described more recently from Sri Lanka (Meegaskumbura & Manamendra-Arachchi 2005; Fernando et al. 2007; Meegaskumubura et al. 2007). Bahir & Gabadage (2009) have further highlighted Cnemaspis tropidogaster (Boulenger 1885) as being OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD Date of publication (online): 26 April 2010 Date of publication (print): 26 April 2010 ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)