Talk:Red wolf/Archive 2

Is "endangered subspecies" acceptable? Booger-mike (talk) 20:59, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

The term is not recognised - IUCN deals with species-level conservation only. If it did, the whole grey wolf v red wolf debate would be solved. William Harristalk 22:29, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

The IUCN do do some assessments on subspecies. There are quite a number of cat family subspecies assessments, especially the tigers (e.g. the Bengal tiger is an endangered subspecies). Overall about 400 mammalian subspecies have assessments, although none in Canidae. In addition, they do two other more restricted assessments: subpopulation and regional assessments. For instance, there are assessments for West African and North African subpopulations of African Wild Dogs and regional assessments for some foxes and for the Golden Jackal in Europe.

According to the IUCN the red wolf is a critically engangered species. As the group of animals they treat as the species is the same as the subspecies of wolf treated in this article, I suppose critically engangered subspecies is an appropriate term.   Jts1882 | talk  07:39, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that, JTS. But the IUCN has not chosen to call it a subspecies, which would make that claim unverifiable despite the excellent logic to it. I am simply explaining the situation to Booger-mike as I see it and I have no position on how this should read - as always, it is what the majority of editors who have an interest in this page decide. (PS: I have no watch on this article.) William Harristalk 22:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)