Talk:Torrey Pine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

I have a question about the conservation status of the Torrey Pine. In the picture it says that the Torrey Pine is endangered. In the article it says: "Despite its rarity the Torrey Pine is not endangered." Which one is it?

This should be resolved. I think the issue is that it is endangered in its native habitat, but is widely grown elsewhere. -Willmcw 01:50, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

The conservation status of Pinus torreyana is Vulnerable according to the 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. This is the list that Wikipedia has standardized upon for consistency's sake among the articles. Vulnerable is one step down from Endangered. Pinus torreyana insularis does not appear on the IUCN list, but as a subspecies is also Vulnerable.

It does; here - MPF 10:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

To be protected in the United States, where the plant is primarily found, it would have to be listed as Endangered or Threatened by the US Fish & Wildlife Service under the Endangered Species Act. As of May 2006 it was not on that list.

To be protected in California, it would have to be listed as either Endangered or Threatened by the California Department of Fish and Game Habitat Conservation Planning Branch. As of May 2006 it was not on the list.

Within the Torrey Pines State Reserve, California state law prohibits the collection of any cones, seeds, or flowers as well as any "natural or historic feature." -Robogun 06:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you definitely confirm that? Farjon (head of the IUCN Conifers Group) lists it as [EN (C2b)], with var. insularis as [EN (D)], in the Kew World Checklist and Bibliography of Conifers (1998). Has its status been changed since then? - MPF 08:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Double-checked in the IUCN/SSC Conifer Specialist Group Status Survey – that also lists it as EN (C2b); so does Farjon's monograph Pines (2nd. ed., 2005). I'd suspect the VU cited here must be a transcription error. - MPF 12:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't check those cites. Do you have any online references. In any event I think we should stick to Wikipedia form which specifies the current Red List. -Robogun 02:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Those are the primary sources, so are the best to follow. For online refs, this redlist page shows it correctly - makes me think the more that the VU on their species page is a transcription error - MPF 10:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll concur with that Red List cite. Thanks for the clarification. -Robogun 07:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)