We do not capture additional, valuable information such as why a species is collected or exploited.

[rukayaj]

Action: it was agreed that this tool should be kept as simple as possible and if the Red List needs additional information it should be part of their process. Once the tool is in use and depending on how it is going, there could be an optional tab for additional information.

[rukayaj]

• Allow people to list if the species listed is a good indicator of where sensitive species occur. This should just be a text field where they can fill something in. <- does this also fall under the above?

[reupost]

I'll check with Brenda. I don't know where that requirement came from (its not in the workshop report) - any ideas?

[rukayaj]

If you look at the flowchart thing you'll notice that in the website we are asking for far less information than is actually in the flowchart. I think originally they wanted to capture details like the number of subpopulations, number of populations etc and that information didn't really have a bearing on whether the species was classed as sensitive or not sensitive.

So we decided that we're leaving all that information out, but Tilla suggested that seeing as we are putting in effort to get a whole load of experts on board it would make sense to capture that additional information. I think she has gathered all the info she needs for her red listing anyway though. But this issue is closed really, it was just a point of discussion and a note to myself that we might in the future need to capture additional info.

[reupost]

Agreed. I think with the number of species that need assessing, and the timeframes we have to do it in, there is no scope for adding more details. If the plants get assessed in a spreadsheet its possible they can include another column or two for more information, but this would not be imported into the NSSL tool.