Endangered Species?

So I just looked up an article on how researchers found 125,000 gorillas in the Congo, because I was bored and remembered hearing some morning radio djs making fun of the find. The reason it's so shocking is because that is more than twice what they thought was left of the species. The article mentions that the number they thought was left was based on a survey from the 1980's and projected loss due to poaching.

This makes me wonder how many other "endangered species" are based off old numbers and flawed projections. We trust these environmental groups without even questioning their methods.

Here's the link to the gorilla article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/science/05apes.html

And here's another article about how the list of endangered species is being added to: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/0502_060502_endangered.html

The reasons they cite for population decrease? Hunting and global warming.
How they reached the numbers they did? "the IUCN took a close look at sharks and rays" What does that even mean? The entire article has the same ambiguous wording.

Here's a quote that really bothers me:" "Here you have an unbiased, objective account," he said. "There's no guesswork and no political pressure. … The listings tend to focus conservation energy." " Really? It doesn't sound unbiased (global warming) and there definitely appears to be a lot of guesswork.

Just some thoughts.