WWF report finds 73% average decline in monitored wildlife populations

WWF’s 2026 Living Planet Report, published on October 7, finds that monitored vertebrate wildlife populations worldwide declined by an average of 73% between 1970 and 2022. The finding points to severe pressure on nature, but it is an average across studied populations, not a count of animals or species lost. The report also documents recoveries that show the global figure does not describe every population’s trajectory.

The index draws on 35,803 population trends across 5,790 species. It covers mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and fish; plants and invertebrates are outside its scope. Those boundaries matter when interpreting a headline figure that can otherwise sound like a census of all wildlife.

What the 73% wildlife decline measures

Our World in Data explains that the Living Planet Index calculates average changes in the size of monitored populations. It cannot tell readers how many individual animals, populations or species have been lost, or how many extinctions occurred. A decline in the index therefore should not be described as 73% of wildlife disappearing.

The same analysis finds that 50% of populations in the dataset were declining, 43% were increasing and 7% were stable. These diverging paths can coexist with a steep overall average decline. They also help explain why examples of recovery do not cancel out the report’s wider warning.

Where monitored populations fell most sharply

The losses differ sharply by ecosystem. WWF reports an 85% average decline for monitored freshwater populations, compared with 69% for terrestrial populations and 59% for marine populations. These figures describe the populations included in each part of the index, rather than every species living in those environments.

Regional results also vary. EL PAÍS reports a 95% average decline for monitored populations in Latin America and the Caribbean, based on 4,737 populations across 1,405 species. Its account puts North America’s average decline at 28%, based on 2,454 populations across 938 species. The comparison shows why the global average alone cannot describe the pressures in a particular region.

EL PAÍS also quotes WWF Colombia conservation and governance director Carlos Mauricio Herrera saying that, over the preceding five years, at least half of monitored populations in the region were stable or improving. That shorter-period observation does not erase the longer-term regional decline. It shows that the direction of change depends in part on the period being examined.

What conservation recoveries show

Al Jazeera reports that mountain gorillas now number more than 1,100 across Uganda, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, after being on a path toward extinction in the 1980s. Tara Stoinski, president and CEO of the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund, attributes the recovery to decades of protection, science-informed management and community involvement. The example concerns a specific species and sustained work, not a reversal of the global index.

The reporting also describes a rise of more than 70% in global wild tiger numbers between 2010 and 2025, linked by WWF to cooperation among tiger-range countries. EL PAÍS reports that the green sea turtle was moved from endangered to least concern on the IUCN Red List in 2025 after decades of conservation work. These cases show what focused protection can achieve, while leaving the broader decline intact.

WWF identifies food, energy and finance systems as major drivers of nature loss. EL PAÍS, citing the report, says about $7.3 trillion went to activities harmful to nature in 2023, against $220 billion for protection or restoration. The figures set the reported recoveries against the scale of the pressures conservation efforts face.

The report arrives weeks before the UN biodiversity conference COP17 in Armenia, according to EL PAÍS. The sources reviewed do not establish any specific commitments or outcomes from that meeting. For now, the evidence is a mixed picture: a steep long-term average decline, substantial differences across populations and places, and documented recoveries where conservation has been sustained.