6 thoughts on “Latham’s Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii): Revise global status?”
I think it is a premature decision to uplist Latham’s snipe to Vu category with data available today. This species continuously shifted northernmost limits of distribution both on Sakhalin and Kuriles since 1950th till recently. It is true that no regular monitoring data are available from those islands to justify population trends. However, rage expansion is rather well documented and published (Stilt 73-74 (2020): 52-58), so it is not obvious why the decline on Hokkado assumed to be a general pattern for the whole breeding range. Criterion B. is not used, yet extent of occurrence should considerably increase during recent decades (the current estimate is based on breeding range known for 1950th-60th of the previous century). The recent decline in Hokkaido is believed to be due drought in Australia. It is very plausible, but not proven hypothesis. Alternatively, it could be a result of range shift from the south to the north, e. g. in response to climate change, with shrinking of distribution area and numbers in the southern part of the range.
I and the Wild Bird Society of Japan believe that it is appropriate for the Latham’s Snipe to be upgraded to VU for the following reasons.
If there is no monitoring data, then as a precautionary principle we should assume that populations are declining in areas such as Sakhalin and the Amur River estuary, as they are in Japan, so that we can avoid the risk of extinction now. Even if the rank is raised to VU long after the population has actually declined, it is unlikely to be effective in terms of conservation.
In the absence of Latham’s Snipe’s monitoring data, it is not possible to say that the population of them are increasing or not decreasing just because the habitat is expanding.
Ura etc. point out a decrease in population size, not a reduction in habitat.
It still breeds in Japan south of Honshu, the southernmost point being the outer ring of Mount Aso in Kyushu (32.9°N). Given that the species also breeds south of Honshu, it is unlikely that the breeding population in Hokkaido is the southern limit. Even if Hokkaido were close to the southern limit of the Latham’s Snipe’s breeding range, the fact that the population has declined by 71% in Sarobetsu Plane, the northernmost part of Hokkaido, cannot be overlooked.
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested by so many people in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments until 21 February 2022. We will now analyse and interpret the new information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’s Red List status on this page on 21 February 2022, when discussions will re-open.
Information received via email (B. Hansen in litt. 2022, P. Ktitorov in litt. 2022) indicates that there is uncertainty with the rate of decline unaccounted for in the initial proposal. Populations in Russia, anecdotally, appear to be stable (P. Ktitorov in litt. 2022) while monitoring in Australia also has not revealed a trend that matches or approaches that estimated in Japan. Although considerable caution is needed in the interpretation of these trends, it is now thought the global rate of decline is more likely to be 20-29%.
Based on the available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2022.1 Red List would be to list Latham’s Snipe as Near Threatened, approaching the threshold for listing as threatened under Criteria A2b+4b.
Following comments on the contemporary range of the species, the map has been updated.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 27 February 2022, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2022.1 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in July 2022, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested by so many people in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments. We will analyse and interpret the new information, and we will post a final decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 7 March 2022.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Latham’s Snipe is recommended to be listed as Near Threatened, approaching the threshold for listing as threatened under Criteria A2b+4b.
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2022.1 GTB Forum process. The final 2022.1 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in July 2022, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
I think it is a premature decision to uplist Latham’s snipe to Vu category with data available today. This species continuously shifted northernmost limits of distribution both on Sakhalin and Kuriles since 1950th till recently. It is true that no regular monitoring data are available from those islands to justify population trends. However, rage expansion is rather well documented and published (Stilt 73-74 (2020): 52-58), so it is not obvious why the decline on Hokkado assumed to be a general pattern for the whole breeding range. Criterion B. is not used, yet extent of occurrence should considerably increase during recent decades (the current estimate is based on breeding range known for 1950th-60th of the previous century). The recent decline in Hokkaido is believed to be due drought in Australia. It is very plausible, but not proven hypothesis. Alternatively, it could be a result of range shift from the south to the north, e. g. in response to climate change, with shrinking of distribution area and numbers in the southern part of the range.
I and the Wild Bird Society of Japan believe that it is appropriate for the Latham’s Snipe to be upgraded to VU for the following reasons.
If there is no monitoring data, then as a precautionary principle we should assume that populations are declining in areas such as Sakhalin and the Amur River estuary, as they are in Japan, so that we can avoid the risk of extinction now. Even if the rank is raised to VU long after the population has actually declined, it is unlikely to be effective in terms of conservation.
In the absence of Latham’s Snipe’s monitoring data, it is not possible to say that the population of them are increasing or not decreasing just because the habitat is expanding.
Ura etc. point out a decrease in population size, not a reduction in habitat.
It still breeds in Japan south of Honshu, the southernmost point being the outer ring of Mount Aso in Kyushu (32.9°N). Given that the species also breeds south of Honshu, it is unlikely that the breeding population in Hokkaido is the southern limit. Even if Hokkaido were close to the southern limit of the Latham’s Snipe’s breeding range, the fact that the population has declined by 71% in Sarobetsu Plane, the northernmost part of Hokkaido, cannot be overlooked.
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested by so many people in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments until 21 February 2022. We will now analyse and interpret the new information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’s Red List status on this page on 21 February 2022, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
Information received via email (B. Hansen in litt. 2022, P. Ktitorov in litt. 2022) indicates that there is uncertainty with the rate of decline unaccounted for in the initial proposal. Populations in Russia, anecdotally, appear to be stable (P. Ktitorov in litt. 2022) while monitoring in Australia also has not revealed a trend that matches or approaches that estimated in Japan. Although considerable caution is needed in the interpretation of these trends, it is now thought the global rate of decline is more likely to be 20-29%.
Based on the available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2022.1 Red List would be to list Latham’s Snipe as Near Threatened, approaching the threshold for listing as threatened under Criteria A2b+4b.
Following comments on the contemporary range of the species, the map has been updated.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 27 February 2022, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2022.1 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in July 2022, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested by so many people in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments. We will analyse and interpret the new information, and we will post a final decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 7 March 2022.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Latham’s Snipe is recommended to be listed as Near Threatened, approaching the threshold for listing as threatened under Criteria A2b+4b.
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2022.1 GTB Forum process. The final 2022.1 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in July 2022, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.