St Kitts Bullfinch (Melopyrrha grandis): Revise global status?

Red List Team (BirdLife International)

St Kitts Bullfinch (Melopyrrha grandis): Revise global status?

7 thoughts on “St Kitts Bullfinch (Melopyrrha grandis): Revise global status?

  1. I think this is a pretty accurate analysis of the status of the St. Kitts Bullfinch. While there have been no confirmed sightings since 1929, there is circumstantial evidence that it may still exist. The sighting in 1994 at Stone-fort Ghut was seen by two people, and I spoke to them some years later, and they were convinced of the description of the bird they saw fit that of the St. Kitts Bullfinch. As a result, I would say that while it is possible that it is extinct, its existence cannot be ruled out.

    In respect to the five questions posed, I would respond as follows:
    a) There is a reasonable probability that the sighting at Stone-fort Ghut in 1994 was the St. Kitts Bullfinch. When I spoke to the gentleman, Campbell Evelyn, the description he gave fit the description of the Bullfinch, including and specifically the red on the crown. His wife generally supported his observations. The other observations and recordings are difficult to judge, but hopefully technology will solve the issue one day.
    b) Not personally aware of any other specific efforts to search for the SK Bullfinch other than those mentioned in the report. Some of the issues is that Mt. Liamuiga is at the other end of the island, about a 2-hour hike to get to the upper locations, and it is not wise to hike alone in the forests, so that tends to be a bit of a hindrance. Over the years, I have asked several of the Volcano/Rain forest tour guides if any of them have seen the SK Bullfinch when shown a picture, but none could confirm a sighting, after some hesitation.
    c) The last official sighting was in 1929. What was not mentioned in the report was that St. Kitts suffered another Hurricane strike in 1924 and then a massive “Mother of all Hurricanes” in 1928, which could have compounded a struggling bird population from the two earlier Hurricanes of 1899. Thus, the earliest it could have gone extinct would be shortly after 1929. Hurricane activity was low thereafter in St. Kitts from 1929 to 1989, with just a few passing storms. However, with the likely sighting in 1994, it is probably that the SK Bullfinch still survived up until then. Unfortunately, a period of 10 years from 1989 to 1998, St. Kitts experienced 6 or 7 Hurricanes, including Hugo, Louis, Marlyn, Bertha, George, three of those were Category 3 or higher. If the SK Bullfinch was holding on to life, the destruction caused by these hurricanes would certainly generate major survival issues!
    d) All indications are that after 1900, the SK Bullfinch was found at the upper levels of Mt. Liamuiga (formerly Mt. Misery). However, if the sighting at Stone-Fort Ghut by Campbell Evelyn and his wife was accurate, then there is a possibility of more than just a single subpopulation could be feasible, as Stone-fort Ghut is on different mountain range, located East of Mt. Liamuiga.
    e) Same response as d) above.

    Please note these are my views as an amateur birdwatcher and with no real scientific background!

  2. An opinion on St Kitts Bullfinch: The split of the PR Bullfinch is probably the reason to reassess a population that was thought to be extinct. I was also suprised that the hurricane of 12-13 September 1928 (the worst known in the Lesser Antilles up to Hugo) was today no more identified to be an important factor to explain the possible eradication of this species. The impact thought to be comparable to Hugo is the almost destruction of any leaf of the trees, transforming the forest on a brown “winter” no more suitable to birds to live or feed. For example it conducted Eulampis jugularis to colonize Grande Terre( low altitude) from the mountain of Basse Terre in Guadeloupe. It could adapt to it and survived and later recolonized the mountain but remains also today in the bottom. The SK&N bullfinch seemed already not to be able to adapt to the bottoms and therefore an already small population may not have survived. After having extensively hiked looking for birds and plants for 30 years in almost all the Lesser Antilles (including St Kitts and Nevis looking for the bird), the vulcano is not so dificult to hike compared to other bigger islands (Guadeloupe, Dominica, Martinique) and I wonder how such a bird could have not been decteted, also as any birdwatcher visiting the island hoped to see it. Even if the forest is “elatively” isolated, we are in an archipelago highly populated with some people living here used to visit regurarly these areas, not so highly remote.
    I would be interested to have access to the song records to hear if it does not fit with some of the (sometimes surprising) song of other LA species.
    A last point is the “memory” of ancient sighting: In the LA, local people try always to give a name of any animal or plant even if if it is technically not the right name. In that case, this is the closest known species’name that is used. It really may be disturbing.

    I agree that maybe a tiny chance exists of the survival of a species. It could be very few individuals with a very elusive behaviour and that would have overcome inbreeding for generations and other threats. The proposal of CR D1 for that species may conduct to assess or re-assess other LA taxa in case of splitting (ie. Troglodytes aedon guadalupensis, last records in the 1980s).
    My answers to the questions are:
    1. Very low
    2. Many birdwatchers have visited the island: if some records would have been made, some information would have been released
    3. After hurricane of September 1928
    4. Yes
    5. No

  3. Mickey gave a very comprehensive summary of the St. Kitts Bullfinch.

    I must add that in spite of some monitoring in search of the species, there is the need for long-term monitoring. Furthermore, there are many untouched areas that need to be monitored.

    The local birders in St. Kitts and Nevis will continue to conduct acoustic monitoring. In addition, to the unknown call recorded in 2021 (stated in the document), the team will use these unknown calls for playback calls surveys in search for the unknown species. We are hoping to conduct these surveys (both passive acoustic monitoring and playbacks) monthly.

  4. Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments until 18 July 2022. We will now analyse and interpret the new information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 18 July 2022, when discussions will re-open.

  5. Preliminary proposal

    Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2022.2 Red List would be to adopt the proposed classifications outlined in the initial forum discussion.

    There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 24 July 2022, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN. The final 2022.2 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in December 2022, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.

  6. Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments. We will post a final decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 1 August 2022.

  7. Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN

    The final categorisation for this species has not changed. St Kitts Bullfinch is recommended to be listed as Critically Endangered under Criterion D1.

    Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2022.2 GTB Forum process. The final 2022.2 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in December 2022, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *