7 thoughts on “Hoary-throated Spinetail (Synallaxis kollari)”
Reassessment seems justified (see also comments on Cercomacra carbonaria). This species has previously been listed in various categories, and returning it to EN or VU seems appropriate based on the information presented.
As the majority of this species’ range, and presumably population, occurs in Brazil, consistency between the national and global list would be desirable. If there is a divergence, the reason for this should be made clear so that this information can be incorporated into the next national red list evaluation.
The national assessment mentions that the most important current threat is construction of hydroelectric dams, as this species (as also Cercomacra carbonaria) is found only in a narrow strip of riparian vegetation along riverbanks, which is vulnerable to flooding from such developments.
A recent paper describing the potential impacts of hydro projects, in particular the proposed “Bem Querer” dam, on this species and others, is the following, by Naka et al. (2020): https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959270919000133 It does not quantify the proportion of the species’ range or habitat that would be lost if the dam is constructed, but describes the impacts that would occur upstream and downstream of the dam.
Naka et al. (2020) write “For those species restricted to the upper stretch of the river, habitat loss due to permanent flooding above the dam will be inevitable, and the higher the final level of the waters (currently set at 62.5 m, Empresa de Pesquisa Energética 2011), the more habitat will be lost. The ‘Critically Endangered’ Synallaxis kollari is restricted to the upper Rio Branco, and the two rivers that form the Branco, the Uraricoera and Tacutú rivers. Loosing this species’ stronghold along these rivers will severely jeopardise its future.”
With this potential near-future threat in the balance, EN, as proposed, may indeed be a more appropriate classification here than the current national assessment of VU.
This species was listed as VU C1 in the last Brazilian national assessment, carried out in 2018. This information can be consulted at:
Aleixo, A.L.P.; Lees, A.C.; Lima, D.M.; Lopes, E.V.; Silveira, L.F.; Haft, M.E.C.; Cerqueira, P.V.; Piacentini, V.Q. 2023. Synallaxis kollari Pelzeln, 1856. Sistema de Avaliação do Risco de Extinção da Biodiversidade – SALVE.
Available in: https://salve.icmbio.gov.br DOI: 10.37002/salve.ficha.12151 – Accessed: 03 de fev. de 2024.
I disagree with the proposal to prioritize reassessment of both Rio Branco endemics (this species and Rio Branco Antbird) for two reasons. The first is that the only population data from the species’ ranges in Brazil (presented in Vale et al. 2007) are now twenty years old. Given the extent of habitat degradation and land use change in Roraima during this time, a resurvey of both species is badly needed. The population estimates we generated (SRCS 2021) are based on these old data, and we emphasized that caveat in our report. In the manuscript describing our findings (currently in review), we urge caution in using our data to justify reassessment of both species: the state of knowledge of their ranges in Brazil at the present time is insufficient, and the current threats are too grave.
To illustrate why updated population estimates from Brazil should precede reassessment by IUCN, consider that our surveys along the Guyana-Brazil border indicated that a range contraction of more than 50 river kilometers likely occurred on the Maú (Ireng) River between 2004-2021, despite relatively little forest loss during this interval. This makes me doubt the value of observed changes in forest cover as a proxy for population trajectories. Indeed, our own forest-cover-based estimates of population size reflect the most optimistic scenario. Remote imagery may suggest that suitable habitat still exists, but there is no guarantee that small, isolated populations will maintain themselves in a fragmented gallery forest landscape.
The other reason for my opposition to reassessment at the present time is more practical. Our findings of considerable numbers of both species along the Takutu-Ireng (Maú) corridor has generated local interest and spurred constructive dialogue between our organization (SRCS) and a number of stakeholders in Guyana, including the Protected Areas Commission, the Guyana Forestry Commission, the Ministry of Agriculture, local landowners, and tourism operators. Our proposed Ireng-Takutu KBA is being used as a focal point to develop an innovative community-based conservation zone to balance habitat preservation and local economic needs to help fulfill Guyana’s national conservation goals for 2030. Up to now, our progress has been encouraging, but we face a challenging path ahead. Guyana is moving forward rapidly with plans to develop large-scale agriculture in the Rupununi region, and the area along the Ireng River in particular is under intense development pressure. In fact, in the few years since we conducted our river surveys, several leaseholders have preemptively begun clearing land and building enormous drainage ditches that cut through the gallery forest in our study area. With the current El Niño conditions, this fire season has been especially intense. One of the forest blocks which we surveyed to generate our population estimates in 2021 has been burning for days and is still on fire as I type this. In short, we can ill afford the setback that we’re certain would result from having to tell our stakeholders that both species’ threat levels have been lowered.
As I wrote in my comments on Rio Branco Antbird, there is no compelling reason to reassess either of these species at the present time, and there is good reason to maintain the status quo for now, given the tenuous situation we face in Guyana as we work to garner support for protection of these species’ habitat. I urge the IUCN to postpone reassessment of both Rio Branco Antbird and Hoary-throated Spinetail for at least two years, pending finalization of protected area status for both species in Guyana and updated population data from Brazil.
(A further note: the range map for this species contains an error. On the Ireng River (Rio Maú), the species occurs up to ~35 km from the confluence with the Takutu. The map shows its range extending almost 100 km farther, and is generally congruent with the area we surveyed without finding any birds (see SRCS 2021). I suspect this is the source of the error.)
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 12 February 2024. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 12 February 2024, when discussions will re-open.
We are grateful for the contributions made during this latest round of discussions, and all relevant information has been incorporated into the updated Red List assessment for this species. Available data suggests that this species’ previous listing as Critically Endangered was unjustified and therefore cannot be upheld: there is no evidence that it meets the thresholds for listing as Critically Endangered under any criterion according to IUCN Red List Guidelines. We emphasise that Red List assessments are a measure of species’ global extinction risk following the best data available at the time of re-assessment and that this is a non-genuine change, i.e. there has been no genuine improvement in extinction risk. Based on available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2024 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 18 February 2024, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2024 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in December 2024, 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 in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments. We will analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a final decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 26 February 2024.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Hoary-throated Spinetail is recommended to be listed as Endangered under Criteria A3c+4c;C2a(i).
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2024.1 GTB Forum process. The final 2024 Red List categories will now be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Reassessment seems justified (see also comments on Cercomacra carbonaria). This species has previously been listed in various categories, and returning it to EN or VU seems appropriate based on the information presented.
The Brazilian National Red List evaluates this species as nationally VU based on criterion C1 (Aleixo et al. 2023, https://doi.org/10.37002/salve.ficha.12151).
As the majority of this species’ range, and presumably population, occurs in Brazil, consistency between the national and global list would be desirable. If there is a divergence, the reason for this should be made clear so that this information can be incorporated into the next national red list evaluation.
The national assessment mentions that the most important current threat is construction of hydroelectric dams, as this species (as also Cercomacra carbonaria) is found only in a narrow strip of riparian vegetation along riverbanks, which is vulnerable to flooding from such developments.
A recent paper describing the potential impacts of hydro projects, in particular the proposed “Bem Querer” dam, on this species and others, is the following, by Naka et al. (2020): https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959270919000133 It does not quantify the proportion of the species’ range or habitat that would be lost if the dam is constructed, but describes the impacts that would occur upstream and downstream of the dam.
Naka et al. (2020) write “For those species restricted to the upper stretch of the river, habitat loss due to permanent flooding above the dam will be inevitable, and the higher the final level of the waters (currently set at 62.5 m, Empresa de Pesquisa Energética 2011), the more habitat will be lost. The ‘Critically Endangered’ Synallaxis kollari is restricted to the upper Rio Branco, and the two rivers that form the Branco, the Uraricoera and Tacutú rivers. Loosing this species’ stronghold along these rivers will severely jeopardise its future.”
With this potential near-future threat in the balance, EN, as proposed, may indeed be a more appropriate classification here than the current national assessment of VU.
This species was listed as VU C1 in the last Brazilian national assessment, carried out in 2018. This information can be consulted at:
Aleixo, A.L.P.; Lees, A.C.; Lima, D.M.; Lopes, E.V.; Silveira, L.F.; Haft, M.E.C.; Cerqueira, P.V.; Piacentini, V.Q. 2023. Synallaxis kollari Pelzeln, 1856. Sistema de Avaliação do Risco de Extinção da Biodiversidade – SALVE.
Available in: https://salve.icmbio.gov.br DOI: 10.37002/salve.ficha.12151 – Accessed: 03 de fev. de 2024.
I disagree with the proposal to prioritize reassessment of both Rio Branco endemics (this species and Rio Branco Antbird) for two reasons. The first is that the only population data from the species’ ranges in Brazil (presented in Vale et al. 2007) are now twenty years old. Given the extent of habitat degradation and land use change in Roraima during this time, a resurvey of both species is badly needed. The population estimates we generated (SRCS 2021) are based on these old data, and we emphasized that caveat in our report. In the manuscript describing our findings (currently in review), we urge caution in using our data to justify reassessment of both species: the state of knowledge of their ranges in Brazil at the present time is insufficient, and the current threats are too grave.
To illustrate why updated population estimates from Brazil should precede reassessment by IUCN, consider that our surveys along the Guyana-Brazil border indicated that a range contraction of more than 50 river kilometers likely occurred on the Maú (Ireng) River between 2004-2021, despite relatively little forest loss during this interval. This makes me doubt the value of observed changes in forest cover as a proxy for population trajectories. Indeed, our own forest-cover-based estimates of population size reflect the most optimistic scenario. Remote imagery may suggest that suitable habitat still exists, but there is no guarantee that small, isolated populations will maintain themselves in a fragmented gallery forest landscape.
The other reason for my opposition to reassessment at the present time is more practical. Our findings of considerable numbers of both species along the Takutu-Ireng (Maú) corridor has generated local interest and spurred constructive dialogue between our organization (SRCS) and a number of stakeholders in Guyana, including the Protected Areas Commission, the Guyana Forestry Commission, the Ministry of Agriculture, local landowners, and tourism operators. Our proposed Ireng-Takutu KBA is being used as a focal point to develop an innovative community-based conservation zone to balance habitat preservation and local economic needs to help fulfill Guyana’s national conservation goals for 2030. Up to now, our progress has been encouraging, but we face a challenging path ahead. Guyana is moving forward rapidly with plans to develop large-scale agriculture in the Rupununi region, and the area along the Ireng River in particular is under intense development pressure. In fact, in the few years since we conducted our river surveys, several leaseholders have preemptively begun clearing land and building enormous drainage ditches that cut through the gallery forest in our study area. With the current El Niño conditions, this fire season has been especially intense. One of the forest blocks which we surveyed to generate our population estimates in 2021 has been burning for days and is still on fire as I type this. In short, we can ill afford the setback that we’re certain would result from having to tell our stakeholders that both species’ threat levels have been lowered.
As I wrote in my comments on Rio Branco Antbird, there is no compelling reason to reassess either of these species at the present time, and there is good reason to maintain the status quo for now, given the tenuous situation we face in Guyana as we work to garner support for protection of these species’ habitat. I urge the IUCN to postpone reassessment of both Rio Branco Antbird and Hoary-throated Spinetail for at least two years, pending finalization of protected area status for both species in Guyana and updated population data from Brazil.
(A further note: the range map for this species contains an error. On the Ireng River (Rio Maú), the species occurs up to ~35 km from the confluence with the Takutu. The map shows its range extending almost 100 km farther, and is generally congruent with the area we surveyed without finding any birds (see SRCS 2021). I suspect this is the source of the error.)
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 12 February 2024. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 12 February 2024, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
We are grateful for the contributions made during this latest round of discussions, and all relevant information has been incorporated into the updated Red List assessment for this species. Available data suggests that this species’ previous listing as Critically Endangered was unjustified and therefore cannot be upheld: there is no evidence that it meets the thresholds for listing as Critically Endangered under any criterion according to IUCN Red List Guidelines. We emphasise that Red List assessments are a measure of species’ global extinction risk following the best data available at the time of re-assessment and that this is a non-genuine change, i.e. there has been no genuine improvement in extinction risk. Based on available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2024 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 18 February 2024, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2024 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in December 2024, 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 in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments. We will analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a final decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 26 February 2024.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Hoary-throated Spinetail is recommended to be listed as Endangered under Criteria A3c+4c;C2a(i).
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2024.1 GTB Forum process. The final 2024 Red List categories will now be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.