6 thoughts on “Rufous-necked Foliage-gleaner (Syndactyla ruficollis)”
The comment is not specifically directed towards Syndactyla ruficollis, but to all species that are under some habitat loss pressure. Even if habitat loss goes at slow pace, it is still habitat loss, and it advances with mostly no options of reverting it. The only species that should be set as Low Concern are the ones spread world wide, without habitat specificity, that can handle habitat changes.
All species specialized in limited-area ecosystem types which endure habitat loss are at some level of endangerment.
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.
Based on available information, 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. Rufous-necked Foliage-gleaner is recommended to be listed as Least Concern.
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2024.1 GTB Forum process. A revised map received from Manuel Sanchez Nivecela is similar to the revision presented in this proposal but extends the distribution towards Loja, connects the two separated range parts (=subspecies) and extends the range further south. These changes will be made. However, there is no justification for the assessment that the species is restricted to a very small Area of Occupancy as also included in that submission. Basing AOO solely on a grid around validated georeferenced records assumes absence from the large proportion of unsurveyed habitat identified as suitable and potentially occupied. There is no a priori reason to assume absence in this case. The assessment as Vulnerable on the National Red List of Ecuador may be justified on the small extent of the global range occurring in that country but at the global scale the species does not approach the thresholds for listing as threatened under Criterion B. While the ongoing unchecked progression of habitat loss, even if slow, will endanger all species that depend on a limited or restricted habitat type, the application of the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria allows the assessment of the relative extinction risk of species. Those that do not currently meet thresholds for listing as threatened are of lower immediate concern than those that do. If impacts continue unmitigated these species will cross these thresholds to be then recognised as at a higher risk of extinction. Because birds are reassessed regularly, these changes of situation will be reflected on the Red List in the future.
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.
The comment is not specifically directed towards Syndactyla ruficollis, but to all species that are under some habitat loss pressure. Even if habitat loss goes at slow pace, it is still habitat loss, and it advances with mostly no options of reverting it. The only species that should be set as Low Concern are the ones spread world wide, without habitat specificity, that can handle habitat changes.
All species specialized in limited-area ecosystem types which endure habitat loss are at some level of endangerment.
A mail was sent to the red list team. +Assessment
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
Based on available information, 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. Rufous-necked Foliage-gleaner is recommended to be listed as Least Concern.
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2024.1 GTB Forum process. A revised map received from Manuel Sanchez Nivecela is similar to the revision presented in this proposal but extends the distribution towards Loja, connects the two separated range parts (=subspecies) and extends the range further south. These changes will be made. However, there is no justification for the assessment that the species is restricted to a very small Area of Occupancy as also included in that submission. Basing AOO solely on a grid around validated georeferenced records assumes absence from the large proportion of unsurveyed habitat identified as suitable and potentially occupied. There is no a priori reason to assume absence in this case. The assessment as Vulnerable on the National Red List of Ecuador may be justified on the small extent of the global range occurring in that country but at the global scale the species does not approach the thresholds for listing as threatened under Criterion B. While the ongoing unchecked progression of habitat loss, even if slow, will endanger all species that depend on a limited or restricted habitat type, the application of the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria allows the assessment of the relative extinction risk of species. Those that do not currently meet thresholds for listing as threatened are of lower immediate concern than those that do. If impacts continue unmitigated these species will cross these thresholds to be then recognised as at a higher risk of extinction. Because birds are reassessed regularly, these changes of situation will be reflected on the Red List in the future.
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.