4 thoughts on “Madagascar Crested Ibis (Lophotibis cristata)”
This appears appropriate to me. In personal experience, it is a species of denser forest, not occurring close to villages (presumably a result of a mix of hunting and its habitat requirements – so increased rates of habitat loss would be impacting it). I would suspect that the old population size still stands as an absolute maximum, but it is likely smaller than 10,000 now – but I don’t have any quantified data for that.
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 3 May 2024. We will now analyse and interpret all information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 3 May 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 13 May 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 October 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
The number of population of this species is less than 10,000 individuals at the moment. This species is only protected inside of Protected areas and regarding the forest degradation before 2005, the population was in decline. Hunting has been continued on the areas which not created as protected areas. So I suggest this species to be classified as Vulnerable.
This appears appropriate to me. In personal experience, it is a species of denser forest, not occurring close to villages (presumably a result of a mix of hunting and its habitat requirements – so increased rates of habitat loss would be impacting it). I would suspect that the old population size still stands as an absolute maximum, but it is likely smaller than 10,000 now – but I don’t have any quantified data for that.
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 3 May 2024. We will now analyse and interpret all information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 3 May 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 13 May 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 October 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
The number of population of this species is less than 10,000 individuals at the moment. This species is only protected inside of Protected areas and regarding the forest degradation before 2005, the population was in decline. Hunting has been continued on the areas which not created as protected areas. So I suggest this species to be classified as Vulnerable.