6 thoughts on “Javan Yellownape (Chrysophlegma mentale)”
The population is indeed likely >10.000 individuals. The mountains and forest fragments with eBird records on Java and Bali add up to a forested area of 4328 km2. For the closely related Checker-throated Woodpecker in West Borneo, Lammertink (2007) found a mean density of 2.9 ind /km2. If the density is the same in Java, that works out at 12.551 individuals just in the areas with eBird records. Adding areas without current records but with suitable habitat, the population should exceed that minimum estimate. The bird market capturing of this species is not targeted at it and is unlikely to have a significant impact on its population.
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 25 April 2025. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List category on this page on 25 April 2025, when discussions will re-open.
We thank M. Lammertink for this comment – following this the species’ population size has been updated to 10,000-20,000 mature individuals. This will be incorporated into the updated species factsheet. Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2025 Red List would be to adopt the proposed classification outlined in the initial forum discussion.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 4 May 2025, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2025 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2025, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Agree with reclassification to LC. still rather common in higher mountain, where habitat destruction is rather minimal (Higginbottom et al 2015). not targeted by bird trade, by catch were observed in small number in bird market.
Based on available data, I estimate that the population size of this species exceeds 10,000 individuals. Our survey (Marsden et al., 2023) found the species to be relatively common in suitable habitats. It was recorded on 8 out of 12 mountains surveyed in western Java using line transect methods. When including incidental records (outside of systematic transects), the species was detected on 10 out of 12 mountains, suggesting a broader distribution than indicated by transect data alone.
The species is currently not a primary target for bird trapping. However, it may occasionally be captured opportunistically when caught in traps intended for other species, as hunters tend to be opportunistic in nature. This may explain occasional sightings of individuals in local bird markets. Nevertheless, hunting pressure is considered to be relatively low and not currently a major threat to the species.
Given these observations, I support the proposed reclassification of the species to the Least Concern category.
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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 12 May 2025.
The population is indeed likely >10.000 individuals. The mountains and forest fragments with eBird records on Java and Bali add up to a forested area of 4328 km2. For the closely related Checker-throated Woodpecker in West Borneo, Lammertink (2007) found a mean density of 2.9 ind /km2. If the density is the same in Java, that works out at 12.551 individuals just in the areas with eBird records. Adding areas without current records but with suitable habitat, the population should exceed that minimum estimate. The bird market capturing of this species is not targeted at it and is unlikely to have a significant impact on its population.
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 25 April 2025. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List category on this page on 25 April 2025, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
We thank M. Lammertink for this comment – following this the species’ population size has been updated to 10,000-20,000 mature individuals. This will be incorporated into the updated species factsheet. Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2025 Red List would be to adopt the proposed classification outlined in the initial forum discussion.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 4 May 2025, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2025 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2025, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Agree with reclassification to LC. still rather common in higher mountain, where habitat destruction is rather minimal (Higginbottom et al 2015). not targeted by bird trade, by catch were observed in small number in bird market.
Based on available data, I estimate that the population size of this species exceeds 10,000 individuals. Our survey (Marsden et al., 2023) found the species to be relatively common in suitable habitats. It was recorded on 8 out of 12 mountains surveyed in western Java using line transect methods. When including incidental records (outside of systematic transects), the species was detected on 10 out of 12 mountains, suggesting a broader distribution than indicated by transect data alone.
The species is currently not a primary target for bird trapping. However, it may occasionally be captured opportunistically when caught in traps intended for other species, as hunters tend to be opportunistic in nature. This may explain occasional sightings of individuals in local bird markets. Nevertheless, hunting pressure is considered to be relatively low and not currently a major threat to the species.
Given these observations, I support the proposed reclassification of the species to the Least Concern category.
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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 12 May 2025.