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 2 February 2026. 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 2 February 2026, when discussions will re-open.
The resumption of phosphate mining on Makatea remains a highly plausible threat. However, available information suggests this would be unlikely to drive the species to Critically Endangered or Extinct in a very short time period (typically within one or two generations), and it is therefore not considered to meet the requirements for listing as Vulnerable under Criterion D2 currently. The species persisted historically in the presence of mining activity, albeit at lower numbers. Although it may have qualified as Critically Endangered C2a(ii) in the past (fewer than 250 mature individuals and an ongoing decline), declines are unlikely to have been rapid given the length of time this threat was operating (>50 years). The species would therefore not be expected to be driven rapidly to Critically Endangered following any future resumption of mining, but further input on this is sought.
There is limited information on historical population size, but it is likely that the species qualified as Critically Endangered or Endangered prior to the cessation of mining, until the species’ population trend started to increase and its size exceeded 250 mature individuals. This represents a genuine improvement in the species’ extinction risk. Although there has been no more recent estimate of the population size since 2009, the population trend is suspected to be stable in the absence of evidence for declines or substantial current threats. Should phosphate mining resume and lead to population declines, the species would likely again qualify as Endangered C2a(ii). In such a case, its Red List status would be revised accordingly, and this would be considered a genuine deterioration in extinction risk.
Given the small population size (estimated at 500-1,500 mature individuals), the species continues to face a high risk of extinction and currently meets the thresholds for listing as Vulnerable D1.
Based on available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 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 8 February 2026, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2026 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
If the specific question from the red list team was “Is there a more recent estimation of the population size” and this has proven not to be the case, is then the proposed change in red list status not automatically premature? There is in the red list team preliminary proposal reply, also a suggestion to reassess should new declines be detected but it is plausible that this will be bound to assessment cycles and workload. For a species which is lost from the vast majority of its historical range I believe listing changes must be more evidence based. French Polynesia is under resourced with high number of terrestrial species severely threatened with extinction and many regions not easily accessible. The lack of actual recent population assessments alone justifies holding this assessment until these are available. Further there is a complete lack of assessment of the long-term food availability for a large Ducula on Makatea. Invasive plants and domestic livestock are serious cause for concern for the rejuvenation of native fruit-trees and forest on several islands and must be assessed in addition to the potential threats of invasive predators and introduced diseases.
All the best
Simon Bruslund
Red List focal point IUCN SSC Pigeon and Dove Specialist Group
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 16 February 2026.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
We thank all contributors for their comments.
A listing under C2a(ii) requires an observed, estimated, projected or inferred continuing decline in mature individuals, for which there is currently no evidence. The species was previously impacted by habitat loss and hunting during the period of active phosphate mining; however, the population increased following the cessation of mining and the associated reduction in human pressure. It is therefore likely that it has not met the thresholds for listing as Critically Endangered or Endangered since this decline ceased and the population size exceeded 250 mature individuals.
Although no more recent population estimates are available, citizen science data suggest that counts are higher than in the previous decade (eBird 2026). Concerns regarding potential future threats, including the possible resumption of mining, invasive species, livestock impacts or disease, are acknowledged. However, there is currently no evidence that such factors are presently driving a continuing decline in the population, and the requirements for listing under Criterion C are therefore not met.
Species for which there is evidence of genuine deterioration in extinction risk are prioritised for reassessment. Should phosphate mining resume or new threats emerge leading to documented declines, the species would be reassessed in accordance with IUCN guidelines.
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Polynesian Imperial-pigeon is recommended to be listed as Vulnerable under Criterion D1.
Many thanks to everyone who contributed to the 2026.1 GTB Forum process. The final Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Dear forum,
Very recently, (2023 – see link above), the potential of Makatea to extract its mining was evaluated, so criteria D to me is still present.
https://reporterre.net/En-Polynesie-une-mine-de-phosphate-ravive-le-traumatisme-de-Makatea
The Chatham Rock Phosphate seems still very active (see below), so I consider this threat as still high for the future of the species
https://www.rockphosphate.co.nz/news/2025/12/22/chatham-confirms-proposed-sale-of-avenir-makatea-pty
There are no current survey of the species. Before changing the status of the species, it may be better to have current data?
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 2 February 2026. 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 2 February 2026, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
We thank all contributors for their comments.
The resumption of phosphate mining on Makatea remains a highly plausible threat. However, available information suggests this would be unlikely to drive the species to Critically Endangered or Extinct in a very short time period (typically within one or two generations), and it is therefore not considered to meet the requirements for listing as Vulnerable under Criterion D2 currently. The species persisted historically in the presence of mining activity, albeit at lower numbers. Although it may have qualified as Critically Endangered C2a(ii) in the past (fewer than 250 mature individuals and an ongoing decline), declines are unlikely to have been rapid given the length of time this threat was operating (>50 years). The species would therefore not be expected to be driven rapidly to Critically Endangered following any future resumption of mining, but further input on this is sought.
There is limited information on historical population size, but it is likely that the species qualified as Critically Endangered or Endangered prior to the cessation of mining, until the species’ population trend started to increase and its size exceeded 250 mature individuals. This represents a genuine improvement in the species’ extinction risk. Although there has been no more recent estimate of the population size since 2009, the population trend is suspected to be stable in the absence of evidence for declines or substantial current threats. Should phosphate mining resume and lead to population declines, the species would likely again qualify as Endangered C2a(ii). In such a case, its Red List status would be revised accordingly, and this would be considered a genuine deterioration in extinction risk.
Given the small population size (estimated at 500-1,500 mature individuals), the species continues to face a high risk of extinction and currently meets the thresholds for listing as Vulnerable D1.
Based on available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 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 8 February 2026, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2026 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
If the specific question from the red list team was “Is there a more recent estimation of the population size” and this has proven not to be the case, is then the proposed change in red list status not automatically premature? There is in the red list team preliminary proposal reply, also a suggestion to reassess should new declines be detected but it is plausible that this will be bound to assessment cycles and workload. For a species which is lost from the vast majority of its historical range I believe listing changes must be more evidence based. French Polynesia is under resourced with high number of terrestrial species severely threatened with extinction and many regions not easily accessible. The lack of actual recent population assessments alone justifies holding this assessment until these are available. Further there is a complete lack of assessment of the long-term food availability for a large Ducula on Makatea. Invasive plants and domestic livestock are serious cause for concern for the rejuvenation of native fruit-trees and forest on several islands and must be assessed in addition to the potential threats of invasive predators and introduced diseases.
All the best
Simon Bruslund
Red List focal point IUCN SSC Pigeon and Dove Specialist Group
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 16 February 2026.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
We thank all contributors for their comments.
A listing under C2a(ii) requires an observed, estimated, projected or inferred continuing decline in mature individuals, for which there is currently no evidence. The species was previously impacted by habitat loss and hunting during the period of active phosphate mining; however, the population increased following the cessation of mining and the associated reduction in human pressure. It is therefore likely that it has not met the thresholds for listing as Critically Endangered or Endangered since this decline ceased and the population size exceeded 250 mature individuals.
Although no more recent population estimates are available, citizen science data suggest that counts are higher than in the previous decade (eBird 2026). Concerns regarding potential future threats, including the possible resumption of mining, invasive species, livestock impacts or disease, are acknowledged. However, there is currently no evidence that such factors are presently driving a continuing decline in the population, and the requirements for listing under Criterion C are therefore not met.
Species for which there is evidence of genuine deterioration in extinction risk are prioritised for reassessment. Should phosphate mining resume or new threats emerge leading to documented declines, the species would be reassessed in accordance with IUCN guidelines.
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Polynesian Imperial-pigeon is recommended to be listed as Vulnerable under Criterion D1.
Many thanks to everyone who contributed to the 2026.1 GTB Forum process. The final Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.