4 thoughts on “Yellowish Imperial-pigeon (Ducula subflavescens)”
The Global Forest Loss analysis does indeed suggest that declines caused by forest loss are aligned with a Red List status of LC. However, we also need to factor-in habitat degradation from logging, which rarely shows in the GFW analysis, and note that the rate of forest loss is much higher in the last 10-15 years than the last 21 years.
As noted above, this species might be dependent on (near-)coastal forests and be declining at a faster rate than modeled by overall forest loss.
Overall, I support its re-categorisation as LC based on a slowing of forest loss in its range with the explicit caveat that there is a risk that the rate of habitat loss and degradation in the lowlands would justify its status as NT.
I stand by the results of Buchanan et al that its rate of decline exceeded 20% over a previous 3-generation period but the data presented above suggest declines of >30% and hence a retrospective categorisation as VU.
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 22 May 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 22 May 2026, when discussions will re-open.
Many thanks to G. Dutson for the helpful comment above. It is noted that remote sensing data are relatively insensitive to habitat degradation from logging which may also be affecting this species, and we will ensure this is captured in the updated assessment. Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 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 31 May 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 in November 2026, 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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 8 June 2026.
The Global Forest Loss analysis does indeed suggest that declines caused by forest loss are aligned with a Red List status of LC. However, we also need to factor-in habitat degradation from logging, which rarely shows in the GFW analysis, and note that the rate of forest loss is much higher in the last 10-15 years than the last 21 years.
As noted above, this species might be dependent on (near-)coastal forests and be declining at a faster rate than modeled by overall forest loss.
Overall, I support its re-categorisation as LC based on a slowing of forest loss in its range with the explicit caveat that there is a risk that the rate of habitat loss and degradation in the lowlands would justify its status as NT.
I stand by the results of Buchanan et al that its rate of decline exceeded 20% over a previous 3-generation period but the data presented above suggest declines of >30% and hence a retrospective categorisation as VU.
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 22 May 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 22 May 2026, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
Many thanks to G. Dutson for the helpful comment above. It is noted that remote sensing data are relatively insensitive to habitat degradation from logging which may also be affecting this species, and we will ensure this is captured in the updated assessment. Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 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 31 May 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 in November 2026, 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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 8 June 2026.