To suggest a reassessment of a species that is currently not under active discussion on the Forums, please use the Comment box below.
To suggest a reassessment of a species that is currently not under active discussion on the Forums, please use the Comment box below.
I would like the team to reassess the Critically endangered Yellow-breasted Bunting. Luckily, we have highly recorded the Yellow-breasted Bunting in Myanmar this year. Only a location in Ayeyarwady Delta recorded over 30,000 individuals. We BANCA also last month introduced a new site of Yellow-breasted Bunting for Myanmar in Bago region.
Audubon’s Shearwater sensu stricto needs to be re-examined after decades of observer noted declines on the water and no rigorous survey work.
Timor Green Pigeon – really need some focus on this bird. Currently EN, may well meet criteria for CE (prompted by John Pilgrim). There seem to be three West Timor records since 1986 (in Ebird at least), the last in 1998. The Rote records are reasonably well documented – from memory 3 or 4 recs of 1-2 individuals only. Timor-Leste is a stronghold, but even there they are highly local in the far east. We’ve had relatively good spread of lowland surveys on the south coast and north coast of Timor-Leste – but with no records outside Lautem. There are almost no records outside Lautem District (c. 2000 km2 of 31,000 km2 island). Recent records near Dili are dubious – possible, and unlikely, including also records from Atauro (where they are absent). On ebird most recent records will actually be mis-identified female Rose-crowned Fruit Doves.
A focus for hunters – and easy to wipe out locally at least, losing populations over decades means there may well be very few left.
Campylorhynchus yucatanicus (Aves, Trogloditydae) is an endemic bird of the northern coast of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico, with a restricted distribution to a narrow strip of habitat between the states of Campeche and Yucatan. We propose that C. yucatanicus be moved from the IUCN-BirdLife International category of “Near Threatened” to “Critically Endangered,” as suggested by the official Mexican criteria of the Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources of Mexico [1]. We base our criteria on the results of our research on the species’ distribution, habitat, and genetic connectivity, as well as ongoing anthropogenic pressures on the species’ habitat. Geographic distribution and habitat quality are key criteria for assessing extinction risk. The potential distribution model shows an area of approximately 2,711 km2, which is 2% of the total area of the Yucatán Peninsula distribution. Within this area, only 10% belongs to core conservation areas, with land use restrictions and relatively effective protection [2]. This species is a habitat specialist and is restricted to a climatic niche [3]. We believe that C. yucatanicus should be classified as Critically Endangered considering Criterion B, which corresponds to the size of the estimated distribution, which is less than 5,000 km2 [4]. In addition, the habitat is fragmented and disconnected [2], and the threats are the same in almost all its distribution (Criterion B-1-a). According to our field observations and the experience of local observers, there has been a decline in the area occupied by the species (Criterion B-1-c), as there are historical records of its presence in places where it is no longer found. For example, in places that are now within human settlements.
To identify anthropogenic barriers to the connectivity of C. yucatanicus, we examined the relationship between genetic variability of the species population at each sampled site and landscape structure using regression models, in addition to the relationship between genetic distance and landscape resistance [5]. Seven nuclear microsatellite loci were used as genetic markers, resulting in four genetic populations of C. yucatanicus highlighted by the clustering method implemented in the Geneland program. Human settlement and availability of suitable habitat were significantly related to genetic distance, suggesting limited connectivity between sites due to ongoing land use changes. Our DIYABC RF results also indicate that C. yucatanicus has recently experienced a population decline, likely related to Holocene climate and vegetation changes [5]. We propose to change the IUCN Threatened category of C. yucatanicus as we found a significant loss of genetic variability in addition to restricted distribution, small population size, habitat degradation, and loss of connectivity.
The coastal dune vegetation complex is being destroyed along 25 km on both sides of the city of Progreso (an important regional commercial port) due to the growth of coastal urban areas, the construction of roads, cargo areas and urbanization for semi-intensive tourism, and the installation of several wind farms [6]. Our field work covered a large part of the known distribution of the species, and we verified the construction of houses where the coastal scrub previously occurred in the Yucatan Peninsula, including within protected natural areas. For this reason, the habitat of C. yucatanicus is being destroyed mainly outside the protected areas (where most of its potential distribution is located) due to the rapidly increasing demand for recreational space during the summer by tourism, residents of the city of Mérida and surrounding areas. In addition, organic pollution has increased [7,8] due to the lack of sewerage and wastewater treatment systems, seriously threatening the health of ecosystems. In addition, the water quality of the coastal lagoons and the adjacent marine zone has been degraded by the discharge of urban and industrial wastewater [7].
(1) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010. Protección Ambiental. Especies Nativas de México de Flora y Fauna Silvestres. Categorías de Riesgo y Especificaciones Para su Inclusión, Exclusión o Cambio. Lista de Especies en Riesgo; SEMARNAT [Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales]: Ciudad de México, México, 2010.
(2) Serrano-Rodríguez, A.; Escalona-Segura, G.; Plasencia Vázquez, A.H.; Iñigo Elias, E.E.; Ruiz-Montoya, L. Distribución potencial y conectividad del paisaje: Criterios para reevaluar el grado de amenaza de Campylorhynchus yucatanicus (Aves: Troglodytidae). Revista de Biología Tropical (Int. J. Trop. Biol.) 2017, 65, 1554–1568.
(3) Serrano-Rodríguez, A., Escalona-Segura, G., Elias, E. E. I., Rodríguez, A. S., Uriostegui, J. M., & De Oca Aguilar, A. C. M. (2018). Potential distribution and climatic niche of seven species of Campylorhynchus (Aves, Troglodytidae): conservation implications for C. yucatanicus. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, 130(1), 13–22.
(4) UICN. (2012). Categorías y Criterios de la Lista Roja de la UICN: Versión 3.1. (2nd edition). Gland, Suiza y Cambridge, Reino Unido: UICN.
(5) Serrano-Rodríguez, A., Escalona-Segura, G., Rodríguez, A. G., Machkour-M’Rabet, S., Ruiz-Montoya, L., Elias, E. E. I., Plasencia-Vázquez, A. H. (2022) Effects of Anthropogenic Habitat Fragmentation on the Genetic Connectivity of the Threatened and Endemic Campylorhynchus yucatanicus (Aves, Trogloditydae) in the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico. Diversity, 14, 1108. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14121108
(6) Herrera, J. A., Comín, F. A., & Capurro, L. (2004). Los usos y abusos de la zona costera en la Península de Yucatán. In E. Rivera, G. J. Villalobos, I. Azuz& F. Rosado (Eds.), El Manejo Costero en México (pp. 387-396). Quintana Roo, México: Universidad Autónoma de Campeche, SEMARNAT, CETYS-Universidad, Universidad de Quintana Roo.
(7) Herrera, J. A, Medina, I., Arandal, N., Zaldivar, J. A.,Ramírez, J., & Trejo, J. (2002). Trophic status in coastal waters of the Yucatán Península (SE, México) using water quality indicators. In C. A. Brebbia (Ed.), Coastal Environment. Environmental Problems inCoastal Regions IV (pp. 351-359). Southampton, England: Wessex Institute of Technology.
(8) Euán, J. & Scout, W. G. (2002). Promoting integrated coastal management in the Yucatan Peninsula, México. Journal of Policy Studies, 12, 1-16.
We would like to propose the Mascarene Swiftlet (Aerodramus francicus) for reassessment. We recently performed a conservation status assessment according to the IUCN red list guidelines. For this purpose, we conducted the first quantitative assessment of population size and distribution through nest surveys on the islands of Mauritius and Réunion. We calculated a population size of 10,100– 10,700 individuals for Mauritius, and 39,600–53,500 individuals for Réunion. Considering the population size data, inferred distributions, and numerous conservation concerns, we elected for an updated conservation status from Near Threatened to Endangered. Importantly, we also found strong evidence that the two island populations represent two separate subspecies. For further information please see Wijnhorst R.E, Janoo I, Ferret P, Tatayah V, Probst J-M, Florens F.B.V, Warren B.H. (2024). Conservation status of the Mascarene swiftlet: nest counts and taxonomic implications of genetic data. Ardea 112(1). doi:10.5253/arde.2023.a9.
marabou stork once a common breeder is in further decline as a breeding sp in The Gambia post Gulah & Barlow 2022.
northern ground hornbill widespread & frequent in The Gambia (an apparent stronghold of the past) is no longer present at many historic sites & areas
We would like to propose reassessing the Pampas Meadowlark (Leistes defilippii). We recently conducted a quantitative assessment of population size and distribution across the species’ range. We estimated a population size of less than 2,000 individuals. Considering the current population size and distribution data, the Pampas Meadowlark would have experienced an overall reduction of 80% across the past ten years. We consider an update of its conservation status is urgently needed.
I would like to reassess the statute of the Peruvian Plantcutter (Phytotoma raimondii) to Critically Endangered. We found in 2015 little presence of the species within its distribution area. From Tumbes to Ancash only six sites have been identified with populations of more than 10 individuals and only three sites where the species is known to reproduce. Results indicate that the current total population is less than 500 individuals. These sites where the species is found contain floral species typical of the Peruvian desert scrub, several of which are threatened. Sites are very small (between 5 to 150 ha), highly fragmented and are under immediate threat of destruction due to agriculture, urban expansion, illegal logging, livestock foraging, and the introduction of exotic plant species like Tamarix. The full paper is here https://revistasinvestigacion.unmsm.edu.pe/index.php/rpb/article/view/11355/10175
Forty-eight sites were visited by the authors and three sites were referred by other researchers or by personal communications. Of the 48 sites visited, in 27 we did not find the species and in 21 we did. Of the 21 sites where the bird was found, 11 are new sites not mentioned by Flanagan et al. (2009). Of the 21 sites where the bird was recorded, a population of more than ten individuals was found in only six. The sites with the largest populations were: Talara (Piura), the Bosque de Pomac Historic Sanctuary (Lambayeque), La Arenita (La Libertad) and El Gramadal (Ancash). We know that they breed in El Alto (Emil Rivas M. pers. comm.), in Quebrada Acholado (Liñán 2013) both in Talara, in S.H. Bosque de Pómac (Edwin Sánchez pers. comm., Nolazco & Roper 2014) and in El Gramadal in Ancash (Rosina & Romo 2010, 2012). Also, other publications indicate the presence of non-active nests in Virú (Pollack et al. 2009) and Talara (Abramonte 2007).
Many of the sites mentioned by Flanagan et al (2009) no longer exist because they have been transformed into crops, settlements or the habitat was destroyed by logging, grazing, change of land use or others. This we have personally seen and/or verified with Google Earth.
Table 1 lists the places mentioned by Flanagan et al. (2009), those referred by other researchers, those found by the authors where the Peruvian plantcutter have been recorded and also the places visited with apparent habitat where the bird was not found. The current status of these sites is also mentioned.
In total, of the 75 sites where the existence of the Peruvian Plantcutter has been mentioned at some point (Flanagan et al. 2009 and this work), only 30 are currently known to exist. These sites are very small (between 5 and 150 ha) and are surrounded by crops, settlements or other threats. Considering the maximum numbers for each site, the population of the “Peruvian plantcutter” would not reach 500 individuals. We do not rule out the existence of a few more sites, all very small, isolated and under serious threat of destruction. The population as of 2014 – according to the estimate made by Flanagan et al. (2009), the population of Peruvian plantcutters at that time would have been 1000 individuals, with half of it in Piura. Currently, according to our observations at the sites we visited, the total population of the Peruvian plantcutter is less than 500 individuals. Not only the number of individuals has been reduced quite a lot but also the number of sites (53%) in the last 7 years (2007 – 2014). Serious danger to the population due to anthropogenic threats: It is clear that the population of the Peruvian plantcutter is in serious danger of extinction due to habitat loss caused by agricultural and urban expansion, logging, overgrazing, especially by goats, which prevents the growth of key species for the bird.
One of the methods for estimating the population of a species is to extrapolate its density measured in a given area to what appears to be the habitat of the species. In the case of the Peruvian plantcutter, it would seem at first glance that its habitat is homogeneous, however the bird chooses some very specific places with particula plants, within it, as has already been mentioned by several authors (Stotz et al. 1996, Flanagan & More 2003, Romo & Rosina 2012). Because of this, an extrapolation to calculate the population in a small area may not result in a large error in the calculation, but the larger the area, the larger the error becomes. This is why it is not adequate to calculate the population of this species based on extrapolations in the larger sites where it is found.
References
-Abramonte C. 2007. Conducta reproductiva y dieta de Phytotoma raimondii (Taczanowski, 1883) “Cortarrama peruana” en el bosque seco de Talara. Tesis para optar el título profesional de biólogo. Universidad Nacional de Piura.
-Flanagan J., G. Engblom, I. Franke, T. Valqui & F. Angulo. 2009. Dis- tribution of the Peruvian Plantcutter Phytotoma raimondii (Passeriformes: Cotingidae). Revista peruana de biologia 16(2): 175-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.15381/rpb.v16i2.202
-Flanagan J. & A. More. 2003. Ecología y conservación de la Corta- rrama Peruana Phytotoma raimondii en el bosque seco ralo del noroeste de Perú. En: Memorias del Primer Congreso Internacional Bosques Secos (6-9 Nov. 2003). Universidad de Piura, Perú.
-Liñán E. 2013. Selección de recursos alimentarios de Phytotoma rai- mondii “cortarrama peruana” en el distrito Pariñas, provincia de Talara. Tesis para optar el título profesional de biólogo. Universidad Nacional de Piura.
-Nolazco, S. & J. Roper. 2014. The challenge of estimating population trends in the endangered Peruvian Plantcutter (Phytotoma raimondii) and implications for conservation. Ornitologia Netropical 25(2):125-134. -Pollack L., W. Zelada, C.A. Medina & J.A. Tiravanti. 2009. Registro de Phytotoma raimondii “Cortarrama peruana” en Virú, departamento La Libertad, Perú, 2009. Arnaldoa 16(1):125-128.
-Romo M. & M. Rosina. 2012. Composición florística del hábitat de la cortarrama peruana(Phytotoma raimondii). Rev. per. biol. 19(3):261-266.
-Rosina M. & M. Romo. 2010. Hallazgo de dos nidos activos de Phyto- toma raimondii, Taczanowski, 1883, Peruvian Plantcutter. Revista peruana de biologia 17(2):257-259. http://dx.doi. org/10.15381/rpb.v17i2.38
-Rosina M. & M. Romo. 2012. Reproducción y alimentación de Phytotoma raimondii,cortarrama peruana en El Gramadal, Ancash. Revista peruana de biologia 19(2):167-173. http:// dx.doi.org/10.15381/rpb.v19i2.836