Archived 2017 topics: Blue Bustard (Eupodotis caerulescens): request for extra information

This discussion was first published as part of the 2016 Red List update. At the time a decision regarding its status was pended, but to enable potential reassessment of this species as part of the 2017 Red List update this post remained open and the date of posting was updated.

BirdLife species factsheet for Blue Bustard: http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/factsheet/22692000

Eupodotis caerulescens is near endemic to South Africa, also extending into Lesotho (Taylor et al. 2015). The population has not been accurately quantified, but the species is currently listed as Near Threatened as it is predicted to undergo a moderately rapid future population decline over three generations (31 years), owing to habitat loss to intensive agriculture. Lee et al. (in press) have suggested that this species may have experienced a range decline of 18% (core range decline of 16%), with an associated possible population size decrease, since 1992. In the 2015 Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland (Taylor et al. 2015) this species is listed as Least Concern because of a lack of evidence for a population or range decline. However, confirmation of the declines presented by Lee et al. (in press) would likely qualify the species to remain at Near Threatened, and accurate population measures could lead to uplisting under criterion C1.

Up to date information on population sizes is welcomed, as well as any comments on any possible declines that may be occurring in this species.

References:

Lee, A.; Barnard, P.; Altwegg, R. (in press) Estimating conservation metrics from atlas data: the case of southern African endemic birds. Bird Conservation International.

Taylor, M. R.; Peacock, F.; Wanless, R. M. 2015. The 2015 Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg.

 

This entry was posted in Africa, Archive, Bustards and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Archived 2017 topics: Blue Bustard (Eupodotis caerulescens): request for extra information

  1. Jessica Shaw says:

    I did some work in the Eastern Karoo conducting a broad scale census of large terrestrial birds to contrast with work conducted by David Allan in the late 1980s. Although I didn’t generate a population estimate, this seemed to indicate a decline of Blue Korhaan in this region. For more detail see:

    Shaw, J.M., Jenkins, A.R., Allan, D.G. and Ryan, P.G. 2016. Population size and trends of Ludwig’s Bustard Neotis ludwigii and other large terrestrial birds in the Karoo, South Africa. Bird Conservation International 26: 69-86.

    Hofmeyr, S . D. ( 2012) Impacts of environmental change on large terrestrial bird species in South Africa: insights from citizen science data. C ape Town: P hD Thesis, University of Cape Town – would also likely have useful info.

  2. James Westrip (BirdLife) says:

    Based on available information, our proposal for the 2016 Red List would be to pend the decision on this species and keep this discussion open until 2017, while leaving the current Red List category unchanged in the 2016 update.

    Final 2016 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in early December, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.

  3. James Westrip (BirdLife) says:

    Preliminary proposals

    Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2017 Red List would be to list:

    Blue Bustard as Near Threatened under criteria A3c; C1.

    There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline of 4 August, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.

    Please note that we will then only post final recommended categorisations on forum discussions where these differ from the initial proposal.

    The final 2017 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in early December, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.

Comments are closed.