Blue-throated Hillstar (Oreotrochilus cyanolaemus): Revise global status?

This entry was posted in Americas, South America and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Blue-throated Hillstar (Oreotrochilus cyanolaemus): Revise global status?

  1. Juan Freile says:

    Dear BirdLife fellows,

    I emailed you a report/proposal for assessing the current conservation status of Blue-throated Hillstar a few minutes ago, but post a similar comment here (without attachment, of course). We do agree with the category you preliminary assigned for this species, but our field data differ in some respects to the information you used.

    Regarding your specific questions above, you can find details in our proposal, but here I provide summarised responses:
    -We are still analysing our field data to better estimate population size. Yet, our figure differs from the one you have, with a total population (adults + immatures) of 180 individuals.
    -Population density is not similar throughout the species range; in fact, we think that the subpopulation in Fierro Urcu and Chinchilla, two localities mentioned in the species’ description, is marginal. We roughly estimated that these two sites might have a total population of 30 individuals, but this might be an overestimate.
    -Our data do not support considering that the species functions as a single subpopulation. There are considerable areas of unsuitable habitats in the intervening areas between each subpopulation we identified, where the species was not detected after intensive surveys. Habitat in these intervening areas is not likely functioning as connectivity corridors between subpopulations. This leads us to suspect that the species has three subpopulations (see details in the attached document).
    -Your range map is somewhat overestimating the EOO. We estimated a much smaller EOO by plotting all occurrence localities (field observation GPS coordinates + localities mentioned in the species description) and calculating the size of a minimum convex polygon that encompassed all occurrence localities (see map at the end of the attached document).

    Although our data does not support your listing as CR under criterion C2a(ii), it does support listing it as CR under criterion C2a(i).
    It nearly meets criterion B1ab(ii,iii,v)+2ab(ii,iii,v); C2a(ii); D.

    We are eager to further discuss our field data and estimations with you, if needed.

Leave a Reply

You have to agree to the comment policy.

All comments must follow the rules of usage.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.