Review of Annex B / Appendix III Species

Home , Crax, Great curassow, Morrocoy National Park, Pauxi, Plain chachalaca, Semnornis

Review of Annex B / Appendix III species

(Version edited for public release)

A report for the European Commission Directorate General E - Environment ENV.E.2. – Environmental Agreements and Trade

by the

United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre

November, 2008

CITATION UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre UNEP-WCMC (2008). Review of Annex B / Appendix 219 Huntingdon Road III species. A Report to the European Commission. Cambridge UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. CB3 0DL United Kingdom PREPARED FOR Tel: +44 (0) 1223 277314 The European Commission, Brussels, Belgium Fax: +44 (0) 1223 277136 Email: [email protected] Website: www.unep-wcmc.org DISCLAIMER

The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect ABOUT UNEP-WORLD CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE the views or policies of UNEP or contributory organisations. The designations employed and the The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre presentations do not imply the expressions of any (UNEP-WCMC), based in Cambridge, UK, is the opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP, the specialist biodiversity information and assessment European Commission or contributory organisations centre of the United Nations Environment concerning the legal status of any country, territory, Programme (UNEP), run cooperatively with WCMC city or area or its authority, or concerning the 2000, a UK charity. The Centre's mission is to delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. evaluate and highlight the many values of biodiversity and put authoritative biodiversity knowledge at the centre of decision-making. © Copyright: 2008, European Commission Through the analysis and synthesis of global biodiversity knowledge the Centre provides authoritative, strategic and timely information for conventions, countries and organisations to use in the development and implementation of their policies and decisions.

The UNEP-WCMC provides objective and scientifically rigorous procedures and services. These include ecosystem assessments, support for the implementation of environmental agreements, global and regional biodiversity information, research on threats and impacts, and the development of future scenarios.

Table of contents

INTRODUCTION ...... 4 SPECIES: Odobenus rosmarus ...... 5 SPECIES: Crax daubentoni ...... 24 SPECIES: Crax globulosa ...... 27 SPECIES: Crax rubra ...... 30 SPECIES: Ortalis vetula ...... 37 SPECIES: Pauxi pauxi ...... 41 SPECIES: Penelopina nigra ...... 45 SPECIES: Arborophila campbelli ...... 48 SPECIES: Arborophila charltonii ...... 50 SPECIES: Lophura erythrophthalma ...... 53 SPECIES: Lophura ignita ...... 59 SPECIES: Semnornis ramphastinus ...... 65 SPECIES: Baillonius bailloni ...... 68 SPECIES: Pteroglossus castanotis ...... 72 SPECIES: Ramphastos dicolorus ...... 77 SPECIES: Selenidera maculirostris ...... 81

INTRODUCTION A total of 16 species listed in CITES Appendix III are listed in Annex B of Council Regulation 338/97. UNEP-WCMC was requested to prepare a review of those species to inform SRG discussions on whether listing in Annex B still appears to be appropriate. This report therefore presents status overviews and trade data for each of the 16 Annex B /Appendix III species. The criteria for listing in the Annexes B and C are specified in Article 3 of the regulation as follows: Annex B shall contain: (a) the species listed in Appendix II to the Convention, other than those listed in Annex A, for which the Member States have not entered a reservation; (b) the species listed in Appendix I to the Convention for which a reservation has been entered; (c) any other species not listed in Appendices I or II to the Convention: (i) which is subject to levels of international trade that might not be compatible: — with its survival or with the survival of populations in certain countries, or — with the maintenance of the total population at a level consistent with the role of the species in the ecosystems in which it occurs: or (ii) whose listing in the Annex for reasons of similarity in appearance to other species listed in Annex A or Annex B, is essential in order to ensure the effectiveness of controls on trade in specimens of such species; (d) species in relation to which it has been established that the introduction of live specimens into the natural habitat of the Community would constitute an ecological threat to wild species of fauna and flora indigenous to the Community. Annex C shall contain: (a) the species listed in Appendix III to the Convention, other than those listed in Annexes A or B, for which the Member States have not entered a reservation; (b) the species listed in Appendix II to the Convention for which a reservation has been entered. For the purposes of this report, the 27 countries that are currently members of the European Union have been considered as part of the EU (EU-27). This may include countries that have not been EU Member States for the duration of the period under consideration in the trade tables of this report.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

MAMMALIA: ODOBENIDAE

SPECIES: Odobenus rosmarus

SYNONYMS: Rosmarus rosmarus

COMMON NAMES: Hvalros (Danish), Walrus (Dutch), Walrus (English), Morsk (Estonian), Mursu (Finnish), Morse (French), Walroß (German), Rozmár (Hungarian), Rostungur (Icelandic), Tricheco (Italian), Hvalross (Norwegian), Mors (Polish), Morsa (Portuguese), Morsa (Spanish), Valross (Swedish), Mors (Turkish) RANGE STATES: Belgium(v), Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greenland, Iceland(v), Ireland, Japan, Netherlands(v), Norway (including Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands), Russian Federation, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland(v), United States of America IUCN RED LIST: Data Deficient PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: Current Article 4.6 (b) suspensions in place for wild specimens from Greenland formed on 03/09/2008. Previous negative opinion for wild specimens from Greenland formed on 26/09/2006. APPENDIX III LISTING: Canada (16/11/1975)

TRADE PATTERNS: No export quotas have been published for this species. For the purposes of this analysis, only the main items in trade were selected. Items described as bodies, claws, derivatives, garments, genitalia, hair, leather products, live animals, meat, skeletons, scientific specimens, tails, skins, skin pieces or unspecified were omitted. All records were assumed to be of wild-caught material and only records where the purpose of the transaction was personal or commercial were considered as the number of records with other purpose codes (B, E, H, L, M, Q, S) was minimal. The main commercial trade comprised tusks, bones and teeth from the United States (41,631 and 1,972 kg tusks; 18,715 and 4,493 kg bones; 435 kg teeth), mostly to Indonesia where it is carved and re-exported back to the United States. Export of tusks, bones and teeth from other countries was comparatively small: 621 tusks, 174 bones and 204 teeth from Canada; 268 tusks, 173 bones and 387 teeth from Greenland; and 38 tusks from the Russian Federation. Greenland and Canada also reported the export of 218 and 85 skulls, respectively. In addition, an important proportion of the trade was in carvings of bone or tusk, mainly tourist souvenirs, exported from Greenland (5,253) and the United States (725 and 2,063 kg) with smaller quantities from the Russian Federation (475) and Canada (265). Details are shown in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1. Direct exports of main items of Odobenus rosmarus to EU-27, 1997-2006. Only transactions with purpose ‘P’ or ‘T’ selected. Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

Austria Canada bones - T Importer 12 8 20

Exporter 6 8 14

skulls - P Importer 1 1

Exporter

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

T Importer 3 3

Exporter 3 3

Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 2 3 5

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

teeth - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Belgium Canada bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

skulls - P Importer 2 1 1 1 5

Exporter 2 1 1 1 3 1 9

T Importer 1 1 2

Exporter 1 1 2

tusks - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 2 1 3

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

T Importer 2 2

Exporter

Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

carvings - P Importer

Exporter 2 5 3 4 5 19

Cyprus Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Czech Republic Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 2 1 3

Denmark Canada skulls - P Importer

Exporter 3 3

tusks - P Importer 4 4

Exporter 5 5

Greenland bones - P Importer 4 1 1 9 5 2 2 24

Exporter 10 1 8 8 16 16 17 20 13 5 114

T Importer 1 1 2 1 5

Exporter 1 1 1 3

carvings - P Importer 128 10 19 19 6 7 19 25 94 72 399

Exporter 180 36 138 108 172 297 293 310 666 849 3049

T Importer 87 206 62 160 109 23 279 31 957

Exporter 78 203 191 12 5 66 2 204 30 791

skulls - P Importer 9 1 1 1 4 4 4 3 6 33

Exporter 21 9 16 1 7 24 13 34 20 17 162

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

T Importer 1 3 1 5 2 2 14

Exporter 1 3 1 2 5 1 1 14

teeth - P Importer 2 2 1 2 6 7 2 11 33

Exporter 61 27 41 14 12 23 59 63 22 322

T Importer 2 12 27 41

Exporter 2 1 1 1 5

tusks - P Importer 28 5 2 1 5 5 3 1 1 3 54

Exporter 1 3 2 45 21 21 21 4 8 1 127

T Importer 11 2 54 1 2 2 72

Exporter 34 31 1 66

United States skulls - P Importer 1 1

Exporter

Estonia Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Finland Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1 2 4

carvings - P Importer

Exporter 4 4 3 3 2 9 1 26

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

France Canada bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1 2

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

carvings - T Importer 1 8 14 5 11 9 48

Exporter 1 2 10 5 23 1 42

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

tusks - P Importer 2 2

Exporter 1 2 1 4

T Importer 3 1 4

Exporter 13 13

Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

carvings - P Importer

Exporter 1 3 7 9 16 18 40 94

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

teeth - P Importer

Exporter 4 1 5

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

Russian Federation carvings - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

T Importer

Exporter 2 2

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 6 8 14

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

T Importer

Exporter 4 4

United States carvings - T Importer 13 13

Exporter 12 12

Germany Canada bones - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 16 17

T Importer 14 21 35

Exporter 66 11 18 95

carvings - P Importer 1 1

Exporter

T Importer

Exporter 2 1 1 4

skulls - P Importer 2 1 3 6

Exporter 1 3 1 1 1 7

T Importer 1 3 2 6

Exporter 1 4 2 7

teeth - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

T Importer 59 97 156

Exporter 36 97 133

tusks - P Importer 2 2 3 11 2 20

Exporter 1 3 2 3 1 1 7 10 31 59

T Importer 8 46 59 39 152

Exporter 1 4 60 45 10 120

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 3 1 5

T Importer 3 3

Exporter

carvings - P Importer 2 1 14 17

Exporter 2 1 7 17 22 29 12 49 77 216

T Importer

Exporter 73 73

skulls - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 3 2 5

T Importer

Exporter 1 1

teeth - P Importer

Exporter 1 2 4 2 1 1 11

T Importer 5 5

Exporter

tusks - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 6 2 1 9

T Importer 1 8 9

Exporter 8 8

Russian Federation carvings - P Importer

Exporter 1 6 7

skulls - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

T Importer 1 1

Exporter

tusks - P Importer 1 2 6 9

Exporter 4 1 5

T Importer 3 3

Exporter

United States carvings - T Importer

Exporter 1 1

Greece Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 1 2 3

Ireland Canada skulls - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

teeth - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 3 1 1 5

United States carvings - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Italy Canada carvings - T Importer 2 2

Exporter

skulls - T Importer

Exporter 4 1 5

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

carvings - P Importer

Exporter 5 6 3 28 37 79

teeth - P Importer

Exporter 1 2 3

Russian Federation tusks - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Latvia Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Lithuania Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Luxembourg Canada tusks - P Importer 1 1

Exporter

T Importer

Exporter 1 1

Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 4 1 1 6

Netherlands Canada carvings - T Importer

Exporter 1 1

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

T Importer 4 4

Exporter 2 1 4 4 11

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

tusks - T Importer 2 2

Exporter 1 2 3 6

Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

carvings - P Importer

Exporter 19 3 2 4 2 1 31

T Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 1 1 2

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

Poland Canada bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 19 1 20

United States bones kg T Importer 4.5 4.5

Exporter

carvings kg T Importer 97.6 156 253.6

Exporter 114 152 266

teeth kg T Importer 11.4 11.4

Exporter

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

Portugal Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

Spain Canada skulls - P Importer

Exporter 1 1 2

T Importer

Exporter 2 2

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

T Importer

Exporter 4 4

Greenland carvings - P Importer

Exporter 2 1 5 1 6 23 38

teeth - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 1 1 2

Russian Federation live - T Importer 5 5

Exporter 5 5

Sweden Canada tusks - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 6 6

Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 3 2 1 6

carvings - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 6 6 3 7 9 5 21 20 77

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

skulls - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1 1 3

teeth - P Importer 3 3

Exporter 2 4 4 10

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

United Kingdom Canada carvings - P Importer

Exporter 18 3 21

T Importer 5 5

Exporter 4 4

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 4 4

T Importer

Exporter 1 3 4

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

Greenland bones - P Importer

Exporter 1 1

carvings - P Importer

Exporter 6 3 4 9 8 15 21 27 93

skulls - P Importer

Exporter 2 1 3

teeth - P Importer

Exporter 1 1 2

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

tusks - P Importer

Exporter 2 2

United States carvings - P Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 2 3

T Importer 3 176 1 180

Exporter 176 176

bones kg T Importer 4.5 4.5

Exporter

- P Importer 4 1 1 9 5 2 3 25

Exporter 12 2 13 10 24 21 18 21 15 21 157

T Importer 1 1 3 2 26 30 63

Exporter 1 1 6 66 20 18 112

carvings kg T Importer 97.6 156 253.6

Exporter 114 152 266

- P Importer 129 10 19 19 9 7 20 25 96 86 420 Subtotals for EU Exporter 188 62 151 143 220 360 366 371 849 1093 3803

T Importer 91 215 76 165 120 208 282 36 13 1206

Exporter 82 208 201 90 5 89 181 208 31 12 1107

skulls - P Importer 11 3 2 1 1 5 5 5 6 11 50

Exporter 29 14 23 3 11 27 19 36 24 21 207

T Importer 1 1 3 2 5 5 1 6 3 27

Exporter 5 5 1 11 10 6 8 46

teeth kg T Importer 11.4 11.4

Exporter

Importer Exporter Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

- P Importer 2 3 1 2 6 7 5 11 37

Exporter 62 33 41 1 14 12 32 62 70 30 357

T Importer 2 17 27 59 97 202

Exporter 2 1 1 37 97 138

trophies - P Importer 3 1 6 1 1 12

Exporter 3 4 5 12

T Importer 1 19 20

Exporter 2 2

tusks - P Importer 28 7 9 3 5 11 5 6 12 7 93

Exporter 5 8 19 66 34 28 24 14 21 32 251

T Importer 14 3 1 65 1 2 8 50 62 41 247

Exporter 2 17 4 42 31 6 64 49 10 225

Table 2. Direct exports of main items of Odobenus rosmarus to countries other than EU-27, 1997-2006. Only transactions with purpose ‘P’ or ‘T’ selected. Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

bones kg T Importer

Exporter 66 4427 4493

- P Importer 1 1 2

Exporter 3 1 4 3 6 7 3 5 32

T Importer 4 1 4 5 5 9 28

1818 Exporter 125 384 0 5 25 15 27 18761

carvings kg T Importer 31 31

Exporter 38 215 38 212 90 255 64 705.7 179.2 1797.0

Term Units Purpose Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

75 8 55

- P Importer 11 45 9 21 17 51 12 4 18 5 193

Exporter 19 251 3 127 85 67 145 103 223 133 1156

T Importer 10 78 7 116 29 2 2013 153 38 1481 3927

Exporter 46 29 20 85 86 134 10 205 31 8 654 skulls - P Importer 13 1 4 1 1 1 21

Exporter 3 2 3 1 3 14 3 2 1 5 37

T Importer 6 2 5 3 2 1 3 3 25

Exporter 2 5 1 4 3 1 16 teeth kg T Importer

Exporter 92 282 58 3 435

- P Importer 3 1 2 30 36

Exporter 3 4 11 3 2 1 5 68 97 tusks kg P Importer 0.001 7.45 0.7 8.151

Exporter

T Importer

Exporter 463 461 459 514 7 17 27 24 1972

- P Importer 49 4 3 2 2 2 6 2 4 12 86

Exporter 1 8 4 9 11 15 8 2 17 42 117

T Importer 2 7 8 3 19 22 94 36 13 20 224

1253 2843 Exporter 803 41 6 8 6 23 17 53 8 41 41966

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states Walruses occupy a nearly circumpolar region of the Arctic and two geographically separated subspecies are recognised: the Atlantic walrus O. r. rosmarus and the Pacific walrus O. r. divergens. There is taxonomic uncertainty about a third subspecies, O. r. laptevi (Laptev Sea), not considered here. Sub-populations of the Atlantic walrus occur in distinct areas: the eastern Atlantic Arctic (eastern Greenland, Spitsbergen, Svalbard-FranzJosef Land, Barents and Kara Seas) and the western Atlantic Arctic (east Canadian Arctic and west Greenland). The Pacific walrus is found principally in the Bering and Chukcki Seas (Reijnders et al., 1993). There are difficulties in estimating walrus population size due to several factors including wide distribution, lack of visibility of animals underwater and variable weather conditions (Fay et al., 1997). The global population size has not been quantified and was classified in the 2008 IUCN Red List as Data Deficient, with the following justification: ―although the global population is undoubtedly still quite large, there is evidence of declining populations in two of the subspecies. Climate change is expected to have negative consequences for walruses, and particularly severe consequences for the Pacific subspecies. Additionally, little recent information is available regarding current population sizes and trends throughout much of the Walrus‘s range‖ (Lowry et al., 2008). Laidre et al. (2008) predicted that climate change is already having an impact on the Pacific walrus population through reduced availability of season ice coverage and availability of prey by warming temperatures, although reduction in sea ice is not considered as threatening for Atlantic walrus due to lower population numbers and availability of benthic food resources. A species review by country is problematic given the species is a migratory marine mammal and is recorded only as a vagrant to some western European countries and Iceland. Conservation status of walrus within range States is considered where possible but, where this is not possible, separate walrus stocks and corresponding range States are reviewed together. United States of America and the Russian Federation (O. rosmarus divergens): Occurs in waters of the United States (Alaska) and the Russian Federation including the Bering and Chukchi seas with occasional movements to the East Siberian and Beaufort Seas (Reijnders et al., 1993). Five yearly aerial surveys were cooperatively initiated in 1975 by the United States and Russian governments. Estimates of the population size of the sub-species based on aerial surveys in 1985 were 232,518 (Gilbert, 1989) and 201,039 in 1990 (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2002). Further surveys have not been undertaken due to unresolved problems with the survey design and methodology (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2002). Population data were presented by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (2002) with a caveat that population trends cannot be inferred as it is unknown what proportion of the population was surveyed each year. Management of walrus in US waters is the responsibility of the US Fish and Wildlife Service through harvest monitoring and reporting programmes (Garlich-Miller & Burn, 1999). Garlich- Miller et al. (2006) documented considerable variation in combined walrus harvests of the United States and Russia during 1952-2002. Harvest levels during the 1980s were 5,000-9,000 per year; since 1992 harvest of Pacific walrus within Alaska (US) and Chukotka (Russian Federation) were 2,400-4,700 animals per year. The US Fish and Wildlife Service reported that subsistence and commercial harvest during 1996-2000 in Alaska and Chukotka was estimated at 5,794 walruses per year; this figure was based on reported harvest and adjusted for animals mortally wounded and not retrieved and other human induced mortality, (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2002). Reported Russian harvest 1996-2000 averaged 1,101 individuals per year (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2002). Canada (O. rosmarus rosmarus): Occurs within Canada in four populations: South and East Hudson Bay, Northern Hudson Bay-Davis Strait, Foxe Basin and Baffin Bay (High Arctic) and it was designated of ‗Special concern‘ by Canadian Wildlife Service in April 2006, (COSEWIC, 2006). Based on opportunistic counts of 270+ walruses in the late 1990‘s, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) categorised the population of South and East Hudson Bay, as ―low hundreds, although population size and structure poorly known‖ (COSEWIC, 2006). The Northern Hudson Bay-Davis Strait population

is larger and may number 4,000-6,000 individuals, with ―some portion of this population hunted in Greenland waters‖ (COSEWIC, 2006). The same report includes a figure for the Fox Basin area in 1989 of 5,500 individuals, and concludes the population of the Baffin Bay area, estimated at 1,500 animals is ―small‖. A survey of the Cumberland Peninsula of SE Baffin Island in 2005 counted 870+ walruses in four haulout sites which was described as ―the highest concentration of walruses reported from the area‖ (NAMMCO, 2007). A 2006 survey counted 775 walruses on SE Baffin Island, with an estimate of at least 2,600 individuals corrected for submerged animals (NAMMCO, 2008). Walruses have some protection in Canada through regulations managing hunting, movement, and sale of walrus products (Fisheries Act, Marine Mammal Regulations SOR/93- 56), (COSEWIC, 2006). The Nunavut Wildlife Management Board in Nunavut and elsewhere the Department of Fisheries and Oceans manages walrus hunts; four Canadian settlements have annual Community hunting quotas including: Coral Harbour 60, Sanikiluaq 10, Arctic Bay 10, and Clyde River 20, (COSEWIC, 2006). Elsewhere, Inuit and Indian natives of Canada can kill up to four walruses per year without a licence; non-natives require a licence. Greenland: (O.rosmarus rosmarus): The Greenland population is divided into three subpopulations; the East Greenlandic, West Greenlandic and the North Water subpopulation (Born, 2005). Population sizes in East Greenland based on opportunistic and systematic observations were estimated at between 500 and 1,000 and were considered to be possibly recovering (Born et al., 1997). This estimate was not considered sufficiently reliable by the walrus working group of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission to use in population modelling/assessment of harvest levels, and its size and status was concluded as ‗uncertain‘ (NAMMCO, 2006). Observations of one tagged walrus suggest the East Greenland population may be linked to the Svalbard population (Norway), Born & Gjertz (1993). For the West Greenland subpopulation, line transect surveys were undertaken in 1990 and 1991 by Born et al. (1994) resulting in an estimate of less than 500 animals (not corrected for submerged animals) and a stock assessment of ‗vulnerable‘. The NAMMCO walrus working group used a correction factor to estimate 938 animals (NAMMCO, 2006) but this was not finally accepted by the working group due to various assumptions in the methodology; the stock was considered, with uncertainty, as ‗depleted and declining‘. A survey by the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources (GINR) in March 2006 found 21 walrus groups (NAMMCO, 2007). Based on these surveys, the West Greenlandic population was estimated at 3,085 individuals, corrected for submerged animals (NAMMCO, 2008). For the North Water area, aerial surveys undertaken in August 1999 counted 452 walruses (NAMMCO, 2006). Correction factors for animals seen in water and on land and for areas not surveyed were used to estimate the total population at 1,500 for the entire North Water area, but again this estimate was considered insufficiently detailed for any conclusion on stock status to be made. The GINR and Danish Natural Research Institute carried out telemetry studies in 2005-6 which demonstrated tagged animals moved from western Greenland to the Canadian Baffin Island, or close to it (NAMMCO 2007). The report also suggests there is no genetic difference between central West Greenland and SE Baffin Island (Canada). Two animals tracked by satellite in 2006 moved from Central Greenland to the coast of south-east Baffin Bay, confirming the stocks are connected (NAMMCO, 2008). The NAMMCO 2006 report suggests ―a link between the North Hudson Bay-Hudson Strait- North Labrador-Southeast Baffin Island (HBDS) and West Greenland (WG) stocks which indicates that the HBDS stock may be a source of immigration to the WG stock.‖ Witting & Born (2005) suggested that West Greenland and North Water populations were being exploited above sustainable levels, whilst the catch in East Greenland, in 2005, appeared sustainable. Greenland has established hunting regulations and quotas and a walrus survey plan (2007-2010) has been developed by the GINR (NAMMCO, 2007).

Norway and the Russian Federation (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus): Wiig et al. (1996) demonstrated migration between walruses in Svalbard (Norway) and Franz Josef Land (Russian Federation) by satellite tagging, and concluded they represent a common stock. NAMMCO (2005) reported that the stock of Svalbard - Franz Joseph Land was less than 2,000, with status ‗increasing‘ due to protection since 1952. Reportedly seen commonly in parts of the island of Svalbard since the 1980s (Gjertz & Wiig, 1994). A combined estimate of the Svalbard and Franz Joseph Land stock was estimated at 1,450 walruses aged over two years plus an unknown number of calves (Gjertz & Wiig, 1995). Lydersen et al. (2008) observed 657 walruses on Svalbard by counting at known haul-out sites in 2006. Counts were extrapolated to estimate the population of 2,629 walruses by reference to behavioural data derived from satellite tagging. The population of the Kara Sea-Barents Sea-Novaya Zemlya stock was estimated at 500 animals with status recorded as ―increasing?‖(NAMMCO, undated). The population of Svalbard, Franz Joseph Land and the western Russian Arctic are fully protected (Born et al., 2001). REFERENCES: Born, E.W. & Gjertz, I. 1993. A link between walruses (Odobenus rosmarus) in northeast Greenland and Svalbard. Polar Record, 29 (171): 329. Born, E.W., Heide-Jørgensen, M.P. & Davis, R.A. 1994. The Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in West Greenland. Bioscience, 40: 1-33. Born, E.W., Dietz, R., Heide-Jørgensen, M.P. & Knutsen, L.Ø. 1997. Historical and present status of the Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in eastern Greenland. Bioscience, 46: 1-73. Born, E.W, Andersen, L.W, Gjertz, I & Wiig, O. 2001.A review of the genetic relationships of the Atlantic walrus Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus east and west of Greenland. Polar Biology, 24:713-718. Born, E,W. 2005. The walrus in Greenland. Ilinniusiorfik Education, Nuuk. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. pp. 79 COSEWIC 2006. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Atlantic walrus Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. Fay, F.H., Eberhardt, L.L., Kelly, B.P., Burns, J.J. & Quakenbush, L.T. 1997 Status of the Pacific Walrus Population 1950-1989 Marine Mammal Science, 13(4): 537-565. Garlich-Miller, J.L. & Burn, D.M. 1999. Estimating the harvest of Pacific walrus Odobenus rosmarus divergens, in Alaska. Fisheries Bulletin, 97(4):1043-1046. Garlich-Miller, J.L., Quakenbush, L.T & Bromaghin, J.F. 2006. Trends in age structure and productivity of Pacific walruses harvested in the Bering Strait region of Alaska, 1952-2002. Marine Mammal Science, 22(4): 880-896. Gilbert, J.R. 1989. Aerial census of pacific walruses in the Chukchi sea, 1985. Marine Mammal Science, 5 (1): 17-28 Gjertz, I. & Wiig, O. 1994. Arctic: Past and Present Distribution of walruses in Svalbard. Arctic, 47(1): 34-42. Gjertz, I. & Wiig, O. 1995. The number of walruses (Odobenus rosmarus) in Svalbard in summer. Polar Biology, 15:527-530. Laidre, K.L., Stirling, I., Lowry, L.F., Wiig, O, Heide-Jørgensen, M.P., & Ferguson, S.H. 2008. Quantifying the sensitivity of arctic marine mammals to climate-induced habitat change. Ecological Applications, 18(2) Supplement: 97-125. Lowry, L., Kovacs, K. & Burkanov, V. 2008. Odobenus rosmarus. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. URL: www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on 13/10/08. Lydersen, C., Aars, J. & Kovacs, K.M. 2008. Estimating the number of walruses in Svalbard from aerial surveys and behavioural data from satellite telemetry Arctic, 61(2): 119-128.

NAMMCO. 2005. The Atlantic walrus. Report of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission Scientific Committee. URL http://www.nammco.no/webcronize/images/Nammco/654.pdf Accessed on 13/10/08. NAMMCO. 2006. Report of the thirteenth meeting. North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission Scientific Committee. Reine, Norway, 25-27 October 2005. NAMMCO. 2007. Report of the fourteenth meeting. North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission Scientific Committee. Reykjavik, Iceland, 21-23 November, 2006. NAMMCO. 2008. Report of the fifteenth meeting. North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission Scientific Committee. Qeqertarsuaq, Greenland, 11-14 April 2008. Reijinders, P. 1993. Seals, Fur Seals, Sea Lions, and Walrus. IUCN Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002 . Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens): Alaska Stock URL http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/mmm/stock/finalpwalrusalaska.pdf Accessed on 13/10/08. Wiig, O., Gjertz, I. & Griffiths, D. 1996. Migration of walruses (Odobenus rosmarus) in the Svalbard and Franz Josef Land area. Journal of Zoology, 238(4): 769-784. Witting, L. & Born, E.W. 2005. An assessment of Greenland walrus populations. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 62: 266-284.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: CRACIDAE

SPECIES: Crax daubentoni

SYNONYMS: -

COMMON NAMES: Daubenton's Curassow (English), Yellow-knobbed Curassow (English), Hocco de Daubenton (French), Daubenton-Hokko (German), Hoco de Daubenton (Spanish), Paují de copete (Spanish), Pavón poría (Spanish), Pavón porú (Spanish), gulflikad knölhocko (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Colombia (br), Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Near Threatened (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: - APPENDIX III LISTING: Colombia (21/09/1988)

TRADE PATTERNS: All trade has been in live, captive-bred specimens. Two exported from the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to the United States in 1998, four from Belgium to the United Arab Emirates in 1999, and one from Brazil to Portugal in 2004. See Table 3 for more details.

Table 3. Direct exports of Crax daubentoni, 1997-2006. [All specimens were live, captive-bred specimens] Importer Exporter Purpose Reported by 1998 1999 2004 Total

Portugal Brazil T Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

B Importer Countries other than EU-27 Exporter 4 4 Z Importer

Exporter 2 2

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states In 1994, del Hoyo stated that it ―Is, or was, common in llanos, at least in Venezuela, and continues to be relatively plentiful in some areas, although declining due to extensive conversion of forest to rice fields in many parts of llanos; locally distributed in rest of

range. Known only from a few scattered localities in Colombia. Receives protection on several cattle ranches, e.g. Hato Piñero and Hato Masaguaral. Uncommon in collections, but has been bred in captivity.‖ BirdLife (2008) stated that ―This species qualifies as Near Threatened because it has a small population which is suspected to be declining significantly owing to hunting and habitat loss and which approaches the threshold for classification as Vulnerable.‖ The population was estimated at 10,000-40,000 individuals, divided into more than five subpopulations, each of which is fragmented and declining (Strahl et al., 1994, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). It was heavily hunted for food and sport and, in Venezuela, parks and reserves were often focal points for local hunting (Strahl & Silva, 1997, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). Agricultural development has fragmented gallery forests and, in many parts of the llanos, there has been extensive conversion to rice fields (Strahl et al., 1994, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). Colombia: BirdLife (2008) stated that the species still occurred at a few scattered localities in the north-east – the west foothills of Sierra de Perijá from Montes de Oca south to Fonseca, and east of the Andes from east Norte de Santander south to north- west Arauca, based on Hilty & Brown (1986). However, Herrera & Buitrago (2007) stated that there had been no records in these areas since 1950, referring to Franco-Maya & Renjifo (2002); they reported the occurrence of the species in 2004 in Cocuy National Park, Arauca Department. However, del Hoyo & Motis (2004) referred to reports from Arauca in the 1990s. Venezuela: Hilty (2003) noted that it was ―Formerly a relatively common resident in dry, deciduous forest, gallery forest, and isolated patches of dry woodland. Now somewhat local in llanos; very spotty away from llanos, and locally extirpated where hunting pressure is high. Can still be found in numbers on large ranches where not hunted (e.g., Hato Cedral, Hato Piñero)‘. Buchholz & Bertsch (2006) described its range as including ‗the Maracaibo Basin (Zuila and western Mérida), western Falcón (including Tucacas), lowlands and foothills of Yaracuy and Carabobo, and eastward through Aragua to Miranda, and generally from the eastern base of the Andes in Táchira, Apure, Barinas and Cojedes to Guárico, and locally to eastern Sucre and Monagas.‖ They also noted that the distribution of the species in the Cordillera de la Costa Central may have been reduced to 30% of the original range, and that in the llanos it may have been reduced to 40%. They noted that the species is included in the Venezuelan sport-hunting calendar, set by the government. Silva & Strahl (1997) noted that this species had an unnatural density in Masaguaral Ranch, and was rare or extirpated within the borders of Guatopo and Henri Pittier National Parks. REFERENCES: BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Crax daubentoni. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 9/10/2008. Buchholz, R. & Bertsch, C. 2006. Yellow-knobbed Curassow (Crax daubentoni). In Brooks, D. M., ed. Conserving cracids: the most threatened family of birds in the Americas. Houston, Texas: Misc. Publ. Houston Mus. Nat. Sci., No. 6. Pp. 91-94 Franco-Maya, A. M. & Renjifo, L. M. 2002. Crax daubentoni. In Renjifo, M. L., Franco-Maya, A. M., Amaya-Espinel, J. D., Kattan, G. H. & López-Lanús, B. (ed.s). Libro rojo de aves de Colombia. Bogota: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt y Ministerio del Medio Ambiente Herrera, J. O. C. & Buitrago, E. A. B. 2007. Registro del paujil piquiamarillo (Crax daubentoni) en el Parque Natural del Cocuy, Colombia. Bulletin of the Cracid Specialist Group 24: 20-25. Hilty, S. L. 2003. Birds of Venezuela. Second edition. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton: Princeton University Press:

del Hoyo, J. 1994. Family Cracidae (chachalacas, guans and curassows). In del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol 2: New World vultures to guineafowl. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Pp. 310-363 del Hoyo, J. & Motis, A. 2004. Updated chapter in Delacour, J. & Amadon, D. 2004. Curassows and related birds. Second edition. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Silva, J. L. & Strahl, S. 1997. Condición actual de las poblaciones de Cracidae en ocho localidades en Venezuela. Abstract. Pp. 396-397 in Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, D., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, Canada and Blaine, USA: Hancock House Publishers Strahl, S., Ellis, S., Byers, O. & Plasse, C. (ed.s) 1994. Conservation assessment and management plan for Neotropical guans, curassows, and chachalacas. Minnesota, USA: International Union for Nature Conservation and Natural Resources. Strahl, S. & Silva, J. L. 1997. The status of the family Cracidae in Venezuela. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, D., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. and Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, Canada and Blaine, USA Pp. 383-395: Hancock House Publishers

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: CRACIDAE

SPECIES: Crax globulosa

SYNONYMS: -

COMMON NAMES: Wattled Curassow (English), Yarrell's Curassow (English), Hocco globuleux (French), Hoco à caroncule (French), Yarrell-Hokko (German), Hoco barbado (Spanish), Pavón carunculado (Spanish), amazonhocko (Swedish), flikhocko (Swedish), rödskäggig hocko (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Bolivia (br), Brazil (br), Colombia (br), Ecuador (br), Peru (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Vulnerable (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: - APPENDIX III LISTING: Colombia (21/09/1988)

TRADE PATTERNS: Belgium reported importing six captive-bred individuals from the United States in 1997 and another two from Brazil in 2001. Mexico reported importing four wild birds from Peru in 1997 for breeding purposes. In 2005 France reported importing some feathers from Brazil for exhibition purposes. See Table 4 for more details.

Table 4. Direct exports of Crax globulosa, 1997-2006. Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 2001 2005 Total

Belgium Brazil live B C Importer 2 2

Exporter 2 2

United States live B F Importer 6 6

Exporter

- C Importer

Exporter 5 5

France Brazil feathers Q W Importer 17 17

Exporter Countries other than EU-27 live B W Importer 4 4 Exporter

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states BirdLife (2008) stated that ―This species is undergoing rapid declines in range and population as a result of hunting and, to a lesser extent, habitat loss. The total population is suspected to be small and consist of very small subpopulations. It consequently qualifies as Vulnerable, although new information suggests its population has been seriously overestimated and it may need to be uplisted to Endangered.‖ The population was estimated to be between 2,500 and 9,999, occupying 28,200 km². Throughout its range, the species has undergone dramatic population declines. New information showing a close tie to water edge habitat in the dry season suggests that its Extent of Occurrence, and therefore population, may have been seriously overestimated. Hunting, whether commercial, subsistence (Santos, 1998, cited in BirdLife International, 2008) or by loggers (Hennessey, 1999, cited in BirdLife International, 2008) is the main threat, with habitat loss contributory (BirdLife International, 2008). Aranibar- Rojas (2006) noted that another mid- and long-term potential threat was isolation that some subpopulations face, which can cause local extinction due to loss of genetic viability. Bolivia: In Bolivia the only known surviving population is along a tributary of the río Beni, where it has been in decline since the 1940s but persists along the río Negro (c. 25 km from the nearest settlement, San Marcos); it was heavily hunted by fur traders during the 1960s, but the prohibition of fur-hunting by CITES in 1971 slowed declines (Hennessey, 1999, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). In 2003 surveys of várzea habitat along the río Negro produced an encounter rate of 0.36 individuals per hour, suggesting that there is a reasonably good population in this region (Aranibar-Rojas et al., 2005). A temporary hunting ban to secure the future of local hunting stocks has reportedly contributed to population recovery (Hennessey, 1999, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). A public education project has focused on conservation presentations to the local Tacuna communities (Hennessey, 2004, cited in BirdLife International, 2008), and the local community in San Marcos now protects an area for ecotourism and research where hunting and resource extraction are banned. It has been speculated that about 100 individuals may persist in Bolivia (Birdlife International, 2008). Cox & Cox (1997) noted that reports from the 19th century cited groups of up to 100 birds along the banks of the río Beni. Brazil: In Brazil, it occurs near the confluence of the ríos Javari and Amazonas, at three disjunct sites in the río Juruá drainage, in Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve (Santos, 1998, cited in BirdLife International, 2008), and ―in the juncture between río Solimoes and río Purus, where the species was locally abundant within a small area of várzea forest, with an extrapolated density of 0.56 individuals/km2. The most important site for the species globally is Mamirauá (Brazil), which was estimated in 2005 to hold a population of well over 250 individuals. It has probably been extirpated from Rondónia‖ (Birdlife International, 2008). Colombia: South Colombia remains remote and poorly known, but it occurs at Isla Mocagua on the río Amazonas (Bennett, 2000; Bennett & Franco-Maya, 2002, cited in BirdLife International, 2008), and on the río Caquetá, near the Brazilian border (Alarcón-Nieto & Palacios, 2005, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). It was reportedly fairly common on the río Apaporis near Chiriquibete National Park, but recent surveys have not found the species. A few sites are known near the confluence of the ríos Javari and Amazonas (Bennett, 2000, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). Likewise it is speculated that the Colombian population could be <100, divided in two completely isolated subpopulations. At Isla Mocagua, the population numbered c. 1000 individuals as recently as the 1950s, but recently a maximum of 61 was estimated to remain (Bennett, 2003) and approximately 40 on Mirití Island (Alarcon-Nieto & Palacios, 2005). Ecuador: Johnson (1993) thought that it had probably been extirpated from Ecuador, and Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) agreed that ―there are no confirmed recent reports, but we still hope it may be found in some remote backwater region.‖ Peru: In Peru, it was reported to occur on the middle río Napo, the río Yavari (untraced site) and part of the lower río Marañón (Begazo & Valqui, 1998, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). There may be less than 300 individuals in Peru. Ortiz Tejada & O‘Neill (1997) recommended

that this species receive the highest conservation priority in Peru, and Álvarez (2007) noted that, owing to hunting pressure, it was virtually extirpated from the Amazon basin in Peru. REFERENCES: Alarcón-Nieto, G. & Palacios, E. 2005. Confirmation of a second population for Colombia of the Wattled Curassow (Crax globulosa) in the lower Caquetá River. Ornitologia Colombiana 3: 97- 99. Álvarez, J. 2007. Comunidades locales, conservación de la avifauna y de la biodiversidad en la Amazonía peruana. Revista Peruana de Biologia 14: 151-158. Aranibar-Rojas, H. 2006. Wattled Curassow (Crax globulosa). In Brooks, D. M., ed. Conserving cracids: the most threatened family of birds in the Americas. Houston, Texas: Misc. Publ. Houston Mus. Nat. Sci., No. 6. Pp. 67-69 Aranibar-Rojas, H., Gutierrez, S. & Hennessey, B. 2005. Preliminary analysis of the conservation status of the Wattled Curassow (Crax globulosa) in varzea habitat, Beni, Bolivia. Bulletin of the IUCN/SSC/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 20: 14-15. Begazo, A. J. & Valqui, T. H. 1998. Birds of Pacaya-Samiria National Reserve with a new population of Myrmotherula longicauda and new record for Peru of Hylophilus semicinereus. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 118: 159-166. Bennett, S. E. 2000. The status of the piuri (Crax globulosa) in Colombia - a brief overview. Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 10: 16-9. Bennett, S. E. 2003. The Wattled Curassow (Crax globulosa) on island Macagua, Amazonas, Colombia. Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 16: 21-28. Bennett, S. E. & Franco-Maya, A. M. 2002. Crax globulosa. In Renjifo, M. L., Franco-Maya, A. M., Amaya-Espinel, J. D., Kattan, G. H. & López-Lanús, B., eds. Libro rojo de aves de Colombia. Bogota: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt y Ministerio del Medio Ambiente. Pp. 146-149 BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Crax globulosa. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 9/10/2008. Cox, G. & Cox, J. 1997. Cracidae country report for Bolivia. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, D., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. :Surrey, Canada and Blaine, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 474-481 Hennessey, A. B. 1999. Status of the Wattled Curassow (Crax globulosa) in the lower Beni river area of Bolivia. Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 8: 16-18. Hennessey, A. B. 2004. Conservation presentations to Tacan communities within the last Bolivian site of the Wattled Curassow (Crax globulosa). Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 19: 28-32. del Hoyo, J. 1994. Family Cracidae (chachalacas, guans and curassows). In del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol 2: New World vultures to guineafowl. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Pp. 310-363 Johnson, A. H. 1993. Determining the parameters for viable cracid populations in Amazonian Ecuador. Cracid Newsletter 2: 2. Ortiz Tejada, E. & O‘Neill, J. 1997. Situacion actual de la familia Cracidae en Peru. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, D., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, Canada and Blaine, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 361-374 Ridgely, R. S. & Greenfield, P. J. 2001. The birds of Ecuador. Christopher Helm: London. Santos, P. M. R. S. 1998. The Wattled Curassow (Crax globulosa) at Mamirauá (Amazonas, Brazil). Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 7: 13-19.

FURTHER READING: Collar, N. J., Gonzaga, L. P., Krabbe, N., Madroño Nieto, A., Naranjo, L. G., Parker, T. A. & Wege, D. C. 1992. Threatened birds of the Americas: the ICBP/IUCN Red Data Book. Cambridge, U.K.: International Council for Bird Preservation.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: CRACIDAE

SPECIES: Crax rubra

SYNONYMS:

COMMON NAMES: Globose Curassow (English), Great Curassow (English), Mexican Curassow (English), Grand hocco (French), Knopfschnabel-Hokko (German), Tuberkel- Hokko (German), Hoco faisán (Spanish), Hoco grande (Spanish), Pavón grande (Spanish), Pavón norteño (Spanish), knölhocko (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Belize (br), Colombia (br), Costa Rica (br), Ecuador (br), El Salvador (br), Guatemala (br), Honduras (br), Mexico (br), Nicaragua (br), Panama (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Near Threatened (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: Previous Article 6(4) b suspensions in place for wild specimens from Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua and Panama, first imposed on 22/12/1997 and most recently applied on 21/11/1998. APPENDIX III LISTING: Costa Rica (29/10/1976), Guatemala (23/04/1981), Honduras (13/04/1987), Colombia (21/09/1988)

TRADE PATTERNS: Most EU-imports between 1997and2006 comprised captive-bred specimens imported for zoos. The United States has reported imports of scientific specimens from Costa Rica and Guatemala. Most of the trade in wild specimens involves hunting trophies and feathers exported from Mexico. Other trade involves small numbers of captive-bred birds for zoos and breeding programmes. See Table 5 for more details.

Table 5. Direct exports of Crax rubra, 1997-2006. Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

Czech Republic Belgium live Z C Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

Germany live Z C Importer

Exporter 1 1

Poland live Z C Importer

Exporter 2 2

Denmark Poland live Z C Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

Hungary Belgium live Z C Importer

Exporter 1 1

bodies S W Importer

Exporter 1 1

T C Importer

Exporter 1 1

feathers P I Importer 1 1 Countries other than EU-27 Exporter T W Importer

Exporter 1000 1000

live B C Importer 1 1

Exporter 4 4

T C Importer 2 2

Exporter 1 1 3 2 7

Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

skeletons S W Importer

Exporter 18 18

skins H W Importer

Exporter 3 3

skulls S W Importer 2 2

Exporter 2 2

specimens S W Importer 261 67 18 346

Exporter 275 1 276

- W Importer 2 2

Exporter

trophies H I Importer 1 1

Exporter

W Importer 6 1 10 4 5 26

Exporter 39 131 170

P W Importer 3 3

Exporter

T W Importer 1 1

Exporter

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states BirdLife (2008) stated that ―This species is classified as Near Threatened because hunting pressure and habitat loss are presumed to be causing significant declines across its extensive range. If these declines are found to be even greater than is currently suspected it may be uplisted to Vulnerable.‖ It has undergone a considerable (and continuing) decline, becoming uncommon to rare or locally extinct throughout much of its range. However, it has recovered or remains relatively common in areas with legal protection or where it is not hunted. It is widely hunted for food, legally in Belize (Miller & Miller, 1997, cited in BirdLife International, 2008), and further threatened by severe habitat loss and fragmentation (Arguedas et al., 1997, cited in BirdLife International, 2008); it rapidly disappears when logging roads are built into previously inaccessible forests (BirdLife International, 2008). Belize: Zimmer (1997) provided an account of an encounter with a flock of over 20 of this species. Jones (2004) reported that it was ―Resident nearly throughout on mainland; now scarce or absent near populated areas where regularly pursued for food. Although fairly common in areas where it is protected (e.g., Rio Bravo Conservation and Management Area OW) it remains shy and retiring,‖ Rios & Muñoz (2006) reported that there were some viable populations, including at Laguna Seca and Chan Chich. Colombia: Hilty & Brown (1986) gave its distribution as continuously along the Pacific lowlands east to the Gulf of Urabá and the upper Sinú valley, but Salaman et al. (2001) found that its distribution was fragmented. Velasco-Abad (1997) reported that the species had not been encountered in recent years in the Cauca valley. Costa Rica: McCoy (1997) showed that its former distribution throughout most of the country had been reduced severely so that it was virtually only left in national parks and wildlife refuges. del Hoyo (1994) noted that it occurred in a number of protected areas including Santa Rosa, Rincón de la Vieja and Corcovado National Parks. Arguedas et al. (1997) formulated a plan for the species recovery in Costa Rica, including enforcement of lumbering regulations and hunting, and habitat management. Rios & Muñoz (2006) considered it to be Endangered in the country. Fournier & Janik (2008) reported on a captive-breeding and reintroduction project was established in secondary forest on the Nicoya Peninsula, with 104 birds released 2000-2004; by 2007 the objective of establishing a viable population had been achieved. Ecuador: Greenfield & Ortíz-Crespo (1997) noted that several formerly documented populations had not been recorded for over 30 years. Mena-Valenzuela & Jahn (2002) considered that it was Critically Endangered, with a population estimated at 30-60 adults, and a reduction of 80% or more over the next 33 years. El Salvador: Sermeño (1997) noted that it occurred in the hills of Jucuarán and Barra de Santiago. He considered it to be a moderately common, but local, resident. Komar & Herrera (2003) estimated the population in El Imposible National Park at 500 individuals. Ríos & Muñoz (2006) considered it to be Endangered in the country. Guatemala: del Hoyo (1994) reported that populations were still stable. Vannini & Rockstroh (1997) reported that the species was originally widespread and common on both versants, but that there had been no confirmed reports in the past decade in the middle elevation forests of the central and western Pacific region; however, it was still fairly common in the eastern Caribbean lowlands, northern El Quiché and remote areas of El Petén. Donegan (2001) estimated 6-8 individuals along a 45 km transect in Tikal, and Eisermann (2004) estimated a density of 1.4 individuals per km² in Punta Manabique. Bestelmeyer & Alonso (2000) found that it was ―abundant in bosque alto on hills and in closed riparian (gallery) forests‖ in Laguna del Tigre National Park. Rios & Muñoz (2006) considered it to be threatened in some regions, and in others its status was unknown. Honduras: Midence (1997) reported that the species became rare in many regions of the country, owing to hunting that became intense in the 1960s. Ríos & Muñoz (2006) considered it to be Endangered in the country.

Mexico: Howell & Webb (1995) described it as occurring in San Luis Potosí, Tamaulipas, Hidalgo, Puebla, Veracruz, Oaxaca, Tabasco, Chiapas and the Yucatán peninsula. Eitniear et al. (2000) reported it from Querétaro for the first time. Martínez-Morales (1999) studied the distinctive race griscomi, which is restricted to Cozumel Island, where it was estimated that 300 individuals remained at a density of 0.9 per km² - it was thought to have declined owing to hunting pressure; potential threats to this race include hurricanes and the introduction of invasive species (Caballero et al., 2006). Healthy populations of the species occurred in the Chimalapas region of Oaxaca, but the effects of extensive fires in 1998 on the species have not been determined (BirdLife International, 2008). Ortega Huerta (2007), studying fragmentation patterns in the north-east, established the occurrence of the species in areas totalling 1190 km², whereas the potential suitable habitat amounted to 41800 km². Nicaragua: del Hoyo (1994) reported that populations were still stable. However, Martínez- Sánchez (1997) noted that, although it was still abundant in the Atlantic and Central regions, it had been almost completely extirpated in the Pacific region. Altrichter & Jiménez (1999) noted that the species was hunted in the Reserva Biológica Indio-Maiz. Panama: Delgado (1997) reported that the species was distributed throughout the country. Robinson (1999) reported that the species was thought to have been extirpated on Barro Colorado Island, along with 64 other forest species, but it was rediscovered in 1996. Angehr & Christian (2000) reported it from the Serrania de Maje in the east. REFERENCES: Altrichter, M. & Jiménez, I. 1999. Hunting and consumption of wild animals in San Juan del Norte, Reserva Biologica Indio-Maiz, Nicaragua. Mesoamericana 4: 117-125. Angehr, G. R. & Christian, D. G. 2000. Distributional records from the highlands of the Serrania de Maje, an isolated mountain range in eastern Panama. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 120: 173-178. Arguedas, N., Mayer, P., Milligan, D. & Nordstrom, L. 1997. Plan de recuperación para Crax rubra en Costa Rica. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 249-262 Bestelmeyer, B. T. & Alonso, L. E., eds. 2000. A biological assessment of Laguna del Tigre National Park, Petén, Guatemala. RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 16: 221 pp. BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Crax rubra. URL: http://www.birdlife.org, Accessed: 9/10/2008. Caballero, C. P. & Martínez-Morales, M. A. 2006. Population status and habitat preferences of Crax rubra griscomi in Cozumel Island, Mexico. In Wings without borders: IV North American Ornithological Conference, October 3-7, 2006, Veracruz, Mexico. American Ornithologists' Union: Waco, TX, USA. Delgado, F. S. 1997. Situación de los cracidos de Panamá. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 345-349 Donegan, T. M. 2001. Recent records of cracids from Tikal, Petén, Guatemala, with notes on their conservation. Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 12: 4-7. Eiserman, K. 2004. Estatus de Crax rubra en punta de Manabique, Guatemala: hábitat, tamaño de la población e impacto humano. Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 18: 4-8. Eitniear, J. C., Tapia, A. A., Gonzalez, V., Pedraza, R. & Baccus, J. T. 2000. New Galliformes for the Mexican state of Querétaro. Cotinga 13: 10-13. Escamilla, A., Sanvicente, M., Sosa, M. & Galindo-Leal, C. 2000. Habitat mosaic, wildlife availability, and hunting in the tropical forest of Calakmul, Mexico. Conservation Biology 14: 1592-1601. Fournier, R. & Janik, D. 2008. [Reproduction techniques of Great Curassow (Crax rubra) in captivity and reintroduction in Nicoya Peninsula.] Ornitologia Neotropical 19: 353-360. (In Spanish.)

Greenfield, P. J. & Ortíz-Crespo, F. I. 1997. An update on the distribution and status of Ecuadorian cracids. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 314-319 Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton: Princeton University Press Howell, S. N. G. & Webb, S. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford: Oxford University Press del Hoyo, J. 1994. Family Cracidae (chachalacas, guans and curassows). In del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol 2: New World vultures to guineafowl. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Pp. 310-363 Jones, H. L. 2004. Birds of Belize. London: Christopher Helm Komar, O. & Herrera, N. 2003. Estado de los Cracidos (Galliformes: Cracidae) en El Salvador: una actualización. Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 16: 28-47. Martínez-Morales, M. A. 1999. Conservation status and habitat preferences of the Cozumel Curassow. Condor 101: 14-20. Martínez-Sánchez, J. C. 1997. Deforestación y conservación de cracidos en Nicaragua: un informe preliminar. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Hancock Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 340-344 McCoy, M. 1997. Country report on cracids of Costa Rica. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 298-313 Mena-Valenzuela, P. & Jahn, O. 2002. Pavón Grande (Crax rubra). In Granizo, T., Pacheco, C., Ridabeneira, M. B., Gerrero, M. & Suárez, L., eds. Libro rojo de las aves del Ecuador. Ecociencia, Conservación Internacional, SIMBIOE; Ministerio del Ambiente, UICN-Sur, Quito. Pp. 76-77 Midence, S. F. 1997. Informe de la familia Cracidae en Honduras. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 335-339 Miller, B. W. & Miller, C.M. 1997. Avian Risk Assessment: Bird Species of Conservation Concern. Wildlife Conservation Society-Report for programme For Belize/The Nature Conservancy. Pp.81 Ortega Huerta, M. A. 2007. Fragmentation patterns and implications for biodiversity conservation in three biosphere reserves and surrounding regional environments, northeastern Mexico. Biological Conservation 134: 83-95. Ríos, M. M. & Muñoz, M. C. 2006. Great Curassow (Crax rubra). In Brooks, D. M., ed. Conserving cracids: the most threatened family of birds in the Americas. Houston, Texas: Misc. Publ. Houston Mus. Nat. Sci., No. 6. Pp. 105-109 Robinson, W. D. 1999. Long-term changes in the avifauna of Barro Colorado Island, Panama, a tropical forest isolate. Conservation Biology 13: 85-97. Salaman, P. G. W., Donegan, T. M. & Cuervo, A. M. 2001. Rapid assessments and conservation of Galliformes along three altitudinal transects in the Colombian Andes. In Brooks, D. M. & Gonzalez-G., F., eds. Cracid ecology in the New Millennium. Houston, Texas: Misc. Publ. Houston Mus. Nat. Sci. 2. Pp. 167-194 Sermeño, A. 1997. Situación de la familia Cracidae en El Salvador. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 320-324 Vannini, J. P. & Rockstroh, P. M. 1997. The status of cracids in Guatemala. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 326-334

Velasco-Abad, E. 1997. Status, distribución, y población de Cracidae en el Valle de Cauca, Colombia. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 283-285 Zimmer, B. 1997. Observations on a large flock of Greater Curassow (Crax rubra). Bulletin of the IUCN/BirdLife/WPA Cracid Specialist Group 5: 10-12.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: CRACIDAE

SPECIES: Ortalis vetula

SYNONYMS: Penelope vetula

COMMON NAMES: Brun chachalaca (Danish), Bruine chachalaca (Dutch), Chachalaca (English) Common Chachalaca (English), Mexican Chachalaca (English), Plain Chachalaca (English), Ruskosiipikaklattaja (Finnish), Ortalide chacamel (French), Ortalide commune (French), Ortalide du Mexique (French), Braunflügelguan (German), Braunflugel-Tschatschalaka (German), Ciacialaca (Italian), Chachalaca de los Llenos (Spanish), Chachalaca norteña (Spanish), nordlig chachalaca (Swedish), östmexikansk chachalaca (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Belize (br), Costa Rica (br), El Salvador (br), Guatemala (br), Honduras (br), Mexico (br), Nicaragua (br), United States of America (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Least Concern

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: - APPENDIX III LISTING: Guatemala (23/04/81), Honduras (13/04/87)

TRADE PATTERNS: No imports of this species to the EU have been reported. Apart from seven hunting trophies reported by the United States as an import from Mexico in 2004, trade in this species appears to be confined to scientific specimens imported by the United States from Belize, El Salvador and Guatemala. See Table 6 for more details.

Table 6. Direct exports of Ortalis vetula, 1997-2006. Importer Term Source Purpose Reported by 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total

derivatives W S Importer 1 1

Exporter

skins W S Importer

Exporter 24 24

specimens W S Importer 35 9 1 1 1 22 69 Countries other than EU-27 Exporter 2 2

- S Importer Exporter 50 50

trophies W H Importer 7 7

Exporter

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states BirdLife (2008) stated that “this species has a large range, with an estimated global extent of occurrence of 610,000 km². It has a large global population estimated to be 500,000-5,000,000 individuals (Rich et al. 2004). Global population trends have not been quantified, but the species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List (i.e. declining more than 30% in ten years or three generations). For these reasons, the species is evaluated as Least Concern.‖ Belize: Jones (2004) described it as a common resident on the Gulf-Caribbean slope of the mainland and also on Ambergris Caye. Costa Rica: McCoy (1997) reported that the centre of distribution was in the mountains of the Nicoya peninsula in the north-west, where the species was quite common; it was rarer from the Tempesque River eastward, but extended to Santa Rosa National Park in the north and the city of Bagaces to the east. Guatemala: Vannini & Rockstroh (1997) noted that the species remained well distributed throughout much of the 40,000 km² that comprised its original range, in the lower and middle elevations of the Caribbean versant, where it was still locally common or very common. Honduras: Midence (1997) reported that the species occurred in the Parque Nacional La Tigra. The subspecies from Útila Island, O. v. deschauenseei, has sometimes been listed as extinct, but recent surveys have confirmed that it still survives (Glowinski, 2007). Mexico: Howell & Webb (1995) described it as a common to frequent resident on the Atlantic slope, and locally in the interior, south from Tamaulipas and eastern Nuevo Leon. Nicaragua: Martínez-Sánchez (1997) noted that the status of the species was poorly known in the Pacific sector, but it appeared to occur on the Meseta de Carazo and elevated parts of the mountain range of the Maribios; however, in the central region it was still abundant. USA: Balda & Schemnitz (1997) reported on a scheme to expand the species‘s range in south Texas by translocating birds.

REFERENCES: Balda, W. E. & Schemnitz, S. D. 1997. Evaluation of success of Plain Chachalaca (Ortalis vetula) transplants in south Texas. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Hancock Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 201-210 BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Ortalis vetula. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 9/10/2008. Glowinski, S. L. 2007. The rediscovery of the Útila Island Chachalaca (Ortalis vetula deschauenseei). Bulletin of the Cracid Specialist Group 23: 28-29. Howell, S. N. G. & Webb, S. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford: Oxford University Press Jones, H. L. 2004. Birds of Belize. Christopher Helm: London Martínez-Sánchez, J. C. 1997. Deforestación y conservación de cracidos en Nicaragua: un informe preliminar. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 340-344 McCoy, M. 1997. Country report on cracids of Costa Rica. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. and Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 298-313 Midence, S. F. 1997. Informe de la familia Cracidae en Honduras. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 335-339

Rich, T. D., Beardmore, C. J., Berlanga, H., Blancher, P. J., Bradstreet, M. S. W., Butcher, G. S., Demarest, D. W., Dunn, E. H., Hunter, W. C., Inigo-Elias, E. E., Martell, A. M., Panjabi, A. O., Pashley, D. N., Rosenberg, K. V., Rustay, C. M., Wendt, J. S. & Will, T. C. 2004. Partners in flight: North American landbird conservation plan. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Lab of Ornithology Vannini, J. P. & Rockstroh, P. M. 1997. The status of cracids in Guatemala. in Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 326-334

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: CRACIDAE

SPECIES: Pauxi pauxi

SYNONYMS: Crax pauxi

COMMON NAMES: Helmeted Curassow (English), Northern Helmeted Curassow (English), Hocco à pierre (French), Pauxi pierre (French), Nordlicher Helmhokko (German), Hoco de casco (Spanish), Paují copete de piedra (Spanish), Paují de yelmo (Spanish), hjälmcuracao (Swedish), hjälmhocko (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Colombia (br), Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Endangered (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: - APPENDIX III LISTING: Colombia (21/09/1988)

TRADE PATTERNS: Trade is almost confined to live specimens bred in captivity with the main producer being Belgium. The only trade in wild-sourced specimens involved the export for commercial purposes from Mexico of two birds in 2001 and 1,000 feathers in 2006. See also Table 7.

Table 7. Direct exports of Pauxi pauxi, 1997-2006. Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2005 2006 Total

Poland Belgium live T C Importer

Exporter 2 2

Germany live Z C Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

eggs S U Importer

Exporter 1

feathers E W Importer

Exporter 1 1

T W Importer

Exporter 1000 1000

live B C Importer

Exporter 8 8

S C Importer 6 6 Countries other than EU-27 Exporter

T C Importer 2 2

Exporter 1 2 5

W Importer 4 4

Exporter 2 2

Z F Importer 1 1

Exporter 2 1 5

- C Importer

Exporter 1 1

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states BirdLife (2008) stated that ―this species has a very small population comprising very small subpopulations, which are declining owing to habitat loss and hunting. It therefore qualifies as Endangered.‖ The population was estimated to be between 1,000 and 2,499, occupying a range of 35,100 km² (BirdLife, 2008). del Hoyo (1994) reported that ―its decline results from hunting and long-term destruction, fragmentation and modification of its habitat. The Sierra de Perijá is being progressively deforested in both countries for cattle-ranching at lower altitudes and for narcotics cultivation higher up. Hunting continues (even in protected areas such as Henri Pittier National Park) and is probably even increasing in the wake of infrastructure development. Birds are hunted for food and, at least formerly, for traditional jewellery; for instance in the buffer zone of Tama National Park (Colombia) each household had at least five skulls and eggs as hunting trophies. A major education campaign concerning the conservation of the species is being mounted for both Colombia and Venezuela and is already being implemented in parts of Venezuela. Uncommon in captivity, but has bred in a few collections, including one in Mexico, where both subspecies are reared.‖ (del Hoyo, 1994). Colombia: Nominate race was considered very rare in 1965, and there appears to be no subsequent information. Nominate pauxi was formerly common on the north-eastern slopes of the East Andes in Colombia (Norte de Santander, Boyacá and Arauca) (BirdLife, 2008). The population has declined considerably, and the species is now generally rare and occurs at low densities (BirdLife, 2008). There is no recent information on the status of race gilliardi, but it is believed to be under considerable pressure; however, its range might extend further south than is currently known. Occurs in two national parks: El Cocuy and Tamá (BirdLife, 2008). Franco- Maya & Álvarez (2002) thought that hunting could negatively affect its populations due to the low density and reproductive rate of this species. Venezuela: Common during the 19th century in mountains of the north: in 1875 a collector took more than 50 specimens in just a few weeks. Still fairly common during 1950s, although by this time it was already extirpated from settled areas and scarce at Henri Pittier National Park, North Venezuela, which held an estimated population of only 25-50 birds. In 1987 the species was said to suffer a drastic decline in North Venezuela, although it seems to occur at a naturally low level of abundance (5-10 birds/km²); current status in Andes of Mérida is unknown. Nominate pauxi was formerly common from the Cordillera de la Costa west to the Cordillera de Mérida, and in south-west Táchira (Birdlife International, 2008). It was also known from three mountain ranges in Falcón, Venezuela, but may have recently disappeared from one (in Morrocoy National Park), and it might once have occurred as far east as Monagas (Silva, 1999, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). There is no recent information on the status of race gilliardi, but it is believed to be under considerable pressure; however, its range might extend further south than is currently known. Occurs in three national parks: Guatopo, Yacambú and Henri Pittier, but it is still hunted and suffering human disturbance associated with roads; the establishment of an international park in Sierra de Perijá has been suggested as an essential measure for the protection of this race. In Venezuela, there is a strong correlation between its current distribution and national parks (Silva, 1999). In northern Venezuela, almost all remaining forests are now legally protected (Silva, 1999), but this has not averted threats. There are records from 18 Venezuelan national parks (Wege & Long 1995, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). Captive breeding and reintroduction in Venezuela has been proposed. In Venezuela, it is legally protected and an education programme draws attention to the species and its habitat Strahl et al. 1997, cited in BirdLife International, 2008). A new reserve, appropriately named Pauxi pauxi Bird Reserve has been established in the Cerro de la Paz to protect the species. Causes of the severe decline of the species in North Venezuela have been deforestation and indiscriminate hunting (for food, and in the case of Indians, also for its casque, or ‗helmet‘, that is used in necklaces), factors that also occur in other parts of species‘ range.

REFERENCES: BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Pauxi pauxi. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 9/10/2008. Franco-Maya, A. M. & Álvarez, M. 2002. Pauxi pauxi. In Renjifo, M. L., Franco-Maya, A. M., Amaya-Espinel, J. D., Kattan, G. H. & López-Lanús, B., eds. Libro rojo de aves de Colombia. Bogota: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt y Ministerio del Medio Ambiente. Pp. 131-134 del Hoyo, J. 1994. Family Cracidae (chachalacas, guans and curassows). In del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol 2: New World vultures to guineafowl. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Pp. 310-363 Silva, J. L. 1999. Notes on the distribution of Pauxi pauxi and Aburria aburria in Venezuela. Wilson Bulletin 111: 564-569. Strahl, S., Rojas-S, F. & Herrera, A. M. 1997. En peligro: el Pauji Copete de Piedra (Pauxi pauxi) un programa de concientización ambiental. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, D., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, Canada and Blaine, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 197-200 Wege, D. C. & Long, A. J. 1995. Key Areas for threatened birds in the Neotropics. Cambridge, U.K.: BirdLife International (BirdLife Conservation Series 05).

FURTHER READING: Collar, N. J., Gonzaga, L. P., Krabbe, N., Madroño Nieto, A., Naranjo, L. G., Parker, T. A. & Wege, D. C. (1992) Threatened birds of the Americas: the ICBP/IUCN Red Data Book. Cambridge, U.K.: International Council for Bird Preservation.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: CRACIDAE

SPECIES: Penelopina nigra

SYNONYMS: Penelope niger

COMMON NAMES: Berggoean (Dutch), Black Chachalaca (English), Black Pajuil (English), Black Penelopina (English), Highland Guan (English), Little Guan (English), Ylänkösaku (Finnish), Pénélope noire (French), Pénélope pajuil (French), Mohrenguan (German), Penelopina (German), Schuchtenguan (German), Ciacialaca nero del Guatemala (Italian), Chachalaca negra (Spanish), Guan negro (Spanish), Pava pajuil (Spanish), bergsguanhöna (Swedish), svart penelopehöna (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: El Salvador (br), Guatemala (br), Honduras (br), Mexico (br), Nicaragua (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Vulnerable (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: Previous Article 6(4) b suspensions in place for wild specimens from Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico, first imposed on 22/12/1997 and most recently applied on 21/11/1998.

APPENDIX III LISTING: Guatemala (23/04/1981)

TRADE PATTERNS: No imports of this species to the EU have been reported. The only reported trade is of two wild birds exported by Mexico in 2001, and one scientific specimen imported by the United States from Mexico in 2006 (Table 8).

Table 8. Direct exports of Penelopina nigra, 1997-2006. [All trade was in wild-caught specimens] Importer Term Purpose Reported by 2001 2006 Total

live T Importer 2 2

Exporter 2 2 Countries other than EU-27 specimens S Importer 1 1

Exporter

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states BirdLife International (2008) stated that “this species‘ once relatively large population has undergone a rapid decline (owing to habitat loss and degradation, and hunting) which is projected to continue into the future. For this reason it is listed as Vulnerable.‖ A recent extrapolation estimates that all remaining habitat could support a total population of c. 91,000 individuals, although this figure is declining rapidly and this trend is likely to continue (BirdLife International, 2008). Penelopina nigra inhabits wet premontane and montane broadleaved forests of subtropical and temperate zones on Pacific and Caribbean slopes. It can occur at densities of 30 birds/km2 and is probably more common than sightings suggest (del Hoyo, 1994; Howell & Webb, 1995). Since 1990, it has been confirmed from 53 sites throughout its range (Eisermann et al., 2006). Habitat alteration and hunting pressure are the principal threats, and the human population is growing rapidly within the species's range (Eisermann et al., 2006). El Salvador: del Hoyo (1994) considered that it may have been extirpated from the country. Sermeño (1997) noted the occurrence of two subspecies: P. n. nigra, confined to the Santa Ana volcano and the nearby mountains of Ta Sierra Apeneca – Ilamatepec, and P. n. dickeyi in the Esesmiles. The species was found to be relatively common in cloud forest of both areas, but more recently was considerted to be local and uncommon. The species was also reported at Montecristo, in the north-west. Subsistence hunting, sport hunting and habitat destruction were reported as the main threats. It was classified as ‗rare‘ and ‗locally extirpated‘ in the country (Sermeño, 1997). Guatemala: Vannini & Rockstroh (1997) considered that it was still locally common, but that suitable habitat had been reduced to under c.10,000 km2, less than half its original extent. del Hoyo (1994) also referred to it as ―still locally common in areas of Guatemala, such as upper altitudes of Volcán Santa María, Volcán de Fuego, Volcán de Agua and the Atitlán complex; readily observed at Biotopo Mario Dary, in Baja Verapaz.‖ del Hoyo (1994) noted that it was ―locally threatened in Guatemala by marble quarrying operations, involving clearance of forests covering the mountain ridges, particularly in the Sierra de las Minas and the Sierra del Merendón.‖ Honduras: Midence (1997) noted that La Asociación Hondureña de Ecología considered this species as ―in danger of extinction.‖ del Hoyo (1994) considered that it was uncommon and rather local, but that in optimal regions it had recently been found that the species could reach densities of 30 or more birds/km2. Mexico: Considered to be uncommon and local (Eisermann et al., 2006), but moderate numbers were reported in El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve (Gómez de Silva Garza et al., 1999). del Hoyo (1994) considered that it was uncommon and local in Chimalapa region, Oaxaca. Nicaragua: del Hoyo (1994) considered the species to be uncommon and rather local and the most endangered cracid in the country, but noted that in optimal regions it had recently been found that the species could reach densities of 30 or more birds/km2. REFERENCES: BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Penelopina nigra. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 9/10/2008. Eisermann, K. (2005) Noteworthy bird observations in Alta Verapaz, Guatemala. Bull. Brit. Ornithol. Club 125: 3-11. Eisermann, K., Herrera, N. & Komar, O. (2006) Highland Guan (Penelopina nigra). In Brooks, D. M., ed. Conserving cracids: the most threatened family of birds of the Americas. Houston, TX, U.S.A.: Houston Museum of Natural Science. Pp. 86-91 Gómez de Silva Garza, H., González-García, F. & Casillas-Trejo, M. P. 1999. Birds of the upper cloud forest of El Triunfo, Chiapas, Mexico. Ornitol. Neotrop. 10: 1-26.

Howell, S.N.G. & Webb, S. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford: Oxford University Press. del Hoyo, J. 1994. Family Cracidae (chachalacas, guans and curassows). In del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol 2: New World vultures to guineafowl. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Pp. 310-363 Midence, S. F. 1997. Informe de la familia Cracidae en Honduras. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 335-339 Sermeño, A. 1997. Situación de la familia Cracidae en El Salvador. In Strahl, S. D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D. M., Begazo, A. J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The Cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, BC, Canada and Blaine, WA, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 320-324 Vannini, J.P. & Rockstroh, P.M. 1997. The status of cracids in Guatemala. In Strahl, S.D., Beaujon, S., Brooks, D.M., Begazo, A.J., Sedaghatkish, G. & Olmos, F., eds. The cracidae: their biology and conservation. Surrey, Canada and Blaine, USA: Hancock House Publishers. Pp. 326-334

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: PHASIANIDAE

SPECIES: Arborophila campbelli

SYNONYMS:

COMMON NAMES: Campbell's Hill Partridge (English)

RANGE STATES: Malaysia

IUCN RED LIST: Least Concern

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Malaysia (13/11/1986)

TRADE PATTERNS: No trade in this species has been reported 1997-2006. CONSERVATION STATUS in range states Taxonomic note Arborophila orientalis (Sibley & Monroe, 1990, 1993) was split into A. orientalis, A. sumatrana, A. rolli and A. campbelli following Mees (1996) as recognised by the CITES standard reference for nomenclature, Dickinson (2003). Malaysia: The Malaysian Partridge Arborophila campbelli is endemic to Peninsular Malaysia where it is confined to primary broadleaved evergreen forest at 750-1600 m in the central highland ridge (Madge & McGowan, 2002). A. campbelli was assessed by BirdLife International in 2008 and considered of Least Concern in the IUCN Red List (BirdLife International, 2008). The species is reportedly fairly common within suitable habitat, however further studies are required in order to determine whether any population declines are occurring (BirdLife International, 2008). BirdLife International (2008) was of the opinion that the species is unlikely to be affected by habitat loss because of the inaccessibility of much of its range. However Wells (1999) had a general expectation of more disruption of mountain forest cover in the near future, although he did not identify any specific conservation issues. There are varying reports of the species‘ abundance. Madge & McGowan (2002) reported the species as sparsely distributed in suitable hill forest throughout the highlands, including the Cameron Highlands and Bukit Fraser (Fraser‘s Hill) Wildlife Sanctuaries (Madge & McGowan, 2002). There have been several recent reports from Fraser‘s Hill including Bakewell (2006) and Carlberg et al. (2000). McGowan (1994) and G. W. H. Davison (pers. comm. in McGowan et al., 1995) also considered A. campbelli to be sparsely distributed in suitable

habitat. Robson (2002) noted the species is an uncommon to fairly common resident while Wells (1999) considered it more or less regular and more or less common. According to G. W. H. Davison (pers. comm. in Wells, 1999) it survives in quite small (down to 5 ha) forest isolates in tea plantations in the Cameron Highlands. REFERENCES: Bakewell, D. 2006. Photograph of Campbell‘s Hill Partridge Arborophila campbelli at Fraser‘s Hill. Oriental Bird Images. URL: http://orientalbirdimages.org/birdimages.php?action=birdspecies&Bird_ID=2799 Accessed 2 October 2008. BirdLife International 2008. Species factsheet: Arborophila campbelli. URL: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 24 September 2008. Carlberg, T. Lundberg, P. & Lundquist, T. 2000. Trip Report: Peninsular Malaysia, July 1-16, 2000 URL http://www.camacdonald.com/birding/tripreports/MalaysiaTC00.html Accessed 2 October 2008. Dickinson, E.C. (ed.) 2003. The Howard and Moore Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World. Revised and enlarged 3rd Edition. Christopher Helm, London. Madge, S. & McGowan, P. 2002. Pheasants, partridges and grouse. London, UK: Christopher Helm. McGowan, P. J. K. 1994. Phasianidae (Pheasants and Partridges). In del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Saragatal, J. (eds.) (1994) Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 2 New World Vultures to Guineafowl. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx edicions. Pp. 434-553 McGowan, P. J. K., Dowell, S. D., Carroll, J. P. & Aebischer, N. J. & the WPA/BirdLife/SSC Partridge, Quail and Francolin Specialist Group 1995. Status survey and conservation action plan 1995-1999. Partridges, quails, francolins, snowcocks and guineafowl. Gland, Switzerland and Reading, UK: IUCN and World Pheasant Association. Mees, G.F. 1996. Geographical variation in birds of Java. Nuttall Ornithological Club 26: 1-119. Robson, C. (2002) Birds of South-East Asia. London, UK: New Holland Publishers. Sibley, C.G. & Monroe, B.L. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale University Press. Sibley, C.G. & Monroe, B.L. 1993. A world checklist of birds. Yale University Press. Wells. D. R. 1999. The birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Vol 1. Non-passerines. London, UK: Academic Press.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: PHASIANIDAE

SPECIES: Arborophila charltonii

SYNONYMS: Perdix charltonii,Tropicoperdix charltonii

COMMON NAMES: Groenpootbospatrijs (Dutch), Chestnut-breasted Tree- Partridge (English), Chestnut-necklaced Hill Partridge (English), Chestnut-necklaced Partridge (English), Suomupuupyy (Finnish), Torquéole à poitrine châtaine (French), Torquéole de Merlin (French), Torquéole des bois (French), Grünfuß-Buschwachtel (German), Pernice a petto castano (Italian), Arborófila pechicastaña (Spanish), Perdiz de bosque de Charlton (Spanish), rödörad sånghöna (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Indonesia (br), Malaysia (br), Thailand (ex?), Viet Nam (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Near Threatened (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Malaysia (13/11/1986)

TRADE PATTERNS: No trade in this species has been reported 1997-2006. CONSERVATION STATUS in range states The Chestnut-necklaced Partridge Arborophila charltonii has four disjunct populations, classified as distinct subspecies. BirdLife International (2008) reported the nominate charltoni from southern Thailand to Peninsular Malaysia; atjenensis in two isolated areas (Aceh and south Sumatra) of Sumatra, Indonesia; tonkinensis occurring in east Tonkin and north Annam, Viet Nam; and graydoni occupying a wide area of Sabah, Malaysia. There is also a specimen from Mt Dulit, Sarawak, Malaysia (BirdLife International, 2008). Population numbers for the subspecies have been estimated based on the area of its lowland forest habitat (Madge & McGowan, 2002; McGowan et al., 1995). A. charltonii was assessed by BirdLife International in 2008 and considered Near Threatened in the IUCN Red List (BirdLife International, 2008). The species reportedly has a disjunct distribution in lowland rainforest where logging is rapid and ongoing and is likely to be undergoing a moderately rapid population reduction (BirdLife International, 2008).

Madge & McGowan (2002) considered that the species has become very scarce through logging. The chief threat to the species is thought to be extensive forest loss (BirdLife International, 2008; Madge & McGowan, 2002; McGowan et al., 1995; Wells, 1999). McGowan et al. (1995) also gave habitat degradation as a threat, while BirdLife International (2008) stated it is scarcer in logged forest. According to BirdLife International (2008) declines are compounded by trapping for the cage-bird industry, although the species‘ use of secondary growth and higher elevations implies it is not immediately threatened. Wells (1999) pointed out that the species is open to trapping in small forest patches. No further information could be located on trapping for trade. Myanmar: Although the species was given for southern Myanmar (charltoni) by some authors (e.g. BirdLife International, 2008; McGowan et al., 1995; Robson, 2002), others (Madge & McGowan, 2002; Wells, 1999) did not report it in the country and no records from the country could be located and it probably has not been recorded there. A. charltonii was listed for Tenasserim by Peters (1934). According to Smythies (1953) its occurrence in Tenasserim rests on the statements of Baker (1928), Riley (1938) and Chasen (1935), although the latter reference did not mention Tenasserim. The species was listed without details by Baker (1928) from Tenasserim and by Riley (1938) from southern Tenasserim. Blanford (1898) reported ―Hume repeatedly refers to a story, which he discredits, of this species having been brought from Southern Tenasserim; but I cannot not find any trustworthy record of a Burmese habitat.‖ Hume & Davison (1878) stated: ―Although the species is said to occur in Tenasserim, I very much doubt the fact. If it occurred anywhere, it would be at the extreme south of that province and this is just the portion that we have most exhaustively worked. However it may occur....‖. Doubts were also expressed in Hume and Marshall (1879): ―This species is said to have been sent from the Southern Tenasserim Hills, but I very much doubt whether it really occurs within our limits‖. Blyth (1867) gave ‗Tenasserim Mountains‘ as the species‘ locality but no further information and Blanford (1898) considered this statement by Blyth a ―palpable misprint.‖ Thailand: The species is reportedly on the verge of extinction in Thailand, where it is known only from a tiny area in Khlong Phraya National Park (Madge and McGowan, 2002; Wells, 1999). Malaysia: According to Madge & McGowan (2002) the vast majority of the nominate race charltoni occurs in Malaysia. Population numbers were estimated to be less than 1,000 (Madge & McGowan, 2002; McGowan et al., 1995), and ranging from 100-10,000, possibly under 1,000 (BirdLife International, 2008). Wells (1999) considered the species local and uncommon to sparse in Peninsular Malaysia . Two records were located from Taman Negara National Park (Riley, 2006; Wells, 1999). Numbers of the only other race in Malaysia (graydoni) were estimated to be more than 100 (BirdLife International, 2008) and as probably a few hundred by (Madge & McGowan, 2002; McGowan et al., 1995). This race was reported to be very common in Danum Valley Conservation Area, Sabah, Malaysia (D. Yong verbally 1999 in BirdLife International, 2008). Smythies & Davison (1999) reported that the species is protected in Sarawak, although they pointed out it has not been recorded from that state. Indonesia: Madge & McGowan (2002) considered the species to be very rare in Indonesia (Sumatra). They reported that it had been unrecorded there for several years and that it had almost certainly disappeared from the south (with the forest), with small numbers probably persisting in the northern lowlands (Madge & McGowan, 2002). A population of less than 100 has been estimated in Indonesia (Madge & McGowan, 2002; McGowan et al., 1995). It is not recorded from any protected area in Indonesia according to McGowan et al. (1995). Viet Nam: It is reportedly still locally quite common and is found in three protected areas in the north (Madge & McGowan 2002). Robson (2002) also considered the species locally common in Viet Nam. A country population of possibly under 10,000 has been estimated (BirdLife International, 2008). REFERENCES: Baker, E. C. S. 1928. The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Birds Vol. V. London, UK: Taylor and Francis.

Blyth, E. 1867. The ornithology of India. A commentary on Dr. Jerdon‘s ‗Birds of India’. Ibis X : 160. BirdLife International 2008. Species factsheet: Arborophila charltonii. URL: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 24 September 2008. Blanford, W. T. 1898. The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. London, UK: Taylor and Francis. Chasen, F. N. 1935..A handlist of Malaysian birds. Raffles Museum, Singapore Bull. 11. Hume, A. O. & Davison, W. 1878. A revised list of the birds of Tenasserim. Stray Feathers VI(1- 6): 1-524. Hume, A. O. & Marshall, C. H. T. 1879. The game birds of India, Burmah and Ceylon. London: John Bale McGowan, P. J. K., Dowell, S. D., Carroll, J. P. & Aebischer, N. J. & the WPA/BirdLife/SSC Partridge, Quail and Francolin Specialist Group 1995. Status survey and conservation action plan 1995-1999. Partridges, quails, francolins, snowcocks and guineafowl. Gland, Switzerland and Reading, UK: IUCN and World Pheasant Association. Madge, S. & McGowan, P. 2002. Pheasants, partridges and grouse. London, UK: Christopher Helm. Peters, J. L. 1934. Check-list of birds of the world. Vol. II. Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press. Riley, J. H. 1938. Birds from Siam and the Malay Peninsula in the United States National Museum collected by Drs Hugh M. Smith and William L. Abbott. United States National Museum Bulletin 172. 581 pp. Washington D.C., USA: Smithsonian Institution. Riley, S. 2006. The birds and mammals recorded on the VENT Malay Peninsular tour, 2006. URL: http://ventbird.com/system/tour_departure/legacy_birdlist/376/806ML_BL.pdf Accessed 2 October 2008. Robson, C. (2002) Birds of South-East Asia. London, UK: New Holland Publishers. Smythies, B. E. 1953. The birds of Burma. London, UK: Oliver and Boyd. Smythies, B. E. & Davison, G. W. H. 1999. The birds of Borneo. Kota Kinabalu, Sabah: Natural History Publications (Borneo). Wells. D. R. 1999. The birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Vol 1. Non-passerines. London, UK: Academic Press.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: PHASIANIDAE

SPECIES: Lophura erythrophthalma

SYNONYMS: Houppifer erythrophthalmus, Phasianus erythrophthalmus

COMMON NAMES: Kuifloze vuurrugfazant (Dutch), Crestless Fireback (English), Rufous-tailed Pheasant (English), Ruosteselkäfasaani (Finnish), Faisan à queue rousse (French), Gelbschwanzfasan (German), Fagiano senza cresta a groppone rosso (Italian), Faisán colicanelo (Spanish), Faisán de carúncula azul (Spanish), tofslös eldryggsfasan (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Brunei Darussalam (br), Indonesia (br), Malaysia (br), Singapore (ex)

IUCN RED LIST: Vulnerable (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Malaysia (13/11/1986)

TRADE PATTERNS: Low numbers of captive-bred birds are traded between pheasant breeders annually. Four wild birds were reported as exports from Malaysia to the United Arab Emirates in 1997 (Table 9).

Table 9. Direct exports of Lophura erythrophthalma, 1997-2006. Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total

Cyprus Netherlands live T C Importer 6 6

Exporter 3 3

Malta United Kingdom live - C Importer 1 1

Exporter

United Kingdom Malaysia live B C Importer 2 2

Exporter 4 4

specimens S W Importer 13 13

Exporter

United States live B C Importer

Exporter 1 1

F Importer 2 2

Exporter

live B C Importer 6 6

Exporter 1 6 2 9

W Importer

Exporter 4 4

P C Importer 2 6 8 Countries other than EU-27 Exporter 1 1

T C Importer 1 2 2 6 11

Exporter 2 9 4 7 22

O Importer 8 8

Exporter

Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total

Z F Importer 1 1

Exporter

specimens S F Importer 1 1

Exporter

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states The Crestless Fireback Lophura erythrophthalma was reported to occur in suitable habitat throughout the Sunda region, from northern Peninsular Malaysia through Sumatra to Borneo, including Sarawak, Brunei, Sabah and Kalimantan (Madge & McGowan, 2002). L. erythrophthalma was assessed by BirdLife International in 2008 and considered Vulnerable in the IUCN Red List. Fuller & Garson (2000) and BirdLife International (2008) were of the opinion that the continuing rapid reduction in extent and quality of this pheasant‘s lowland rainforest habitat, across most of its known range, implies a rapid population reduction. The species was reported to be very scarce and local (BirdLife International, 2001). D. A. Holmes in litt. to Fuller & Garson (2000) and BirdLife International (2008) considered the overriding threats to the species were habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation as a result of large-scale commercial logging (even within protected areas), and widespread clearance for plantations of rubber and oil palm. BirdLife International (2008) reported that the rates of forest loss in the Sundaic lowlands have been extremely rapid. Hunting for food may pose an additional, more localised threat, according to O‘Brien et al. (1998). R. Sözer (in litt. to BirdLife International, 2001) reported a regular trade in live specimens out of Kuching, Sarawak. No further information could be found on this trade. According to Johnsgard (1999) the species‘ future depends upon the preservation of adequate areas of primary or mature secondary forests. Madge & McGowan (2002) and Wells (1999) considered that the future of L. erythrophthalma seems likely to rely on maintaining tracts of plains forest in protected areas. Malaysia: The species was formerly reported as occurring throughout Peninsular Malaysia southwards from Kedah, but commonest in the more southerly districts (Robinson & Chasen, 1936). Robinson & Chasen (1936) stated that ―the species was by no means common in the central part of the Peninsula, although at one time it must have been very abundant in the territory of Malacca and northern Johore, judging from the numbers of Malacca trade skins that were to be found in European museums‖ (Robinson & Chasen, 1936). Wells (1999) considered the species uncommon to more or less common in Peninsular Malaysia, and Madge & McGowan (2002) reported it to be quite sparsely distributed both in Peninsular and East Malaysia. Holmes (1989) was of the opinion that continued forest clearance outside well-protected areas in Peninsular Malaysia must be causing a rapid decline. There is reportedly some evidence of tolerance of secondary forest by the species, but this is only limited to populations in Peninsular Malaysia (BirdLife International, 2008; Madge & McGowan, 2002). L. erythrophthalma is apparently rare in Sarawak and there have only been a few records from Sabah according to BirdLife International (2001, 2008) and Smythies & Davison (1999). L. erythrophthalma is known from a number of protected areas in Malaysia. In Peninsular Malaysia there have been several records from Taman Negara National Park since the 1980s (e.g. Fischer, 1998; Fuller & Garson, 2000; Mitzen, 2008; D. Rogers in litt. 1999 to BirdLife International, 2001; Rufray, 2005) , although numbers were thought to be very small (BirdLife International, 2001). Other protected areas where the species has been recorded recently include Sungkai Wildlife Reserve in 1993 (K. H. Phon in litt. 1999 to BirdLife International, 2001), Krau Wildlife Reserve (Fuller & Garson, 2000), Sungai Klah Forest Reserve and Besout Forest Reserve (Siti Hawa Yatim 1993 in BirdLife International, 2001), Pasoh Forest Reserve (D. Cooper & F. Cooper in litt., 1999 to BirdLife International, 2001; Miura et al., 1997), and Panti Forest Reserve (Bird Malaysia, 2008; Ding Li, 2006). In Sarawak it has been recorded from Gunung Mulu National Park (Fuller & Garson, 2000; Smythies & Davison 1999), Batang Ai National Park (Meredith, 1995; Ritai, 1998; Sarawak Forestry, 2006) , in 2006 in Loagan Bunut National Park (UNDP, 2006) and in Samunsam Wildlife Sanctuary in 1986 (A. C. Sebastian in litt. 1999 to BirdLife International, 2001). The species is protected in Sarawak (Smythies & Davison, 1999).

Brunei Darussalam: There are few records of L. erythrophthalma from Brunei, including from Labu, presumably Labu Forest Reserve in 1949 (Gore, 1968), Ulu Belait, undated (Smythies & Davies, 1999) and one seen at Seria in 1982 (Vowles & Vowles, 1997). No later records of the species could be located from Brunei. Indonesia: BirdLife International (2008) considered that continuing forest clearance throughout the Indonesian lowlands must be causing a rapid decline. L. erythrophthalma is scarce on Sumatra and in Kalimantan where it occurs in low densities, according to Madge and McGowan (2002). It is found uncommonly in Sebangau National Park, Central Kalimantan (Dragiewicz et al., 2007). Fuller & Garson (2000) indicated there are just a handful of recent records from Sumatra, all from Riau and Jambi Provinces. In 2003 the species was also recorded from Jambi Province in the Kandang River area where the Anak Dalam tribe report they regularly encounter and occasionally trap this species (Mauro, 2003). L. erythrophthalma was in 1991 reported from nearby Bukit Tigapuluh (Danielsen & Heegaard, 1995) which achieved National Park status in 2001 (Lambert and Collar, 2002). BirdLife International (2008) pointed out that following the withdrawal of records from Way Kambas National Park and an apparently erroneous listing for Kerinci-Seblat National Park, it remained to be ascertained whether the species occurs in other protected areas on Sumatra. There are rather few recent records from Kalimantan. These include reports from Tanjung Puting National Park (Fuller & Garson, 2000; Holmes, 1997), from Gunung Palung National Park (Laman et al., 1996) and from Sebangau National Park (Dragiewicz et al., 2007). REFERENCES: BirdLife International 2001. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data Book. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. URl: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 30 September 2008. BirdLife International 2008. Species factsheet: Lophura erythrophthalma URL: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 30 September 2008. Danielsen, F. & Heegard, M. 1995. The birds of Bukit Tigapuluh, southern Riau, Sumatra. Kukila 7: 99-120. Dragiewicz, M., Husson, S.J., Allinson, T. & Page, S.E., 2007. Avifauna of the Sabangau Peat- Swamp Forest. http://www.orangutantrop.com/BirdList2007.pdf Accessed 30 October 2008. Ding Li, Yong 2006. Preliminary List of Larger Vertebrates in the Panti Forest Reserve, South Johore (2002-2006 URL: http://wildbirdsingapore.nss.org.sg/Store/Panti%20Vertebrate%20List.pdf Accessed 30 September 2008. Fischer, D. 1998. Trip Report: Peninsular Malaysia, February 22 - March 8, 1998. URL: http://www.camacdonald.com/birding/tripreports/Malaysia98.html Accessed 30 September 2008. Fuller, R. A. & Garson, P. J. (eds.) 2000. Pheasants status survey and conservation action plan 2000- 2004. WPA/BirdLife/SSC Pheasant Specialist Group. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN and Reading, UK: World Pheasant Association. Gore, M. E. J. 1968. A check-list of the birds of Sabah, Borneo. Ibis 110: 165-196. Harrap, S. 1986. Birding in Peninsular Malaysia. Unpublished. Holmes, D. A. 1989. Status report on Indonesian Galliformes Kukila 4: 133-143. Holmes, D. A. 1997. Kalimantan bird report – 2. Kukila 9: 141-169. Johnsgard, P. A. 1999. Pheasants of the world. Biology and natural history. Second edition. Shrewsbury, UK: Swan Hill Press. Laman, T. G., Gaither, J. C. & Lukas, D. E. 1996. Rain forest bird diversity in Gunung Palung National Park, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Tropical Biodiversity 3: 281-296. Lambert, F. R. & Collar, N. J. 2002. The future for Sundaic lowland forest birds: long-term effects of commercial logging and fragmentation. Forktail 18:127-146. Madge, S. & McGowan, P. 2002. Pheasants, partridges and grouse. London, UK: Christopher Helm.

Mauro, I. 2003. A rapid ornithological assessment of Asialog Forest Concession, Jambi Province, South-Sumatra, Indonesia. International report to BirdLife International. BirdLife International (2008). Meredith, M. 1995. A faunal survey of Batang Ai National Park, Sarawak, Malaysia. Sarawak Mus. J. 48(69): 133-161. Miura, S., Yasuda, M. & Ratnam, L. 1997. Who steals the fruits? Monitoring frugivorous mammals in a tropical rainforest. Malay. Nature Journal 50: 183-193. Mitzen, T. 2008. The Greater Sundas: Borneo, Sumatra, Java and West Malaysia - June - July 2008. Bird report. URL: http://www.surfbirds.com/trip_report.php?id=1475 Accessed 30 September 2008. O‘Brien, T. G., Winarni, N. L., Saanin, F. M., Kinnaird, M. F. & Jepson, P. 1998. Distribution and conservation status of Bornean peacock-pheasant Polyplectron schleiermacheri in central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Bird Conservation International 8: 373-385. Ritai, P. 1998. Birds seen at Batang Ai National Park (9-18th Oct & 16th – 22nd Nov 1992. URL: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/6980/batangai.html Accessed 30 September 2008. Robinson H. C. & Chasen, F. N. 1936. The birds of the Malay Peninsula. Volume III. Sporting birds; birds of the seashore and estuaries. London, UK: H. F. and G. Witherby. URL: http://rmbr.nus.edu.sg/biblio/robinson_chasen/#vol3 Accessed 30 September 2008. Rufray, X. 2005. Photograph of Crestless Fireback, Taman Negara National Park, March 2003. Oriental Bird Images. URL: http://orientalbirdimages.org/photographers.php?p=67&action=birderimages&Bird_Ima ge_ID=15140&Birder_ID=501 Accessed 30 September 2008. Sarawak Forestry Corporation 2006. Batang Ai National Park, URL: http://www.sarawakforestry.com/htm/snp-np-batangai.asp Accessed 30 September 2008. Smythies, B. E. & Davison, G. W. H. 1999. The birds of Borneo. Kota Kinabalu, Sabah: Natural History Publications (Borneo). UNDP. 2006. Peat swamp forests – a haven for birds. URL: http://www.undp.org.my/uploads/Peat_swamp_forests_a_haven_for_birds.pdf Accessed 30 September 2008. Vowles, G. A. & Vowles, R. S. 1997. An annotated checklist of the birds of Brunei. Newent, UK: Centro de Estudos Ornitologicos no Algarve. Wells. D. R. 1999. The birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Vol 1. Non-passerines. London, UK: Academic Press.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: PHASIANIDAE

SPECIES: Lophura ignita

SYNONYMS: Lophura rufa, Phasianus ignitus, Phasianus rufus

COMMON NAMES: Borneo ildrygget fasan (Danish), Gekuifde vuurrugfazant (Dutch), Crested Fireback (English), Vieillot's Fireback (English), Kruunufasaani (Finnish), Faisan noble (French), Hauben-Feuerrückenfasan (German), Fagiano nobile (Italian), Faisán de carúncula azul crestado (Spanish), Faisán noble (Spanish), vitstjärtad eldryggsfasan (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Brunei Darussalam (br), Indonesia (br), Malaysia (br), Myanmar (br), Thailand (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Near Threatened (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Malaysia (13/11/1986)

TRADE PATTERNS: Small numbers of captive-bred birds are traded between pheasant breeders annually (Table 10), the main producer countries being Belgium and the Netherlands. Four wild birds were reported as exports from Malaysia to the United Arab Emirates in 1997 (Table 10).

Table 10. Direct exports of Lophura ignita, 1997-2006. Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

Cyprus Belgium live B C Importer

Exporter 2 2

Malta Denmark live - C Importer 1 1

Exporter

skins T C Importer

Exporter 1 1

Poland Czech Republic live Z C Importer 1 1

Exporter 1 1

Germany live Z C Importer 2 2

Exporter 2 2

Unite d Kingdom Malaysia live B C Importer 2 2

Exporter 4 4

specimens S W Importer 5 5

Exporter

South Africa eggs P C Importer

Exporter 1 1

United States live B C Importer

Exporter 3 3

F Importer 3 3

Exporter

T C Importer 1 1

Exporter

Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total

- C Importer

Exporter 1 1

specimens - C Importer

Exporter 3 3

live B C Importer 2 4 6

Exporter 2 6 6 4 12 30

W Importer

Exporter 4 4

P C Importer 2 2 4

Exporter

T C Importer 10 32 38 8 6 10 104 Countries other than EU-27 Exporter 4 26 56 65 39 6 6 4 10 216

O Importer 20 20

Exporter

Z C Importer

Exporter 1 2 3

skins T C Importer

Exporter 4 1 5

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states The Crested Fireback Lophura ignita is known from extreme southern Tenasserim in Myanmar, peninsular Thailand, Peninsular and East Malaysia, and Kalimantan, Sumatra and Bangka Island in Indonesia (BirdLife International, 2008). The species was assessed by BirdLife International in 2008 and considered Near Threatened in the IUCN Red List (BirdLife International, 2008). L. ignita is considered a lowland forest specialist inhabiting a region where logging is rife and the species is therefore thought to be experiencing a moderately rapid population decline (BirdLife International, 2008). According to Johnsgard (1999) the future of L. ignita in its native range depends on the survival of suitable primary forest. BirdLife International (2008) and Madge & McGowan (2002) were of the opinion that although it has been recorded in logged forest, the species‘ tolerance of secondary habitats is unclear. ―If it was found to be less tolerant of logged habitat than is currently suspected, then it might qualify for uplisting to Vulnerable‖ (BirdLife International, 2008). Madge & McGowan (2002) considered that the species‘ future appears reliant on maintaining tracts of plains forest in protected areas. BirdLife International (2001) pointed out that forest destruction in the Sundaic lowlands of Indonesia and Malaysia has been extensive. The declines of L. ignita were considered compounded by trapping for the cage-bird industry (BirdLife International, 2008), although no country was specified and no further information could be found on this. Myanmar: L. ignita was reported as sparingly distributed through the Victoria Point subdivision of Mergui district (southern Tenasserim) (Smith, 1943); this information was repeated by Smythies (1953). There were also earlier reports of the species from extreme southern Tenasserim by Baker (1928), Blanford (1898), Hume & Davison (1878), and Riley (1938). According to BirdLife International (2008) there are no recent records of the species for Myanmar and it was not listed for Myanmar by Madge & McGowan (2002). McGowan (1994) considered the species was probably only ever sparsely distributed in the country. Thailand: According to BirdLife International (2008) the species is rare in Thailand, where it occurs in the peninsula; it is now considered extinct on Phuket Island (BirdLife International, 2008). McGowan (1994) also considered the species rare in Thailand and probably endangered as a result of extensive destruction of lowland forests. It was reported to be rare in the south by Robson (2002). Madge & McGowan (2002) were of the opinion that it is almost certainly restricted to boundary strips of lowland forest in protected areas in the south of the country, which are mainly on mountains and where it is hunted. The species is known from Khao Luang National Park (Madge & McGowan, 2002). Peninsular Malaysia: L. ignita was reportedly widely distributed throughout in lowland jungle, but not very abundant (Robinson & Chasen, 1936). BirdLife International (2008) considered that its current distribution was rather poorly known, despite recent records from protected areas, including Taman Negara National Park and Krau Wildlife Reserve. The species was reported as local and sparse to more or less common in Peninsular Malaysia by Wells (1999), uncommon by McGowan (1994) and sparsely distributed by Madge & McGowan (2002). It was considered probably declining outside well-protected areas in the Thai-Malay peninsula (BirdLife International, 2008). In Borneo, Smythies & Davison (1999) reported L. ignita as common in lowland forests throughout. McGowan (1994) considered it is probably common in Sabah and may actually be commoner in logged than in undisturbed forests. It is apparently still locally common in Sabah according to BirdLife International (2008), where it occurs in Danum Valley Conservation Area (e.g. Carattello, 2003; Penhallurick, 2000). In Sarawak it was reported from Gunung Mulu National Park (G. W. H. Davison in litt. 1994 to BirdLife International, 2008). The species is protected in Sarawak (Smythies & Davison, 1999).

Brunei Darussalam: There are a few records of the pheasant from Brunei: Mann (1987, 1991), and Smythies & Davison (1999). The latest record was a specimen dated 1987 (Mann, 1991); no more recent information on the species in Brunei could be located. Indonesia: BirdLife International (2008) considered L. ignita to be declining in lowland Indonesia, based on rates of forest loss, but reported it is apparently still locally common on Kalimantan and Sumatra (BirdLife International, 2008). The species is reportedly reasonably common on Sumatra and in Kalimantan (Madge & McGowan, 2002). The species was considered probably secure in Indonesia although the population of Bangka Island representing the link between Sumatran and Bornean populations, was probably endangered or even extinct, as a result of habitat loss (McGowan, 1994). In Kalimantan it was reported in the east from Tanjung Puting National Park (Madge & McGowan, 2002), from Kutai National Park (Anon., 2008), in Ulu Barito and near Malinau (McGowan, 1994). The species was also found in East Kalimantan during a survey of unlogged forest of the Malinau timber concession surrounding Kayan Mentarang National Park in 1998 (O‘Brien & Fimbel, 2001) and in a survey of logged forest in PT Daisy logging concession, Berau district in 2001 (Eames, 2005). According to McGowan (1994) the species was common in dry, heavily disturbed forests of Way Kambas National Park, south Sumatra, and was also reported common there by Olah & Simay (2007). In Jambi Province, south Sumatra in April 2003, questioned Anak Dalam tribal people stated the species was still regularly encountered in the Kadang River area, sometimes even venturing on the logging tracks and occasionally caught in ground snares (Mauro, 2003). It was listed for Gunung Leuser National Park (Sumatra) by Sumardja (1981) and van Marle & Voous (1988), but not recorded there during a survey carried out between 1995 and 2000 (Buij et al., 2006). REFERENCES: Anon. 2008. Birds of Kutai National Park, Kalimantan, Indonesia. National Parks Indonesia. URL: http://indonesiatraveling.com/National%20Parks%20Indonesia/kalimantan%20pages/k utai/birds.htm Accessed 29 September 2008. Baker, E. C. S. 1928. The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Birds Vol. V. London, UK: Taylor and Francis. BirdLife International 2001. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data Book. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. URL: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 30 September 2008. BirdLife International 2008. Species factsheet: Lophura ignita. URL: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 29 September 2008. Blanford, W. T. 1898. The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. London, UK: Taylor and Francis. Buij, R., Fox, E. A., & Wich, S. A. 2006. Birds of Gunung Leuser National Park, Northern Sumatra. Kukila 13: 23-47. Carettello, R. 2003. Photograph of Crested Fireback Lophura ignita, Danum Valley, Sabah. URL: http://www.mangoverde.com/birdsound/picpages/pic38-128-1.html Accessed 2 October 2008. Eames, J. C. 2005. A preliminary ornithological assessment and conservation evaluation of the PT Daisy logging concession, Berau district, East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Forktial 21: 51–60 URL: http://www.orientalbirdclub.org/publications/forktail/21pdf/Eames-Daisy.pdf Accessed 29 September 2008. Hume, A. O. & Davison, W. 1878. A revised list of the birds of Tenasserim. Stray Feathers VI(1- 6): 1-524. Johnsgard, P. A. 1999. Pheasants of the world. Biology and natural history. Second edition. Shrewsbury, UK: Swan Hill Press. McGowan, P. J. K. 1994. Phasianidae (Pheasants and Partridges) Pp. 434-553 in del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. and Saragatal, J. (eds.) 1994. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 2 New World Vultures to Guineafowl. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx edicions.

Madge, S. & McGowan, P. 2002. Pheasants, partridges and grouse. London, UK: Christopher Helm. Mann, C. 1987. A checklist of the birds of Brunei Darussalam. Brunei Museum Journal 6(3): 170- 212. Mann, C. 1991. Bird report for Negara Brunei Darussalam, July 1988-June 1990. Brunei Museum Journal 7(3): 86-111. van Marle, J. G. & Voous, K. H. 1988. The birds of Sumatra. B. O. U. Checklist No. 10. Tring, UK: British Ornithologists Union. Mauro, I. 2003. A rapid ornithological assessment of Asialog Forest Concession, Jambi Province, South-Sumatra, Indonesia. International report to BirdLife International. BirdLife International (2008). O‘Brien, T.G. & R. A. Fimbel (eds.) 2001. Faunal Surveys in unlogged forest of the INHUTANI II Malinau timber concession, East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, USA. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) URL: http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/mla/_ref/publications/detail/faunal.htm Accessed 29 September 2008. Olah, J. & Simay, A. 2007. Birding Hotspot: Way Kambas National Park, Indonesia, the best Asian night-birding. BirdingASIA 8:39-44. URL: http://www.orientalbirdclub.org/publications/ba8pdfs/olah-waykambas.pdf Accessed 29 September 2008. Penhallurick, J. 2000. Trip Report: Sabah, NE Borneo (Malaysia), April 15-28, 2000 URL: http://www.camacdonald.com/birding/tripreports/Borneo00.html Accessed 2 October 2008. Riley, J. H. 1938. Birds from Siam and the Malay Peninsula in the United States National Museum collected by Drs Hugh M. Smith and William L. Abbott. United States National Museum Bulletin 172. 581 pp. Washington D.C., USA: Smithsonian Institution. Robinson H. C. & Chasen, F. N. 1936. The birds of the Malay Peninsula. Volume III. Sporting birds; birds of the seashore and estuaries. London, UK: H. F. and G. Witherby. URL: http://rmbr.nus.edu.sg/biblio/robinson_chasen/#vol3 Accessed 29 September 2008. Robson, C. 2002. Birds of South-East Asia. London, UK: New Holland Publishers. Smith, R. C. 1943. Notes on birds of Burma. Privately published. Smythies, B. E. 1953. The birds of Burma. London, UK: Oliver and Boyd. Smythies, B. E. & Davison, G. W. H. 1999. The birds of Borneo. Kota Kinabalu, Sabah: Natural History Publications (Borneo). Sumardja, E. A. 1981. First five national parks in Indonesia. Parks 6(2): 1-4. In Johnsgard (1999). Wells. D. R. 1999. The birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Vol 1. Non-passerines. London, UK: Academic Press.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: CAPITONIDAE

SPECIES: Semnornis ramphastinus

SYNONYMS:

COMMON NAMES: Toekanbaardvogel (Dutch), Toucan Barbet (English), Kauluriseppä (Finnish), Cabézon toucan (French), Caebézon toucan (French), Toucan barbet (French), Tukan-Bartvogel (German), Cabezón tucán (Spanish), rödbukad tukanskäggök (Swedish), tjocknäbbad skäggök (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Colombia (br), Ecuador (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Near Threatened (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Colombia (28/05/1989)

TRADE PATTERNS: No imports of this species to the EU have been reported. The only reported trade is in one live specimen, source unknown, reported as an import from Mexico by the United States in 1997. CONSERVATION STATUS in range states The Toucan Barbet Semnornis ramphastinus occurs on both slopes of the west Andes in south- west Colombia and north-west Ecuador (Hilty & Brown, 1986; Ridgely & Greenfield, 2001). S. ramphastinus was assessed by BirdLife International in 2008 and considered Near Threatened in the IUCN Red List (BirdLife International, 2008a). The species‘ range was reportedly moderately small and thought to be decreasing owing to habitat loss. Its population was also considered to be declining moderately rapidly owing to trapping and habitat loss (BirdLife International, 2008a). ―The species could potentially be uplisted in the near future if illegal trade and habitat destruction continue uncontrolled‖ (BirdLife International, 2008a). Short & Horne (2001) indicated that the species remained common in many places in its small range, although it was trapped as a cage-bird and was suffering loss of habitat. According to Short & Horne (2002) the main problem for the species was taking of birds for the cage-bird trade, as well as by local people for pets, this being a major threat in some areas. In Colombia Hilty et al. (1986) noted S. ramphastinus was a widely sought cage-bird, while Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) also indicated it suffered from trapping pressure due to intense local demand for the bird trade. However, the impact of trapping appeared to be negligible in

Ecuador according to (Ridgely & Greenfield, 2001). No further information could be located on trade or trapping of the species. Dinerstein et al. (1995) were of the opinion that intensive logging, human settlement, cattle grazing, mining and coca and palm cultivation posed threats to the species‘ remaining forests. However, while Short & Horne (2002) considered habitat loss a potential problem, with forest destruction rampant in most of its range, the species appears to be adaptable, and where not molested, it reportedly occupies secondary habitats (Short & Horne, 2002). Surveys at La Planada Nature Reserve, Colombia in the mid to late 1980s suggested a world population of c.73,000 (Restrepo & Mondragón (1987, 1988). Its range was estimated to be 21,900 km2 by BirdLife International (2008a). Ecuador: Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) reported S. ramphastinus uncommon to fairly common in the canopy and borders of montane forest and secondary woodland in the subtropical zone on the west slope of the Andes in the north-west, south to west Cotopaxi. The species has been found recently in several protected areas. It appeared to be common at Cerro Golondrinas Reserve in 1997 (Hornbuckle & Brace, 1997); numerous in Otonga Strict Nature Reserve by Freile & Chaves (2004); fairly common in the Tandayapa and Mindo region, which includes the Mindo Cloud Forest Reserve (Higbee, 2002; Hopkins, 2003; Planting, 2000; Welford, 2000 and van der Woude, 1995); occurs in Santa Lucía Reserve, a small-scale conservation project run by the local community (Planque, 2002; Johnsen, 2007); and recorded in Yanacocha Reserve on the Pinchincha Volcano (Anon., 2008; Jones, undated). Colombia: S. ramphastinus still remains reportedly locally common in the south-west Andes (Short & Horne, 2002). There are recent records from several protected areas, including Río Ñambí reserve where it is fairly common (BirdLife International, 2008a; Hansson, 1999), La Planada Nature Reserve (BirdLife International, 2008b; Restrepo & Mondragón, 1987, 1988), and Reserva Natural Tambito, Cauca (Donegan & Davalos, 1999). Recently it was reported to be common to abundant at Alto de Pisones, a new site for the species (Cuervo et al., 2003). REFERENCES: Anon. 2008. Wings Birding Tour to Ecuador. http://wingsbirds.com/tours/view/34 Accessed 1 October 2008. BirdLife International 2008a. Species factsheet Semnornis ramphastinus URL: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 1 October 2008. BirdLife International 2008b. BirdLife's online World Bird Database: the site for bird conservation. Version 2.1. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. URL: http://www.birdlife.org Accessed 30 September 2008. Cuervo, A.M., Stiles, F.G., Cadena, C.D., Toro, J.L. & Londono, G.A. 2003. New and noteworthy bird records from the northern sector of the Western Andes of Colombia. Bull. Brit. Ornithol. Club 123: 7-24. Dinerstein, E., Olson, D.M., Graham, D.J., Webster, A.L., Primm, S.A., Bookbinder, M.P. & Ledec, G. 1995. A conservation assesssment of the terrestrial ecoregions of Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Donegan, T. M. & Davalos, L. M. 1999. Ornithological observations from Reserva Natural Tambito, Cauca, south-west Colombia. Cotinga 12: 48-55. Freile, J. F. & Chaves, J.A. 2004. Interesting distributional records and notes on the biology of bird species from a cloud forest reserve in north-west Ecuador. Bull. B. O. C. 124: 6-16. Hansson, S. 1999. Peru, Ecuador and Colombia Birding, 6 June – 5 August 1999. URL: http://www.worldtwitch.com/hansson_peru.htm Accessed 1 October 2008. Higbee, R. 2002. Birding the Americas trip report. Ecuador, mid October to mid November 2002. URL: http://maybank.tripod.com/SouthAmerica/Ecuador/Ecuador-10-2002.htm Accessed 1 October 2008. Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.

Hopkins, M. 2003. Ecuador birds photogallery. URL: http://www.pbase.com/hophopkins/ecuador_birds&page=all Accessed 1 October 2008. Hornbuckle, J. & Brace, 1997. Birding Cerro Golondrinas - Northwest Ecuador, 8-11 September 1997. URL: http://www.worldtwitch.com/golondrinas_ecuador.html Accessed 1 October 2008. Johnsen, S. 2007. Santa Lucia: a community conservation success in Ecuador. Neotropical Birding 2: 48-51. Jones, M. undated. Photograph of Toucan Barbet. URL: http://www.art.co.uk/asp/sp- asp/_/pd--12859729/sp-- A/Toucan_Barbet_Cloud_Forest_Western_Slope_of_Pichincha_Volcano_Ecuador.htm Accessed 1 October 2008. Planque, R. 2002. A survey of the avifauna of the Santa Lucia cloud forests, 2000-2001 URL: http://www.santa-lucia.org/birdreport2000.html Accessed 1 October 2008. Planting, D. 2000. Birdwatching trip to Ecuador, October 2000. URL: http://www.surfbirds.com/mb/Trip%20Reports/ecuador-dp.html Accessed 1 October 2008. Restrepo, C. & Mondragón, M. L. 1987. Historia natural de Semnornis ramphastinus (Aves: Capitonidae), una especie vulnerable. Informe finale. Unpublished report. Restrepo, C. & Mondragón, M. L 1988. Der Tukan bartvoel Semnornis ramphastinus gefährdete Art. Trochilus 9: 107-140. Ridgely, R. S. & Greenfield, P. J. 2001. The birds of Ecuador. Status, distribution and taxonomy. London, UK: Christopher Helm. Short, L. & Horne, J. 2001. Toucans, barbets and honeyguides. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Short, L. L. & Horne, J. F. M. 2002. Family Capitonidae (Barbets). Pp. 140-219 in: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. and Sargatal, J. (eds.) 2002. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 7. Jacamars to Woodpeckers. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Welford, M. R. 2000 The importance of early successional habitats to rare, restricted-range, and endangered birds in the Ecuadorian Andes. Bird Conservation International 10 : 351- 359. URL: http://journals.cambridge.org/article_S0959270900000307 Accessed 1 October 2008. van der Woude, J. 1995. Ecuador. Birding trip report. Ecuador (northern part), 27 Aubust – 15 Sept 1995. URL: http://home.tiscali.nl/jvanderw/ecu95/ecurep95.html Accessed 1 October 2008.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: RAMPHASTIDAE

SPECIES: Baillonius bailloni

SYNONYMS: Andigena bailloni, Pteroglossus bailloni, Ramphastos bailloni

COMMON NAMES: Goudtoekan (Dutch), Saffron Toucanet (English), Sahramitukaani (Finnish),Toucan de Baillon (French), Regenbogen-Tukan (German), Arasarí banana (Spanish), grönnäbbad bergstukan (Swedish), saffranstukan (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Argentina (br), Brazil (br), Paraguay (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Near Threatened (↓)

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Argentina (11/06/1992)

TRADE PATTERNS: The Saffron Toucanet has rarely been recorded in international trade (Table 11) apart from ten wild-sourced live birds exported by Brazil to the United States for Zoo purposes between 1999 and 2002. The United Kingdom reported importing two captive-bred specimens in 1997 (Table 11).

Table 1. Direct exports of Baillonius bailloni, 1997-2006. [All specimens were live] Importer Exporter Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1999 2000 2002 Total

United Kingdom United States P C Importer 2 2

Exporter

Z W Importer 2 2 Countries other than EU-27 Exporter 4 2 4 10 - W Importer 4 4

Exporter

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states B. bailloni was classified as Near Threatened by Birdlife (2008) in the IUCN Red List, because it was suspected to be undergoing moderately rapid population declines owing to habitat

loss, hunting and capture for the illegal cagebird trade (Birdlife International, 2008a,b). Its range was estimated to be 654,000 km2 (Birdlife International, 2008b). The following information was reported by Birdlife International (2008b): ―Baillonius bailloni occurs in lowland and montane Atlantic forests of south-east Brazil, east Paraguay and north-east Argentina... A recent survey of 24 forest fragments in the states of São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Mato Grosso do Sul, only found the species in the largest fragment (Paranapiacaba, 1,400 km2). Surveys showed that the encounter rate at this site had declined by 47.5% between 1987-1991 and 1998 (Guix et al., 2000). If such declines are mirrored in the northern part of its range, and in eastern Paraguay and north-east Argentina, then its status would have to be re-evaluated. It is less conspicuous than other toucans in the same region, and may be more easily overlooked.... There is an illegal cage-bird trade, hunting and significant habitat loss (Brooks et al., 1993; Chebaz, 1994). Montane forests have suffered less destruction than adjacent lowland forest in Brazil, but isolated forests in the north of its range have been reduced by the expansion of pasture and cultivation, and fires spreading from cultivated areas. Cage-bird trade and hunting are apparently minimal in Argentina (M. Pearman, in litt. 2003; N. Rey in litt. 2004) but it is still hunted in Paraguay.‖ Short and Horne (2001) provided the following information on range and status: ―Often on mountain slopes northwardly, disjunct and possibly now extinct in Serra Negra, W-central Pernambuco, and from SE Minas Gerais and N-central Espirito Santo south through upland Rio de Janeiro and S and central Sao Paulo to Parana, E-central Paraguay, and NE corner of Argentina (N Misiones), extreme N Rio Grande do Sul, and W and NE Santa Catarina. Found from near sea level in Santa Catarina to 1,160 m in Rio de Janeiro, 1,300 m in Minas Gerais (Serra do Caparao), likely higher in such mountains as the Serra do Mar; mainly at 400 to 600 m in the southern part of its range. Nowhere common; though widespread, considered near threatened.‖ Di Bitett et al. (2003) identified that the main threats to biodiversity conservation in the Upper Paraná Atlantic forest ecoregion (spanning Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina), were fragmentation, isolation and degradation of forest fragments. Hunting of most native species was reported to be prohibited by law in all three countries; yet illegal hunting was reported to be widespread across the region and to be a strong cultural tradition. B. bailloni occurs in a number of protected areas including Itatiaia and Foç do Iguaçu National Parks, Brazil; Reserva Natural del Bosque Mbaracayú and Estancia San Antonio, La Golondrina and Estancia Itabó Private Nature Reserves, Paraguay; and Iguazú National Park, Argentina (Birdlife International, 2008b). Birdlife International (2008b) recommended the following conservation measures: ―Enforce law to prevent capture for the illegal cage-bird trade. Develop awareness-raising campaigns in areas where hunting is a particular threat. Effectively protect national parks where species occurs. Study its ecological requirements.‖ Argentina: B. bailloni was reported to be less common in Argentina than Brazil (Canevari, 1991 in: Birdlife International, 2008b). During an avifaunal survey of Yacutinga Wildlife Reserve (part of the Paranaense forest, province of Misiones) July 2000 to March 2001, a pair of B. bailloni were observed once, though not during the census (Pugnali, 2001). Brazil: Birdlife International (2008b) reported that in Brazil, B. bailloni was ―most common in montane regions (up to 1,550 m) of Espírito Santo and Minas Gerais to Rio Grande do Sul, but also occurs in Pernambuco, and has been re-introduced into ex-Guanabara, Rio de Janeiro (Sick, 1993; Parker et al., 1996).‖

The National Finch and Softbill Society (2004) described B. bailloni as a ―lowland species found in the southeastern rainforests of Brazil, where it is still fairly common.‖ In a study estimating toucan abundances in the Paranapiacaba fragment of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest area (Hernández et al., 2002), density estimates for B. bailloni could not be performed due to the low number of sightings. B. bailloni was sighted only six times on >350 km of line transects, yielding an encounter rate of 0.017 ± 0.0073 contacts/km. This was lower than the encounter rate measured in an earlier study in the same study area (0.072 ± 0.021 groups/km encountered in 1994) (Guix et al., 1997 in: Hernández et al., 2002). Hernández et al (2002) also reported that Galetti & Aleixo (1998) did not see any specimen of B. bailloni along 255.4 km of mature forests, whilst they obtained an encounter rate of 0.06 contacts/hour in 58.6 km of altered forests (about 0.02 contacts/km considering mature and altered forests jointly), and that there were no data on population density estimates for B. bailloni in other areas of the Atlantic rainforest. In a study of bird sensitivity to forest fragmentation in the Atlantic forest, Paraná State, southern Brazil, Anjos (2006) classified B. bailloni as a species of ‗high sensitivity‘ to forest fragmentation (species were considered highly sensitive if they occurred only in large and not- isolated forest remnants). In a similar study in the Viçosa region, State of Minas Gerais, southeastern Brazil, Ribon et al. (2003) listed B. bailloni as a threatened forest bird species of the region and classified it as a species of ‗high sensitivity‘ to environmental disturbance and of ‗medium‘ conservation priority (following Parker et al., 1996) . This species was not among the list of birds known to be hunted locally for meat or the pet trade (Ribon et al., 2003). In a comparison of the bird communities in riparian and upland forest in Godoy State Park, Paraná State, southern Brazil, B. bailloni was found in both habitat types, three sightings in the uplands compared with four in the riparian zone (Anjos et al., 2007). Hernández et al (2002) commented that ―the fact that its distribution area is the Atlantic rainforest (Aleixo & Galetti, 1997) but it is absent from many localities within it (Willis & Oniki, 1981; Scott & Brooke, 1985; Sick, 1993) shows, though, that this species [B. bailloni] is in a worrying situation (Guix et al., 2000)....Based on its continuous habitat loss and its rare occurrence in the remaining fragments of Atlantic rainforest and subtropical forests, it has recently been proposed to be included in the list of threatened species as Vulnerable and within Appendix I of the CITES regarding species trade regulation (Guix et al., 2000).‖ The species, however, has not been proposed for inclusion in CITES Appendix I.

PARAGUAY: B. bailloni was reported to be less common in Paraguay than Brazil, but within Paraguay to be most numerous in the southeast (Lowen et al., 1996 in: Birdlife International, 2008b). Esquivel et al. (2007) reviewed birds from San Rafael National Park, Paraguay, and reported that B. bailloni was often seen in pairs or small groups, most frequently in forest edges, and in degraded and primary forest. Whilst this area was reported to be globally important for its avifauna, Esquivel et al. (2007) cautioned that the Park was under threat from selective logging and clearance for agriculture, hunting and frequent fires, as well as being almost totally isolated from other forests. REFERENCES: Aleixo, A. & Galetti, M. 1997. The conservation of the avifauna in a lowland Atlantic forest in south-east Brazil. Bird Conservation International, 7: 235-262. Anjos, L. 2006. Bird species sensitivity in a fragmented landscape of the Atlantic Forest in Southern Brazil. Biotropica, 38 (2): 229-234. Anjos, L., Volpato, G. H., Lopes, E. V., Serafini, P. P., Poletto, F., & Aleixo, A. 2007. The importance of riparian forest for the maintenance of bird species richness in an Atlantic Forest remnant, southern Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia, 24 (4): 1078-1086. Birdlife International. 2008a. Baillonius bailloni. In: IUCN. 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species URL: www.iucnredlist.org Accessed: 15-10-2008.

Birdlife International. 2008b. Species factsheet: Pteroglossus bailloni URL: www.birdlife.org Accessed: 30-9-2008. Brooks, T. M., Barnes, R., Bartrina, L., Butchart, S. H. M., Clay, R. P., Esquivel, E. Z., Etcheverry, N. I., Lowen, J. C., & Vincent, J. 1993. Bird surveys and conservation in the Paraguayan Atlantic forest: Project CANOPY '92 final report. Birdlife International Study Report 57. Cambridge, UK. Canevari, M. 1991. Nueva guia de las aves Argentinas. Fundación Acindar, Buenos Aires. Chebaz, J. C. 1994. Los que se van: especies argentinas en peligro. Albatross, Buenos Aires. Di Bitetti, M. S., Placci, G., & Dietz, L. A. 2003. A biodiversity vision for the Upper Parana Atlantic forest ecoregion: designing a biodiversity conservation landscape and setting priorities for conservation action. World Wildlife Fund. Washington D.C. Esquivel, A., Velazquez, M. C., Bodrati, A., Fraga, R., Del Castillo, H., Klavins, J., Clay, R. P., Madrono, A., & Peris, S. J. 2007. Status of the avifauna of San Rafael National Park, one of the last strongholds of the Atlantic forest in Paraguay. Bird Conservation International, 17: 301-317. Galetti, M. & Aleixo, A. 1998. Effects of palm heart harvesting on avian frugivores in the Atlantic rain forest of Brazil. Journal of Applied Ecology, 35 (2): 286-293. Guix, J. C., Manosa, S., Pedrocchi, V., Vargas, M. J., & Souza, F. L. 1997. Census of three frugivorous birds in an Atlantic rainforest area of southeastern Brazil. Ardeola, 44 (2): 229- 233. Guix, J. C., Martin, M., Hernández, A., & Souza, F. L. 2000. Conservation status of the saffron Toucanet (Baillonius bailloni, Ramphastidae): a new case of population isolation and depletion in South America. Grupo Estud Ecol.Ser.Doc., 6: 10-25. Hernández, A., Martin, M., Serra, A., & Guix, J. C. 2002. Density estimates of syntopic species of toucans (Aves: Ramphastidae), in Mateos, E. et al., (eds.), Censuses of vertebrates in a Brazilian Atlantic rainforest area: the Paranapiacaba fragment. Centre de Recursos de Biodiversitat Animal. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona. 79-94. Lowen, J. C., Bartrina, L., Clay, R. P., & Tobias, J. A. 1996. Biological surveys and conservation priorities in eastern Paraguay (the final reports of Projects Canopy '92 and Yacutinga '95). CSB Conservation. Cambridge, UK. National Finch and Softbill Society. 2004. Saffron Toucanet (Baillonius bailloni) URL: http://www.nfss.org/Birds/Species/Softbill/Toucans/toucanette/Saffron.html Accessed: 16-10-2008. Parker, T. A., Stotz, D. F., & Fitzpatrick, J. W. 1996. Ecological and distributional databases, in Stotz, D. F. et al., (eds.), Neotropical birds: ecology and conservation. University of Chicago, Chicago. 131-436. Pugnali, G. 2001. Avifauna survey of Yacutinga wildlife refuge July 2000 to March 2001. Wildlife Refuge Programme. URL: http://64.233.179.104/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:Olm8lEUzytoJ:www.yacutinga.com/h tml/v2/i_ing/estacion_biologica/proyetos_doc_pdf/Project%2520Birds%2520inventory.d oc+Selenidera+maculirostris . Ribon, R., Simon, J. E., & De Mattos, G. T. 2003. Bird extinctions in Atlantic forest fragments of the Vicosa region, southeastern Brazil. Conservation Biology, 17 (6): 1827-1839. Scott, D. A. & Brooke, M. L. 1985. The endangered avifauna of Southeastern Brazil: a report on the BOU/WWF expeditions of 1980/81 and 1981/82. ICBP Technical Publication, Manchester, 4: 115-139. Short, L. L. & Horne, J. F. M. 2001. Toucans, barbets and honeyguides: Ramphastidae, Capitonidae and Indicatoridae. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Sick, H. 1993. Birds in Brazil: A Natural History. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Willis, E. O. & Oniki, Y. 1981. Levantamento preliminar de aves em treze areas do Estado de Sao Paulo. Rev.Bras.Biol., 41 (1).

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: RAMPHASTIDAE

SPECIES: Pteroglossus castanotis

SYNONYMS:

COMMON NAMES: Zwartetoekan (Dutch), Chestnut-eared Aracari (English), Ruskoposkiarakari (Finnish), Araçari à oreillons roux (French), Braunohr-Arassari (German), Arasarí caripardo (Spanish), Arasarí orejicastano (Spanish), Tucán tilingo (Spanish), Tucán-Tilingo verde (Spanish), brunörad arassari (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Argentina (br), Bolivia (br), Brazil (br), Colombia (br), Ecuador (br), Paraguay (br), Peru (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Least Concern

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Argentina (11/06/1992)

TRADE PATTERNS: No imports of this species to the EU have been reported. Imports of small numbers of wild- sourced live birds from Peru (32) and Brazil (3) have been reported by the United States and Mexico. The most recent trade appears to have been of 11 live captive-bred birds imported by the United States from Peru in 2005 (Table 12).

Table 12. Direct exports of Pteroglossus castanotis, 1997-2006. Importer Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 Total

live B W Importer 8 8

Exporter

E W Importer

Exporter 4 4

T C Importer 11 11

Exporter

W Importer 24 24

Exporter

Z C Importer

Exporter 2 2 Countries other than EU-27 W Importer 1 1

Exporter 2 2

- W Importer 2 2

Exporter

skins T C Importer

Exporter 1 1

specimens S I Importer 2 2

Exporter

W Importer 11 11

Exporter 2 2

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states Pteroglossus castanotis was classified as a species of Least Concern by Birdlife (2008) in the IUCN Red List, with the following justification: ―This species has a large range, with an estimated global extent of occurrence of 5,100,000 km². The global population size has not been quantified, but it is believed to be large as the species is described as 'common' in at least parts of its range (Stotz et al., 1996a). Global population trends have not been quantified, but the species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the population decline criterion of the IUCN (i.e., declining more than 30% in ten years or three generations).‖ Stotz et al. (1996a) reported that P. castanotis occurred in southern Amazonia and central South America, up to altitudes of 900 m, in river-edge forest, secondary forest, flooded tropical evergreen forest and tropical lowland evergreen forest. The species was described as being common. Short and Horne (2001) provided the following information on range and status: ―Generally forested lowlands near streams from N Boyaca (upper Casanare R.) and S Vaupes R. (Rio Apapornis), Colombia, south along Andes in Ecuador, Peru (west to San Martin, Ayacucho and E Cuzco), and Bolivia south to SE Cochabamba (San Mateo), and Santa Cruz in W Brazil about the Solimoes-Amazon here and there on N bank (Santa Rita in west, about Manacapuru, and W bank of lowermost Rio Negro, to Barra; likely crosses Amazon at times), and generally south of the Solimoes-Amazon, east to Rio Madeira and beyond it along Amazon at Parintins, and south to E Bolivia, Rondonia and Mato Grosso. In E and S Brazil from far N Mato Grosso, SW Tocantins (reaches upper Xingu R. and Tocantins R.), Goias and W Minas Gerais (Romaria, Rio Jordao) south through Mato Grosso do Sul and E Paraguay (west to near, but not along Paraguay R.) to Misiones, Argentina, W Sao Paulo, Parana, Santa Catarina, and barely to far N Rio Grande do Sul (Nomoai and Turbo forests).‖ The Upper Paraná Atlantic forest ecoregion (spanning Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina) where P. castanotis occurs, was reported to be threatened by fragmentation, isolation, and degradation of forest fragments, as well as unsustainable hunting (Di Bitetti et al., 2003). Argentina: During an avifaunal survey of Yacutinga Wildlife Reserve (part of the Paranaense forest, province of Misiones) July 2000 to March 2001, P. castanotis was recorded as common or abundant in each of the four survey periods, and reported to be ―the most common toucan, usually seen in flocks of approximately 6 individuals‖ (Pugnali, 2001). Bolivia: P. castanotis was reported to occur in the Pilón Lajas Biosphere Reserve and Communal Lands, Departments of Beni and La Paz (Hennessey et al., 2003), where it was classified as a common species, occurring from lowlands to elevations of 1000 m above sea level; in the selectively-logged Guarayos Forest Reserve, Department of Santa Cruz (Felton et al., 2008), where it was classified as a species with high sensitivity to disturbance (following Stotz et al., 1996b), and found to be associated with natural tree-fall gaps in comparison to anthropogenic gaps; in the chiquitano and cerrado of eastern Bolivia (Brooks et al., 2005); and the valleys of the Rio Pampa Grande and Rio Altamachi, Department of Cochabamba, (Macleod et al., 2005) at altitudes of 1,100 to 1,300 m. A hunted specimen thought to be P. castanotis was recorded in a study of the hunting impacts of employees of the Brazil nut harvesting trade in the Bolivian Amazon (Rumiz & Maglianesi, 2001). Brazil: P. castanotis was described as the ―best-known and most common aracari of central and eastern Brazil‖ (Sick, 1993) and often the commonest toucan in much of Brazil (Short & Horne, 2001). P. castanotis was recorded at Fazenda Rio Negrol, a well-preserved area of Brazil‘s southern Pantanal (Donatti et al., 2004), but was not recorded in a study of the Pantanal of Poconé, northern Pantanal (Heckman, 1998), and was thought to be presently rare in this area (Heckman, 1998).

P. castanotis was reported to be common around Alto Floresta, State of Mato Grosso, Brazil (Lees, 2003). Lees and Peres (2006) gave P. castanotis a habitat sensitivity score of 3 (scale 1-4) denoting forest species that are able to tolerate secondary or more degraded forest. Pearson (2001) reported that habitat clearing and hunting were the main factors explaining declines of toucan populations in some parts of Brazil, but none of the species were considered threatened at this time. Colombia: P. castanotis was reported to be ―Common in humid forest borders, second growth woodland, and várzea in Amazonia; gallery forest and savanna woodland in the Llanos‖ (Hilty & Brown, 1986). Ecuador: Ridgely and Greenfield (2001) reported that P. castanotis was ―Uncommon to locally fairly common in the canopy and borders of várzea and riparian forest, along the shores of larger rivers and lakes...and in adjacent clearings in the lowlands and to a limited extent the foothills of east Ecuador....[but] is absent from extensive areas of terra firme forest.‖ It was reported to range up to about 1000 m along the eastern base of the Andes (Ridgely & Greenfield, 2001). Paraguay: Short and Horne (2001) described P. castanotis as often the commonest toucan in east Paraguay. P. castanotis was recorded in an Atlantic forest reserve and adjacent plantations, Estancia Itabó, Department of Canindeyú, Paraguay (Cockle et al., 2005). P. castanotis was recorded in a survey of Estancia Laguna Blanca, District of Santa Rosa del Aguaray, north-eastern Paraguay (Smith et al., 2005). Estancia Laguna Blanca has been declared an Important Bird Area but remains unprotected. Major threats to the forest were reported to be illegal logging of valuable tree species, clearance for farming and burning, and pollution and run-off of toxic chemicals used in the intensive farming of the surrounding area (Smith et al., 2005). Peru: Schulenberg et al. (2007) described P. castanotis as ―Common and widespread in forest and second growth of eastern lowlands, up to 1000 m. Rarely in terra firme. One of the most common toucans in Peru, and perhaps most easily seen.‖ REFERENCES: Birdlife International. 2008. Pteroglossus castanotis. In: IUCN. 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species URL: www.iucnredlist.org Accessed: 15-10-2008. Brooks, D. M., Porzecanski, A. L., Weicker, J. J., Honig, R. A., Saavedra, A. M., & Herrera, M. 2005. A preliminary assessment of avifauna of the Bolivian Chiquitano and Cerrado. Ornitologia Neotropical, 16: 85-99. Cockle, K. L., Leonard, M. L., & Bodrati, A. A. 2005. Presence and abundance of birds in an Atlantic Forest Reserve and adjacent plantation of shade-grown yerba mate, in Paraguay. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14 (13): 3265-3288. Di Bitetti, M. S., Placci, G., & Dietz, L. A. 2003. A biodiversity vision for the Upper Parana Atlantic forest ecoregion: designing a biodiversity conservation landscape and setting priorities for conservation action. World Wildlife Fund. Washington D.C. Donatti, C., Galetti, M., & Pizo, M. 2004. Fruits and frugivores in the Pantanal. Pantanal conservation research initiative, annual report 2004. Earthwatch Institute. URL: http://www.earthwatch.org/images/Pdfs/AboutUs/Conservation/Pantanal%20Annual %20Report%202004.pdf . Felton, A., Wood, J. T., Felton, A. M., Hennessey, A. B., & Lindenmayer, D. B. 2008. A comparison of bird communities in the anthropogenic and natural-tree fall gaps of a reduced-impact logged subtropical forest in Bolivia. Bird Conservation International, 18: 129- 143. Heckman, C. W. 1998. The Pantanal of Pocone: biota and ecology in the northern section of the world's largest pristine wetland. Kluwer Academic Pub.

Hennessey, A. B., Herzog, S. A., Kessler, M., & Robison, D. 2003. Avifauna of the Pilón Lajas Biosphere Reserve and Communal Lands, Bolivia. Bird Conservation International, 13: 319- 349. Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Lees, A. 2003. Cristalino jungle lodge and Alta Floresta, Brazil birding trip report URL: http://www.worldtwitch.com/brazil_lees_2003.htm Accessed: 16-10-2008. Lees, A. C. & Peres, C. A. 2006. Rapid avifaunal collapse along the Amazonian deforestation frontier. Biological Conservation, 133 (2): 198-211. Macleod, R., Ewing, S. K., Herzog, S. A., Bryce, R., Evans, K. L. & Maccormick, A. 2005. First ornithological inventory and conservation assessment for the yungas forests of the Cordilleras Cocapata and Mosetenes, Cochabamba, Bolivia. Bird Conservation International, 15 (4): 361-382. Pearson, D. L. 2001. Brazil: Amazon and Pantanal. APUK, London. Pugnali, G. 2001. Avifauna survey of Yacutinga wildlife refuge July 2000 to March 2001. Wildlife Refuge Programme. URL: http://64.233.179.104/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:Olm8lEUzytoJ:www.yacutinga.com/h tml/v2/i_ing/estacion_biologica/proyetos_doc_pdf/Project%2520Birds%2520inventory.d oc+Selenidera+maculirostris . Ridgely, R. S. & Greenfield, P. J. 2001. The Birds of Ecuador: Status, Distribution and Taxonomy. Christopher Helm, London. Rumiz, D. & Maglianesi, M. 2001. Hunting impacts associated with Brazil nut harvesting in the Bolivian Amazon. Vida Silvestre Neotropical, 10 (1-2): 19-29. Schulenberg, T. S., Stotz, D. F., Lane, D. F. O‘Neill, J. P. & Parker, T. A. III. 2007. Birds of Peru. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. Short, L. L. & Horne, J. F. M. 2001. Toucans, barbets and honeyguides: Ramphastidae, Capitonidae and Indicatoridae. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Sick, H. 1993. Birds in Brazil: A Natural History. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Smith, P., Del Castillo, H., Batjes, H., Montiel, M., & Wainwright, B. 2005. An avifaunal inventory of Estancia Laguna Blanca, Departmento San Pedro, north-eastern Paraguay. FAUNA Paraguay Technical Publication Number 2. URL: http://www.faunaparaguay.com/lagblancareport.html Accessed 16-10-2008. Stotz, D. F., Fitzpatrick, J. W., Parker, T. A., & Moskovits, D. K. 1996a. Neotropical birds: ecology and conservation. University of Chicago Press. Stotz, D. F., Fitzpatrick, J. W., Parker, T. A., & Moskovits, D. K. 1996b. Zoogeographic and ecological attributes of bird species breeding in the Neotropics, in Stotz, D. F. et al., (eds.), Neotropical birds: ecology and conservation. University of Chicago, Chicago. 118-291.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: RAMPHASTIDAE

SPECIES: Ramphastos dicolorus

SYNONYMS: -

COMMON NAMES: Rødbrystet tukan (Danish), Roodborsttoekan (Dutch), Red-breasted Toucan (English), Kultarintatukaani (Finnish), Toucan à ventre rouge (French), Bunttukan (German), Tucán bicolor (Spanish), Tucán rojo y amarillo (Spanish), Tucán verde (Spanish), grönnäbbad tukan (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Argentina (br), Brazil (br), Paraguay (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Least Concern

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Argentina (11/06/1992)

TRADE PATTERNS: EU imports involved a small number of feathers in 2003 and 2005. Exports of 16 live birds, both wild and captive-bred were imported from Brazil between 1997 and 2003. The only other trade reported is in feathers for exhibition and scientific purposes (Table 13).

Table 13. Direct exports of Ramphastos dicolurus, 1997-2006. Importer Exporter Term Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 1999 2000 2003 2005 Total

France Brazil feathers E W Importer

Exporter 8 8

Q W Importer 17 17

Exporter

bodies S W Importer

Exporter 1 1

live T C Importer 6 6

Exporter

F Importer 2 2

Exporter

Z C Importer 4 4 Countries other than EU-27 Exporter 6 6

W Importer 4 4

Exporter 4 4

- W Importer 4 4

Exporter

specimens S W Importer 2 2

Exporter 1 1

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states Ramphastos dicolorus was classified as a species of Least Concern by Birdlife (2008) in the IUCN Red List, with the following justification: ―This species has a large range, with an estimated global extent of occurrence of 1,400,000 km². The global population size has not been quantified, but it is believed to be large as the species is described as 'frequent' in at least parts of its range (Stotz et al., 1996). Global population trends have not been quantified, but the species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List (i.e., declining more than 30% in ten years or three generations). For these reasons, the species is evaluated as Least Concern‖ (Birdlife International, 2008). Short and Horne (2001) provided the following information on range and status: ―Occurs from SW and E-central Goias (Veadeiros), S Tocantins (new state, formerly N Goias, at Rio Sao Miguel) and central Minas Gerais southward through SE Mato Grosso Sur, Sao Paulo, Parana, W and N Rio de Janeiro and W Espirito Santo (Novaes 1949), to E Paraguay (barely W of Rio Paraguay in north), NE Argentina (north from E Chaco, N Corrientes and Misiones, possibly slightly farther south in past), and SE Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.‖ R. dicolorus was reported to occur in the Upper Paraná Atlantic forest ecoregion (spanning Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina), an area threatened by fragmentation, isolation, and degradation of forest fragments, as well as unsustainable hunting (Di Bitetti et al., 2003). R. dicolorus was reported to occur in a number of protected areas in Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina (Parker & Goerck, 1997 in: Short & Horne, 2001). Argentina: During an avifaunal survey of Yacutinga Wildlife Reserve (part of the Paranaense forest, province of Misiones) conducted from July 2000 to March 2001, R. dicolorus was recorded in each of the four survey periods, its abundance ranging from rare to common (Pugnali, 2001). Conversion of native forests to monoculture plantations was reported to be one of the major threats to the Upper Paraná Atlantic Forest eco-region (Di Bitetti et al., 2003; Galindo- Leal & Camara, 2003 in: Zurita et al., 2006). Brazil: The density of R. dicolorus in the Paranapiacaba fragment of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest area was estimated to be 3.23 ± 1.25 individuals per km2 (based on >350 km of line transects) (Hernández et al., 2002). In comparison, Martín (2000 in: Hernández et al., 2002) was reported to have calculated a density value for R. dicolorus of 16.96 ± 13.37 individuals per km2 (based on 118.5 km of line transects) on São Sebastião island, State of São Paulo. The higher densities of R. dicolorus estimated on São Sebastião island were thought to be due to the absence of some predators (Hernández et al., 2002). R. dicolorus was recorded in the Atlantic forest, Paraná State, southern Brazil (Anjos, 2006), classified as a species of ‗medium sensitivity‘ to forest fragmentation. It was recorded in both riparian and upland forest in Godoy State Park, northern Paraná State, southern Brazil, (Anjos et al., 2007), and on Santa Catarina Island, southern Brazil (Naka et al., 2002), where it was reported to be an uncommon resident. The future for the birds of Santa Catarina Island was reported to be uncertain, threatened by habitat loss for the development of tourist resorts (Naka et al., 2002). R. dicolorus was not observed in a study of the Pantanal of Poconé, southern Matto Grosso, and was reported to be currently considered rare in this region (Heckman, 1998). Rodrigues (2008) presented information on some rare and threatened birds for the region of Lagoa Santa, state of Minas Gerais and reported that, compared to birds seen by ornithologist J. T. Reinhardt 1847-1855, some species were now considered to be locally extinct, including R. dicolorus. Corso (2007) reported that ―this species is declining outside reserves due to deforestation and capture for bird trade.‖

Short and Horne (2001) reported that R. dicolorus was persecuted in south Brazil for predation on birds. Paraguay: R. dicolorus was recorded in an Atlantic forest reserve and adjacent plantations, Estancia Itabó, Department of Canindeyú, Paraguay (Cockle et al., 2005). REFERENCES: Anjos, L. 2006. Bird species sensitivity in a fragmented landscape of the Atlantic Forest in Southern Brazil. Biotropica, 38 (2): 229-234. Anjos, L., Volpato, G. H., Lopes, E. V., Serafini, P. P., Poletto, F., & Aleixo, A. 2007. The importance of riparian forest for the maintenance of bird species richness in an Atlantic Forest remnant, southern Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia, 24 (4): 1078-1086. Birdlife International. 2008. Ramphastos dicolorus. In: IUCN 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species URL: www.iucnredlist.org Accessed: 15-10-2008. Cockle, K. L., Leonard, M. L., & Bodrati, A. A. 2005. Presence and abundance of birds in an Atlantic Forest Reserve and adjacent plantation of shade-grown yerba mate, in Paraguay. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14 (13): 3265-3288. Corso, J. 2007. Ramphastos dicolorus - Red-breased Toucan. Boletin SAO, XVII (1): 65. Di Bitetti, M. S., Placci, G., & Dietz, L. A. 2003. A biodiversity vision for the Upper Parana Atlantic forest ecoregion: designing a biodiversity conservation landscape and setting priorities for conservation action. World Wildlife Fund. Washington D.C. Galindo-Leal, C. & Camara, I. G. 2003. The Atlantic forest of South America: biodiversity status, threats and outlook. Island Press, Washington. Heckman, C. W. 1998. The Pantanal of Pocone: biota and ecology in the northern section of the world's largest pristine wetland. Kluwer Academic Pub. Hernández, A., Martin, M., Serra, A., & Guix, J. C. 2002. Density estimates of syntopic species of toucans (Aves: Ramphastidae), in Mateos, E. et al., (eds.), Censuses of vertebrates in a Brazilian Atlantic rainforest area: the Paranapiacaba fragment. Centre de Recursos de Biodiversitat Animal. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona. 79-94. Martin, M. 2000. Estima de la densidad poblacional de Tucán de Pico Verde (Ramphastos dicolorus) en una isla del Sureste de Brasil. Grupo Estud.Ecol., Sér.Doc, 6 (1): 1-9. Naka, L. N., Rodrigues, M., Roos, A. L., & Azevedo, M. A. G. 2002. Bird conservation on Santa Catarina Island, Southern Brazil. Bird Conservation International, 12 (2): 123-150. Parker, T. A. & Goerck, J. M. 1997. The importance of national parks and biological reserves to bird conservation in the Atlantic forest region of Brazil, in Remsen, V. J. j., (ed.), Studies in Neotropical Ornithology Honoring Ted Parker. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington. Pugnali, G. 2001. Avifauna survey of Yacutinga wildlife refuge July 2000 to March 2001. Wildlife Refuge Programme. URL: http://64.233.179.104/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:Olm8lEUzytoJ:www.yacutinga.com/h tml/v2/i_ing/estacion_biologica/proyetos_doc_pdf/Project%2520Birds%2520inventory.d oc+Selenidera+maculirostris . Rodrigues, M. 2008. Noteworthy bird records at Lagoa Santa, southeastern Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia, 25 (1): 150-153. Short, L. L. & Horne, J. F. M. 2001. Toucans, barbets and honeyguides: Ramphastidae, Capitonidae and Indicatoridae. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Stotz, D. F., Fitzpatrick, J. W., Parker, T. A., & Moskovits, D. K. 1996. Neotropical birds: ecology and conservation. University of Chicago Press. Zurita, G. A., Rey, N., Varela, D. M., Villagra, M., & Bellocq, M. I. 2006. Conversion of the Atlantic Forest into native and exotic tree plantations: effects on bird communities from the local and regional perspectives. Forest Ecology and Management, 235 (1-3): 164-173.

REVIEW OF ANNEX B (APPENDIX III) SPECIES

AVES: RAMPHASTIDAE

SPECIES: Selenidera maculirostris

SYNONYMS: Pteroglossus maculirostris

COMMON NAMES: Vleksnavelpepervreter (Dutch), Spot-billed Toucanet (English), Täplänokkatukaani (Finnish), Toucanet à bec tacheté (French), Fleckenarassari (German), Tucán de pico acanalado (Spanish), Tucancito picomaculado (Spanish), Tucanete piquimaculado (Spanish), fläckarassari (Swedish)

RANGE STATES: Argentina (br), Bolivia, Brazil (br), Paraguay (br)

IUCN RED LIST: Least Concern

PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: -

APPENDIX III LISTING: Argentina (11/06/1992)

TRADE PATTERNS: The only direct trade reported involved six live captive-bred individuals (Table 14). Additionally, one body of unknown origin was re-exported by the United Kingdom in 2006.

Table 14. Direct exports of Selenidera maculirostris, 1997-2006. [All trade was in live specimens] Importer Exporter Purpose Source Reported by 1997 1998 2002 Total

Germany United States T F Importer 1 1

Exporter 2 2

T C Importer 2 2

Exporter 2 2 Countries other than EU-27 Z C Importer 2

Exporter 2 2

CONSERVATION STATUS in range states Selenidera maculirostris was reported to have a large range, with an estimated global Extent of Occurrence of 930,000 km² (Birdlife International, 2008). It was classified as a species of Least Concern by Birdlife (2008) in the IUCN Red List as its global population size and population trends, whilst not quantified, where not thought to reach the thresholds necessary to place it in a category of higher threat (Birdlife International, 2008).

Short and Horne (2001) provided the following information on range and status: ―A small forest toucan of SE Brazil (E Minas Gerais and S Bahia southwest to Parana and Santa Catarina, formerly to NE Rio Grande do Sul), E-central Paraguay (mainly near Rio Parana), and NE corner of Argentina (NE Misiones). Can be common if forest is sufficiently unmodified, even occurring in remnant forest patches (E Paraguay). Occurs from sea level to 1000 and probably 1200 m in remnant SE Brazilian forests on mountain slopes (Espirito Santo, Sao Paulo).‖ S. maculirostris was reportedly described as 'uncommon' in at least parts of its range (Stotz et al., 1996 in: Birdlife International, 2008). The National Finch and Softbill Society (2004) reported that S. maculirostris was ―native of southern Brazil and northern Argentina, where it is fairly common.‖ The Upper Paraná Atlantic forest ecoregion (spanning Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina) where S. maculirostris occurs, was reported to be threatened by fragmentation, isolation, and degradation of forest fragments, as well as unsustainable hunting (Di Bitetti et al., 2003). S. maculirostris was reported to occur in a number of protected areas in Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina (Hayes, 1995; Parker & Goerck, 1997, cited in Short & Horne, 2001). Argentina: S. maculirostris was observed during an avifaunal survey of Yacutinga Wildlife Reserve (part of the Paranaense forest, province of Misiones) conducted from July 2000 to March 2001, where it was reported to be rare (Pugnali, 2001). Bolivia: No information was found for Bolivia. Brazil: S. maculirostris was reported to occur in the Atlantic forest, Paraná State, southern Brazil (Anjos, 2006), where it was classified a species of ‗medium sensitivity‘ to forest fragmentation; in the Viçosa region, State of Minas Gerais, southeastern Brazil (Ribon et al., 2003), where it was classified as a species of ‗medium sensitivity‘ to environmental disturbance and of ‗medium‘ conservation priority (following Parker et al., 1996); at the Reserva Ecológica de Guapiaçu, Mata Atlântica (REGUA, 2008), where it was reported to be fairly common around the reserve; and in Godoy State Park, northern Paraná State, southern Brazil (Anjos et al., 2007), where it was sighted more often in the upland forests than the riparian forests (30 sightings in the uplands compared with 4 in the riparian zone). S. maculirostris was not among the list of birds known to be hunted locally for meat or the pet trade in the Viçosa region (Ribon et al., 2003). In a study estimating toucan abundances in the Paranapiacaba fragment of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest area (Hernández et al., 2002), the density of S. maculirostris could not be estimated. However, it was sighted 23 times, giving an encounter rate of 0.0653 ± 0.0147 contacts per km. S. maculirostris was reported to be one of the two Ramphastidae species that appeared most often; given that it was often sighted, its population was not thought to be at risk in the study area (Hernández et al., 2002). S. maculirostris was not observed in a study of the Pantanal of Poconé, southern Matto Grosso, and was reported to be currently considered rare in this region (Heckman, 1998). Rodrigues (2008) presented information on some rare and threatened birds for the region of Lagoa Santa, state of Minas Gerais and reported that, compared to birds seen by ornithologist J. T. Reinhardt 1847-1855, some species were now considered to be locally extinct, including S. maculirostris. Sodhi et al. (2004) cautioned that larger-bodied frugivorous birds were at greater risk of extinction as they tend to occur at low densities, increasing their vulnerability to habitat alterations. He noted that a 198 ha forest remnant near Lagoa Santa, Brazil, did not contain vulnerable species such as S. maculirostris (Christiansen & Pitter, 1997 in: Sodhi et al., 2004). Pearson (2001) reported that habitat clearing and hunting were the main factors explaining declines of toucan populations in some parts of Brazil, but none of the species were considered threatened at this time.

Paraguay: S. maculirostris was recorded in an Atlantic forest reserve and adjacent plantations, Estancia Itabó, Department of Canindeyú, Paraguay (Cockle et al., 2005). REFERENCES: Anjos, L. 2006. Bird species sensitivity in a fragmented landscape of the Atlantic Forest in Southern Brazil. Biotropica, 38 (2): 229-234. Anjos, L., Volpato, G. H., Lopes, E. V., Serafini, P. P., Poletto, F., & Aleixo, A. 2007. The importance of riparian forest for the maintenance of bird species richness in an Atlantic Forest remnant, southern Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia, 24 (4): 1078-1086. Birdlife International. 2008. Selenidera maculirostris. In: IUCN. 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species URL: www.iucnredlist.org Accessed: 15-10-2008. Christiansen, M. B. & Pitter, E. 1997. Species loss in a forest bird community near Lagoa Santa in southeastern Brazil. Biological Conservation, 80 (1): 23-32. Cockle, K. L., Leonard, M. L., & Bodrati, A. A. 2005. Presence and abundance of birds in an Atlantic Forest Reserve and adjacent plantation of shade-grown yerba mate, in Paraguay. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14 (13): 3265-3288. Di Bitetti, M. S., Placci, G., & Dietz, L. A. 2003. A biodiversity vision for the Upper Parana Atlantic forest ecoregion: designing a biodiversity conservation landscape and setting priorities for conservation action. World Wildlife Fund. Washington D.C. Hayes, F. E. 1995. Status, distribution and biogeography of the birds of Paraguay. American Birding Association. Heckman, C. W. 1998. The Pantanal of Pocone: biota and ecology in the northern section of the world's largest pristine wetland. Kluwer Academic Pub. Hernández, A., Martin, M., Serra, A., & Guix, J. C. 2002. Density estimates of syntopic species of toucans (Aves: Ramphastidae), in Mateos, E. et al., (eds.), Censuses of vertebrates in a Brazilian Atlantic rainforest area: the Paranapiacaba fragment. Centre de Recursos de Biodiversitat Animal. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona. 79-94. National Finch and Softbill Society. 2004. Spot Bill Toucanet (Selenidera maculirostris) URL: http://www.nfss.org/Birds/Species/Softbill/Toucans/toucanette/Spot-bill.html Accessed: 16-10-2008. Parker, T. A. & Goerck, J. M. 1997. The importance of national parks and biological reserves to bird conservation in the Atlantic forest region of Brazil, in Remsen, V. J. j., (ed.), Studies in Neotropical Ornithology Honoring Ted Parker. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington. Parker, T. A., Stotz, D. F., & Fitzpatrick, J. W. 1996. Ecological and distributional databases, in Stotz, D. F. et al., (eds.), Neotropical birds: ecology and conservation. University of Chicago, Chicago. 131-436. Pearson, D. L. 2001. Brazil: Amazon and Pantanal. APUK, London. Pugnali, G. 2001. Avifauna survey of Yacutinga wildlife refuge July 2000 to March 2001. Wildlife Refuge Programme. URL: http://64.233.179.104/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:Olm8lEUzytoJ:www.yacutinga.com/h tml/v2/i_ing/estacion_biologica/proyetos_doc_pdf/Project%2520Birds%2520inventory.d oc+Selenidera+maculirostris . REGUA. 2008. Speciality birds - Spot-billed toucanet Selenidera maculirostris URL: http://www.guapiassubirdlodge.com/specialitybirds.html Ribon, R., Simon, J. E., & De Mattos, G. T. 2003. Bird extinctions in Atlantic forest fragments of the Vicosa region, southeastern Brazil. Conservation Biology, 17 (6): 1827-1839. Rodrigues, M. 2008. Noteworthy bird records at Lagoa Santa, southeastern Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia, 25 (1): 150-153. Short, L. L. & Horne, J. F. M. 2001. Toucans, barbets and honeyguides: Ramphastidae, Capitonidae and Indicatoridae. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Sodhi, N. S., Liow, L. H., & Bazzaz, F. A. 2004. Avian extinctions from tropcal and subtropical forests. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 35: 323-345. Stotz, D. F., Fitzpatrick, J. W., Parker, T. A., & Moskovits, D. K. 1996. Neotropical birds: ecology and conservation. University of Chicago Press.