||Tachycineta cyaneoviridis (Bryant, 1859)
Callichelidon cyaneoviridis ssp. cyaneoviridis (Bryant, 1859) — Stotz et al. (1996)
Hirundo cyaneoviridis Bryant, 1859
||del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A., Fishpool, L.D.C., Boesman, P. and Kirwan, G.M. 2016. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 2: Passerines. Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.
||15 cm. Blue, green and white swallow. Dark green crown, nape and mantle, bluish-green rump, blue wings and forked tail, white underparts. Female duller with less pure white underparts. Similar spp Tree Swallow T. bicolor is more metallic with darker, blackish wings and less forked tail. Juvenile T. cyaneoviridis is greyer on back and head with less brown on breast than T. bicolor. Voice Sharp, metallic chep or chi chep. Hints Often feeds high and glides. Most active in evenings and cloudy weather.
|Red List Category & Criteria:
||Butchart, S. & Symes, A.
||Gape, L., Lloyd, J., Mitchell, A., Moore, D., Rivera-Milan, F., Stahala, C., Wardle, C., White, A. & Wunderle, J.
||Bird, J., Isherwood, I., Pilgrim, J., Pople, R., Sharpe, C J, Wege, D., Symes, A. & Wheatley, H.
This species is listed as Endangered because it has a small and declining population, which faces a number of threats that may increase in severity in the future. Renewed logging and planned housing developments may result in further declines in available breeding habitat.
|Previously published Red List assessments:|
- 2013 – Endangered (EN)
- 2012 – Endangered (EN)
- 2009 – Endangered (EN)
- 2008 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 2006 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 2004 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 2000 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 1994 – Lower Risk/near threatened (LR/nt)
- 1988 – Threatened (T)
|Range Description:||Tachycineta cyaneoviridis breeds on Grand Bahama, Great Abaco and Andros in the northern Bahamas (AOU 1998, Raffaele et al. 1998). It may be extinct as a breeding bird on New Providence (Raffaele et al. 1998), but a few birds are seen each breeding season suggesting the presence of a relict but severely threatened population (A. White in litt. 1999). The winter distribution is poorly defined, but there are a number of records from the southern Bahamas and eastern Cuba, and small numbers appear to be resident on the breeding islands (A. White in litt. 1999). On migration, it occurs irregularly in the lower Florida Keys and through southern Florida, USA (AOU 1998). The area of breeding habitat is c.2,000 km2 (Allen 1996), and a population of 2,400 pairs was crudely estimated in the late 1980s (Smith and Smith 1989). There are no empirical data to confirm population trends, but anecdotal reports suggest that the species has declined considerably in numbers and is now a scarce species even in suitable habitat (J. Lloyd in litt. 2009, D. Moore in litt. 2009, F. Rivera-Milan in litt. 2009, Lloyd and Slater 2011). |
Bahamas; Cuba; United States
|♦ Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO):||Unknown|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO):||No||♦ Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) - km2:||49800|
|♦ Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO):||Unknown||♦ Extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO):||No|
|♦ Number of Locations:||11-100||♦ Continuing decline in number of locations:||Unknown|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations:||No|
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||Smith and Smith (1989) previously estimated a global population of 2,400 pairs, i.e. 4,800 mature individuals. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the population has declined substantially since then and available survey data suggests the species occurs at low densities, even in apparently suitable habitat (Lloyd and Slater 2011); consequently we cautiously assume a population of 1,000-2,499 mature individuals. This equates to 1,500-3,749 individuals in total, rounded here to 1,500-4,000 individuals.|
Trend Justification: Frequency of encounters with this species appear to have declined substantially in recent years in several parts of its range, though no empirical evidence is available to support this. It is presumed to have declined in line with modest habitat loss and degradation, plus pressure from invasive species. Planned housing developments could eliminate 8% of remaining breeding habitat (Allen 1996), and an increase in hurricane frequency owing to climate change may further degrade remnant habitats in the future.
|Current Population Trend:||Decreasing|
|♦ Number of mature individuals:||1000-2499||♦ Continuing decline of mature individuals:||Yes|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations:||No||♦ Population severely fragmented:||Yes|
|♦ No. of subpopulations:||1||♦ Continuing decline in subpopulations:||Unknown|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations:||No||♦ All individuals in one subpopulation:||Yes|
|♦ No. of individuals in largest subpopulation:||100|