Red List Category & Criteria: |
Least Concern
ver 3.1
|
Year Published: |
2016 |
Date Assessed: |
2016-10-01 |
Assessor(s): |
BirdLife International |
Reviewer(s): |
Butchart, S. & Symes, A. |
Facilitator/Compiler(s): |
Harding, M., Ekstrom, J., Butchart, S. |
Justification:
This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size has not been quantified, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
|
Previously published Red List assessments: | - 2012 – Least Concern (LC)
- 2009 – Least Concern (LC)
- 2008 – Least Concern (LC)
- 2004 – Least Concern (LC)
- 2000 – Lower Risk/least concern (LR/lc)
- 1994 – Lower Risk/least concern (LR/lc)
- 1988 – Lower Risk/least concern (LR/lc)
|