|Red List Category & Criteria:
||Butchart, S. & Symes, A.
||Sharpe, C J, Pérez-Emán, J.
||Capper, D., Pople, R., Sharpe, C J, Symes, A.
This species has a very small range at a minimum of three locations. Significant areas of habitat remain, but it is presumably declining in response to changing agricultural practices and conversion of habitat, especially to shade coffee plantations. It is therefore listed as Endangered.
|Previously published Red List assessments:|
- 2008 – Endangered (EN)
- 2004 – Endangered (EN)
- 2000 – Endangered (EN)
- 1996 – Critically Endangered (CR)
- 1994 – Critically Endangered (CR)
- 1988 – Threatened (T)
|Range Description:||Diglossa venezuelensis is restricted to two mountainous areas in north-east Venezuela: the Turimiquire Massif (both the Serranía de Turimiquire west of the San Antonio valley, and the Cordillera de Caripe to the east) on the borders of Anzoátegui, Monagas and Sucre, and the westernmost Paria Peninsula, Sucre. Collections from the 1920s and 1930s suggest that it was once not uncommon, but there have been relatively few records since. Systematic surveys on Cerro Humo in 1990-1991 (C. J. Sharpe in litt. 1992) and 1994 (Evans et al. 1994) failed to find the species, although it has been seen on Cerro Humo sporadically since then (C. J. Sharpe in litt. 2011); it has never been recorded elsewhere on the peninsula. Searches in the Cordillera de Caripe during the same period also proved fruitless (Colvee 1999). Since the 1990s it has only been recorded on five mountains: cerros El Guamal and Quiriquire ("Piedra 'e Mole'") in the in the Serranía de Turimiquire (Azpúrua 2007), Cerro Negro and Cumbres de San Bonifacio in the Cordillera de Caripe (Boesman and Curson 1995, Azpúrua 2007) and cerro de Humo on the Paria Peninsula (C. J. Sharpe in litt. 2011).|
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
|♦ Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO):||Yes|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO):||No||♦ Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) - km2:||920|
|♦ Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO):||Yes||♦ Extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO):||No|
|♦ Number of Locations:||3||♦ Continuing decline in number of locations:||Unknown|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations:||No||♦ Lower elevation limit (metres):||885|
|♦ Upper elevation limit (metres):||2450|
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||The population is estimated to number 2,500-9,999 individuals based on an assessment of known records, descriptions of abundance and range size. This is consistent with recorded population density estimates for congeners or close relatives with a similar body size, and the fact that only a proportion of the estimated Extent of Occurrence is likely to be occupied. This estimate is equivalent to 1,667-6,666 mature individuals, rounded here to 1,500-7,000 mature individuals.|
Trend Justification: A comparison of historical collection data with that obtained over the past few decades suggests that the population is decreasing (Sharpe 2008). An on-going population decline of 10-19% over ten years is suspected owing to rates of habitat loss and fragmentation.
|Current Population Trend:||Decreasing|
|♦ Number of mature individuals:||1500-7000||♦ Continuing decline of mature individuals:||Yes|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations:||No||♦ Population severely fragmented:||No|
|♦ No. of subpopulations:||2-100||♦ Continuing decline in subpopulations:||Unknown|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations:||No||♦ All individuals in one subpopulation:||No|