10.2305 IUCN - UK.2018-2.RLTS.T22690874A131031811.en

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™
ISSN 2307-8235 (online)

IUCN 2008: T22690874A131031811
Scope: Global
Language: English
Leptotila wellsi, Grenada Dove

Assessment by: BirdLife International
View on www.iucnredlist.org
Citation: BirdLife International. 2018. Leptotila wellsi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
2018: e.T22690874A131031811. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-
2.RLTS.T22690874A131031811.en
Copyright: © 2018 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written
permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged.
Reproduction of this publication for resale, reposting or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written
permission from the copyright holder. For further details see Terms of Use.
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species Programme, the IUCN
Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership. The IUCN Red List Partners are: Arizona State
University; BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International; Conservation International; NatureServe;
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; and Zoological Society of London.
If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown in this document, please provide us with
feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided.
THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

Taxonomy
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Aves Columbiformes Columbidae
Taxon Name: Leptotila wellsi (Lawrence, 1884)
Common Name(s):
• English: Grenada Dove
Taxonomic Source(s):
del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A. and Fishpool, L.D.C. 2014. HBW and BirdLife
International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 1: Non-passerines. Lynx Edicions
BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.
Identification Information:
31 cm. Medium-sized, plump bicoloured dove. Brown upperparts, with white forehead and white
breast feathers that extend around shoulder. White underparts with pinkish-brown breast, plain dark
wings, tail tipped white, and pale eye. Shows cinnamon underwing in flight. Pinkish red legs, feet and
bare skin around the eyes. Similar spp. Eared Dove Zenaida auriculata is smaller, more uniform brown
with dark eye and auricular mark, black spots on scapulars and no white in tail. Voice Mournful
descending hoooo, repeated at seven to eight-second intervals.
Assessment Information
Red List Category & Criteria: Critically Endangered C2a(i) ver 3.1
Year Published: 2018
Date Assessed: August 7, 2018
Justification:
This species is considered Critically Endangered because it has an extremely small and fragmented
population which has declined owing to habitat loss and fragmentation caused by hurricanes, fire and
clearance for tourism, industry, residential housing and roads, as well as grazing and predation by
invasive species. A 2008 recovery plan aims to urgently prevent further population decline due to
habitat loss and other threats, and increase the wild population through protection and restoration to
allow for four self-sustaining subpopulations.
Previously Published Red List Assessments

2017 – Critically Endangered (CR)
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-1.RLTS.T22690874A110630534.en


© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Leptotila wellsi – published in 2018. 1
1988 – Threatened (T)
Geographic Range
Range Description:
The species is endemic to Grenada in the Lesser Antilles. Historically, it was more widespread in coastal
and possibly offshore islands (Rusk et al. 1998), but may always have been rare (Devas 1943). The
population declined by c.50% in 1987-1990 (Blockstein 1991), and by 1998 numbered only c. 100
individuals, with strongholds on the Mt Hartman estate, and on the Perseverance and adjacent
Woodford estates in the west (Rusk et. al. 1998). The population increased to an estimated 182
individuals by 2003-2004 (Rusk and Clouse 2004), but in 2004 hurricane Ivan had a devastating impact
upon the island and the dove's population. This resulted in declines, particularly severe along the west
coast, where the population declined from 36 calling males to 3-12 calling males, but also within the Mt
Hartman area, from 55 males to 30-48 males (Rusk 2005). Three years following hurricane Ivan the
population was estimated at 68 calling males with 136 individuals in total (Rusk 2008), however this
assumes an even sex ratio, and there is a tendency for such relict populations to be male-dominated.
The total population may therefore be as small as 100 mature individuals or c. 30 reproductive pairs (N.
J. Collar in litt. 2008). A survey in 2013 estimated the population to be approximately 160 (+/- 30)
individuals using distance sampling, with 33 birds recorded (Rivera-Milán et al. 2015). This is equivalent
to approximately 110 mature individuals (range 90-130). Of all remaining known territories, 28 are
within protected areas, 11 on unprotected crown land and 29 on private land. Forty-three per cent of
remaining birds are thought to occur in the Mt Hartman Estate (Rusk 2010).
Country Occurrence:
Native: Grenada
Distribution Map
Leptotila wellsi
Population
The global population is estimated at c. 160 individuals, roughly equivalent to 110 mature individuals
(range 90 to 130) (Rivera-Milán et al. 2015).
Trend Justification
The population was estimated at 100 individuals in 1998, climbing to 182 individuals by 2003-2004.
However, the population declined following hurricane Ivan in 2004, with a maximum of 136 individuals
estimated in 2007 (Rusk 2007). Although these figures suggest that the population may have increased
between 1998 and 2007, this includes c. 30 new individuals discovered in 2003, and increases may
reflect an improvement in sampling methods. The population is thought to be undergoing a continued
decline (B. L. Rusk in litt. 2010), estimated here at 1-19% over 13 years (three generations).
Current Population Trend: Decreasing
Habitat and Ecology (see Appendix for additional information)

It inhabits a successional stage of dry, coastal scrub-woodland in the south-west, which comprises a
closed canopy of leguminous (often thorny) trees and shrubs c.3-6 m high, a sparse understorey of
shrubs and saplings, sparse to absent ground-cover and much exposed soil (Blockstein 1991). The
flowering tree Haematoxylum campechianum is dominant in these areas (Rusk 1992, Baptista et al.
2015). On the west coast, its habitat includes some mixed deciduous/evergreen vegetation. It may have
been always confined to xeric, coastal areas where climax vegetation was deciduous, seasonal forest
and thorn woodland, but frequent natural disturbances (particularly hurricanes) kept the vegetation in a
sub-climax condition (Rusk et. al. 2008). This temporary occupation of ephemeral patches and
recolonisation of developing patches may be the normal life history pattern. Breeding is limited to the
rainy season in the south-west, but is more extended on the less xeric west coast (Rusk 1998).
Systems: Terrestrial
Threats (see Appendix for additional information)

Habitat loss due to clearing for small plantations and charcoal production has been replaced in recent
years with chronic and continuing habitat loss for residential housing, roads, commercial and other
development. Habitat on private land is vulnerable to development and high land prices mean that it is
not practical for the government to purchase these areas to ensure their protection (Anon. 2012). Forest
clearing was substantially reduced at the Mt Hartman Estate by the late 1990s due to the establishment
of the Mt. Hartman National Park and Dove Sanctuary and the cessation of farming on the remainder of
the estate (Rusk 1998) but, in 1995, 50% of Perseverance was clear-cut for a planned quarry, with half
the site now a sanitary land-fill (Rusk and Temple 1995). A lease was granted for a new quarry at this site
in 2008, but that was temporarily halted in 2009 (Rusk 2008, 2010). Increases in squatters and cattle in
the 1990s resulted in more disturbance at Perseverance, though currently habitat degradation is due to
garbage and toxic fumes invading the site from the garbage dump across the road as well as spillover
from the adjacent hurricane debris site (Rusk 2008, 2010). Population declines are likely to be
compounded by high numbers of introduced mongooses, cats, rats and opposum predating eggs and
fledglings, of which mongoose were found to be the most abundant (Rusk 2015), but rats the most
widespread (Twyman and Hyslette unpubl. data). It is possible that mongooses and cats are able to
climb diagonal branches and trunks to reach the birds. By 2012, mongoose numbers had reached levels
whereby they were found to occur daily across much of Grenada Dove habitat (Bolton et al. 2015). A
resort development proposed in 2015 at Mt. Hartman poses a significant threat to, and would have
serious impact on the adjacent protected critical habitat unless mitigation measures including a
predator exclusion fence are put in place to protect the species (B. L. Rusk in litt. 2016). This
development will displace all doves outside the national park. Expanded national park boundaries were
agreed to by the developer but are not yet legally established. Resort planning was halted in 2016, but
may resume (B. L. Rusk in litt. 2016). Hurricanes pose a pertinent threat now that the remaining
population is so small. Following hurricane Ivan in 2004, calling frequency by males during the breeding
season appeared to have fallen significantly, possibly as a result of stress owing to limited resources
(Rusk 2005). The hurricane damaged habitat structure and allowed the invasion of alien vines into
suitable dove habitat. In the Mount Hartman Estate the dove was found to use man-made wells, and
one which the birds used frequently was threatened by development (Bolton et al. 2015). Spread of
disease (e.g. trichomonosis) between other bird species using these water sources is also a threat
(Bolton et al. 2015).
Conservation Actions (see Appendix for additional information)

Conservation Actions Underway
Grenada Dove is the national bird of Grenada, has been a focus of environmental education in schools
and ecotourism, and features on stamps. In 1996, parts of the Mt Hartman and Perseverance estates
were declared a national park and a protected area, respectively. A recovery plan was drafted in 1998
and a four-year GEF/WB funded Dry Forest Biodiversity Conservation Project based on stakeholder input
was implemented from 2001-2006. In 2008, an updated 10 year conservation and recovery plan was
drafted (Rusk et. al. 2008). In 2011, critical dove habitat on crown lands at the Beauséjour Estate (c.100
acres) received Government of Grenada cabinet approval for its protection and addition to the
Perseverance Protected Area (Rusk 2011), but a government housing development is planned for this
site. This species is legally protected from hunting and egg-collecting, but these threats are insignificant.
Dove habitats on private lands at Beauséjour, Grenville Vale and Woodford, all IBAs, are recommended
for protection in the 2010 Conservation and Management Plan for Perseverance Protected/Beauséjour
Area. All currently occupied dove habitat are IBAs and are included in Grenada's System Plan for Parks
and Protected Areas. Currently, all remaining dove habitat is on unprotected, privately owned land. A
legislative review to address private lands slated for protection has taken place (2013). The Grenada
Dove Conservation Programme (GDCP), with the Forestry and National Parks Department (FNDP), is
collaborating with BirdsCaribbean with the aim of developing eco-tourism activities in two of the key
areas for the species (Mt Hartman and Beauséjour) (Anon. 2013). This collaboration has resulted in
extensive interpretation at the Mt Hartman Visitor Center, a school outreach programme and increased
student site visitation. Predator control measures at dove sites were initiated in 2014, with over 1,000
mongoose trapped and removed at Mt Hartman in an 18 month period. The Grenada Dove
Conservation Programme and Forestry and National Parks Department collaborated with the University
of Chester (2014-2015) to study tropical dry forest changes (including dove habitat) using historical and
current data, and to look at possible future changes using climate change modelling scenarios.
Conservation Actions Proposed
Habitat protection and restoration and predator removal should be priorities for conservation of this
species (Rivera-Milán et al. 2015). Eliminate/mitigate further habitat loss. Carry out regular surveys and
establish a long-term monitoring programme (Bolton et al. 2016) to monitor population trends and
determine the sex ratio (and therefore the actual population) of remaining birds. Monitor rates of
habitat loss and degradation. Continue and expand control programme to reduce mongoose, rat and cat
presence in dove habitat and monitor and manage numbers of other introduced predators (Bolton et al.
2016). Undertake research into the species's ecology, including home range size and habitat preferences
(Bolton et al. 2016). Ensure that the Mt Hartman and Perseverance reserves are effectively protected.
Formally protect important habitat that falls within private lands (Rusk 2011) and protect the Mt
Hartman national park from development impacts and predation with a predator exclusion fence.
Address other limiting factors and implement species management activities (supplemental food
/water). Develop incentives/regulations for protection of dove habitat on private residential lots in the
south-west (adjacent to Mt Hartman), and Beauséjour and Woodford on the west coast (B. L. Rusk
unpubl. data). Restore habitat at existing and new sites. Implement the revised recovery plan (Rusk et al.
2008). Establish two new subpopulations (Rusk et al. 1998) and consider establishing a captive breeding
population. Provide alternatives to standing water sources such as 'leaky' hose water stations to reduce
the risk of disease (Bolton et al. 2015).
Credits
Assessor(s): BirdLife International
Reviewer(s): Westrip, J.
Contributor(s): Blockstein, D., Collar, N., Ellard, J., Rusk, B. & Wege, D.
Facilitators(s) and Ashpole, J, Benstead, P., Bird, J., Butchart, S., Calvert, R., Capper, D., Hermes, C.,
Compiler(s): Khwaja, N., Sharpe, C.J., Symes, A., Wege, D., Wheatley, H.
Bibliography
Anon. 2012. High prices put Grenada Dove at risk. World Birdwatch 34(2): 9.
Anon. 2013. Un nouvel espoir pour la colombe de Grenade. L'Oiseau Magazine 111: 58-59.
Baptista, L.F., Trail, P.W., Horblit, H.M., Kirwan, G.M. and Sharpe, C.J. 2015. Grenada Dove (Leptotila
wellsi). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., Christie, D.A. and de Juana, E. (eds), Handbook of the Birds
of the World Alive, Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
Blockstein, D. E. 1991. Population declines of the endangered endemic birds on Grenada, West Indies.
Bird Conservation International 1: 83-91.
Bolton, N.M., van Oosterhout, C., Collar, N.J. and Bell, D.J. 2016. Population constraints on the Grenada
Dove Leptotila wellsi: preliminary ndings and proposals from south-west Grenada. Bird Conservation
International 26: 205 –213.
Devas, R. P. 1943. Birds of Grenada, St Vincent and the Grenadines. Carenage Press, St George's,
Grenada.
IUCN. 2018. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2018-2. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org.
(Accessed: 15 November 2018).
Rivera-Milán, F.F., Bertuol, P., Simal, F. and Rusk, B.L. 2015. Distance sampling survey and abundance
estimation of the critically endangered Grenada Dove (Leptotila wellsi). The Condor 117(1): 87-93.
Rusk, B. L. 1992. The Grenada Dove and the Mt Hartman Estate: management recommendations.
Unpublished report. Forestry and National Parks Dept., Government of Grenada., St George’s, Grenada.
Rusk, B. L. 1998. Status of the endangered endemic Grenada Dove.
Rusk, B. L. 2005. Draft post-Hurricane Ivan Grenada Dove evaluation. Unpublished report. Forestry and
National Parks Dept., Government of Grenada, St George’s, Grenada.
Rusk, B. L. 2007. Grenada Dove (Leptotila wellsi) Census 2007.
Rusk, B.L. 2008. Grenada Dove census 2007 (Unpublished report). Forestry and National Parks Dept.,
Government of Grenada, St. George’s, Grenada.
Rusk, B.L. 2010. Case Study Mt Hartman and the Grenada Dove: Finding a Win-Win Solution.
(Unpublished report). USAID & The Nature Conservancy.
Rusk, B. L. 2011. Saving Grenada's national bird.
Rusk, B.L. 2015. Predator Control for the Grenada Dove. Unpublished Report. Grenada Dove
Conservation Programme and American Bird Conservancy.
Rusk, B. L. & Clouse, L. Status of the endangered endemic Grenada Dove (Leptotila wellsi). Unpublished
report. Forestry and National Parks Dept., Government of Grenada, St George’s, Grenada.
Rusk, B.L. & Temple, S.A. 1995. Grenada Dove census, post habitat loss: west coast. Unpublished report.
Rusk, B. L., Temple, S. A., Wege, D., Wallace, G., Blockstein, D. E., Ledec, G., Sorenson, L. 2008. Recovery
and Action Plan for the Grenada Dove (Draft). Forestry and National Parks Department, Government of
Grenada.
Citation
BirdLife International. 2018. Leptotila wellsi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018:
e.T22690874A131031811. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-2.RLTS.T22690874A131031811.en
Disclaimer
To make use of this information, please check the Terms of Use.
External Resources
For Images and External Links to Additional Information, please see the Red List website.
Appendix
Habitats
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
Major
Habitat Season Suitability
Importance?
1. Forest -> 1.5. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Dry Resident Suitable Yes
Threats
Threat Timing Scope Severity Impact Score
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.1. Ongoing Majority (50- Rapid declines Medium
Housing & urban areas 90%) impact: 7
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.3. Ongoing Majority (50- Very rapid High impact: 8
Tourism & recreation areas 90%) declines

1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.4. Storms Ongoing Whole (>90%) Very rapid High impact: 9
& flooding declines

2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & Ongoing Minority (50%) Rapid declines Medium
perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.4. Scale impact: 6
Unknown/Unrecorded
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming Ongoing Minority (50%) Slow, significant Low impact: 5
& ranching -> 2.3.2. Small-holder grazing, ranching or declines
farming
6. Human intrusions & disturbance -> 6.3. Work & Ongoing Majority (50- Slow, significant Medium
other activities 90%) declines impact: 6
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance
8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & Ongoing Majority (50- Rapid declines Medium
diseases -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien 90%) impact: 7
species/diseases -> 8.1.2. Named species (Felis catus)

Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects ->
2.3.7. Reduced reproductive success
8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & Ongoing Majority (50- Rapid declines Medium
diseases -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien 90%) impact: 7
species/diseases -> 8.1.2. Named species

(Unspecified Rattus)
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects ->
2.3.7. Reduced reproductive success
8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & Ongoing Majority (50- Very rapid High impact: 8
diseases -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien 90%) declines
species/diseases -> 8.1.2. Named species (Herpestes

auropunctatus)
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & Ongoing Majority (50- Slow, significant Medium
diseases -> 8.2. Problematic native species/diseases 90%) declines impact: 6
-> 8.2.2. Named species (Trichomonas gallinae)

Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
9. Pollution -> 9.5. Air-borne pollutants -> 9.5.4. Type Ongoing Minority (50%) Unknown Unknown
Unknown/Unrecorded
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
Conservation Actions in Place

Conservation Actions in Place

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
Action Recovery plan: Yes
Systematic monitoring scheme: Yes
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
Conservation sites identified: Yes, over entire range
Occur in at least one PA: Yes
Invasive species control or prevention: Yes
In-Place Species Management
Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly: No
Subject to ex-situ conservation: No
In-Place Education
Subject to recent education and awareness programmes: Yes
Included in international legislation: No
Subject to any international management/trade controls: Yes
Conservation Actions Needed

Conservation Actions Needed
1. Land/water protection -> 1.2. Resource & habitat protection
2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management
2. Land/water management -> 2.2. Invasive/problematic species control
2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration
3. Species management -> 3.2. Species recovery
3. Species management -> 3.3. Species re-introduction -> 3.3.1. Reintroduction
3. Species management -> 3.4. Ex-situ conservation -> 3.4.1. Captive breeding/artificial propagation
5. Law & policy -> 5.1. Legislation -> 5.1.3. Sub-national level
Research Needed
Research Needed
1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.4. Habitat trends
Additional Data Fields

Distribution
Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO): Yes
Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO): No
Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) (km²): 70
Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO): Yes
Extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO): No
Number of Locations: 2-5
Continuing decline in number of locations: Yes
Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations: No
Lower elevation limit (m): 0
Upper elevation limit (m): 150
Population
Number of mature individuals: 110
Population
Continuing decline of mature individuals: Yes
Extreme fluctuations: No
Population severely fragmented: No
No. of subpopulations: 2
Continuing decline in subpopulations: Yes
Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations: No
All individuals in one subpopulation: No
Habitats and Ecology

Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat: Yes
Generation Length (years): 4.2
Movement patterns: Not a Migrant
The IUCN Red List Partnership
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species
Programme, the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership.
The IUCN Red List Partners are: Arizona State University; BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens
Conservation International; Conservation International; NatureServe; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew;
Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; and Zoological Society of London.
THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

10.2305 IUCN - UK.2018-2.RLTS.T22690874A131031811.en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10.2305 IUCN - UK.2018-2.RLTS.T22690874A131031811.en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™

ISSN 2307-8235 (online)

Leptotila wellsi, Grenada Dove

THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

Animalia Chordata Aves Columbiformes Columbidae

Taxon Name: Leptotila wellsi (Lawrence, 1884)

Year Published: 2018

Date Assessed: August 7, 2018

Previously Published Red List Assessments

2016 – Critically Endangered (CR)

2015 – Critically Endangered (CR)

2012 – Critically Endangered (CR)

2010 – Critically Endangered (CR)

2009 – Critically Endangered (CR)

2008 – Critically Endangered (CR)

2004 – Critically Endangered (CR)

2000 – Critically Endangered (CR)

1996 – Critically Endangered (CR)

1994 – Critically Endangered (CR)

1988 – Threatened (T)

Habitat and Ecology (see Appendix for additional information)

Threats (see Appendix for additional information)

Conservation Actions (see Appendix for additional information)

Rusk, B. L. 1998. Status of the endangered endemic Grenada Dove.

Rusk, B. L. 2007. Grenada Dove (Leptotila wellsi) Census 2007.

Rusk, B. L. 2011. Saving Grenada's national bird.

1. Forest -> 1.5. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Dry Resident Suitable Yes

Threat Timing Scope Severity Impact Score

Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion

Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion

Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion

Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

species/diseases -> 8.1.2. Named species (Felis catus)

species/diseases -> 8.1.2. Named species

species/diseases -> 8.1.2. Named species (Herpestes

-> 8.2.2. Named species (Trichomonas gallinae)

Conservation Actions in Place

Conservation Actions in Place

Action Recovery plan: Yes

Systematic monitoring scheme: Yes

In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management

Conservation sites identified: Yes, over entire range

Occur in at least one PA: Yes

Invasive species control or prevention: Yes

In-Place Species Management

Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly: No

Subject to ex-situ conservation: No

Subject to recent education and awareness programmes: Yes

Included in international legislation: No

Subject to any international management/trade controls: Yes

Conservation Actions Needed

2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management

2. Land/water management -> 2.2. Invasive/problematic species control

2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration

3. Species management -> 3.2. Species recovery

3. Species management -> 3.3. Species re-introduction -> 3.3.1. Reintroduction

1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology

3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends

3. Monitoring -> 3.4. Habitat trends

Additional Data Fields

Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO): No

Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) (km²): 70

Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO): Yes