Publication Cover
Ostrich
Journal of African Ornithology
Volume 71, 2000 - Issue 1-2
57
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
SYMPOSIUM: USING BIRD DATA FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING CHAIR. DEREK POMEROY

Birds to watch: a Red Data List for East Africa

, &
Pages 310-314 | Published online: 19 Oct 2010
 

Abstract

Bennun, L.A., Njoroge, P. & Pomeroy, D. 2000. Birds to watch: a Red Data List for East Africa. Ostrich 71 (1 & 2): 310–314.

The value of Red Data books and lists is well established; there has been much recent work on improving the criteria for listing species of conservation concern. So far these have been applied mainly at the global level. Regional lists can be useful, however, in improving the resolution of conservation priorities and setting an agenda for research, monitoring and conservation, especially where data are collected by amateur naturalists. A Red Data list for East African birds has been drawn up following an eight-month process that involved wide consultation within the region, defined as Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya and Burundi. The criteria for listing were based on those defined by IUCN, and summarised in a single, simple table that could be used for screening large numbers of species. A criterion based on geographic range eliminated from consideration vagrant species or those on the extreme edge of their range. A separate Near Threatened category (Lower Risk but very close to Vulnerable) proved useful. An additional category of Regional Responsibility captured species that are entirely or mainly confiied to East Africa, or to three habitats where the region has special responsibility: coastal forests, Albertine Rift forests, and papyrus swamps. A total of 107 species (about 8% of the regional avifauna) were listed as regionally threatened. This includes four Critical, 18 Endangered and 85 Vulnerable species, proportions very close to those expected from the theoretical probabilities of extinction in each case. One hundred and four species were listed as Near-threatened and 153 as Regional Responsibility, 87 of which are not under threat. Placing a species in a particular category of threat, for explicit reasons, poses an hypothesis about its status that can be tested with additional data. This process is now under way with the compilation of a more detailed, annotated list.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.