Data Zone
Taxonomic source(s)
AERC TAC. 2003. AERC TAC Checklist of bird taxa occurring in Western Palearctic region, 15th Draft. Available at: #http://www.aerc.eu/DOCS/Bird_taxa_of _the_WP15.xls#.
Cramp, S. and Simmons, K.E.L. (eds). 1977-1994. Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and Africa. The birds of the western Palearctic. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
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.
| Critically Endangered | Endangered | Vulnerable |
|---|---|---|
| - | - | - |
| Year | Category | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| 2017 | Near Threatened | A3cde |
| 2016 | Vulnerable | A2ce+3ce+4ce |
| 2012 | Vulnerable | A2ce+3ce+4ce |
| 2008 | Vulnerable | A2c,e; A3c,e; A4c,e |
| 2006 | Vulnerable | |
| 2004 | Vulnerable | |
| 2000 | Lower Risk/Conservation Dependent | |
| 1996 | Vulnerable | |
| 1994 | Vulnerable | |
| 1988 | Threatened |
| Migratory status | full migrant | Forest dependency | does not normally occur in forest |
| Land-mass type |
Land-mass type - continent |
Average mass | - |
| Estimate | Data quality | |
|---|---|---|
| Extent of Occurrence breeding/resident (km2) | 12,600,000 | medium |
| Extent of Occurrence non-breeding (km2) | 14,900,000 | medium |
| Number of locations | 11-100 | - |
| Severely fragmented? | no | - |
| Value | Data quality | Derivation | Year of estimate | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of mature individuals | 11400-13400 | medium | estimated | 2017 |
| Population trend | decreasing | poor | suspected | 1975-2008 |
| Decline % (10 years/3 generations future) | 20-29 | - | - | - |
| Number of subpopulations | 2-100 | - | - | - |
| Percentage in largest subpopulation | 1-89 | - | - | - |
| Generation length (years) | 11 | - | - | - |
Population justification: The population was previously estimated to number 4,350-4,800 individuals in the Black Sea and Mediterranean; 6,000-9,000 individuals in South-East Asia and south Asia, and 50 individuals in east Asia (Simba Chan in litt. 2005), totalling 10,000-13,900 individuals, which roughly equates to 6,700-9,300 mature individuals.
Catsadorakis and Portolou (2017) have since reviewed the global population of the species, and have calculated a revised estimate of the global population size at a minimum of 5,693-6,694 breeding pairs, and potentially as high as 7,342-8,984 pairs (G. Catsadorakis in litt. 2017). Taking the estimate from Catsadorakis and Portolou 2017 and converting to mature individuals produces a revised population estimate of 11,386-13,388, rounded here to 11,400-13,400 mature individuals.
Trend justification: Of the nine countries where the species breeds regularly, four populations are fluctuating (Russia, Bulgaria, Ukraine and Montenegro), three are increasing (Greece, Turkey and Albania) and one is stable (Romania) (Catsadorakis and Portolou 2017), with indications that the populations in Russia and Montenegro may be increasing too (G. Catsadorakis in litt. 2017). Based on the available data, the species is also thought to have increased overall in Kazakhstan over the last decade (A. Zhatkanbayev in litt. to Catsadorakis and Portolou 2017). Given this data, it is therefore plausible that the species has actually increased over the past 3 generations (33 years), and in the European Red List the species was listed as Least Concern at regional scale because of such increases (BirdLife International 2015). There are still population declines being reported for some countries, particularly those outside of Europe (Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, parts of Kazakhstan and Iran), but the data suggests that overall these have been outweighed by the increases elsewhere.
However, there remains some doubt about the current overall size and trend of the breeding population in Kazakhstan, which potentially contains 29-47% of the global population and where a number of threats remain active (Catsadorakis and Portolou 2017). Additionally, the species in south-east Europe is entirely management-dependent and so the removal of conservation measures could lead to future population declines (G. Catsadorakis in litt. 2017). Therefore, there is the potential for large declines in the future (though not necessarily >30% of the global population over 3 generations), even though the evidence suggests that the species has not globally declined in the recent past. As such, it is precautionarily suspected that this species could undergo moderately rapid declines in the next three generations.
| Country/Territory | Presence | Origin | Resident | Breeding | Non-breeding | Passage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Afghanistan | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Albania | extant | native | yes | |||
| Algeria | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Armenia | extant | native | yes | |||
| Azerbaijan | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Bangladesh | possibly extinct | native | yes | |||
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | extinct | native | yes | |||
| Bulgaria | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| China (mainland) | extant | native | yes | |||
| Croatia | extinct | native | yes | |||
| Cyprus | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Czechia | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Egypt | extant | native | yes | |||
| Georgia | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Germany | extinct | native | yes | |||
| Greece | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Hong Kong (China) | extant | native | yes | |||
| Hungary | extinct | vagrant | yes | |||
| India | extant | native | yes | |||
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | extant | native | yes | |||
| Iraq | extant | native | yes | |||
| Israel | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Italy | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Japan | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Kazakhstan | extant | native | yes | |||
| Kuwait | extant | vagrant | yes | yes | ||
| Kyrgyzstan | extant | native | yes | |||
| Latvia | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Lebanon | extant | native | yes | |||
| Moldova | extant | native | yes | |||
| Mongolia | extant | native | yes | |||
| Montenegro | extant | native | yes | |||
| North Macedonia | extinct | native | yes | yes | ||
| Norway | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Oman | extant | vagrant | yes | |||
| Pakistan | extant | native | yes | |||
| Poland | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Romania | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Russia | extant | native | yes | yes | yes | |
| Russia (Central Asian) | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Russia (European) | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Serbia | extant | uncertain | yes | |||
| Slovakia | extant | vagrant | ||||
| South Korea | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Spain | extant | vagrant | yes | yes | ||
| Sri Lanka | extant | uncertain | ||||
| Syria | extant | native | yes | |||
| Taiwan, China | extant | vagrant | ||||
| Tajikistan | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| Türkiye | extant | native | yes | |||
| Turkmenistan | extant | native | yes | |||
| Ukraine | extant | native | yes | yes | ||
| United Arab Emirates | extant | vagrant | yes | |||
| Uzbekistan | extant | native | yes | |||
| Western Sahara | extant | vagrant |
| Habitat (level 1) | Habitat (level 2) | Importance | Occurrence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marine Coastal/Supratidal | Coastal Brackish/Saline Lagoons/Marine Lakes | major | breeding |
| Marine Coastal/Supratidal | Coastal Brackish/Saline Lagoons/Marine Lakes | major | non-breeding |
| Marine Coastal/Supratidal | Coastal Freshwater Lakes | suitable | breeding |
| Marine Coastal/Supratidal | Coastal Freshwater Lakes | suitable | non-breeding |
| Marine Neritic | Estuaries | suitable | non-breeding |
| Wetlands (inland) | Permanent Freshwater Lakes (over 8ha) | major | breeding |
| Wetlands (inland) | Permanent Freshwater Lakes (over 8ha) | major | non-breeding |
| Wetlands (inland) | Permanent Inland Deltas | major | breeding |
| Wetlands (inland) | Permanent Inland Deltas | major | non-breeding |
| Altitude | Occasional altitudinal limits |
| Threat (level 1) | Threat (level 2) | Impact and Stresses | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agriculture & aquaculture | Annual & perennial non-timber crops - Agro-industry farming | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Majority (50-90%) | Negligible declines | Low Impact: 5 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Biological resource use | Fishing & harvesting aquatic resources - Unintentional effects: (large scale) [harvest] | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Minority (<50%) | Slow, Significant Declines | Low Impact: 5 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Biological resource use | Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals - Intentional use (species is the target) | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Past, Unlikely to Return | Majority (50-90%) | Slow, Significant Declines | Past Impact | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Biological resource use | Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals - Persecution/control | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Minority (<50%) | Negligible declines | Low Impact: 4 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Energy production & mining | Renewable energy | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Future | Majority (50-90%) | Slow, Significant Declines | Low Impact: 4 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Human intrusions & disturbance | Recreational activities | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Minority (<50%) | Negligible declines | Low Impact: 4 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Invasive and other problematic species, genes & diseases | Problematic native species/diseases - Sus scrofa | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Minority (<50%) | Slow, Significant Declines | Low Impact: 5 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Natural system modifications | Dams & water management/use - Dams (size unknown) | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Minority (<50%) | Negligible declines | Low Impact: 4 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Pollution | Agricultural & forestry effluents - Type Unknown/Unrecorded | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Future | Majority (50-90%) | Slow, Significant Declines | Low Impact: 4 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Transportation & service corridors | Roads & railroads | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Minority (<50%) | Negligible declines | Low Impact: 4 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Transportation & service corridors | Utility & service lines | Timing | Scope | Severity | Impact | ||||
| Ongoing | Minority (<50%) | Negligible declines | Low Impact: 4 | ||||||
|
|||||||||
| Purpose | Primary form used | Life stage used | Source | Scale | Level | Timing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Food - human | - | - | non-trivial | recent | ||
| Pets/display animals, horticulture | - | - | international | non-trivial | recent |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2023) Species factsheet: Pelecanus crispus. Downloaded from
http://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/dalmatian-pelican-pelecanus-crispus on 26/09/2023.
Recommended citation for factsheets for more than one species: BirdLife International (2023) IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from
http://datazone.birdlife.org on 26/09/2023.
