Data Zone
Justification of Red List category
Following methods developed in a series of papers published in 2017 (Akcakaya et al. 2017, Keith et al. 2017, Thompson et al. 2017), the probability that the species is extinct based on records and surveys is 0.973, and the probability it is extinct based on threats is 0.873. Although this generates an average extinction probability of 0.92, the threats models does not meet the threshold for Extinct. Accordingly, it is classified as Critically Endangered (Possibly Extinct). There have been no recent records of Lophura edwardsi despite extensive surveys, suggesting that any remaining wild population is likely to be extremely small and severely fragmented. Population declines have been driven by high levels of hunting pressure and lowland forest clearance and degradation.
Population justification
The last confirmed records of L. edwardsi were in 2000, when a juvenile male was captured in February, and two males, a female and four eggs were reported in March (Eames and Mahood 2017). A purported female was photographed in 2009 but was identified as a female Silver Pheasant Lophura nycthemera (R. Dams in litt. 2023, J. Eaton in litt. 2023). A male with a deformed beak, also supposedly photographed in 2009, is not considered to be a genuine record (R. Dams in litt. 2023).
Lophura 'hatinhensis', which was previously described as a species, is a mutation of L. edwardsi that has been observed at either end of, and within, the known range of, L. edwardsi (J. Eames in litt. 2012, Hennache et al. 2012). The occurrence of birds showing inbred characteristics since the 1960s and the lack of any recent records of the species are an indication that any remaining populations would be extremely small, fragmented and declining. Similarly, the description of another invalid taxon, Imperial Pheasant Lophura imperialis, a L. nycthemera x L. edwardsi hybrid, suggest the population size has been small for some time.
Following methods developed in a series of papers published in 2017 (Akcakaya et al. 2017, Keith et al. 2017, Thompson et al. 2017), the probability that this species is extinct based on records and surveys is 0.973, and the probability it is extinct based on threats is 0.873. The minimum population size is therefore set to 0 mature individuals, while the upper limit is arbitrarily set to <50 mature individuals, recognising that if this species is extant, any remnant population must be tiny.
Trend justification
The species is suspected to have declined rapidly from a combination of hunting and habitat loss, given that virtually all forest habitat within its range has now been lost and remaining fragments are under intense pressure. L. edwardsi has likely always been rare. There were 22 individuals recorded from its discovery in 1895 to 1935, most of which were taken as specimens (Eames and Mahood 2017). The species was next seen in 1964, with 24 records of 62 individuals seen between then and 2000 (Eames and Mahood 2017). Only one bird was recorded in the 1960s, one in the 1970s, three in the 1980s, 53 in the 1990s and four birds were seen in 2000 (BirdLife International 2001, Eames and Mahood 2017). The two males (one of which was captured), a female and four eggs are considered the last genuine records of the species (Eames and Mahood 2017). The absence of records since, despite considerable survey effort (R. Dams in litt. 2023), indicates that the population has continued to decline, and the probability it is extinct is estimated at greater than 90% (following methods in Akcakaya et al. [2017], Keith et al. [2017], and Thompson et al. [2017]).
Lophura edwardsi is endemic to central Viet Nam. Known historically from four provinces (Ha Tinh, Quang Binh, Quang Tri and Thua Thien Hue), it was formerly described as locally fairly common. Individuals were recorded near to the Phong My Commune, Thua Thien Hue, and also near the Huong Hiep Commune, Quang Tri (Le Trong Trai et al. 1999). Several other individuals were found in the Quang Tri and Thua Thien Hue Provinces, but the last confirmed recent record was in 2000, where one male was confiscated from a hunter and held in captivity in the Hai Lang District Forest Protection Department, Quang Tri. It has been suggested that the species may have historically occurred in Lao PDR, but this remains unconfirmed and if it was once present, it is now almost certainly extinct given hunting pressure, which is even more acute in Lao PDR than Viet Nam (Timmins et al. 2024).
L. edwardsi is confined to 'exceedingly damp' evergreen lowland forest below 300 m, characterised by year-round high humidity, high rainfall and a thick understory rich in lianas (N. Brickle in litt. 2004).
Threats for this species have operated at an acuity and spatial scale that may have driven it extinct. Using the threats extinction probability model devised by Keith et al. (2017), the probability the species is extinct based on threats is 0.873 (BirdLife International, unpubl. data).
The two main threats faced by L. edwardsi are habitat loss and degradation, and hunting, primarily with snares. L. edwardsi is thought to be confined to 'everwet' evergreen lowland forest below 300 m in the Central Annam region of Viet Nam (Eames and Mahood 2017). However, this lowland habitat has been extensively deforested and replaced almost entirely with irrigated rice cultivation (Eames and Mahood 2017). Remaining forest suffered acute and extensive defoliation during the American-Vietnam War, during which 72 million litres of herbicide were sprayed on Vietnamese forests (Eames et al. 1992) and continues to be exploited through commercial logging, firewood collection, charcoal production and fragrant oil extraction (Robson et al. 1991, Eames et al. 1992, BirdLife International 2001). Selective logging and the near-total removal of the largest trees has had an extensive impact on the structure and associated microclimates of forest remnants, and the thinning of the canopy and degradation of the understory is thought to have led to the drying of the ‘everwet’ forest on which L. edwardsi relies (Timmins et al. 2024).
The use of wire snares for hunting is a pervasive and insidious threat across South-East Asia (Gray et al. 2018, 2021). Hunters erect multiple drift fences that extend for hundreds, if not thousands, of metres with snares placed along them every few metres (Holden 2005). Terrestrial birds and mammals are killed indiscriminately. Such techniques are employed not only by professional hunters but also by rattan collectors, loggers, gold miners and fragrant oil extractors, exerting an immense hunting pressure on wildlife (Eames et al. 1992, Le Manh Hung et al. 2004). Snaring occurs across Viet Nam on an almost industrial scale. For example, between 2011 and 2019 around 127,000 wire snares were removed from the 320 km2 Hue-Quang Nam Saola Reserves alone (Gray et al. 2021). Regardless of such intense persecution, other Galliformes such as Gallus gallus and L. nycthemera seem to be somewhat more tolerant of this hunting pressure than L. edwardsi (Brickle et al. 2008). The tolerance of other species to hunting suggest that hunting pressure is not solely responsible for decline but instead is the coup de grâce following an extensive loss of suitable habitat and microclimate.
The description of what transpired to be two invalid taxa in the 20th century is somewhat indicative of L. edwardsi having a small population size for quite some time, likely a result of the historical clearance of lowland forest. L. imperialis is a naturally occurring hybrid between L. edwardsi and L. nycthemera, while L. hatinhensis is an inbred form of L. edwardsi (Hennache et al. 2012). Hybridisation with L. nycthemera, may threaten the genetic integrity of remaining L. edwardsi and competition with this congener (which is more plastic in habitat use) may also pose a threat (BirdLife International 2001).
Conservation Actions Underway
Listed in CITES Appendix I. An Action Plan was published for this species in 2015 (Pham Tuan Anh and Le Trong Trai 2015).
Surveys for the species were conducted on foot in 1988, 1990, 1991, 1994, 2002 and 2004 (Eames et al. 1988; Robson et al. 1991; Eames et al. 1992; Eames et al. 1994; Le Manh Hung et al. 2002; Le Manh Hung et al. 2004). From 2005 to 2023, extensive camera trap surveys were carried out across Viet Nam by a number of organisations including VietNature, WWF and Re:wild (R. Dams and Le Trong Trai in litt. 2023, Nguyen Quang Hoa Anh in litt. 2023, A. Tilker in litt. 2023). In that time, it is estimated that there have been at least 500,000 camera trap nights of surveys within the potential range of L. edwardsi. The localities from which the most recent records derive have been incorporated into the Phong Dien, Dakrong and Ke Go protected areas, for which management feasibility studies have been completed (Le Trong Trai 1999). Bac Huong Hoa. Khe Net and Khe Nuoc Truong have also been proposed as protected areas (Pham Tuan Anh and Le Trong Trai 2015). Site Support Groups have been established for Dakrong IBA and Bac Huong Hoa IBA.
In December 2003, the captive population numbered 1,033 individuals (A. Hennache in litt. 2004) and in December 2023 it was estimated to be close to 1,400 birds (R. Dams in litt. 2023). A project investigating the feasibility of reintroductions is underway with aviaries under construction to facilitate the programme. The maternal line has been screened and hybrids purged from the captive stock (A. Hennache in litt. 2004). Poster distribution and community interviews have occurred since 2014 around Trurong Son, but there has been little information gained from these about the persistence of the species in this location.
Conservation Actions Proposed
Use remote sensing to classify forest according to humidity in order to identify potentially suitable areas for the species within the remaining forest matrix (Eames and Mahood 2017). Conduct further surveys of remaining forest fragments within and to the north of its historical range using camera trapping and specially trained dogs (Eames and Mahood 2017), particularly at areas identified through modelling approaches (e.g. Grainger et al. 2017), to clarify the species status and ecological requirements. Establish the proposed Phong Dien and Dakrong Nature Reserves, encourage the protection of other key sites for the species (Pham Tuan Anh and Le Trong Trai 2015) and enhance Site Support Groups. Promote careful management of captive Vietnamese Lophura pheasants through the ISB system, and regularly review ex-situ measures until their taxonomic relationships are clarified. If appropriate, utilise the captive population to prepare suitable individuals for reintroduction (Pham Tuan Anh and Le Trong Trai 2015, R. Dams in litt. 2023). Prepare a landscape level management plan to redress genetic problems caused by habitat fragmentation and establish effective habitat protection. Assess the level and impact of hunting and campaign for its control, starting with complete cessation in protected areas holding the species. Conduct research to establish the feasibility and effects of using forest corridors to connect forest fragments.
58-65 cm. Blue-black pheasant (male) with short, shaggy white crest and red facial skin. Female uniform cold greyish-brown with warmer tinged wings and blackish tail with brown central feathers. Juvenile (both sexes) resembles female but females may have black spots/bars on mantle, scapulars and wing-coverts, males show patches of adult plumage. Voice: Alarm call is low guttural uk uk uk uk uk.
Text account compilers
Nesbit, D., Berryman, A.
Contributors
Brickle, N., Duckworth, W., Eames, J.C., Hennache, A., Mahood, S., Pham, T.A., Safford, R., Trai, L., Tilker, A., Ashpole, J, Martin, R., Symes, A., Davidson, P., Bird, J., Benstead, P., Keane, A., Taylor, J., Westrip, J.R.S., Dams, R., Grainger, M., McGowan, P., Geary, M., Richardson, L., Eaton, J. & Nguyen, Q.
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Vietnam Pheasant Lophura edwardsi. Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/vietnam-pheasant-lophura-edwardsi on 22/11/2024.
Recommended citation for factsheets for more than one species: BirdLife International (2024) IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/search on 22/11/2024.