• Summary
• Text account
• Data table and detailed info
• Distribution map
• Reference and further resources

Justification of Red List category
This species is listed as Vulnerable because remote-sensing techniques indicate that the lowland forest on which this species depends for nesting is being cleared at such a rate that the population is likely to be undergoing a rapid decline.

Population justification
It is usually encountered in pairs, but birds may congregate in flocks of up to 40 individuals (Marsden et al. 2001). The species was frequently encountered in primary and disturbed forest during surveys in 1997-1998 and 2010 (Davis et al. 2018). Its population density has been estimated at 27 (+/- 12) and 73 (+/- 24) individuals per km² in primary forest, 64 (+/- 24) individuals per km² in selectively logged forest, and 6 (+/- 3.5) and 28 (+/- 20) individuals per km² in forest gardens (Marsden et al. 2001). It is widely distributed across the island, and in 1996 most remaining forest was considered to be of adequate quality to support a reasonal population density (Marsden et al. 2001). However, parrot species are known to make altitudinal and seasonal movements, so occupancy may not be uniform across all available habitat (Marsden et al. 2001). Based on the lowest density estimate across all habitats (6 individuals per km²), the lowest density estimate for primary forest (26 individuals per km²), and an estimated area of forest of 19,200 km² in 1996, the population size was previously tentatively estimated at approximately 115,000 - 499,000 individuals (Marsden et al. 2001). The area of forest cover in 2000 was later estimated at 21,833 km² (Buchanan et al. 2008). Based on the same density estimates and the new estimate of forest area, the population estimate can be revised to c. 131,000 - 568,000 individuals. This roughly equates to 87,000-378,000 mature individuals. There is assumed to be a single subpopulation.

Trend justification

Although the species may still appear to be relatively numerous, it is long-lived and declines in reproductive output, due to loss of large hollow-bearing trees suitable for nesting, may be masked.

Buchanan et al. (2008) calculated the amount of forest loss within the species's range on New Britain as 11.6% over the period 1989-2000. Extrapolating back to 1976 and assuming the rate of deforestation remained constant, approximately 25% of forest may have been lost from the species's range from 1976 to 2000. Over 2000-2019, approximately 9% of tree cover with at least 50% canopy cover was lost from the species's range (Global Forest Watch 2021). Combining these figures and extrapolating to 2020, approximately 35% of forest in the species's range may have been lost over the past three generations (44 years).

From 2016-2019, approximately 2.8% of tree cover with at least 50% canopy cover was lost from within the species's range (Global Forest Watch 2021). Extrapolating rates of tree cover loss over 2000-2019 and over 2016-2019 forward over three generations, it is suspected that 24-32% of tree cover may be lost from the species's range over the next three generations.

Although the species occurs at similar densities in primary and in selectively logged forest (Marsden et al. 2001), it is found at much lower densities in forest gardens and it avoids oil palm plantations (Marsden et al. 2001; Marsden and Pilgrim 2003). It also appears to nest mainly in primary forest (Marsden et al. 2001, Marsden and Pilgrim 2003). It is therefore assumed that the population size will decline roughly in line with forest loss, although there may be a delayed response due to the species's slow life history. The species's population size is therefore suspected to be declining at a rate placed in the band 20-40% over three generations.

Cacatua ophthalmica is endemic to New Britain, Papua New Guinea, where it is widespread in suitable habitat. 

It occurs in primary forest, selectively logged forest, and, at lower densities, forest gardens (Marsden et al. 2001). However, it appears to rely on intact forest with large trees for nesting (Marsden et al. 2001; Marsden and Pilgrim 2003). It has been recorded up to c.1,600 m (Igag 2009). It feeds on fruits including coconut Cocos nucifera, Melanolepis multiglandulosa and Ficus sp., and flowers including Eucalyptus deglupta and Cryptocarya sp. (Marsden et al. 2001; Marsden and Pilgrim 2003).

It is threatened by logging and forest conversion, particularly for conversion to oil palm plantations. Around 12% of forest cover in New Britain was lost between 1989 and 2000 (Buchanan et al. 2008). Since then, the rate of deforestation apparently slowed (B. Beehler in litt. 2016, Global Forest Watch 2021).

In 2002, all forest in West New Britain was allocated for industrial forestry, and New Britain accounted for approximately half of Papua New Guinea's timber exports (Bun et al. 2004). Regulations on the frequency of re-logging areas are being ignored (Nelson et al. 2014).

Many areas of lowland forest in New Britain have been converted to oil palm plantations (Swartzendruber 1993; Buchanan et al. 2008). Much of the Bismarck Archipelago has been allocated as Special Agricultural Business Lease (SABL) areas, which would permit conversion to oil palm plantations. However, many of these areas appear to be unsuitable for oil palm, suggesting that they may be in place to facilitate commercial logging, under the pretext of oil palm development (Nelson et al. 2014; Bryan et al. 2015). Nevertheless, conversion to oil palm is likely to continue slowly in the region (Nelson et al. 2014).

The species is trapped in low numbers to be kept as a pet, and is traded internationally in small numbers. Approximately 15 individuals were found on sale at a market in Kokopo, New Britain in 1996 (Wilkinson et al. 2000) and 38 wild individuals were imported to CITES signatory countries in 1996-1997 (Marsden et al. 2001; WCMC CITES Database). However, very few imports of wild individuals were reported since 2000 (WCMC CITES Database) and extensive surveys in 1997-1998 and 2010 found no evidence of poaching (Davis et al. 2018).

Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. A captive population is maintained (Wilkinson et al. 2000).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Monitor populations and breeding success in logged and unlogged forest throughout its range. Monitor trends in the national and international trade of this species. Continue to monitor deforestation across its range. 

Ensure the protection of a number of large areas of lowland forest on New Britain as part of a protected area network for the island. Conduct awareness campaigns to discourage trapping of the species. Discourage the logging of trees with holes or other suitable nesting cavities.

50cm. White cockatoo, bases of head feathers undersurfaces of wing and tail suffused with yellow. Yellow crest feathers only visible easily when crest is erect. Grey-black bill and feet and diagnostic sky-blue wattled skin around the eyes (much darker than on other similar cockatoos).

Text account compilers
Wheatley, H.

Contributors
Beehler, B.M., Bishop, K.D., Butchart, S., Davis, R.A., Derhé, M., Dutson, G., Ekstrom, J., Mahood, S. & Wilkinson, R.

---

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Blue-eyed Cockatoo Cacatua ophthalmica. Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/blue-eyed-cockatoo-cacatua-ophthalmica on 24/11/2024.
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 24/11/2024.