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

Taxonomic note
Erythropitta venusta (del Hoyo and Collar 2016) was previously listed as Pitta venusta.

Taxonomic source(s)
del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A., Fishpool, L.D.C., Boesman, P. and Kirwan, G.M. 2016. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 2: Passerines. Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.

Red List criteria met

Critically Endangered	Endangered	Vulnerable
-	-	-

Red List history

Year	Category	Criteria
2023	Least Concern
2016	Vulnerable	C2a(i)
2012	Vulnerable	C2a(i)
2008	Vulnerable	C2a(i)
2004	Vulnerable
2000	Vulnerable
1994	Lower Risk/Least Concern
1988	Lower Risk/Least Concern

Migratory status	not a migrant	Forest dependency	high
Land-mass type	shelf island	Average mass	-

	Estimate	Data quality
Extent of Occurrence (breeding/resident)	200,000 km2	medium
Severely fragmented?	no	-

	Estimate	Data quality	Derivation	Year of estimate
Population size	unknown	-	-	-
Population trend	decreasing	poor	suspected	2016-2029
Rate of change over the past 10 years/3 generations (longer of the two periods)	5-9%	-	-	-
Rate of change over the future 10 years/3 generations (longer of the two periods)	5-9%	-	-	-
Rate of change over the past & future 10 years/3 generations (longer of the two periods)	5-9%	-	-	-
Generation length	4.17 years	-	-	-
Number of subpopulations	1	-	-	-
Percentage of mature individuals in largest subpopulation	100%	-	-	-

Population justification: There are no data available from which to estimate this species' population size, although it is described as uncommon (Eaton et al. 2021) and eBird (2022) data suggest the species is elusive rather than especially rare. The area of suitable habitat is very large (c.40,000 km²; per Global Forest Watch 2022) and although no density data are available, it is considered highly unlikely that the number of mature individuals is fewer than 10,000.

Trend justification: The population is suspected to be declining slowly due to habitat loss at the lower elevations of its range, and potentially trapping (although there is not yet evidence of the latter). In the three generations (12.5 years; Bird et al. 2020) to 2022, forest cover loss in its range was 5-7% (Global Forest Watch 2022, based on Hansen et al. [2013] and methods disclosed therein), and this is thought to have had a minor impact on the population. Trapping for the songbird trade has impacted other Sundaic pitta species (see Shepherd et al. 2015); however there is no evidence that this species is trapped with any regularity, having never appeared in published songbird inventories. Evaluating all the data available, the population is suspected of declining at a past and future rate of 5-9% over three generations. With much of the range lying in protected areas, there is little prospect of the rate of declining substantially worsening in the near-future.

Country/Territory	Presence	Origin	Resident	Breeding visitor	Non-breeding visitor	Passage migrant
Indonesia	extant	native	yes

Country/Territory	IBA Name
Indonesia	Bukit Barisan Selatan
Indonesia	Bukit Kaba
Indonesia	Gunung Singgalang
Indonesia	Hutan Raya Bukit Barisan
Indonesia	Kerinci Seblat
Indonesia	Malampah Alahan Panjang

Habitat (level 1)	Habitat (level 2)	Importance	Occurrence
Forest	Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland	major	resident
Forest	Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane	major	resident
Altitude	400 - 1400 m	Occasional altitudinal limits

Threat (level 1)	Threat (level 2)	Impact and Stresses
Agriculture & aquaculture	Annual & perennial non-timber crops - Shifting agriculture	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Minority (<50%)		Slow, Significant Declines		Low Impact: 5
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Agriculture & aquaculture	Annual & perennial non-timber crops - Small-holder farming	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Minority (<50%)		Slow, Significant Declines		Low Impact: 5
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Biological resource use	Logging & wood harvesting - Unintentional effects: (subsistence/small scale) [harvest]	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Minority (<50%)		Slow, Significant Declines		Low Impact: 5
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation

---

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Graceful Pitta Erythropitta venusta. Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/graceful-pitta-erythropitta-venusta on 23/12/2024.
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 23/12/2024.