Data Zone
Justification of Red List category
This species has a very small range and population, restricted to a number of very small subpopulations, which are inferred to be declining as a variety of threats including narcotics cultivation, uncontrolled colonisation, cattle-ranching and mineral exploitation cause the loss and fragmentation of its high altitude habitat. It has consequently been uplisted as Endangered.
Population justification
The species was once considered to be fairly common at one Colombian locality (López-O et al. 2014). Recent surveys however only counted 10 individuals and the species is considered rare (O. Cortés in litt. 2020, P. Salaman in litt. 2020). Recent population densities estimates are low at 2.23 individuasl/km2 (Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020). Assuming the species occupies only parts of its mapped range, the population may number 526 individuals, roughly equating to 351 mature individuals. However, based on uncertainty in population numbers, it is here tentatively placed in the band of 250-999 mature individuals, equating to 375-1,499 individuals.
Trend justification
Although it occupies a wide variety of habitat, the species is thought to in decline owing to habitat loss caused by illegal roads and settlements, mineral exploitation, cultivation of narcotics and coffee, cattle-ranching and colonisation. Recent forest loss estimates are low at <2% (Global Forest Watch 2020) across a three generation period (10 years; Bird et al. 2020). However, 20% of remaining habitat is thought to have been lost in the last 10-20 year period, with northern extremities likely to be absent in suitable habitat due do agriculture and colonisation (Cortés et al. 2020). The population is therefore thought to be decreasing (O. Cortés in litt. 2020), but the rate has not been quantified.
Coeligena consita is endemic to the Sierra de Perijá, where it is considered rare (P. Salaman in litt. 2020), along the border of Colombia and Venezuela. It likely occupies a very patchy distribution (O. Cortés in litt. 2020). A number of records and specimens came from Colombia since 2008 (López-O et al. 2014), where it was previously known from one 1942 specimen (del Hoyo et al. 2014); it has not been observed in Venezuela for several decades, where specimens date from 1952 (del Hoyo et al. 2014). A recent record 30 km south of the Sierra de Perijá is however the first record in Venezuela for almost 80 years (eBird 2020). Where the species was considered to previously occur north of Sierra de Perijá, suitable habitat there is now thought to be largely lost (Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020). Its southern most range is also thought to suffer from heavy deforestation, but still contains traces of adequate habitat, with one individual being observed at Brisas de Perijá during surveys conducted in 2014 here and at the Chamicero del Perijá ProAves Reserve (Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020).
Specimens and observations of this species come from a narrow altitudinal range of 2,550-3,025 m across the Chamicero del Perijá ProAves Reserve (del Hoyo et al. 2014, Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020). The species is highly forest dependent (P. Salaman in litt. 2020) and does not occur in secondary forests or growth, pasturelands, coffee plantations, blackberry plantations, burnt or degraded forests, and páramo (Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020). It is commonly seen on flowers such as Bomarea, Ericacea, and Gesneriacea sp. (O. Cortés in litt. 2020).
Habitat on the lower slopes of the Sierra de Perijá is severely threatened by narcotics cultivation, uncontrolled colonisation, cattle-ranching and mineral exploitation, which are all facilitated by the many roads approaching the sierra from the Colombian side (C. J. Sharpe in litt. 1997, 2000, A. Viloria per J. Fjeldså in litt. 1998, R. Strewe in litt. 2003, Sharpe and Lentino 2008). Forest loss also seems to have increased since 2016 on the eastern slope (Global Forest Watch 2020). Much of the deforested area of the Sierra de Perijá is thought to be mostly secondary growth and scrub that may also suffer from periodic burning (Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020). Higher-elevation habitat was thought to be less affected by these developments, but even this is now believed to be fragmented and declining as a result of illegal cultivation (Renjifo et al. 2002, C. J. Sharpe in litt. 2003). Forest is still being lost to poppy cultivation. Security problems make access very difficult (R. Strewe in litt. 2003). Forest fires also threaten the species's habitat, and whether induced or natural can limit natural regeneration processes (Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020).
Conservation and research actions underway
Some or all of the range is formally protected by Sierra de Perijá National Park, Venezuela, but there is no active management (Rodríguez and Rojas-Suárez 1995, A. Viloria per J. Fjeldså in litt. 1998). 7 individuals are thought to be protected in the Chamicero del Perijá ProAves Reserve (Fundación ProAves in litt. 2020).
Conservation and research actions proposed
Estimate the population size. Study its ecological requirements. Assess habitat availability. Manage and effectively protect Sierra de Perijá National Park.
Text account compilers
Fernando, E.
Contributors
Butchart, S., Cortés, O., Ekstrom, J., Fjeldså, J., Fundación ProAves, Salaman, P.G.W., Sharpe, C.J., Sharpe, C J, Strewe, R., Symes, A., Taylor, J. & Viloria, A.
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Perija Starfrontlet Coeligena consita. Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/perija-starfrontlet-coeligena-consita on 24/12/2024.
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 24/12/2024.