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

Justification of Red List category
This species has a large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (extent of occurrence <20,000 km² combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). Although suspected of declining very slowly, it does not meet or approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size is not estimated, but suspected of being relatively large, hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.

Population justification
The population size of this species has not been quantified, but it is described as fairly common to locally abundant (Frith and Beehler 1998, Pratt and Beehler 2015, Beehler and Pratt 2016) and, given the extent of suitable habitat in its mapped range (19,000 km² in 2021; Global Forest Watch [2022], based on data and methods from Hansen et al. [2013]), it is considered unlikely to have a population size smaller than 10,000 mature individuals.

Trend justification
There are no data on population trends; however, the species is thought to be in slow decline, owing to ongoing (albeit slow) habitat degradation. In the three generations to 2021, forest cover loss in this species’ range was equal to 2-3% (Global Forest Watch 2022, based on data from Hansen et al. [2013] and methods disclosed therein). Much of this amounts to complete clearance and conversion to agriculture, such that although this species is tolerant of moderate degradation, there are likely to be some localised declines.

Astrapia mayeri is endemic to the central mountains of Papua New Guinea, from the Strickland River to Mt Hagen and Mt Giluwe, c.130 km west. Its western limits require further surveying. It is generally fairly common, even in degraded forest. At a new site, Kumul Lodge in the west of its range, it is reported to be abundant (Salvadori 1998).

It occurs in montane forest between 2,400 and 3,400 m, sometimes down to 1,800 m and also in degraded forest.

It is locally threatened by hunting for tail plumes and by large-scale logging and forest degradation, but it is considered safe in the inaccessible portions of its range (Coates 1990, P. Gregory in litt. 1994, Frith and Beehler 1998). Previous concerns of genetic swamping through hybridisation with Stephanie's Astrapia A. stephaniae in the far east of its range are now discounted.

Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Regularly monitor the populations at selected sites. Further research its tolerance of degraded forest across an altitudinal gradient. Protect significant areas of remaining primary forest.

Text account compilers
Berryman, A.

Contributors
Gregory, P.

---

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Ribbon-tailed Astrapia Astrapia mayeri. Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/ribbon-tailed-astrapia-astrapia-mayeri 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.