Breeding and global population sizes of the Critically Endangered Red-fronted Macaw Ara rubrogenys revisited

Abstract

Summary The ‘Critically Endangered’ Red-fronted Macaw is endemic to seasonally dry, rain-shadowed valleys in the south-central Andes of Bolivia. The remoteness and inaccessibility of most of this region have hampered the rigorous collection of reliable range-wide data on the species’ global, local and breeding population sizes. Such data are imperative, however, for effective conservation and management. Estimated to number up to 5,000 birds in the early 1980s, the most recent and thorough survey to date reported a total of only 807 macaws and a breeding population fraction of about 20% in 2011, disjunctly distributed across eight breeding and six foraging areas and divided into four genetic clusters. Ten years later, we reassessed the species’ population sizes and breeding distribution with increased survey effort and geographic coverage. Six teams simultaneously surveyed different sections of the species’ entire known breeding range in four watersheds focusing on nesting sites. We estimated a global population size of 1,160 macaws, a breeding population fraction of 23.8–27.4% (138–159 nesting pairs) and discovered four new breeding areas. Watersheds and breeding areas differed widely in nesting pair and total macaw numbers. The Mizque watershed held 53% of the species’ breeding and 41.5% of its global population and had the highest breeding population fraction of 30.7–34.9%; the Pilcomayo watershed obtained the lowest values (6%, 8.5% and 14.1–18.2%, respectively). Two of the four documented genetic clusters (subpopulations) each held well over 50 breeding individuals. Two of the eight breeding areas documented in 2011 were found unoccupied in 2021. Numbers of nesting pairs per breeding area in 2011 were poorly correlated with those in 2021, and timing of breeding activities also differed between years. Our new data indicate that the Red-fronted Macaw no longer meets IUCN Red List criteria for ‘Critically Endangered’ species and that it should be downlisted to ‘Endangered.’