Report shows population on decline across bird species

House Sparrow’s numbers fairly stable overall during past 25 yrs, says study

NEW DELHI/GANDHINAGAR: The House Sparrow, which was thought to be disappearing from towns and cities, may not be as threatened as believed, a new analysis has found. That good news, though, is offset by the fact that around half of 261 Indian bird species studied have seen a decline in numbers since 2000, with a fifth seeing a sharp decline.

The report titled “State of India’s Birds 2000” based on around 10 million observations contributed by over 15,500 birdwatchers to an e-bird, an online bird registry that’s widely used by birdwatchers suggests that the House Sparrow’s numbers have been fairly stable overall during the past 25 years.

However, data from six cities --Bengaluru, Chennai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Kolkata and Mumbai —- indicates a gradual decline in their abundance in urban centres. “Extremely large range of the species (House Sparrow) across the country, and the lack of evidence for either long-term or current countrywide decline results in it being classified as of low conservation concern,” said the report, which was released on Monday at the 13th conference of parties of the Convention on Conservation of Migratory Species. Feral Pigeons, which dominate the urban landscape have seen a rise in numbers in the past 25 years, as have Peafowls.

“We did not have country level data so far to understand this.

The data contributed by citizen scientists is of a quality which I as a biologist cannot collect across the geography and across years,” said Suresh Kumar from Wildlife Institute of India, who also worked on the report.

The report, apart from capturing interesting trends in change in population of common species rings alarm bells on the large scale decline of important bird species. It analysed the status of 867 bird species using data uploaded by bird watchers and made assessments based on three indices. Of the 261 species for which long-term trends are available 52% have seen a decline in numbers since 2000, with 22% declining strongly. In all, 43% of species showed stable numbers and 5% showed an increasing trend.

“In India, the decline could be because of habitat loss, but there

could also be several other reasons... There could also be some disease outbreak we do not know about. We came to know of the association in the declining population of vultures and veterinary diclofenac use after years...,” said Kumar. Diclofenac, a drug used on cattle, was found to be toxic for vultures. Current annual trends could be estimated only for 146 species for which data is available. Of those, nearly 80% are declining, 6% are stable and 14% are increasing.

The groups that show the greatest decline are raptors (birds of prey), migratory shorebirds, and habitat specialists (confined to some habitats), among others including Whiterumped Vulture, Richard’s Pipit, Indian Vulture, Large-billed Leaf Warbler, Pacific Golden Plover and Curlew Sandpiper. The overall decline in species demands research into the causes, and action to protect the high concern species, the report said. Species that show an increasing trend in the past 25 years include Rosy Starling, Feral Pigeon, Glossy Ibis, Plain Prinia, Ashy Prinia, and Indian Peafowl.

Interestingly, of the species in the high category of conservation concern for India, 26% (26 species) are classified as globally of "least concern” by the IUCN Red List 2019. But 7 species considered globally “near threatened” are classified as being of low concern in India through this assessment. These are: Ferruginous Duck, Black-tailed Godwit, Woollynecked Stork, Oriental Darter, Black-headed Ibis, Alexandrine Parakeet and Long-tailed Parakeet. “IUCN makes a global assessment, this is India specific. There are some species that are doing fine globally but are rapidly declining in India...” said Suhel Quader, scientist, Nature Conservation Foundation.

Around 12 species endemic to the Western Ghats are nearly 75% lower in abundance compared to 2000. Some threatened habitats like the grasslands of the Terai, which harbour the entire global population of the Hodgson’s Bushchat, require immediate attention, the report flagged. “...Based on the broad patterns captured in the report we can now ask why a certain species has declined. We couldn’t have asked these questions before,” said MD Madhusudan, wildlife biologist and member of team that produced the report.

NEW DELHI: The Centre told the Supreme Court on Monday that its collegium is equally responsible for the delay in the appointment of judges, and added that the government takes 127 days on average to clear a recommendation, while the SC collegium takes 119 days.

The Centre’s top law officer attorney general KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court that responsibility for the delay in appointing judges to high courts doesn’t lie with the government alone. Venugopal pointed out that the delay by collegia of high courts in making timely recommendations as and when vacancies arise and the time taken by the SC collegium in processing the recommendations, all contributed to the delay in appointing judges to the high courts. He also pointed out that out of the 394 vacancies in the various high courts, no recommendations have been made with respect to 199 vacancies.

The apex court sought reports from registrars of all high courts regarding the current vacancy position in the HCS and the time period within which the high court collegia can make recommendations to fill up the vacancies. The order came in a transfer petition filed by a company, PLR Projects, whose case was pending before the Orissa high court and could not be heard due to a strike by lawyers.while dealing with the issues concerning the lack of judges in Odisha, the court entrusted the Centre’s seniormost law officer attorney general Venugopal with the task of ensuring that the high court vacancies are expeditiously filled up.

During the hearing on Monday, the top court asked the attorney general to explain delay on the part of the Centre in notifying appointments. As per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in its 1993 judgment, the central government is authorised to return the name of a candidate proposed by the SC collegium. However, if the SC collegium reiterates the name, the central government is bound to clear it.

“How can Centre hold back recommendations reiterated by the collegiums,” asked justice KM Joseph.