The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™
ISSN 2307-8235 (online)
IUCN 2008: T22697742A49747539
Fregata andrewsi, Christmas Frigatebird
Assessment by: BirdLife International
View on www.iucnredlist.org
Citation: BirdLife International. 2013. Fregata andrewsi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
2013: e.T22697742A49747539. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.20132.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
Copyright: © 2015 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written
permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged.
Reproduction of this publication for resale, reposting or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written
permission from the copyright holder. For further details see Terms of Use.
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species Programme, the IUCN
Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership. The IUCN Red List Partners are: BirdLife
International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International; Conservation International; Microsoft; NatureServe; Royal
Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; Wildscreen; and Zoological Society of London.
If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown in this document, please provide us with
feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided.
THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™
Taxonomy
Kingdom
Phylum
Class
Order
Family
Animalia
Chordata
Aves
Suliformes
Fregatidae
Taxon Name: Fregata andrewsi Mathews, 1914
Common Name(s):
• English:
• French:
Christmas Frigatebird, Andrews' Frigatebird, Christmas Frigatebird
Frégate d'Andrews
Taxonomic Source(s):
del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A. and Fishpool, L.D.C. 2014. HBW and BirdLife
International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Lynx Edicions BirdLife International.
Identification Information:
90-100 cm. Huge, mostly black, fork-tailed seabird with white belly and pale bar on upperwings. Adult
male has red gular pouch and small white belly patch; long, dark grey, hooked bill. Adult female has
black head, throat and spur on sides of upper breast and white collar, breast, belly and spur onto
axillaries. Pink bill and red orbital ring. Similar spp. Adult Great Frigatebird F. minor male has all black
underparts. Female has dusky throat, black axillaries and lower belly. Adult Lesser Frigatebird F. ariel is
smaller with black belly. Immature F. minor has shorter bill and tawny-white head (tawny-yellow in F.
andrewsi). Immature F. ariel is smaller and tends to have dark belly. Juvenile F. andrewsi tends to have
white lower belly and white spur on axillaries. See James (2004) for detailed notes on identifying
frigatebirds.
Assessment Information
Red List Category & Criteria:
Critically Endangered B2ab(ii,iii,v) ver 3.1
Year Published:
2013
Date Assessed:
November 1, 2013
Justification:
This species has a small population which breeds within a tiny Area of Occupancy on just one island, and
which is continuing to decline. For these reasons it is listed as Critically Endangered.
Previously Published Red List Assessments
2012 – Critically Endangered (CR)
2010 – Critically Endangered (CR)
2009 – Critically Endangered (CR)
2008 – Critically Endangered (CR)
2007 – Critically Endangered (CR)
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
1
2005 – Critically Endangered (CR)
2004 – Critically Endangered (CR)
2000 – Critically Endangered (CR)
1996 – Vulnerable (VU)
1994 – Vulnerable (VU)
1988 – Threatened (T)
Geographic Range
Range Description:
This species is endemic as a breeding species to Christmas Island (to Australia). In 2003 it was estimated
that there were 1,171 (± 58) breeding pairs. The number of nests was probably between 3% and 16%
lower in 2003 than 1985 (one generation; 1985 estimates ranging from 1,320-1,620 pairs [Stokes 1988]),
but this may not be an accurate indication of population trends. Due to biennial breeding, the total
breeding population is between one and two times the number of pairs nesting per annum (i.e. 1,2002,400 pairs). An historical review of the extent and decline of the four sub-colonies suggests that the
pre-settlement population was about 6,300 breeding pairs per annum, but declined to 4,500 by 1910,
3,500 by 1945, 2,500 by 1967, and 1,500 by 1978. If this reconstruction is correct, then the population
declined by about 66% over three generations between 1945 and 2003 (James 2003). In 2003 there
were four sub-colonies (since reduced to three) covering an area of c.49 ha (Stokes 1988, James 2003).
The Flying Fish Cove sub-colony probably contained c.50 ha of habitat in 1887; it underwent an almost
complete decline in the early 1900s, and in 2003 it contained only c.10 ha of habitat and two nests. The
Dryers sub-colony underwent an almost complete decline by the 1970s, and in 2003 contained c.62 ha
of habitat and 20 nests. The Golf Course sub-colony lost c.13 ha (25%) in the 1940s, and in 2003 it
contained c.25 ha of habitat and an estimated 828 (± 42) nests. The Cemetery sub-colony contained 46
ha of habitat and an estimated 321 (± 15) nests in 2003 (James 2003). Surveys in 2004 showed a
significant increase in number of nests, with 767 nests in 244 nest trees at the largest colony (James
2004b) but surveys in 2005 showed a return to 2003 levels, suggesting that inter-annual variation rather
than population growth explains the increase in numbers in 2004. Breeding and non-breeding birds
have been recorded foraging at low densities in the Indo-Malay Archipelago (James 2004) over the
Sunda Shelf to the South China Sea, the Andaman Sea, the Sulu Sea, off south-west Sulawesi, and in the
Gulf of Thailand (Catterral 1997, Vromant and Chau 2007, D. James in litt. 2007, Tebb et al. 2008),
commuting directly over Java in the process (James 2006). When not breeding the species ranges widely
across the seas of South-East Asia to Indochina and south to northern Australia (Stokes 1988), but its
status in the Indian Ocean to the west is less well known.
Country Occurrence:
Native: Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; China; Christmas Island; Hong Kong; Indonesia; Malaysia;
Philippines; Singapore; Sri Lanka; Thailand; Timor-Leste
Vagrant: Australia; Cocos (Keeling) Islands; India; Japan; Viet Nam
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
2
Distribution Map
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
3
Population
The most recent population census indicates a population of 2,400-4,800 mature individuals (D. James
in litt. 2003), roughly equivalent to 3,600-7,200 individuals in total.
Trend Justification
A historical review suggests that the population declined by around 66% over the last three generations
(James 2003), apparently owing to habitat clearance and dust fallout from phosphate mining, marine
pollution, over-fishing and bycatch in fishing gear. These declines are projected to continue, and while
the introduced yellow crazy ant has not yet been shown to adversely affect frigatebird colonies it
undoubtedly represents a serious future threat.
Current Population Trend: Decreasing
Habitat and Ecology (see Appendix for additional information)
It nests in tall forest trees. Terminalia catappa and Celtis timorensis trees hold 65.5% of all nests (Hill and
Dunn 2005).It is only capable of raising a maximum of one fledgling every two years. It forages for flying
fish, squid and other marine creatures, and is largely dependent on subsurface predators to drive prey
to the surface. Most food is captured by plucking it from the sea surface while on the wing, but it is also
an accomplished aerial kleptoparasite. Evidence suggests that breeding birds frequently forage
hundreds or even thousands of kilometres from the colony. Satellite tracking showed that one female
with a large chick undertook a non-stop 26-day 4,000 km return flight from Christmas Island via Sumatra
and Borneo (James 2006). Replacement rate of pairs is thought to be extremely slow (15-25 years)
rendering the population slow to recover following declines (Hill and Dunn 2005).
Systems: Terrestrial, Marine
Threats (see Appendix for additional information)
About a quarter of the breeding area was cleared before 1946 for phosphate mining, and the Flying Fish
Cove colony was largely deserted because of continuing dust fallout from phosphate dryers. Future
habitat loss is possible through clearance for mining. A new application to mine a 250 ha area of
rainforest (P. Green in litt. 2007) is currently under review. About two thirds of the nests are now located
in a single colony, making the species vulnerable to cyclones. Poaching ceased in the 1980s. A possible
threat is the introduced yellow crazy ant Anoplolepis gracilipes which formed super-colonies during the
1990s and spread rapidly to cover about 25% of the island or about 3,400 ha. Control measures have so
far been unable to eradicate this non-native species, but to date frigatebirds have not apparently been
adversely affected by them. However, ant super-colonies alter island ecology by killing the dominant lifeform, the red crab Gecaroidea natalis, and by farming scale insects which damage the trees. This may
alter the breeding habitat of the species in the medium- to long-term (Hennicke in litt. 2010). Less
specific threats include over-fishing and marine pollution, plus clearance of vegetation and hunting on
non-breeding roost islands (P. Green and D. O'Dowd in litt. 2003, S. Garnett in litt. 2003, James 2003,
Jensen and Tan 2010). Approximately 10% of the population nests outside the national park and does
not have any formal protection (Hill and Dunn 2005). Clearance of vegetation within 300 m of nesting
colonies should be avoided (Hill and Dunn 2005). Frigatebirds are highly susceptible to entanglement in
fishing gear, so intense fishing pressure in the South-East Asian waters and severe marine pollution
there represent significant threats to the species (James 2006). Research is underway to establish
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
4
whether a potentially new blood parasite poses a threat to the species (Hennicke in litt. 2010).
Conservation Actions (see Appendix for additional information)
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix I. Listed as vulnerable under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Act 1999 (Hill and Dunn 2005). The Christmas Island National Park was established in 1980, and has
since been extended to include two of the three current breeding colonies (90% of the population) (P.
Green and D. O'Dowd in litt. 2003). A recovery plan has been completed (Hill and Dunn 2005) and a
study using satellite telemetry to study movements has been underway since 2005 (J. Hennicke in litt.
2008, 2010). A control programme for A. gracilipes was initiated after 2000, including aerial baiting in
2002, and effectively eliminated the ant from 2,800 ha of forest (95% of its former extent) (P. Green and
D. O'Dowd in litt. 2003, Olsen 2005). However, the ant population continued to increase, covering
upwards of 500 ha by 2006. Despite continued control efforts, ants remained persistent in 2009, and
perpetual baiting may be the only means of controlling them (Olsen 2005). Efforts are underway to find
alternative bait that is not toxic to invertebrates on the island (Olsen 2005). Plans have been established
to control the scale bugs that the ants tend for their sugar secretions in order to reduce this food supply,
but there remains no evidence that they are adversely affecting frigatebird colonies (Hennicke in litt.
2010). A census of Christmas Island was planned for April 2010 (Hennicke in litt. 2010). Conservation
Actions Proposed
Implement the species recovery plan. Continue to control the abundance and spread of A. gracilipes.
Develop and implement appropriate techniques to monitor the total/breeding population size and
population structure (Hill and Dunn 2005). Analyse existing data on breeding biology and success. Lobby
to prevent mining close to colonies. Negotiate protection of all known and potential nesting habitat and
appropriate buffers. If necessary, implement appropriate management in feeding habitat in South-East
Asia to avoid bycatch etc. Maintain a quarantine barrier between Christmas Island and other lands to
minimise the risks of new avian diseases establishing (Hill and Dunn 2005).
Credits
Assessor(s):
BirdLife International
Reviewer(s):
Butchart, S.
Contributor(s):
Garnett, S., Green, P., Hennicke, J., James, D., Low, T. & O'Dowd, D.
Facilitators(s) and
Compiler(s):
Benstead, P., Bird, J., Calvert, R., Crosby, M., Lascelles, B., McClellan, R., Symes, A.,
Taylor, J., Martin, R
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
5
Bibliography
Catterrall, M. 1997. Bird survey report of Buton Island 1996-1997. Available at:
#http://www.opwall.com/Library/Indonesia/Indonesia%20Terrestrial/Birds/bird_survey_report_1996.h
tm#.
Garnett, S. T.; Crowley, G. M. 2000. The action plan for Australian birds 2000. Environment Australia,
Canberra.
Hill, R.; Dunn, A. 2004. National recovery plan for the Christmas Island Frigatebird Fregata andrewsi.
Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
IUCN. 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (ver. 2013.2). Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org.
(Accessed: 13 November 2013).
James, D. 2006. Secrets of Christmas seabird revealed. World Birdwatch 28(1).
James, D. J. 2003. A survey of Christmas Island Frigatebird nests in 2003.
James, D. J. 2004. Christmas Island biodiversity monitoring programme. Third Quarterly Report AprilJune 2004.
James, D.J. 2004. Identification of Christmas Island, Great and Lesser Frigatebirds. BirdingASIA: 22-38.
Stokes, T. 1988. A review of the birds of Christmas Island, Indian Ocean.
Tebb, G.; Morris, P.; Los, P. 2008. New and interesting bird records from Sulawesi and Halmahera,
Indonesia. BirdingASIA: 67-76.
Vromant, N.; Nguyen Thi Hoai Chau. 2007. Christmas Island Frigatebird Fregata andrewsi: first
confirmed observation for Vietnam. BirdingASIA 7: 88-89.
Citation
BirdLife International. 2013. Fregata andrewsi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013:
e.T22697742A49747539. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
Disclaimer
To make use of this information, please check the Terms of Use.
External Resources
For Images and External Links to Additional Information, please see the Red List website.
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
6
Appendix
Habitats
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
Habitat
Season
Suitability
Major
Importance?
1. Forest -> 1.6. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland
Breeding
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.1. Marine Neritic - Pelagic
Resident
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.2. Marine Neritic - Subtidal Rock and Rocky Reefs
Resident
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.3. Marine Neritic - Subtidal Loose Rock/pebble/gravel
Resident
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.4. Marine Neritic - Subtidal Sandy
Resident
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.5. Marine Neritic - Subtidal Sandy-Mud
Resident
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.7. Marine Neritic - Macroalgal/Kelp
Resident
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.9. Marine Neritic - Seagrass (Submerged)
Resident
Suitable
Yes
9. Marine Neritic -> 9.10. Marine Neritic - Estuaries
Resident
Suitable
No
10. Marine Oceanic -> 10.1. Marine Oceanic - Epipelagic (0-200m)
Resident
Suitable
Yes
10. Marine Oceanic -> 10.2. Marine Oceanic - Mesopelagic (200-1000m)
Resident
Suitable
Yes
Use and Trade
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
End Use
Local
National
International
Food - human
Yes
Yes
No
Pets/display animals, horticulture
No
No
Yes
Threats
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
Threat
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact Score
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual &
perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.2. Small-holder
farming
Ongoing
Minority (50%)
Negligible declines
Low impact: 4
Stresses:
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
Ongoing
Majority (5090%)
Stresses:
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
3. Energy production & mining -> 3.2. Mining &
quarrying
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
Slow, significant
declines
Medium
impact: 6
7
2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping
terrestrial animals -> 5.1.1. Intentional use (species is
the target)
5. Biological resource use -> 5.4. Fishing & harvesting
aquatic resources -> 5.4.4. Unintentional effects:
(large scale)
8. Invasive & other problematic species & genes ->
8.1. Invasive non-native/alien species -> 8.1.1.
Unspecified species
8. Invasive & other problematic species & genes ->
8.1. Invasive non-native/alien species -> 8.1.2.
Named species (Anoplolepis gracilipes)
9. Pollution -> 9.2. Industrial & military effluents ->
9.2.3. Type Unknown/Unrecorded
11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.4. Storms
& flooding
Ongoing
Minority (50%)
Negligible declines
Stresses:
2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
Ongoing
Whole (>90%)
Stresses:
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.3. Indirect ecosystem effects
2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
Ongoing
Unknown
Stresses:
2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
Ongoing
Whole (>90%)
Stresses:
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.3. Indirect ecosystem effects
Ongoing
Minority (50%)
Stresses:
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
Future
Majority (5090%)
Stresses:
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
Slow, significant
declines
Unknown
Unknown
Negligible declines
Slow, significant
declines
Low impact: 4
Medium
impact: 7
Unknown
Unknown
Low impact: 4
Low impact: 4
Conservation Actions in Place
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
Conservation Actions in Place
In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
Action Recovery plan: Yes
Systematic monitoring scheme: No
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
Conservation sites identified: Yes, over entire range
Occur in at least one PA: Yes
Invasive species control or prevention: Yes
In-Place Species Management
Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly: No
Subject to ex-situ conservation: No
In-Place Education
Subject to recent education and awareness programmes: No
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
8
Conservation Actions in Place
Included in international legislation: No
Subject to any international management/trade controls: Yes
Conservation Actions Needed
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
Conservation Actions Needed
1. Land/water protection -> 1.1. Site/area protection
2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management
2. Land/water management -> 2.2. Invasive/problematic species control
Research Needed
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
Research Needed
1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
1. Research -> 1.5. Threats
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
Additional Data Fields
Distribution
Estimated area of occupancy (AOO) (km²): 2
Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO): Yes
Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO): No
Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO): Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO): No
Number of Locations: 1
Continuing decline in number of locations: Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations: No
Lower elevation limit (m): 0
Population
Number of mature individuals: 2400-4800
Continuing decline of mature individuals: Yes
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
9
Population
Extreme fluctuations: No
Population severely fragmented: No
No. of subpopulations: 1
Continuing decline in subpopulations: Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations: No
All individuals in one subpopulation: Yes
No. of individuals in largest subpopulation: 100
Habitats and Ecology
Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat: Yes
Generation Length (years): 15.5
Movement patterns: Not a Migrant
Congregatory: Congregatory (and dispersive)
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Fregata andrewsi – published in 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-2.RLTS.T22697742A49747539.en
10
The IUCN Red List Partnership
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species
Programme, the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership. The IUCN
Red List Partners are: BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International; Conservation
International; Microsoft; NatureServe; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of Rome; Texas
A&M University; Wildscreen; and Zoological Society of London.
THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™