Species

BirdLife Species Champion	Become a BirdLife Preventing Extinctions Programme Supporter
BirdLife Species Guardian	Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS)
For information about BirdLife Species Champions and Species Guardians visit the BirdLife Preventing Extinctions Programme.

Justification
This species has a tiny, severely fragmented population, known from fewer than 12 recent locations. It is likely to be declining as a result of loss of its deciduous forest habitat. Although surveys continue to discover more individuals, these factors lead to its present classification as Critically Endangered. Further information may warrant its downlisting to a lower category of threat in future.

Taxonomic source(s)
Sibley, C. G.; Monroe, B. L. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale University Press, New Haven, USA.

Synonym(s)
Athene blewitti Collar and Andrew (1988), Athene blewitti Collar et al. (1994), Athene blewitti Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993), Athene blewitti blewitti Collar and Andrew (1988), Athene blewitti blewitti Collar et al. (1994), Athene blewitti blewitti Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993)

Identification
23 cm. Typical owlet with rather plain crown and heavily banded wings and tail. Dark grey-brown crown and nape, faintly spotted white. Broadly banded, blackish-brown and white wings and tail, with a broad white tail-tip. Dark brown breast with broad, prominent barring on flanks. Rest of underparts are white. Similar spp. Spotted Owlet A. brama has more distinct spotting on crown and nape, a prominent white nuchal collar, and lacks broadly banded tail. Voice Territorial call is rather loud, mellow uwww or uh-wuwww. Calls include hissing shreeee or kheek and repeated kwaak notes, rising and falling in pitch.

Distribution and population
Heteroglaux blewitti is endemic to central India. Until its rediscovery in 1997, it was only known from seven specimens collected during the 19th century at four localities in two widely separated areas, north-western Maharashtra (G. Jathar in litt. 2012), and south-east Madhya Pradesh/western Orissa. In 2000, a survey of 14 forest areas across its former range located 25 birds at four sites in northern Maharashtra and south-western Madhya Pradesh, including three pairs at Taloda Forest Range and seven pairs at Toranmal Forest Range. Further surveys in 2004 found 12 adults and 7 fledglings in Toranmal but no birds were found in Taloda (Jathar and Rahmani 2004), and following surveys in 2005 and 2006 also reported a pair of birds at Toranmal Forest Range (Jathar and Rahmani 2006, Jathar and Patil 2011, G. Jathar in litt. 2012). Further surveys on the Toranmal Forest Range in November 2009 revealed that only two of the seven territories remain (G. Jathar in litt. 2010). A further study in 2010-2011 surveying known localities in Taloda and Toranmal Forest Ranges found no birds in Taloda and only one pair in Toranmal despite intensive surveying over two seasons (Jathar and Patil 2011). No birds were found in a brief survey of its former eastern range in Orissa, or in north-east Andhra Pradesh (Mehta et al. 2007, Anon 2009). In 2003, survey effort in the Satpura Range (Maharashtra) located another five sites with a total of nine birds (Rithe 2003), indicating that the species may prove to be widespread but previously overlooked in the western Satpura Mountains, and in 2006, 24 birds were found in two sites in Burhanpur and one site in Khandwa (Mehta et al. 2007). By 2005, over 100 individuals had been recorded in Melghat Tiger Reserve, Maharashtra (Kasambe et al. 2005), which is now recognised as the species's stronghold. The species has also been found breeding nearby at Yawal Wildlife Sanctuary (Chavan and Rithe 2009). Modelling suggests that its remaining range is severely fragmented, and only c.10% is protected (G. Jathar in litt. 2010). Although there is some confusion over its former abundance, evidence strongly suggests it has always been scarce.

Population justification
The population is estimated to number 50-249 mature individuals based on the number of records from known sites, with c.100 individuals now recorded from Melghat Tiger Reserve. This estimate is equivalent to 75-374 individuals in total, rounded here to 70-400 individuals. Given the increasing number of records and sites known within its range it may prove to be more common than previous evidence has suggested.

Trend justification
The species faces a number of threats which in combination are suspected to be causing a decline at a rate of 10-19% over ten years.

Ecology
It appears to be a sedentary resident with recent sightings from fairly open dry deciduous forest dominated by teak Tectona grandis (Ishtiaq et al. 2002). Along with teak, a ground cover of weed like wild basil and grasses is typical of the known owlet sites (D. Patil in litt. 2012). It was rediscovered at 460 m and other known locations are at 400-700 m (G. Jathar in litt. 2012). Most historical records came from moist deciduous forest or dense jungle, the altitudinal range of which is unclear, although most specimens were collected in plains forest. This suggests that the recent observations from hill slopes may represent birds in suboptimal habitat. It appears to be quite strongly diurnal and fairly easy to detect, frequently perching on prominent bare branches. Lizards, small rodents, nestlings of other birds, grasshoppers, frogs and caterpillars are all prey items (Ishtiaq et al. 2002, Kasambe et al. 2005), which are often cached in hollow tree trunks (Ishtiaq et al. 2002). It appears to partition resources with the similar and widespread Spotted Owlet Athene brama (Kasambe et al. 2005). It breeds between October and May, laying a brood of two eggs (Ishtiaq and Rahmani 2005) in a hole in a softwood tree, and can re-lay if its first nesting attempt fails. At one nest, the young fledged at 30-32 days, after which they were dependent on the parents for at least another 40-45 days (Ishtiaq et al. 2002).

Threats
Given its rarity, identification of threats is difficult. The site of its initial discovery in 1872 (Chhattisgarh) has completely been encroached by agriculture (D. Patil in litt. 2012). It is likely that other forest areas where it occurs are under similarly intense pressure. Forest in its range is being lost and degraded by illegal tree cutting for firewood and timber, and encroachment for cultivation, grazing and settlements (Ishtiaq et al. 2002, Chavan and Rithe 2009), as well as forest fires and minor irrigation dams (Chavan and Rithe 2009). Overgrazing by cattle may reduce habitat suitability (Jathar 2003). The proposed Upper Tapi Irrigation Project threatens 244 ha of prime habitat used by the species (Kasambe et al. 2004). It suffers predation from a number of native raptors, limiting productivity, and it faces competition for a limited number of nesting cavities (Jathar 2003, Ishtiaq and Rahmani 2005). The species is hunted by local people and body parts and eggs are used for local customs, such as the making of drums (Jathar 2003, Jathar and Rahmani undated). Pesticides and rodenticides are used to an unknown degree within its range and may pose an additional threat (Jathar 2003).

Conservation actions underway
CITES Appendix I and II. Since its rediscovery in 1997, fieldwork has been conducted to study its status, ecology and threats. Interventions have been made to seek the prevention of further forest losses at the site of rediscovery. Over 100 individuals have been seen in the protected Melghat Tiger Reserve, Maharashtra (Kasambe et al. 2005), and it has been recorded in Toranmal Reserve Forest, Khaknar Reserve Forest and Yawal Wildlife Sanctuary. Further surveys in 2009 in the Melghat Tiger Reserve indicate that the park is well protected (G. Jathar in litt. 2010). An education and awareness programme has been initiated. A recent survey was carried out in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh in 2010 and 2011 (Jathar and Patil 2011). A recovery plan is being worked on (D. Patil in litt. 2012).

Conservation actions proposed
Prevent illicit wood-cutting and hunting of wildlife in forests within the species's range (Ishtiaq and Rahmani 2005). Conduct surveys in remaining suitable habitat, particularly sites not surveyed until, in the 800 km gap between the east/west limits of the historical records, to establish its total range, current distribution and population status, habitat use, and to assess its main threats. Potential habitat should be searched at Orissa and Chhattisgarh particularly. Research its relationship with both invasive and potentially problematic native species (D. Patil in litt. 2012). Provide support to the education and awareness-raising programme among local communities to promote the value and importance of this species and convey its potential benefits. Control the use of pesticides and rodenticides. Use nest site protection to avoid destruction of nests. Initiate a number of forest management measures and establish community reserves within its range (Rahmani and Jathar 2004, G. Jathar in litt. 2012), with Khaknar and Toranmal being priority sites for protection. Train forest staff in conservation. Use watershed development to stabilise the species's habitat. Publicise conservation among local young people (D. Patil in litt. 2012).

References
BirdLife International. 2001. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data Book. BirdLife International, Cambridge, U.K.

Rithe, K. 2003. Saving the Forest Owlet. Sanctuary Asia 23: 30-31.

Jathar, G. 2003. Saving the mysterious Forest Owlet. Mistnet 4(3 & 4): 9-10.

Kasambe, R.; Pande, S.; Wadatkar, J.; Pawashe, A. 2004. Additional records of the Forest Owlet Heteroglaux blewitti Hume, 1873, in Melghat Tiger Reserve, Maharashtra. Newsletter for Ornithologists: 12-14.

Kasambe, R.; Wadatkar, J.; Bhusum, N.S.; Kasdekar, F. 2005. Forest Owlets Heteroglaux blewitti in Melghat Tiger Reserve, Distt. Amravati, Maharashtra. Newsletter for Birdwatchers 45: 38-40.

Ishtiaq, F.; Rahmani, A. R. 2005. The Forest Owlet Heteroglaux blewitti: vocalization, breeding biology and conservation. Ibis 147: 197-205.

Mehta, P.; Kulkarni, J.; Patil, D.; Kolte, P.; Khatavkar, P. 2007. A survey of critically endangered Forest Owlet (Heteroglaux blewitti) in Central India.

Anon. 2009. Status of Blewitt's Owl in Aruka Valley and Environmental Management Plan in view of the proposed bauxite mines. Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History Annual Report 2007-2008: 50-51.

Further web sources of information
Detailed species accounts from the Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data Book (BirdLife International 2001).

View photos and videos, and hear sounds of this species from the Internet Bird Collection

Text account compilers
Benstead, P., Bird, J., Butchart, S., Davidson, P., Derhé, M., Khwaja, N., Mahood, S., Peet, N., Symes, A., Taylor, J., Tobias, J.

Contributors
Ishtiag, F., Jathar, G., Kasambe, R., Mehta, P., Patil, D.

IUCN Red List evaluators
Butchart, S., Symes, A.

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2013) Species factsheet: Heteroglaux blewitti. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 24/05/2013. Recommended citation for factsheets for more than one species: BirdLife International (2013) IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 24/05/2013.

This information is based upon, and updates, the information published in BirdLife International (2000) Threatened birds of the world. Barcelona and Cambridge, UK: Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International, BirdLife International (2004) Threatened birds of the world 2004 CD-ROM and BirdLife International (2008) Threatened birds of the world 2008 CD-ROM. These sources provide the information for species accounts for the birds on the IUCN Red List.

To provide new information to update this factsheet or to correct any errors, please email BirdLife

To contribute to discussions on the evaluation of the IUCN Red List status of Globally Threatened Birds, please visit BirdLife's Globally Threatened Bird Forums.

Additional resources for this species

0