Migratory species in 2026: what the UN interim report found

What the 2026 interim report measured

The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals is a United Nations environmental treaty. Its appendices cover species that cross national borders or move between habitats in predictable cycles and require coordinated conservation. The interim report updates the first State of the World's Migratory Species assessment, published in 2024, using IUCN Red List data available in version 2025-1 and newer scientific literature.

Decreasing populations

592 species (49%)

Globally threatened

284 species (24%)

Stable populations

307 species (26%)

Increasing populations

152 species (13%)

Another 149 listed species, or 12%, had an unknown or unassessed population trend. The extinction-risk total combines species categorized as Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List. The report records 130 Vulnerable, 80 Endangered and 74 Critically Endangered listed species, plus one species already classified as Extinct.

What changed since the 2024 baseline

Why protecting one site is rarely enough

Migration links breeding grounds, feeding areas, stopovers and seasonal refuges. A wetland may be well managed while a distant stopover is drained; a marine feeding area may be protected while animals face bycatch, ship strikes or noise elsewhere. The weakest part of a route can limit the entire population, which is why the treaty is built around international cooperation.

• Habitat loss and fragmentation can remove stopovers or block movement corridors.
• Overexploitation includes unsustainable hunting, fishing and incidental capture.
• Infrastructure such as fences, dams, roads, power lines and poorly placed energy development can create barriers or mortality risks.
• Pollution, including underwater noise and contaminants, can disrupt navigation, prey and reproduction.
• Climate change can alter the timing and location of food, water and suitable habitat across a route.

The report also contains evidence of recovery

Seven reassessed listed species moved to a lower-risk category. CMS highlights the saiga antelope, scimitar-horned oryx and Mediterranean monk seal among improved cases. These examples differ in ecology and management history, so they are not a single recipe. They do show that coordinated protection, enforcement, habitat work, monitoring and long-term funding can change outcomes.

Mapping has also improved. The report points to the Global Initiative on Ungulate Migration, the Migratory Connectivity in the Ocean system and work to map major marine flyways. Better maps are useful only when they influence land-use, fisheries, infrastructure and protected-area decisions.

A donor checklist for migration projects

1. Name the species or population and cite its latest assessment rather than relying on a generic endangered-wildlife label.
2. Show which breeding, stopover, feeding or movement site the project affects and how it connects to the wider route.
3. Define a measurable pressure—bycatch, illegal killing, fence mortality, habitat loss or another documented threat.
4. Track an outcome suited to the intervention, such as threat reduction, habitat condition, passage use or population trend.
5. Explain partners and jurisdictions because migratory conservation commonly crosses administrative or national borders.

For WildCare Trust readers, the report is a reminder that rescue stories and individual animals are only one part of conservation. A credible migratory-species project should connect its activities to a population, a route, a documented threat and a monitoring plan.