I hadn't heard about this. Very good news.Yeah , not to mention there are almost double the high figure of spix macaws
as they said
Dozens of last blue macaws to be reintroduced to Brazil | The Express Tribune
The article as a whole is full of mistakes. Just as an example, the paragraph which lists those other species and their dates of extinction has them incorrect. The New Caledonian Lorikeet (in the article noted as being last recorded in 1987) is known for certain only from two specimens from the mid-1800s. The Javan Lapwing (1994 in the article) hasn't been recorded since about 1940. For the Glaucous Macaw (1998 in the article), the IUCN says there have been only two credible reports from the 20th century, from 1951 and the early 1960s.The article title is very misleading. After stating at the beginning of the article that Spix's macaw is extinct, then going on to list a handful of other recently extinct birds, it says at the bottom that 60-80 Spix's macaws exist in captivity. If they exist in captivity then how can they be extinct?The article should have stated at the beginning and in the title that they are likely extinct in the wild, an important distinction. But of course that is not as dramatic a headline and they want people to click on their article (an assumption on my part, but I think it's true).
The New Caledonian Lorikeet (in the article noted as being last recorded in 1987) is known for certain only from two specimens from the mid-1800s. The Javan Lapwing (1994 in the article) hasn't been recorded since about 1940. For the Glaucous Macaw (1998 in the article)
The article says those dates are the last sightings.The official date of an extinction is 50 years after the last official record, so this matches well with the lapwing and macaw dates in the article. For the lorikeet the time lapse is much bigger so maybe they just had a typo or something.