Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40657-018-0100-2
Avian Research
Open Access
REVIEW
Birds of the Kangchenjunga Landscape,
the Eastern Himalaya: status, threats
and implications for conservation
Pratikshya Kandel1, Ishana Thapa2, Nakul Chettri1*, Rebecca Pradhan3 and Eklabya Sharma1
Abstract
Birds are reliable and widely used indicators for conservation planning and monitoring. We reviewed birds of the
Kangchenjunga Landscape, a transboundary complex shared by Bhutan, India and Nepal in the Eastern Himalaya.
Using 119 literature, we analyzed the bird survey efforts in the landscape, their taxonomic representation, global
threat status, distribution patterns, and habitat preferences. We also discussed the potential threats and conservation challenges and documented current conservation efforts and government policies. Most of the bird surveys are
carried out in India followed by Nepal and Bhutan. A total of 618 bird species belonging to 19 orders and 77 families
are recorded. Passeriformes is the dominant order that constitutes 62% of the total records listed from the landscape.
Among the families, Muscicapidae is the most common and diversely represented family. There are 41 species of birds
that are categorized as threatened under IUCN Red List. Of the total birds occurring in the landscape, the highest
number of bird species (95%) was documented from India, followed by Nepal (55%) and Bhutan (34%). Of them, 24%
of the species were found to occur in the tropical zone. Forested habitat is widely used by 63% of the total species followed by wetlands (16%). Despite promising policies and legal provisions, the landscape faces numerous challenges
including habitat loss and fragmentation, hunting and trapping, unsustainable extraction of natural resources, invasive alien species, unregulated tourism and global climate change. We suggest protection and management of birds
through strengthening Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas, reduction in forest encroachment and habitat destruction, conservation awareness programmes and comprehensive bird surveys with long term monitoring to assess the
impact of environmental change as some of the approaches to conserve the rich avifaunal diversity of the landscape.
Keywords: Avifauna, Transboundary landscape, Nepal, India, Bhutan, Biodiversity, Conservation
Background
Birds have been widely considered as an important tool
in biodiversity conservation planning and monitoring
(Kremen 1992; Chettri et al. 2001; Bregman et al. 2014)
and for identifying conservation actions. Birds and their
diversity provide strong bio-indication signals (Vielliard
2000; Bhatt and Joshi 2011; Urfi 2011; Bregman et al.
2014), and stand as surrogates for the health of ecosystem
and status of biodiversity overall (Chettri 2010; Pakkala
et al. 2014; Pierson et al. 2015). Anthropogenic drivers
*Correspondence: Nakul.Chettri@icimod.org
1
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development,
GPO Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
of change have fomented large-scale habitat destruction,
fragmentation and degradation, necessitating an assessment of the impacts of such change on birds (Wiens
1995; Chettri et al. 2001; McLaughlin 2011; Bregman
et al. 2014). Understanding diversity of bird communities in different habitats is essential to understand the
community structure and niche relationships, as well to
delineate the importance of regional or local landscapes
for avian conservation (Kattan and Franco 2004; Chettri
2010; Singh et al. 2013).
The Eastern Himalaya is a meeting ground for the IndoMalayan, Palaearctic, and Sino-Japanese biogeographical
realms. The area is known for diverse ecological and altitudinal gradients (CEPF 2005, 2007) and provides habitat
for rich diversity of flora and fauna, including birds of the
© The Author(s) 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license,
and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/
publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Page 2 of 13
Oriental region (Crosby 1996). The Eastern Himalaya has
been identified as a Priority I Endemic Bird Area (Birdlife
International 2001), supporting 22 restricted-range bird
species of which 19 are endemic to the region (Stattersfield et al. 1998; Jathar and Rahmani 2006; Acharya and
Vijayan 2010). The region also represents one of the largest concentrations of globally threatened birds in Asia
(Acharya and Vijayan 2010).
The Kangchenjunga Landscape (KL) is a transboundary
landscape shared by Bhutan, India and Nepal, and one of
the biologically richest landscapes in the Eastern Himalaya (Yonzon 2000; Chettri et al. 2008; ICIMOD et al.
2017). Located in the Himalayas, one of the 36 Global
Biodiversity Hotspots, the landscape is one of the richest in terms of biodiversity, including birds. With about
43% of the total geographical area of Nepal and 54% of
Bhutan, the landscape is reported to have almost equal
number of birds as Bhutan and two-thirds of Nepal. In
addition, with 22 Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas
(IBAs) and 19 protected areas (ICIMOD et al. 2017), the
landscape has the highest number of protected areas
for biodiversity conservation and it is identified as one
of the priority areas for biodiversity conservation in the
Himalayan region (CEPF 2005). It encompasses a part
of eastern Nepal; Sikkim and a part of West Bengal in
India and the western and southwestern parts of Bhutan
(Fig. 1). The KL, being designated through a consultative
process (from 2012 to 2015) and endorsed by the governments of Bhutan, India and Nepal, includes an area
over 25,000 km2 that surrounds Mount Kangchenjunga,
the third highest mountain in the world (ICIMOD et al.
2017). Shared area by country is presented in Table 1.
The KL is situated between 26°21′40.49ʺ–28°7′51.25ʺN
and 87°30′30.67ʺ–90°24′31.18ʺE. The KL’s altitudinal
range extends from 50 m a.s.l. in the south to 8586 m
a.s.l.—the height of Mount Kangchenjunga. Based on its
extreme altitudinal variation, the vegetation in the KL
ranges widely: tropical, subtropical, warm temperate,
cool temperate, subalpine, and alpine zones (Chaudhary
et al. 2015; Uprety et al. 2016; ICIMOD et al. 2017). The
different vegetation zones of the KL support a wide diversity of flora and fauna. More than 5000 species of flowering plants including more than 500 varieties of orchid
and 40 varieties of rhododendron are recorded from the
region (Kandel et al. 2016). Of the 160 recorded mammal species, four are endemic to this region (Chettri et al.
2008).
The KL supports wide diversity of birds, many of them
endemic to the region (Chettri et al. 2008). Of the 19
endemic bird species of the Eastern Himalaya, 10 are
found in Sikkim (India) alone. The KL also represents a
relatively high number of threatened bird species: Of the
Fig. 1 The Kangchenjunga Landscape
Table 1 The Kangchenjunga Landscape area by country and percentage of total area
Country
Bhutan
India
Nepal
Total
Area (km2)*
Percentage of total KL area* (%)
Total number of species
Number of threatened species
5834
23
210
4
14,062
56
585
39
5190
21
342
15
25,086
100
*Source ICIMOD et al. (2017), other data from this study
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
78 threatened birds on the Indian Sub-continent, 17 (one
endangered, three critically endangered and 13 vulnerable) occur in Sikkim (Acharya and Vijayan 2010). However, like many other landscapes worldwide, the KL is
experiencing intense disturbances due to anthropogenic
pressures such as logging, firewood collection, livestock
grazing, development activities, and a growing tourism
industry that may jeopardize its rich avifaunal diversity
(Chettri et al. 2002, 2007a, b). These global changes also
pose acute threats to biodiversity of the Himalayan landscape as they are rich in endemic species that have narrow and restricted ranges of distribution (Chettri 2010).
Hence, documentation of bird communities, their patterns of distribution, habitat preferences, threats and
conservation practices and policies are crucial for developing future conservation measures in the KL.
Documentation of bird communities in the KL dates
back to 19th century and many preliminary accounts on
birds from the region are extant (Bulger 1869; Blandford 1871, 1872; Gammie 1877; Brooks 1880; Ludlow
and Kinnear 1937a, b; Mills 1944; Maclaren 1947, 1948;
Sen 1948, 1957; Law 1953). However, despite these
excellent volumes, information on birds in the KL are
still limited and skewed in many respects. For instance,
some areas including Sikkim and some protected areas
(e.g., Kanchenjunga Conservation Area and Buxa Tiger
Reserve) have been intensively catalogued while some
protected areas (e.g., Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary and
Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary) lack even basic information
such as species checklists. Furthermore, many literature
in KL birds is not easily accessible as they are distributed
among wide variety of sources. For example, unpublished student’s theses held in libraries of universities and
unpublished reports prepared by organizations working
in the KL. For these reasons, we attempt to consolidate
the knowledge on birds reported and documented from
the KL, understand their distribution, identify conservation and management challenges, and note directions for
future research.
Methods
We collected information using secondary sources run
through a systematic review process. We reviewed published journals articles and books on the birds reported
from the KL, and conducted several systematic webbased searches. Using ‘Google Scholar,’ we searched
literature using specific search terms including ‘birds’,
‘avifauna’, and ‘Bhutan’, ‘Sikkim’, ‘Darjeeling’, ‘Jalpaiguri’,
‘India’, ‘Nepal’ and ‘Kangchenjunga Landscape’. Since the
literature searches were done in 2017, we collected literature published till 2016. To account for publications that
were not retrieved using these search terms, we searched
literature using the name of protected areas found within
Page 3 of 13
the landscape. We also conducted additional searches for
technical reports, student theses, government publications, agency reports, websites and databases of ongoing projects, and synthesis papers or book chapters. For
practicality, we included only English language literature.
A total of 119 literature related to the birds of the KL
were collected and considered for the review. To enlist
the birds of the KL, we referred 23 literature whose references are given against each bird species in the database
of the birds. The list of literature and the database of birds
from the KL are provided as Additional files 1 and 2.
With the collated material, we prepared a database of
bird species found in each country, noting each species
by common name, Latin name, genus, species, order,
family, distribution (by altitude in meters), habitat preferences, IUCN threat status, and country level protection. Oriental Bird Club codes as given by Inskipp et al.
(1996) and reference of a literature for each species are
also included in the database. The precision of our species identification is dependent on the clarity and presentation of the original sources. We verified nomenclature
and conservation statuses from the International Union
for the Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) online source
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/) as well as in Inskipp et al.
(1996). We used the altitudinal ranges and habitat preferences based on Grimmett et al. (1998). For some of
the bird species that were not found in Grimmett et al.
(1998), we searched in the IUCN’s online source (http://
www.iucnredlist.org/) to fill those gaps. For additional
classification, we used five major altitudinal zones of the
KL considering different zonation reported by Chaudhary et al. (2015), Uprety et al. (2016) and simplified to
make distinct zones as also used by Ali (1962) namely (1)
tropical (2) subtropical (3) temperate (4) subalpine and
(5) alpine. To bring clarity, we combined warm temperate and cool temperate into one broad category as a temperate zone. Although it is difficult to confine altitudinal
range of a bird due to its movement along large elevational gradient, we considered elevation range of individual species as reported in the literature for analysis. The
habitat preference of each species has been sub-divided
into eight categories: forest, wetland, scrub, cultivation, semi-desert, grassland, around habitation and open
country (Grimmett et al. 1998). Finally, we analyzed the
data to look into the patterns of distribution and identify
habitat preferences of the general and threatened species.
Review
Sampling efforts
Our review resulted in 119 literature on birds of the
KL. Of these, 92 are journal articles and rest are books,
book chapters, government documents and institutional
reports (Additional file 1). Majority of the bird studies
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
in the KL are from India (83%) followed by studies from
Nepal (9%) and Bhutan (8%). In India, 43% of the studies
are carried out in Sikkim alone, while 57% are carried out
in North Bengal, including Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri and Alipurduar districts. In Nepal, majority of the studies (71%)
are carried out in the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area.
This indicate that the bird studies in the KL skew to several specific areas or protected areas such as Sikkim and
the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area.
Of the 92 journal articles, 57% are checklists that have
used observation as a methodology to enlist the bird species. Around 26% are focused on the ecological research
of the specific bird species. Around 17% of the studies
are systematic investigation on species richness that have
used point count method.
Taxonomic coverage
We collated a dataset of 618 bird species belonging to
19 orders and 77 families. This indicates that the KL is
one of the richest areas in bird diversity in the Himalayan region. Passeriformes is the most dominant order,
comprising 62% of the total records. Falconiformes is the
second highest order, but only 8% of the total records.
Figure 2 shows the taxonomic distribution of the dataset
Page 4 of 13
by order. Supporting the local, regional and global trends,
the landscape showed higher proportion of passerine
birds as also revealed by Ali (1962), Inskipp et al. (1996)
and Fjeldså et al. (2012).
Among families, Muscicapidae (26 genera and 71 species) emerges as the most diversely represented family, followed by Sylviidae (26 genera and 50 species),
Accipitridae (19 genera and 36 species) and Fringillidae
(11 genera and 30 species). Other species rich families
include Corvidae (14 genera and 29 species), Timaliidae
(11 genera and 26 species) and Picidae (14 genera and 23
species). The dataset includes 22 families representing
only one genus and one species each (see Fig. 3 for those
bird families with more than 10 species in the KL). Narwade et al. (2011) also found highest number of bird species from the family Muscicapidae in a study carried out
in the birds of Northeast India.
Conservation status
Out of 618 bird species in the KL, the region harbors
41 species (7%) that are globally threatened and are categorized according to the terms used on the IUCN Red
List. Among these 41, five species are “critically endangered”: Baer’s Pochard (Aythya baeri), Bengal Florican
Passeriformes
Falconiformes
Piciformes
Charadriiformes
Coraciiformes
Anseriformes
Ciconiiformes
Cuculiformes
Galliformes
Columbiformes
Strigiformes
Apodiformes
Caprimulgiformes
Psiaciformes
Suliformes
Gruiformes
Podicipediformes
Trogoniformes
Odiformes
Fig. 2 Taxonomic distribution of the birds in the KL by order
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Page 5 of 13
Fig. 3 Bird families with number of genera and species reported in the Kangchenjunga Landscape
Table 2 Threat status of birds of the Kangchenjunga Landscape
Threat status
Number of species
Percentage (%)
Critically endangered
5
0.81
Endangered
3
0.49
Vulnerable
19
3.07
Near threatened
14
2.27
577
93.37
Least concern
(Houbaropsis bengalensis), Red-headed Vulture (Sarcogyps calvus), Slender-billed Vulture (Gyps tenuirostris) and
White-rumped Vulture (Gyps bengalensis). Three species
are “endangered”: Lompobattang Flycatcher (Ficedula
bonthaina), Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) and Steppe
Eagle (Aquila nipalensis). Nineteen species (0.81% of
the total species listed) are considered ‘vulnerable.’ And
fourteen (2.27%) are categorized as ‘near threatened’. The
remaining 577 species (93.37%) belong the category ‘least
concern’ (Table 2).
The conservation policies of Bhutan, India, and Nepal,
have provided protection to a number of bird species that reside in the KL. Among the nationally protected bird species of Bhutan, Common Raven (Corvus
corax), Himalayan Monal (Lophophorus impejanus) and
Rufous-necked Hornbill (Aceros nipalensis) are found in
the landscape. There are 22 bird species in the KL that
are protected by the government of India. Five species
of birds, Satyr Tragopan (Tragopan satyra), Himalayan
Monal, Great Hornbill (Buceros bicornis), Bengal Florican, and Black Stork (Ciconia nigra), are found in the KL
that are protected by the government of Nepal.
Distribution pattern
Distribution by country
Of all the birds documented in the KL, 95% can be found
in India, 55% in Nepal, and 34% in Bhutan. Similarly, of
the total 41 threatened bird species present in the KL,
95% of these can be found in India, 37% in Nepal, and
10% in Bhutan (Table 1). The highest number of bird
species in India followed by Nepal and Bhutan could be
attributed to the largest part of the landscape area being
covered by the KL-India (56.3%) followed by the KLNepal (23%) and the KL-Bhutan (21%).
Distribution along elevation
Most KL bird species (24%) can be found in the tropical
zone below 1000 m a.s.l. (Fig. 4) and 19% are found in the
altitudinal zones from tropical to subtropical (0–2000 m
a.s.l.) (see Fig. 4 for a comprehensive representation of
the birds in relation to elevation). The results are in line
with the trend of having less species diversity as we move
higher elevation as also revealed by Acharya et al. (2011),
Chettri et al. (2001) and Chettri (2010).
Habitat preferences
Sixty-three percent of KL bird species inhabit forests,
while 16% can be found in wetlands (Fig. 5). Approximately 11% of the species were found in scrub land and
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Page 6 of 13
Fig. 4 Distribution of birds at different altitudinal zones in the Kangchenjunga Landscape
just 15 was found in open country. If we consider only
threatened bird species, 34% inhabit forests and 34%
inhabit wetlands, 12% live in grasslands. Three species
each inhabit scrub land, open country, and around habitation areas.
Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas
There are 22 IBAs in the KL (see Table 4 and Fig. 6 for
a detailed description of the IBAs). Among them, three
are in Nepal, five in Bhutan, and 14 in India (GanguliLachungpa et al. 2007; Chaudhary et al. 2015; Birdlife International 2016). These IBAs provide shelter to
a number of endemic bird species such as Chestnutbreasted Partridge (Arborophila mandellii), Rusty-bellied
Shortwing (Brachypteryx hyperythra) and White-naped
Yuhina (Yuhina bakeri), restricted range species like
Hoary-throated Barwing (Actinodura nipalensis) and
Ward’s Trogon (Harpactes wardii) that are endemic to
the KL. These IBAs also provide either permanent or
temporary habitats for a number of threatened bird species including the critically endangered and globally
threatened species. Globally significant bird species that
are present in the IBAs of the KL are given in Table 3.
450
400
Number of bird species
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Forest
Wetland
Scrub
Cul va on
Semidesert
Grassland
Around
Open
habita on country
Habitat preferences
Fig. 5 Number of bird species occurring in different habitats. Figures are not cumulative because several species are found in more than one
habitat types
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Page 7 of 13
Fig. 6 Map showing IBAs within the Kangchenjunga Landscape
Threats and conservation challenges
Despite the global biological significance, the region
faces numerous challenges for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. While some of these
issues are at the local and national levels, others occur
at the transboundary level. Habitat loss and fragmentation pose major factors in the decline in population of
threatened and endemic birds in the Himalaya and elsewhere (Crosby 1996; Chettri et al. 2001, 2005; Pandit
et al. 2007). Various human activities common in the KL
such as deforestation, forest encroachment for expansion
of agricultural land and overgrazing affect the bird community structure in the landscape (Chettri et al. 2005).
Many ethnic communities in the forested highlands of
the KL continue to clear forested land and practice slashand-burn agriculture (shifting cultivation), which drives
habitat loss at higher altitudes, particularly in KL-Nepal
where the practice is considered illegal (Inskipp et al.
2008; Aryal et al. 2010). Slash-and-burn agriculture with
lesser annual cycle has a significant negative impact on
bird diversity (Inskipp et al. 2008).
Hunting plays a significant role in the culture, tradition
and subsistence economies of the people living in the KL
and is still commonly practiced in the region (Inskipp
et al. 2008; Sathyakumar et al. 2010; Inskipp et al. 2013). It
poses a serious threat to game birds (Galliformes), water
birds, and large- bodied species such as hornbills (Keane
et al. 2005; Velho et al. 2012). Hunting practices also
imperil a number of threatened species, including Satyr
Tragopan and Himalayan Monal. For instance, Himalayan Monal has been hunted in the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area for generations and in a survey conducted
by Inskipp et al. (2008) only one individual species was
located despite an extensive suitable habitat. Similarly,
owls and pheasants are popular targets for hunters and
trappers in some parts of the landscape (Sathyakumar
et al. 2010; Inskipp et al. 2013).
The majority of local people in the KL relies upon natural resources for meeting their essential requirements for
fuel, livestock fodder, timber, and other basic materials
(Chettri and Sharma 2006). The unsustainable, and often
illegal, harvest of these resources is another major concern in the KL. Unsustainable harvesting of resources in
the forests has caused thinning of woodlands, and affects
vegetation structure and composition, which in turn
influences occupancy and resource use patterns of birds
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Page 8 of 13
Table 3 Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas in the Kangchenjunga Landscape
IBA*
Country Protected area Significant bird species
Jigme Khesar Strict Nature Reserve (BT002) (formerly known as Toorsa
Strict Nature Reserve)
Bhutan
Samtse (BT003)
Bhutan
Rufous-necked Hornbill
Chele La (BT004)
Bhutan
Wood Snipe
Paro wetlands (BT005)
Bhutan
Wood Snipe
Kamji (BT007)
Bhutan
Lava-Neora Valley National Park (IN322)
India
√
Chestnut-breasted Partridge
Wood Snipe Rufous-necked Hornbill
Rufous-necked Hornbill
√
Eastern-imperial Eagle
Pale-capped Pigeon
Rufous-necked Hornbill
Black-breasted Parrotbill Beautiful Nuthatch
Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary (IN323)
India
√
White rumped Vulture
Slender-billed Vulture
Bengal Florican
Swamp Francolin
Lesser Adjutant
Rufous-necked Hornbill
Black-breasted Parrotbill
Singhalila National Park (IN325)
India
√
Chestnut-breasted Partridge
Greater-spotted Eagle
Wood Snipe
Beautiful Nuthatch
Barsey Rhododendron Sanctuary (IN327)
India
Dombang Valley-Lachung-Lema-Tsungthang (IN328)
India
FambongLho Wildlife Sanctuary-Himalayan Zoological Park-Ratey Chu
Reserve Forest (IN329)
India
√
Pallas’s Fish-eagle Black-breasted Parrotbill
Wood Snipe
Beautiful Nuthatch
√
White rumped Vulture
Slender-billed Vulture
Chestnut-breasted Partridge
Rufous-necked Hornbill
Beautiful Nuthatch
Khangchendzonga National Park and Biosphere Reserve (IN330)
India
√
Baer’s pochard
Pallas’s Fish-eagle
Black-breasted Parrotbill
Kyongnosla Alpine Sanctuary-Tsomgo-Tamze-Chola Complex (IN331)
India
√
Greater-spotted Eagle
Pallas’s Fish-eagle
Wood Snipe
Lhonak Valley (IN332)
India
Wood Snipe
Lowland forests of South Sikkim (IN333)
India
White rumped vulture
Black-necked Crane
Slender-billed Vulture
Chestnut-breasted Partridge
Rufous-necked Hornbill
Grey-crowned Prinia
Slender-billed Babbler
Black-breasted Parrotbill
Beautiful Nuthatch
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Page 9 of 13
Table 3 continued
IBA*
Country Protected area Significant bird species
Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary-Tendong Reserve Forest (IN334)
India
√
Chestnut-breasted Partridge
Blyth’s Tragopan
Greater-spotted Eagle
Rufous-necked Hornbill
Beautiful Nuthatch
Pangolakha Wildlife Sanctuary-Zuluk-Bedang Tso-Natula Complex (IN335) India
√
Chestnut-breasted Partridge
Greater-spotted Eagle
Pallas’s Fish-eagle
Wood Snipe
Rufous-necked Hornbill
Grey-crowned Prinia
Slender-billed Babbler Black-breasted Parrotbill
Tso Lhamo Plateau-Lashar-Sebu La-Yumesandong Complex (IN336)
India
Greater-spotted Eagle
Wood Snipe
Black-necked Crane
Yumthang-Shingba Rhododendron Wildlife Sanctuary (IN337)
India
√
Wood Snipe
Kangchenjunga Conservation Area (NP010)
Nepal
√
Wood Snipe
Mai Valley Forests (NP015)
Nepal
Spiny Babbler
White Rumped Vulture
Slender-billed Vulture
Red-headed Vulture
Wood Snipe
Greater-spotted Eagle
Lesser Adjutant
Spiny Babbler
Tamur Valley and Watershed (NP026)
Nepal
Spiny Babbler
*Numbers indicate IBA code numbers. The Latin names of all these species are in Additional file 2
(Chettri et al. 2005). Similarly, riverbed mining and the
unsustainable extraction of sand, gravel and stones poses
a serious threat to those bird species that breed in river
areas (Acharya et al. 2010).
Some invasive and alien species, including Waterhyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes), Bittervine (Mikania
micrantha), Lantana (Lantana camara) and Crofton
Weed (Ageratina adenophora) have invaded tropical and
subtropical ecosystems in the landscape and pose serious
threats to the bird diversity of the KL (Baral 2002; Dahal
2007).
Unregulated tourism is another factor that poses
immense pressure on local vegetation and birds of the
Himalayan region, including the KL leading to increased
fragmentation and deterioration of wildlife and their habitats (Chettri et al. 2001, 2002; Laiolo 2004).
Global climate change also poses strong negative
impacts on avifaunal populations of tropical mountains,
including Himalayas, leading to bird species changing
their nesting and migratory patterns, changing breeding
seasonality and shifting their distribution range to obtain
optimum food resources necessary for their survival (Ali
1962; Both et al. 2006; Acharya and Chettri 2012).
Current conservation efforts
The KL forms a part of the Eastern Himalaya which is
identified as a part of the Himalayan biodiversity hotspot,
one of 36 hotspots in the world (Conservation International 2017). The hotspot is home to the world’s highest
mountains including Mount Everest (highest) and Mount
Kangchenjunga (third-highest), as well as important populations of numerous large birds and mammals including
vultures, tigers, elephants, rhinos, and snow leopards.
A rich variety of gene pools, species and ecosystems of
global significance are found only in the region and most
of them are under a high degree of threat (Mittermeier
et al. 2004).
Because of these multiple challenges to bird life and
habitats in the KL, several conservation efforts have been
devised and launched to protect vulnerable populations
and environment. There are 19 protected areas in the KL
of which nine are transboundary in nature (see Kandel
Some national policies
Bhutan
India
Nepal
National Forest Policy 1974
Forest Policy 1952
New Forest Policy 1978
Master plan for forest development 1990
National conservation Strategy and Policy Statement,
India 1992
National Conservation Strategy 1988 which is later
revisited as Nature Conservation National Strategic
Framework for Sustainable development (2015–2030)
Biodiversity Action plan 1994
National Forest Policy 1998
Environment Policy and action Plan 1993
National Environment Strategy (“The Middle Path”)
1998
National Wildlife Action Plan (2002–2016)
Tenth Plan (2002–2007)
Biodiversity Action Plan 2002
National Action Plan on Climate Change 2008
Nepal Biodiversity Strategy 2002
Revision of Forest Policy draft 2010
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2009
Sustainable Development Agenda for Nepal 2003
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Table 4 A summary of national policies, laws and international conventions of the countries that share the Kangchenjunga Landscape (in chronological order)
Nepal Biodiversity Strategy Implementation Plan 2006
National Bio-safety framework 2006
Three-year Interim Plan (2007–2010)
National Agriculture Policy 2004
Rangeland Policy 2012
National Wetland Policy 2012
Vulture Conservation Action Plan (2009–2013)
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
(2014–2020)
Some national laws
Bhutan Forest Act 1969
Indian Forest Act 1927 and its successive amendments
1980
Nepal Legal Code “the muliki ain” 1854
Forest and Nature Conservation Act 1995
Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 (last amended in 2013)
Nepal Forest Nationalization Act 1957
Environment Assessment Act 2002
Environment Protection Act 1986
Nepal Forest Act 1962 its amendments 1968
Forest and Nature Conservation Rules Volumes I & II
2002
Panchayati Raj (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1996 Forest Act 1993
National Biodiversity Act 2003
Biological Diversity Act 2002
Land Act of Bhutan 2007
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, Nepal 1972
and amendment 2002
National Environment Protection Act 2007
International conventions
Ramsar Convention 1971
Ramsar convention 1971
United Nations Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES)
1975
UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Programme 1971
CITES
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 1992
CITES 1975
Bonn convention 1983
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) 1992
Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species
of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention) 1983
CBD 1992
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
(UNCCD) 1994
CBD 1992
UNFCCC 1992
UNFCCC 1992
UNCCD 1994
UNCCD 1994
Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC
465 (279 with in protected areas network and 16 are
listed as Ramsar sites)
27 (13 within protected areas network)
23 (8 within protected area network)
Page 10 of 13
IBAs
Ramsar Convention 1971
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
et al. 2016 for details on the protected areas). These protected areas cover 30% of the total landscape area. All
of these protected areas, except two, are located in KLIndia—one in KL-Bhutan and one KL-Nepal. These protected areas provide habitat to many charismatic floral
and faunal species, including more than 500 bird species
(Chettri et al. 2008; Chaudhary et al. 2015).
There is one Ramsar site—the Mai Pokhari Ramsar
in the KL which is located in Ilam district in the eastern Nepal. Given its global significance as an important
waterfowl habitat, it was declared as a Ramsar Site (No.
1850) during the 10th Conference of Parties to the Ramsar Convention (COP10) at Changwon, the Republic of
Korea, on 28 October 2008. Located in Mai Pokhari VDC
of Ilam district at an altitude of 2100 m, it has a catchment area of 12 hectares (WWF 2007). Mai Pokhari is
a major habitat and breeding ground for more than 300
species of birds and some indigenous fauna such as the
Tree Frog (Polypedates maculatus) and Himalayan Newt
(Tylototriton verrucosus) (Chaudhary et al. 2015).
Government policies
A comparison of government policies of Bhutan, India
and Nepal reveal that all three countries have supportive
policies for bird conservation in place. Bhutan’s national
policy stipulates that 60% of the country maintain forests,
many of which are large areas of pristine Himalayan forests and alpine habitats. These forests support threatened
species such as Blyth’s Tragopan and Chestnut-breasted
Partridge. The forests on the lower slopes of the Bhutan
are particularly important, as low-altitude forests have
been extensively cleared in Nepal and parts of northeast
India. This makes Bhutan a stronghold for birds such as
Rufous-necked Hornbill.
Similarly, the Government of India has an extensive
body of constitutional provisions, laws and policies in
place to protect biodiversity and their habitats. The Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 (last amended in 2013) is an
important statute that provides a powerful legal framework for protecting and managing wildlife habitats, and
regulating and controlling trade in products derived from
protected areas. In Nepal, the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1973 (last amended in 1991) is the
primary legislation that forms the basis for Nepal’s biodiversity conservation programme. In Table 4, we provide
a more comprehensive list and description of other government legislation and policies that support conservation of wildlife and their habitats in the KL.
Conclusions
In this paper, we reviewed birds of the KL using 119 literature, and made a comprehensive documentation on species lists by taxonomy, threat status, distribution patterns
Page 11 of 13
at country levels, altitudinal zones and habitat preferences along with a list of IBAs. We found 618 bird species
belonging to 19 orders, 77 families, and 41 species are
identified as globally threatened species under IUCN red
list status. We found the majority of bird species occupying the tropical zones and in forested areas.
Despite the immense biological significance and continuous efforts of KL countries to conserve the rich biodiversity of the landscape, the region still faces numerous
local, national, and transboundary challenges. Major
constraints to long-term conservation in the region
include habitat loss and fragmentation, hunting and
trapping, unsustainable extraction of natural resources,
invasive alien weeds, unregulated tourism, and global
climate change. Protection and suitable management of
IBAs could safeguard the survival of many threatened
bird species in the landscape. Considering the cultural
traditions for hunting and the low awareness level about
wildlife conservation that prevail in the KL, conservation
awareness programmes among students and community
groups, as well as systematic and comprehensive bird
surveys, particularly in the less explored areas of the KL
that are identified as most intact and extensive habitat,
are recommended. Long-term monitoring and assessment considering various drivers of change including climate change and their impacts on bird species could also
fill existing knowledge gaps regarding Himalayan birds.
Additional files
Additional file 1. List of references.
Additional file 2. Bird database.
Authors’ contributions
All authors contributed to developing the ideas and writing the manuscript.
All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Author details
1
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, GPO Box 3226,
Kathmandu, Nepal. 2 Bird Conservation Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal. 3 Royal
Society for Protection of Nature (RSPN), Thimphu, Bhutan.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to Dr. David Molden, Director
General of ICIMOD, for his inspiration and support. The authors would also
like to thank Mr. Kabir Uddin, GIS and Remote Sensing Specialist, ICIMOD for
providing the maps used in the article and Dr. Christopher Butler for English
language editorial inputs. The views and interpretations in this publication
are those of the authors and are not necessarily attributable to the affiliated
organizations. The inputs provided by anonymous reviewers enabled us to
bring this paper in its present form so we are really grateful.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Availability of data and materials
All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article as
supplementary information files.
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Funding
This study was partially supported by core funds of ICIMOD contributed
by the governments of Afghanistan, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Bhutan,
China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Switzerland, and the United
Kingdom. We also would like to recognize the support of the Austrian Development Agency and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation
and Development through its German Agency for International Cooperation,
which made this publication possible.
Received: 22 July 2017 Accepted: 5 March 2018
References
Acharya BK, Chettri B. Effect of climate change on birds, herpetofauna and
butterflies in Sikkim Himalaya: a preliminary investigation. In: Arrawatia
ML, Tambe S, editors. Climate change in Sikkim: patterns, impacts and
initiatives. Gangtok: Information and Public Relations Department; 2012.
p. 141–60.
Acharya BK, Sanders NJ, Vijayan L, Chettri B. Elevational gradients in bird
diversity in the Eastern Himalaya: an evaluation of distribution patterns
and their underlying mechanisms. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e29097. https://doi.
org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029097.
Acharya BK, Vijayan L. Status and distribution of endemic and threatened birds
of the Eastern Himalaya in Sikkim, India. JoTT. 2010;2:685–9.
Acharya BK, Vijayan L, Chettri B. The bird community of Shingba Rhododendron wildlife sanctuary, Sikkim, Eastern Himalaya, India. Trop Ecol.
2010;51:149–59.
Ali S. The birds of Sikkim. New Delhi: Oxford University Press; 1962.
Aryal KP, Kerkhoff E, Maskey N, Sherchan R. Shifting cultivation in the Sacred
Himalayan Landscape: a case study in the Kanchenjunga Conservation
Area. 1st ed. Kathmandu: WWF Nepal; 2010.
Baral HS. Invasive weed threatens protected area. Danphe. 2002;11:10–1.
Bhatt D, Joshi KK. Bird assemblages in natural and urbanized habitats along
elevational gradient in Nainital district (Western Himalaya) of Uttarakhand state, India. Curr Zool. 2011;57:318–29.
BirdLife International. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red
data book. Cambridge: BirdLife International; 2001.
BirdLife International. Important Bird Areas fact sheet. 2016. http://datazone.
birdlife.org/info/ibasasia. Accessed on 15 Dec 2016.
Blandford WT. Notes on collection of birds from Sikkim. JASB. 1871;41:30.
Blandford WT. Notes on collection of birds from Sikkim. Ibis. 1872;152–70.
Both C, Bouwhuis S, Lessells CM, Visser ME. Climate change and population
declines in a long-distance migratory bird. Nature. 2006;441:81–3.
Bregman TP, Sekercioglu CH, Tobias JA. Global patterns and predictors of bird
species responses to forest fragmentation: implications for ecosystem
function and conservation. Biol Conserv. 2014;169:372–83.
Brooks WE. Ornithological observation in Sikkim, the Punjab and Sind. Stray
Feathers. 1880;5:380–7.
Bulger GF. List of birds obtain in Sikkim, Eastern Himalayas between March and
July 1867. Ibis. 1869;2:154–70.
CEPF. Ecosystem profile: Indo-Burman Hotspot, Eastern Himalayan region.
Kathmandu: WWF, US-Asian Programme/Critical Ecosystem Partnership
Fund; 2005.
CEPF. Ecosystem profile: Indo-Burma Hotspot, Indochina region. Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. Cambridge: Birdlife International; 2007.
Chaudhary RP, Uprety Y, Joshi SP, Basnet K, Basnet G, Shrestha KR, Bhatta KP,
Acharya KP, Chettri N. Kangchenjunga Landscape Nepal: from conservation and development perspectives. Kathmandu: Ministry of Forests and
Soil Conservation (MoFSC), Government of Nepal; Research Centre for
Applied Science and Technology (RECAST), Tribhuvan University; and
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD);
2015.
Page 12 of 13
Chettri N. Cross-taxon congruence in a trekking corridor of Sikkim Himalaya: surrogate analysis for conservation planning. J Nat Conserv.
2010;18:75–88.
Chettri N, Jackson R, Sharma E. Birds of Khecheopalri and Yuksom-Dzongri
trekking corridor west Sikkim. J Hill Res. 2005;18:16–25.
Chettri N, Shakya B, Sharma E. Biodiversity conservation in the Kangchenjunga
Landscape. Kathmandu: ICIMOD; 2008.
Chettri N, Sharma E. Assessment of natural resources use patterns: a case
study along a trekking corridor of Sikkim Himalaya. Resour Energy Dev.
2006;3:21–34.
Chettri N, Sharma E, Deb DC. Bird community structure along a trekking
corridor of Sikkim Himalaya: a conservation perspective. Biol Conserv.
2001;102:1–16.
Chettri N, Sharma E, Deb DC, Sundriyal RC. Effect of firewood extraction on
tree structure, regeneration, and woody biomass productivity in a trekking corridor of the Sikkim Himalaya. Mt Res Dev. 2002;22:150–8.
Chettri N, Sharma E, Shakya B, Bajracharya B. Developing forested conservation
corridors in the Kangchenjunga Landscape, Eastern Himalayas. Mt Res
Dev. 2007a;27:211–4.
Chettri N, Thapa R, Shakya B. Participatory conservation planning in Kangchenjunga transboundary biodiversity conservation landscape. Trop Ecol.
2007b;48:163–73.
Conservation International. Hotspots. Targeted investment in nature’s most
important places. 2017. http://www.conservation.org/How/Pages/Hotspots.aspx. Accessed 7 April 2017.
Crosby M. Threatened birds in the eastern Himalayas. OBC Bull. 1996;23:21–3.
Dahal BR. Effects of Water Hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes on aquatic birds at
Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, south-east Nepal. Danphe. 2007;16:64–5.
Fjeldså J, Bowie RC, Rahbek C. The role of mountain ranges in the diversification of birds. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2012;43:249–65.
Gammie JA. Occasional notes on birds from Sikkim. Stray Feathers.
1877;5:482–7.
Ganguli-Lachungpa U, Islam MZ, Rahamani AR. Important bird areas of Sikkim:
priority sites for conservation. Gangtok: Department of Forest Environment and Wildlife Management; 2007.
Grimmett R, Inskipp C, Inskipp T. Birds of the Indian subcontinent. London:
Christopher Helm; 1998.
ICIMOD, WCD, GBPNIHESD, RECAST. Kangchenjunga Landscape Conservation and Development Initiative feasibility assessment report—regional
synthesis. ICIMOD working paper 2017/9. Kathmandu: ICIMOD; 2017.
Inskipp C, Baral HS, Inskipp T, Stattersfield A. The state of Nepal birds 2010.
JoTT. 2013;5:3473–503.
Inskipp C, Inskipp T, Winspear R, Collin P, Robbin A, Pandey P, Thakuri J. Bird survey of the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area, April 2008. Report to Critical
Ecosystem Partnership Fund. Kathmandu: Bird Conservation Nepal; 2008.
Inskipp T, Lindsey N, Duckworth W. An annotated checklist of birds of oriental
region. Sandy: Oriental Birds Club; 1996.
Jathar GA, Rahmani AR. Endemic birds of India. Buceros. 2006;11:5–53.
Kandel P, Gurung J, Chettri N, Ning W, Sharma E. Biodiversity research trends
and gap analysis from a transboundary landscape, Eastern Himalayas. J
Asia-Pac Biodivers. 2016;9:1–10.
Kattan GH, Franco P. Bird diversity along elevational gradients in the Andes of
Colombia: area and mass effects. Glob Ecol Biogeogr Lett. 2004;13:451–8.
Keane A, Brooke MDL, McGowan PJK. Correlates of extinction risk and hunting
pressure in gamebirds (Galliformes). Biol Conserv. 2005;126:216–33.
Kremen C. Assessing the indicator properties of the species assemblages for
natural areas monitoring. Ecol Appl. 1992;2:203–17.
Laiolo P. Diversity and structure of the bird community overwintering in the
Himalayan subalpine zone: is conservation compatible with tourism? Biol
Conserv. 2004;115:251–62.
Law SC. Occurrence of the Smew [Mergellusalbellus (Linn.)] in West Bengal. J
Bombay Nat Hist Soc. 1953;51:508–9.
Ludlow F, Kinnear NB. The birds of Bhutan and adjacent territories of Sikkim
and Tibet. Ibis. 1937a;79(1):1–46.
Ludlow F, Kinnear NB. Systematic results of birds collected at high altitude in
Ladak and Sikkim. Ibis. 1937b;79(3):467–504.
Maclaren PIR. Short birds notes from S. F. Sikkim. J Ben Nat Hist Soc.
1947;9:92–7.
Maclaren PIR. Notes from Darjeeling and Sikkim. December 1945. J Ben Nat
Hist Soc. 1948;22:112–20.
Kandel et al. Avian Res (2018) 9:9
McLaughlin DW. Land, food, and biodiversity. Conserv Biol.
2011;25(6):1117–20.
Mills JD. An ornithologist’s trip to Sikkim. J Ben Nat Hist Soc. 1944;19:57–70.
Mittermeier RA, Gils PR, Hoffman M, Pilgrim J, Brooks T, Mittermeier CG, Lamoreux J, Fonseca GA. Hotspots revisited. Earth’s biologically richest and
most endangered terrestrial ecoregions. Mexico City: CEMEX/Agrupación
Sierra Madre; 2004.
Narwade S, Kalra M, Jagdish R, Varier D, Satpute S, Khan N, Talukdar G, Mathur
VB, Vasudevan K, Pundir DS, Chavan V. Literature based species occurrence data of birds of northeast India. ZooKeys. 2011;150:407–17.
Pakkala T, Lindén A, Tiainen J, Tomppo E, Kouki J. Indicators of forest biodiversity: which bird species predict high breeding bird assemblage diversity
in boreal forests at multiple spatial scales? Ann Zoo Fen. 2014;51:457–76.
Pandit MK, Sodhi NS, Koh LP, Bhaskar A, Brook BW. Unreported yet massive
deforestation driving loss of endemic biodiversity in Indian Himalaya.
Biodivers Conserv. 2007;16:153–63.
Pierson JC, Barton PS, Lane PW, Lindenmayer DB. Can habitat surrogates predict the response of target species to landscape change? Biol Conserv.
2015;184:1–10.
Sathyakumar S, Poudyal K, Bhattacharya T, Bashir T. Galliformes of
Khangchendzonga Biosphere Reserve, Sikkim, India. In: Arrawatia ML,
Tambe S, editors. Biodiversity of Sikkim—exploring and conserving a
global hotspot. Gangtok: Information and Public Relation Department;
2010. p. 301–15.
Sen S. Identification notes on Sikkim Yellow-Billed Blue Magpie. J Ben Nat Hist
Soc. 1948;29:169–71.
Page 13 of 13
Sen S. An ornithological visit to Changu. J Ben Nat Hist Soc. 1957;29:1–5.
Singh R, Kour DN, Ahmad F, Sahi DN. Species diversity, relative abundance and
habitat use of the bird communities of Tehsil Chenani, District Udhampur,
Jammu and Kashmir, India. Indian J Life Sci. 2013;2:81–90.
Stattersfield AJ, Crosby MJ, Long AJ, Wege DC. Endemic bird areas of the
world: priorities for biodiversity conservation., BirdLife Conservation series
No. 7Cambridge: BirdLife International; 1998.
Uprety Y, Poudel RC, Gurung J, Chettri N, Chaudhary RP. Traditional use and
management of NTFPs in Kangchenjunga Landscape: implications for
conservation and livelihoods. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2016;12:1–59.
Urfi AJ. Climate change and its impacts on Indian birds: monsoon phenology
and monitoring heronry birds. Curr Sci. 2011;101:1140–2.
Velho N, Karanth KK, Laurance WF. Hunting: a serious and understudied
threat in India, a globally significant conservation region. Biol Conserv.
2012;148:210–5.
Vielliard JM. Bird community as an indicator of biodiversity: results from quantitative surveys in Brazil. An Acad Bras Ciênc. 2000;72:323–30.
Wiens JA. Habitat fragmentation: island v landscape perspectives on bird
conservation. Ibis. 1995;137:S97–104.
WWF. Mai Pokhari, Ilam: samrakchen ma dharma, sankirti ra paramparako
mahatyo (in Nepali). Importance of religion, culture, and tradition in
conservation (unofficial translation). Kathmandu: WWF-Nepal; 2007.
Yonzon PB. Opportunities in ecoregion based conservation in the Kanchenjunga region, eastern Nepal. Biodiversity assessment and conservation
planning in Kanchenjunga mountain complex. Kathmandu: WWF-Nepal;
2000.
Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central
and we will help you at every step:
• We accept pre-submission inquiries
• Our selector tool helps you to find the most relevant journal
• We provide round the clock customer support
• Convenient online submission
• Thorough peer review
• Inclusion in PubMed and all major indexing services
• Maximum visibility for your research
Submit your manuscript at
www.biomedcentral.com/submit