DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT USE OF PHEASANTS IN THE
HEADWATER FORESTS OF SETI KHOLA, ANNAPURNA
CONSERVATION AREA, NEPAL
Thesis Submitted to the
Tribhuvan University-Institute of Forestry
Office of the Dean, Pokhara
Nepal
FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF SCIENCE IN NATURAL
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
By
LAXMAN PRASAD POUDYAL
Tribhuvan University-Institute of Forestry
Office of the Dean, Pokhara,
NEPAL
November 2008
DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT USE OF PHEASANTS IN THE HEADWATER
FORESTS OF SETI KHOLA, ANNAPURNA CONSERVATION AREA, NEPAL
Thesis Submitted to the
Tribhuvan University-Institute of Forestry
Office of the Dean, Pokhara
Nepal
FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF SCIENCE IN NATURAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
By
Laxman Prasad Poudyal
Advisor
Shree Prasad Dhoubhadel
Associate Professor, IOF, Pokhara
Nepal
Co-advisors
Biswombher Man Pradhan
Institute of Forestry
Nepal
Dr K Ramesh
Wildlife Institute of India
India
Dr Philip McGowan
World Pheasant Association
UK
Tribhuvan University-Institute of Forestry
Office of the Dean
Pokhara
November 2008
Declaration
I, Laxman Prasad Poudyal, hereby declare to the Tribhuvan University- Institute of
Forestry that this thesis is my original work and all other sources of information used are
duly acknowledged. This work has not been submitted to any other university for any
academic award.
…………………………
Laxman Prasad Poudyal
Preferred Citation: Poudyal L.P. 2008. Distribution and Habitat Use of Pheasants in
the Headwater Forests of Setikhola, Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Masters
Thesis to the Tribhuvan University-Institute of Forestry, Nepal.
ii
TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY
INSTITUTE OF FORESTRY
Office of the Dean
Hariyokharka,
Pokhara, Nepal
Ref. No.:
Date:
LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE
The thesis attached hereto entitled “Distribution and Habitat Use of Pheasants in the
Headwater Forests of Seti Khola, Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal” prepared and
submitted by Laxman Prasad Poudyal, in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Master of Science in Natural Resource Management and Rural
Development (NRMRD) is hereby accepted.
Principal Advisor
Mr Shree Prasad Dhoubhadel
Associate Professor
iii
Preface
My interest for a master thesis in the distribution and habitat use of Galliformes species
was stimulated by workshops during the 4th International Galliformes Symposium held in
Chengdu, China on October 2007. The workshop on Landscape Ecology leaded by
Qamar Qurushi and Dr K Ramesh at Wolong National Nature Reserve and WPAScientist’s Workshop on Galliformes at Baishuihe Nature Reserve leaded by Professor
Dr John Caroll encouraged me to do this study.
Choosing Setikhola valley for my field work was a combination of my interest and
earlier experience on pheasants of Pipar, and advice from Dr Peter Garson (Chair,
Pheasant Specialist Group), Dr Philip McGowan (Director, World Pheasant Association)
and Dr K Ramesh (Wildlife Institute of India). The valley is a flagship area for bird
conservation in Nepal.
This masters thesis is mainly aimed to conduct altitudinal surveys of Galliformes,
analyse habitat association and map habitat suitability at a landscape level covering the
whole area of Lawang Sector of Annapurna Conservation Area. This project also aimed
to train an IOF student on pheasant fieldworks. My colleague Mr Babu Ram Lamichhane
was involved during the fieldworks and data analysis at WII. If we have more people
involved on research we will have more people involved on conservation. Most of the
field assistants (Tapta Bahadur Pun, Sula Bahadur Tamang, Santa Bahadur Tamang,
Surya Tamang and Mana Prasad Poudyal) were taken from Karuwa village thinking that
future researchers can use them for field verification and data collection as we did this
time.
The fieldwork supporting this thesis was undertaken in 2008 winter at Pipar forests and
in spring at Khumai, Thulokhobang, Pipar, Kalki, Nhirgu, Dhije, Khuine and Namsung
areas. The analysis works were done at Wildlife Institute of India (WII) under the direct
guidance from Shree Qamar Qurushi and Dr K Ramesh.
The supervisors of this thesis were Associate Professor Shree Prasad Dhoubhadel and
Lecturer Biswombher Man Pradhan, Institute of Forestry, Nepal; Dr K Ramesh, Wildlife
Institute of India; and Dr Philip McGowan, World Pheasant Association, UK.
iv
Abstract
A study was carried out in the upper Setikhola forests of Annapurna Conservation Area in
winter and spring of 2008 to estimate the abundance of Galliformes, assess their habitat and
map their habitat suitability of these species at a landscape level.
Dawn call counts for Hill Partridge, Satyr Tragopan and Koklass Pheasant, and trail walks
were carried out to determine abundance and distribution of Galliformes in the study areas in
the altitudinal range 1600m to 4000m. Ocular estimation of canopy cover, shrub cover and
herb cover were made in the plots. Means, deviations, correlations and one way ANOVA
were applied to analyse the data. Topographic map (1:50000), Landsat Image, and GPS data
acquired from the field were used for spatial analysis.
Hill Partridge, Satyr Tragopan, Koklass Pheasant, Blood Pheasant and Himalayan Monal
were observed (seen) both in winter and spring whereas Snow Partridge was observed only
in spring. Kalij Pheasant and Rufous-throated Partridge were observed in winter only.
Himalayan Monal was the most highly encountered Galliform in the trail walk (6.74
bird/kilometer) followed by Hill Partridge (0.81), Blood Pheasant (0.81), Satyr Tragopan
(0.42) and Kalij Pheasant (0.36). Rufous-throated Partridge, Snow Partridge and Koklass
Pheasant were observed only once. The detection rate per listening station was 3.64 males
for Satyr Tragopan followed by Hill Partridge (2.99) and Koklass Pheasant (1.37). Galliform
per listening stations heard from different sites differed significantly. While comparing the
data across the seven surveys since 1979, the number of Satyr Tragopan and Koklass
Pheasant heard at Pipar was stable.
There was coexistence between Satyr Tragopan, Koklass Pheasant and Hill Partridge. The
habitats were mainly Rhododendron forest sparsely associated with other broadleaf forest
mostly Arundinaria species in the shrub layer.
The Habitat Suitability Index Model suggested that more habitat is suitable for Himalayan
Monal (5.55 to15.08 percentage of the area of Setikhola valley) compared to the other study
species. The suitable areas for Satyr Tragopan, Koklass Pheasant and Hill Partridge were
2.83 to 7.55, 2.65 to 6.35 and 2.79 to 9.27 percentages respectively. Further studies are
suggested in the forests North-West of Mardikhola as habitat suitability map indicated the
presence of Galliform there as at Pipar and Santel forests.
v
Acknowledgements
This report is based on research conducted on the forests of upper Setikhola valley of
Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal in February to May 2008. I would like to thank
Institute of Forestry for acceptance this piece of work as a thesis for my master’s degree. I
would like to thank IUCN/SSC/WPA-Pheasant Specialist Group for endorsement of this
project and World Pheasant Association, Jimmy Robberts Memorial Fund and James
Goodhart for funding support.
I would like to thank Associate Professor Shree Prasad Dhoubhadel, Lecturer Bishwombher
Man Pradhan, Dr K Ramesh, Dr Philip McGowan, Dr Peter Garson, Keith Howman, Robin
Marston and Qamar Qurushi for their guidance and suggestions during all phases of the
project. Shree Qurushi and Dr Ramesh taught me at WII to analyse the data and prepare
habitat suitability map. Dr Ramesh did very hardwork to conclude the data available from
the field and prepare the maps. Most of the GIS analyses were done on his computer.
I stayed in new hostel on 20th to 30th August 2008 and got facilities what a WII student gets.
I am very much thankful to Director and Dean of WII for such a help and endorsement of my
application on internship for this short period. I would like to thank S Satya Kumar, Sabita
Malla, Merwyn Fernandes, Tapajit Bhattacharya, library staff, computer staff, and hostel and
canteen staff for their cordial help during the staying at WII.
I always get encouragement from Mrs Carol Inskipp and Dr Hem Sagar Baral to do the
works on birds in Nepal. I am very much grateful to them for their suggestions and
comments on entire peeriod of this project. I would like to thank Department of National
Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Bird Conservation Nepal, National Trust for Nature
Conservation and Annapurna Conservation Area Project.
I would like to thank Nawaraj Chapagain and Narendra Shrestha for their help in preliminary
GIS works and map preparation. I never forget my colleague Babu Ram Lamichhane for his
tireless works from field to new hostel at WII India. Special thank goes to Mr Heera KC for
his valuable efforts on bird identification. I would like to thank Ashok Kumar Ram, Yajna
Murti Khanal and all colleagues of my class for their help during the study.
I would like to thank crew members of the field works Renji Sherpa, Tapta Bahadur Pun,
Khadga Ghale, Kajiman Tamang, Gaman Singh Tamang, Sula Bahadur Tamang, Santa
Bahadur Tamang, Surya Tamang, and Mana Prasad Poudyal. Pahar Trust Nepal provided us
camping equipment and kitchen utensils. All our crew members arranged the camping in a
very good manner in the remote fields even there were very difficult situations and hurricane
days.
I would like to thank Lal Prasad Gurung (Director, Annapurna Conservation Area Project),
Raj Kumar Gurung (Office Incharge of Lawang Sector of ACA), Rohit Kumar Pokharel and
Surya Bahadur Pande (Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation) for their
cordial help and encouragement during the study.
I would like to acknowledge my wife Shanti and children Biplab and Ashma for their
patience and sacrifice during my long absence in the period of my study.
vi
Contents
DECLARATION
LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE
PREFACE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.
BACKGROUND
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
GALIFORMES STUDIES IN NEPAL
2.1.1
Studies in Setikhola Valley
2.1.2
Studies in Other Areas in Nepal
2.2
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY SPECIES
2.2.1
Taxonomy
2.2.2
Biology and Ecology
3.
STUDY AREA
3.1
ANNAPURNA CONSERVATION AREA
3.2
INTENSIVE STUDIES AREAS
3.2.1
Khumai Forest
3.2.2
Thulokhobang Forest
3.2.3
Pipar
3.2.4
Kalki Forest
3.2.5
Nhirgu
3.2.6
Dhije
3.2.7
Khuine and Namsung
4.
METHODS
4.1
4.2
4.3
5.
RELATIVE ABUNDANCE
HABITAT USE
SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND HABITAT MODELING
RESULTS
5.1
RELATIVE ABUNDANCE
5.1.1
Winter Survey
5.1.2
Spring Survey
5.2
HABITAT AVAILABILITY
5.3
SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND HABITAT MODELING
6.
DISCUSSION
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
7.
III
IV
ABSTRACT
1.
II
RELATIVE ABUNDANCE
HABITAT USE
SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND HABITAT MODELING
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
V
VI
VII
1
1
3
3
4
4
4
6
7
7
8
16
17
20
20
20
20
20
21
21
21
22
22
24
25
28
28
28
31
35
43
46
46
48
49
50
51
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Galliformes of Nepal ............................................................................................2
Table 2: Winter Trails of the Study Area .........................................................................22
Table 3: Variable Considered for Habitat Suitability Modeling ......................................26
Table 4: The Range and Type of Habitat Variables Incorporated....................................26
Table 5: Mean Encounter Rate of Different Species During Winter of 2008 ..................28
Table 6: Mean Number of Individuals per Listening Stations ........................................34
Table 7: Mean Encounter Rate of Different Species During Spring of 2008...................34
Table 8: Mean Habitat Variable Available for Different Galliformes in Winter .............37
Table 9: Mean Habitat Variables used by Different Galliformes in Winter 2008............38
Table 10: Correlations Between Species and Habitat Variables ......................................41
Table 11: Estimated Area of Distribution of the Galliformes in the Setikhola Valley....43
Table 12: Estimated Numbers of Galliformes in the Setikhola Valley ............................43
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Pipar and Santel Forest Showing Intensive Study Area………………………16
Figure 2: Flow Chart of the Modeling works …………………………………………...27
Figure 3: Equipment Used ……………………………………………………………...27
Figure 4: Galliformes Density at Different Sites..............................................................33
Figure 5: Calls of Pheasants in Pipar Since 1979 .............................................................33
Figure 6: Ground Coverage Available in Winter .............................................................36
Figure 7: Ground Coverage Available in Spring..............................................................36
Figure 9: Ground Coverage used by Galliformes in Winter.............................................42
Figure 10: Ground Coverage used by Galliformes in Spring ...........................................42
Figure 11: Predicted Area of Distribution for Satyr Tragopan and Hill Partridge………44
Figure 12: Predicted Area of Distribution for Satyr Tragopan and Hill Partridge………45
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Number of Calling Birds Heard During the Field Survey. ..........................57
Appendix 2: Pheasants of the World ................................................................................60
Appendix 3: Birds Recorded During the Field Survey 2008............................................61
Appendix 4: List of Acronyms .........................................................................................65
viii
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Pheasants are large, ground dwelling birds the males often with brightly colored plumage
and inhabit diverse habitats in the tropical and temperate forests of Asia and Africa.
Taxonomically, they represent the family Phasianidae of the order Galliformes. Among
52 species of pheasants belonging to 16 genera have been recognized so far, 51 species
survive in the world (Appendix 2). The pheasants are Asian in their native distributions,
with the single exception of Congo Peafowl Afropavo congensis, which is endimic to the
Democratic Republic of Congo in Central Africa (Fuller and Garson 2000). Out of eight
pheasant species distributed in Nepal six are restricted to the Himalayan ranges. The
Himalayan pheasants of Nepal are Himalayan Monal Lophophorus impejanus, Satyr
Tragopan Tragopan satyra, Koklass Pheasant Pucrasia macrolopha, Kalij Pheasant
Lophura leucomelanos, Cheer Pheasant Catreus wallichii and Blood Pheasant Ithaginis
cruentus.
Nepal is rich in avifaunal diversity due to its wide variety of forests and other habitat
types ranging from bare rock and scrub in the alpine zone to tropical rainforests in the
lowlands (Baral and Inskipp 2005). Altogether 863 bird species (Bird Conservation
Nepal 2006, BCN 2008) have been recorded so far which include 22 Galliformes
species. The Galliformes of Nepal occupy a wide range of altitudes (Table 1). Red Jungle
Fowl Gallus gallus and Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus are found as low as 75m altitudes
(Baral 2005) whereas Himalayan Snowcock Tetraogallus himalayensis is recorded as
high as 6,000 m altitude (Inskipp & Inskipp 1991). Himalayan Monal is the national bird
of Nepal and is also protected by law. Of the nine bird species that are protected by law,
three are pheasants; the other two pheasant species are Cheer Pheasant and Satyr
Tragopan.
Annapurna Conservation Area (ACA) is the largest protected area of Nepal. It is the
country’s only protected area that has all of Nepal’s six Himalayan pheasant species
(Inskipp 1989, Baral and Inskipp 2005). Pipar and Santel area within ACA, which lies in
Setikhola watershed, is a flagship area for Himalayan pheasant conservation and
provides habitat for five Himalayan pheasants and seven other Galliformes species. This
1
study describes ecological relationships of pheasants and partridges with their habitats,
and their abundances in the Setikhola watershed.
Table 1: Galliformes of Nepal
SN Common Name
1
Cheer Pheasant
Scientific Name
Catreus wallichi
2
Satyr Tragopan*
Tragopan satyra
3
Blood Pheasant *
Ithaginis
cruentus
4
5
Himalayan
Monal *
Indian Peafowl
Lophophorus
impejanus
Pavo cristatus
6
Kalij Pheasant*
7
Koklass
Pheasant*
Red Junglefowl
Lophura
leucomelanos
Pucrasia
macrolopha
Gallus gallus
11
Tibetan
Snowcock*
Himalayan
Snowcock*
Chukar *
Tetraogallus
tibetanus
Tetraogallus
himalayensis
Alectoris chukar
12
Hill Partridge*
13
15
Rufous throated
Partridge*
Tibetan
Partridge*
Snow Partridge*
Arborophila
torqueola
Arborophila
rufogularis
Perdix
hodgsoniae
Lerwa lerwa
16
Black Francolin
8
9
10
14
17
18
19
20
21
22
Francolinus
francolinus
Swamp Francolin Francolinus
gularis
Grey Francolin
Francolinus
pondicerianus
Common Quail
Coturnix
coturnix
Rain Quail
Coturnix
coromandelica
Blue-breasted
Coturnix
Quail
chinensis
Jungle Bush
Perdicula
Quail
asiatica
Habitat
steep craggy hillsides with
scrub, secondary growth
moist evergreen forest with
dense undergrowth
bamboo clumps, forests or scrub
of rhododendron, birch and
juniper
rocky and grass covered slopes
in summer and forests in winter
dense riverine vegetation and
open Shorea robusta forest
all types of forests with dense
undergrowth
conifer, oak and Rhododendron
forest
Forest undergrowth and scrub
rocky slopes and alpine
meadows
rocky slopes and alpine
meadows
open rocky or grassy hills; dry
terraced cultivation
broadleaved evergreen forest
broadleaved evergreen forest
semi desert, rock and scrub
slopes
rocky and grassy slopes with
scrub
cultivation, tall grass and scrub
in plains and hills
tall wet grassland and marshes
Altitude (meter)
1800 to 3050
(-2100) 2500 to
3800
3200 to 4400
(-2500) 3300 to
4750
below 300
245 to 3050 (3700)
2680 to 3200(3500)
mainly below 300
(-1200)
(-3650) 4500 to
5000
4250 to 5500 (5900)
2100 to 3960
1830 to 3200
(3550)
mainly 1450 to
1830 (250-2050)
3700 to 4100 (5000)
(-3050) 4000-5000
up to 2050
below 200
dry grass and thorn scrub
below 200
crops and grasslands
below 915 (-2900)
cultivation, grass and scrub
vagrant species
wet grassland, field edges and
up to 1200
scrub
Extirpated; only recorded in 19th century
*Species found in Setikhola Valley
2
1.2 Objectives of the Study
The general objective of this study was to describe general ecological relationship of
pheasants with their habitats. The specific objectives were to:
1. Conduct altitudinal surveys of Galliformes and their habitat use in winter and
spring in upper Seti-Khola valley
2. Assess available habitat throughout headwater forests of this valley.
3. Analyse the species – habitat association, and map habitat suitability at landscape
scale.
1.3 Rationale of the Study
Pheasants and partridges have been associated with social and religious status of people
living in Asia and Europe. They are killed for food, feathers and entertainment. Pheasant
hunting is a very popular game sport in Europe and America. Though the hunting is
banned by the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973, the male Himalayan
Monal has been under heavy hunting pressure for its crest feathers which are used in
traditional hats in several rituals in Himalayan range of Nepal.
About 300 species of Galliformes around the world (26%) are at risk (WPA 2008). 21
species of pheasants are globally threatened and 12 species are near threatened. Three
pheasants are endangered and 18 are vulnerable in IUCN category (IUCN 2007); 17
species are listed in CITES Appendix I, eight are in Appendix II and four are in
Appendix III (CITES 2008). These birds are threatened because of high human activities
on their natural habitats. Many pheasant species are likely to become extinct within the
next 100 years, if over exploitation and habitat destruction continues (Ramesh 2003).
The first ecological studies on pheasants in the Setikhola valley were conducted in the
late 1970s and early 1980s (Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a, Lelliott 1981). Since the late
1970s, a series of studies have been conducted in this area by various teams (Yonzon
1987, Picozzi 1984, 1986, 1987, Bhandary et al. 1986, Howman and Garson 1993, Kaul
and Shakya 2001, Baral et al. 2001, Gyawali 2004, Poudyal 2005, Mahato et al. 2006).
Poudyal et al. (2007) have suggested declaring the area as a strict nature reserve due to
its ecological importance.
Most of these surveys were restricted to Pipar areas only but most have recommended
and encouraged the study of pheasants in other areas including Khumai and the upper
Seti-Khola valley. Analysis of the relationship between Galliformes species and ecogeographical variables is highly imperative to prepare maps on habitat suitability in the
upper Setikhola valley and Lwang Sector of Annapurna Conservation Area as a whole.
3
2. Literature Review
2.1 Galiformes Studies in Nepal
2.1.1
Studies in Setikhola Valley
Jhalak Thapa discovered Pipar in 1977 when he was scouting for a new trekking route.
He reported that it was particularly rich in Galliformes and appeared to contain five of
Nepal's six Himalayan Pheasant species (WPA 2004). The World Pheasant Association
(WPA) has been monitoring the health of the Pipar forest and Galliformes since 1979 at
regular interval (McGowan 2004).
Anthony D. Lelliott carried out studies and counted the pheasants at Pipar and
Annapurna Himalayas in 1979-1980. He suggested boundaries for a Pheasant
Conservation Reserve and made management proposals to the World Pheasant
Association in his MSc research project (Lelliott 1981). He was accompanied by Pralad
Bahadur Yonzon of the Department of Zoology of Tribhuvan University. They provided
basic ecological information on Blood Pheasant, Koklass Pheasant, Satyr Tragopan and
Himalayan Monal (Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a, Yonzon and Lelliott 1981). Their
observations concentrated on populations, human impact, behaviour, feeding,
reproduction and vocalization (Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a). They examined the extent of
pheasant hunting and trapping and suggested proper conservation measures to ensure
pheasants existence (Yonzon and Lelliott 1980). Forster and Lelliott also formulated a
management plan in 1982 (Forster and Lelliott 1981, Forster 1982).
Anthony D. Lelliott revisited the area in 1981 with WPA funding accompanying JK
Tamrakar, and prepared a further report on Pipar area to the Department of National
Parks and Wildlife Conservation (Tamrakar and Lelliott 1982).
Pralad Bahadur Yonzon made counts of calling Pheasants on Pipar in May 1982.
Botanist Hemanta Ram Bhandary of TU accompanied him and made a large collection of
plants from Pipar (Yonzon 1987). Col. Roberts and his party counted Pheasants in 1983
in the same area to continue the series began by A.D. Lelliott in 1979.
In November 1983, N. Picozzi carried out an ecological survey of a proposed reserve for
Himalayan Pheasants at Pipar. He described the vegetation of Pipar and effects of human
4
activities on pheasants (Picozzi 1984). Dr Sanford D. Schemnitz of New Mexico State
University and botanist Hemanta Ram Bhandary of TU accompanied him. They
collected droppings and identified main autumn foods of pheasants (Bhandary et al.
1986). Around the same time Stapleton and Tamrakar studied the bamboos of Pipar
(Stapleton and Tamrakar 1984).
Members of a WPA trek carried out dawn call counts of Satyr Tragopan and Koklass
Pheasant in May 1985 in the same site that AD Lelliott did at Pipar. The maximum
estimates from the Pipar bowl from positions 1-4 were 12 Koklass and 13 Tragopan
(Picozzi 1986).
N Picozzi revisited the same area in April 1987 and counted pheasants in four listening
points at Pipar. Pheasants were counted in the same area in 1991 also. The maximum
estimates from the Pipar bowl from positions 1-4 were 30 Koklass and 31 Tragopan in
1987 and 18 Koklass and 30 Tragopan in 1991(Picozzi 1987, Howman and Garson
1993).
Dr Rahul Kaul, Director of WPA South Asian Regional Office visited Pipar and
adjoining areas in 1995. He collected first hand information about the activities of WPA
in this region and conducted dawn call counts on 14-16 October. He counted maximum
of 16 calling groups of Koklass Pheasant from 1-3 listening stations at Pipar bowl (Kaul
1995).
A French team assembled of botanist, ornithologist, grouse specialists and mammologist,
visited Pipar area in April 1997 and counted the pheasants following methods used by
previous team. They counted 16 Satyr Tragopan and 9 Koklass at Pipar bowl (Emmanuel
et al. 1997).
Rahul Kaul and Suresh Shakya conducted dawn call counts at Pipar between 28 April
and 5 May 1998. They recorded fewer individuals calling in 1998 than in 1991 for both
Satyr Tragopan and Koklass Pheasant. They reported that serious consideration should
be given to the inclusion of Santel within the area covered by the Reserve (Kaul and
Shakya 1998, Kaul and Shakya 2001).
In April/May 2001, Hem Sagar Baral, Prem Chandra Gurung, Rahul Kaul and K Ramesh
conducted dawn call counts of Galliformes species in the Santel area, east from the Seti
River. They were accompanied by some staff from the Annapurna Conservation Area
5
Project, students of Institute of Forestry- Pokhara, and members of Bird Conservation
Nepal. They counted maximum of 36 Satyr Tragopan, nine Koklass Pheasant and 29 Hill
Partridge from the 10 listening stations at Santel forests (Baral et al. 2001). Further they
prepared a list of 191 species of birds recorded during the survey period.
In August 2004, Nabin Gyawali studied summer grazing and forest resource collection
and their effects on pheasants of Pipar and adjacent areas. He observed the extent and
pattern of nomadic grazing and determined the pattern of NTFPs collection (Gyawali
2004).
I carried out a study on vegetation and effects of nomadic grazing on pheasants in
autumn 2004 for my BSc thesis. I mostly followed the same methods that Picozzi had
done two decades before. A total of 67 plant species was identified belonging to 51
Genera and 30 Families. Grazing pressure and NTFP collection from Pipar have reduced
considerably during the last 20 years (Poudyal 2005, Poudyal et al. 2007).
In continuance of the long-term monitoring at Pipar and to provide a second count at
Santel, dawn call counts were conducted in both areas between 29th April and 9th May
2005. The numbers of species detected were found to be reasonably stable and that there
was no long-term decline (Poudyal et al. 2008). Both areas have exceptional bird species
richness, with 227 species recorded in Pipar and 236 in Santel (Mahato et al 2006).
2.1.2
Studies in Other Areas in Nepal
Tony Lelliott carried out a study on Cheer in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve in 1980
(Lelliott 1981). Poorneswor Subedi carried out a Cheer study in 2003 in the same area.
The population of Cheer in the upper Dhorpatan valley was found to be unchanged since
the 1980; there are estimated to be 100-200 breeding territories, making this one of the
largest known populations of Cheer in the world (Subedi et al. 2005).
In 2004 Raju Acharya carried out a survey of Cheer Pheasant in the Kali Gandaki valley
in the Annapurna Conservation Area. He discovered Cheer populations at five of seven
sites they selected at random in the both sides of the valley, extending 300m east of the
River (Acharya 2004). This is the place where Nepal’s other five pheasant species also
exist.
In 2005 Bharat Budthapa, Jeetendra Mahat and Suman Sharma visited Rara National
Park. They found Cheer at five of the six sites they visited near Rara Lake (Garson and
6
Baral 2007). Paras Bikram Singh and I carried out a survey of Cheer Pheasant in
Baglung and Myagdi Districts near Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve and recorded high
densities of Cheer despite evident heavy pressure on the vegetation by human and
livestock (Singh et al. 2006).
Ramji Gautam studied habitat use of Nepal Kalij at Dhital VDC of Kaski district in
Nepal in 1998 for his Master’s Thesis. He found that the maximum number of birds in
closed forest with high understorey followed by closed forest with low understorey,
terraced field and open forest (Gautam and Baral 2002). Bhagawati Subedi studied
population status, habitat use and conservation threats of Kalij Pheasant in Hemja area of
Kaski district for her Masters degree. She identified Castanopsis indica as main roosting
tree species followed by Schima wallichii, Angelhardia spicata and Myrica esculenta
(Subedi 2006).
Hem Sagar Baral studied the status, distribution and habitat preferences of Swamp
Francolin Francolinus gularis in Koshi Tappu and Suklaphanta Wildlife Reserve on
several occasions between 1991 and 1995. He estimated the total population of 212
individuals in Nepal (Baral 1998). Bhagawan Raj Dahal carried out a study on status and
conservation of Swamp Francolin in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve in 1999. He
observed 80 individuals and recorded 106 calls in May and 90 individuals and 122 calls
in October-November (Dahal 2000).
Suresh Shakya, Anil Shrestha and Rajiv Kalsi carried out a survey of Swamp Francolin
in March-April 2000. They found 14.26 birds/Km2 at Koshi Tappu, 8 birds/Km2 at
Chitwan and 23 birds/Km2 at Suklaphanta Wildlife Reserve (Shakya et al 2000). Paras
Bikram Singh studied the population status and habitat utilization of Swamp Francolin in
Suklaphanta Wildlife Reserve in April-June 2004 and estimated a maximum 46 pairs of
birds at Suklaphanta, Jhilmila, Singhpur and Kalikitch grasslands of the reserve (Singh
2005, 2007).
2.2 Description of the Study Species
2.2.1 Taxonomy
Kingdom:
ANIMALIA
Phylum:
CHORDATA
Class:
AVES
GALLIFORMES
Order:
Family:
PHASIANIDAE
7
Scientific Names
Tragopan satyra
Pucrasia macrolopha
Lophura leucomelanos
Ithaginis cruentus
Lophophorus impejanus
Arborophila torqueola
2.2.2
Sub Species in Nepal
Macrolopha, nipalensis
leucomelanos, hamiltonii, melanota
Cruentus
Common Names
Satyr Tragopan
Koklass Pheasant
Kalij Pheasant
Blood Pheasant
Himalayan Monal
Hill-Partridge
Biology and Ecology
SATYR TRAGOPAN
Physical Description: The male is about 67-72cm in length and brightly coloured.
Plumage on the neck and under part is bright red. The back and sides are mottled black
and brown with round white spots. Head and tail is black. The male has two fleshy horns
of sky-blue colour which along with the blue bib, get engorged during courtship displays.
The female is smaller than the male and is rufous-brown with white streaking and
spotting (Grimmett et al. 2000).
Distribution: Satyr Tragopan is native to Bhutan, China, India and Nepal. It occurs in
the Himalayas of Nepal (uncommon), India (uncommon), Bhutan (fairly common) and
China (local, with a limited range in south and south-east Tibet). In Nepal it is scarce
resident and reported from 2500-3800m in summer and down to 2100m in winter. It is
found west to Jumla. Sites include Ghasa, Langtang and Khumbu (Inskipp and Inskipp
1991). This bird is reported from Khaptad National Park (KNP), Shey Phoksundo
National Park (SPNP), Langtang National Park (LNP), Sagarmatha National Park (SNP),
Makalu Barun National Park (MBNP), Kanchanjungha Conservation Area (KCA) and
ACA (Bhuju et al. 2007).
Habitat: It is resident in moist oak and rhododendron forest with dense undergrowth and
bamboo clumps, mixed forest, scrub and densely vegetated ravines in gentle and steep
slopes (Inskipp and Inskipp 1991, Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a).
Habits: This species is shy but less difficult to observe than the Koklass. It is solitary or
in pairs. The mating call is a long drawn out wah, waah oo-aaaaa much like the crying
of an infant voiced 12-14 times
mainly at dawn, the series rising in volume and
becoming more protracted; also a wah wah at any time (Grimmett et al. 2000).
Food: The birds feed on young leaves and other edible parts of plants like Berberis and
Rhododendron. This is in addition to mosses, grasses and insects, lichens and quartz
8
fragments (Yonzon and Lelliott 1981). Individuals feed actively in the morning and late
afternoon.
Breeding: There is very little known of its breeding but the season is believed to be in
May-June and occasionally into July (Madge and McGowan 2002). Satyr is partly
arboreal; nests have been found in trees and also on the ground. Clutch size is 2-3 eggs in
the wild and 4-6 in captivity. The reddish buff coloured eggs are generally freckled all
over with deeper brick red (Johnsgard 1986).
Threats: Major threats include hunting for local consumption as well as habitat
clearance and degradation due to timber harvesting, fuelwood and fodder collection and
livestock grazing (IUCN 2007, Madge and McGowan 2002). Extraction of bamboo also
poses problems for habitat of the species, given its association with bamboo
undergrowth.
KOKLASS PHEASANT
Physical Description: Male is about 58-64cms and has bottle green head and ear tufts,
chestnut on under parts, and streaked appearance to upperparts. Female is smaller than
the male and has white throat, short buff ear tufts, and heavily streaked body. Both sexes
have wedge-shaped tail (Grimmett et al. 2000).
Distribution: Koklass is native to Afganistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal and China (IUCN
2007). It occurs in the Himalayas of Afghanistan to Pakistan in west, continuously
through northern India, Nepal, North east Tibet and China. In Nepal it is locally resident
and reported from 2680m to 3200(-3500)m in summer and down to 2135 m in winter
(Grimmett et al. 2000). Race in Nepal is mainly nipalensis and extends as far east as the
Madi khola and possibly to the Marsyandi khola (Roberts 1980). Birds in the far west
may be sub species macrolopha (Inskipp and Inskipp 1991). It is regularly recorded at
Pipar, Ghasa, Ghorepani and Dhorpatan valley. This bird is reported from KNP, RNP,
SPNP, DHR, and ACA (Bhuju et al. 2007).
Habitat: It occurs mainly in mature Oak and mixed Spruce Juniper, Cedar,
Rhododendron forest and occasionally in adjacent Berberis scrubland and grasslands
(Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a, Inskipp and Inskipp 1991).
Habits: It is shyest and most secretive species among the Himalayan pheasants of Nepal,
though it is the most vocal. It can be met singly or in pairs of coveys of 1-3 pairs (Lelliott
and Yonzon 1980b). Call of male is a far carrying, rough kuk -kuk- kuk- kokas- kokas
9
(in Setikhola valley local people say parkhes kaakaa) in the early morning and evening
but also at other times of the day in cloudy weather. The species derives its name to its
crowing.
Food: The birds feed on young leaves grass, moss, seeds and quartz fragments (Yonzon
and Lelliott 1981) during early morning and late afternoon, in grassy areas, but dug over
patches found in a variety of places, presumably searching for roots and tubers (Madge
and McGowan 2002).
Breeding: In courtship display, the cock puffs out his body feathers, erects the long
black ear tufts with the brown crest between them and struts about in the proximity of the
hen. The breeding season is April through June (Ali and Replay 1978). The nest is a
scrape in the ground roughly lined with sticks leaves and grass concealed under dense
bushes or rocks. The clutch size is 5-7 up to 9 eggs with an incubation period of 26-27
days (Johnsgard 1986) although 21-22 days also reported (Madge and McGowan 2002).
Threats: Habitat destruction is one of the primary causes of concern. It appears to prefer
a significant understorey and where this is being degraded through grazing or collection
of fodder for domestic stock or firewood, the species is probably under pressure (Madge
and McGowan 2002).
KALIJ PHEASANT
Physical Description: The male is about 65-73cm and female is 50-60cm in length.
Both sexes have red facial skin and down curved tail. Three intergrading race occur in
Nepal; white crested L. l. hamiltonii (male has white or grey brown crest, broad white
barring on rump) black crested or Nepal Kalij L. l. leucomelanos (male has blue black
crest and white barring on rump, and heavily scaled upper parts) and black backed L. l.
melanota (male has blue back crest, and blue black rump that lacks pale scaling). Female
is reddish brown, with grayish-buff fringes producing scaly appearance (Grimmett et al.
2000).
Distribution: Kalij Pheasant occurs in Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh,
Myanmar, Thailand, China and United States. In Nepal it is fairly common and
widespread resident and reported from 245-3050m altitude. Maximum height recorded is
3660m in May 1954 (Biswas 1974). This bird is reported from all protected areas of
Nepal except Bardia and Koshitappu (Bhuju et al. 2007). Sub species leucomelanos is
endemic to Nepal and is central Nepal bird. Sub species hamiltonii is west Nepal bird
10
occurring about as far east as Jumla; leucomelanos occurs thence to about the Arun
valley in east Nepal. Sub species melanota continues to eastern boarder (Roberts 1980).
Habitat: This is one of the more adaptable pheasant species found in many habitat types
and frequents in all types of forests (including Sal, oak, spruce and rhododendron, and
other evergreen and deciduous forests) with dense undergrowth (Inskipp and Inskipp
1991, Madge and McGowan 2002).
Habits: The birds keep in pairs or small groups and feed in open areas early in the
mornings. They are very shy and run quickly for cover at the slightest hint of alarm. The
bird does not seem to have a mating call but emits a low chirrip accompanied with wing
whirring or wing drumming (WPA India 2008).
Food: Kalij pheasants are omnivorous, eating almost anything from bamboo seeds to
small snakes and lizards, and wide variety of foods including berries, grass, herbs,
shrubs, roots, and diversity of insects, worms and larvae (Johnsgard 1986).
Breeding: The breeding season is from February to October but mainly in April – May.
The white crested Kalij is said to be breed from March to June, the Nepal Kalij from
April to June and the Black backed Kalij from March to May ((Johnsgard 1986).
Threats: It is elusive, but dazzaled by a flash lamp an entire family may be shot, one by
one, as it roosts at night. Roosting sites can be spotted in advance by the droppings at the
foot of trees (Roberts 1980). Being usually found close to villages, it is a victim of local
hunting. As the species seems to be tolerant to habitat changes, it is thus not particularly
threatened by habitat loss (WPA India 2008).
BLOOD PHEASANT
Physical Description: Looks somewhat like a large partridge, with a dumpy appearance.
The male and female are the same size about 38cm in length. Both sexes have crested
head, and red orbital skin and legs/feet. Male has grey upper parts streaked with white,
and greenish under parts and plumage is splashed with red. Female has grey crest and,
rufous orange face, dark brown upperparts, and rufous brown underparts (Grimmett et al.
2000).
Distribution: Blood pheasant is native to India, Nepal, Bhutan, China and Myanmar.
Sub species cruentus is found in Nepal. It is locally fairly common resident mainly in
11
centre and east found between 3200m-4400m altitude (Grimmett et al. 2000). It occurs
eastwards from the Kali Gandaki valley (Roberts 1980) but there are also reports from
west to Rara and Jumla areas (Inskipp and Inskipp 1991). It is frequently seen in
Gosaikunda, Khumbu, Pipar, and the upper valley Arun. Protected areas include RNP,
LNP, ACA, SNP, MBNP and KCA (Bhuju et al. 2007).
Habitat: The birds inhabit bamboo clumps, forests or scrub of rhododendron, birch and
juniper, often near water (Inskipp and Inskipp 1991, Fleming et al. 1984). It also occurs
in open areas of Berberis scrub and hill side (Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a).
Habit: Blood Pheasants are usually tame and gregarious in habit and often found in
coveys of about 10 birds (Inskipp and Inskipp 1991). Outside the breeding season the
blood pheasant travels in small flocks through open scrub or thin forest (Roberts 1980)
and can be observed as many as six or seven flocks of birds, each one composed of eight
to ten members (Shakya 1980). The birds emit a repeated chuk; a loud grating alarm
screech kzeeuuk-cheeu-cheeu-chee (Fleming et al. 1984).
Food: The bird feeds on berries and other vegetable matter (Fleming et al. 1984) which
consist mainly moss, leaf litter, grass shoots and lichens. Some times it flies to catch
flying insects. They do not have their own special feeding period, they feed at all time of
the day including arboreal feeding on moss covered branches, but it is greatest in the
morning (Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a).
Breeding: The bird is believed to be monogamous, but polygamy and polyandry is also
reported. Breeding probably occurs in April-May as small chicks have been seen in June
and early July (WPA India 2008). Cheeks were found at 3200m in June 1981 at Pipar
(Inskipp and Inskipp 1991). The nest is a depression in the ground lined with dead grass
stems. A clutch of 2-7 eggs is known to be laid from mid April to late June; most nests
found in May. Incubation in captive birds is 26-29 days (Madge and McGowan 2002).
Threats: As this is a bird of the high altitude region, it is not really under human
pressure like the other forest dwelling pheasants. However, hunting for local
consumption by shepherd and poachers during and after monsoon cannot be ignored
(Yonzon and Lelliott 1980).
12
HIMALAYAN MONAL
Physical Description: The male bird is around 70 cm in length and has a crest on its
rather large head. It is iridescent green, copper and purple, with white patch on back and
cinnamon-brown tail. Female has white throat, short crest, boldly streaked under parts,
white crescent on upper tail coverts, and narrow white tip to tail (Grimmett et al. 2000).
The bare skin of both sexes around the eye is blue (Fleming et al. 1984). This is the
Nepali national bird of nine colours.
Distribution: Himalayan Monal is native to Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan,
China and Myanmar. In Nepal it is fairly common widespread resident subject to vertical
movements between from 3300-4750m in summer and down to 2500m in winter. This
bird is reported from all Himalayan protected areas (Bhuju et al. 2007).
Habitat: The species prefers alpine and sub-alpine areas in steep grassy and open rocky
slopes and the adjacent forest during summer and descends to lower altitudes in
rhododendron forest during winter, especially in times of heavy snow fall (Inskipp and
Inskipp 1991, Lelliott and Yonzon 1980a).
Habit: The species is reported to be polygamous; males can be seen with more than one
female. Both sexes utter a series of upward –inflected whistles, kleee, kleee …kluks. The
bird is usually quite shy and flushes at a considerable distance. When flushed, the birds
take to wing emitting a loud call sounding like pi-pi-pi. It digs for tubers with powerful
bill, often remaining in one spot for half an hour or more. A dozen of cocks can be seen
digging under the trees and open lands in the early morning (Fleming et al. 1984).
Food: Terrestrial insects and tubers forms are the chief food (Johnsgard 1986). The bird
is usually seen digging for tubers and roots, which seem to form their main diet in
addition to grass roots and seeds, berries, mosses, insects and grubs (Yonzon and Lelliott
1981).
Breeding: Eggs are laid in rudimentary nests on ground during May-June, generally
under boulders and are 4-6 in number. Incubation period is 28 days (WPA India 2008).
The nest is a simple scrape, often under the shelter of a bush, a rock, or in the hole of
some large tree (Johnsgard 1986).
Threats: The main threats to the species arise from hunting and trapping for local
consumption especially during winter, when the bird descends to lower altitudes, closer
13
to human habitations. Hunting and trapping by shepherds and poachers during and after
monsoon cannot be ignored (Yonzon and Lelliott 1980). It is also killed for its plumes.
HILL PARTRIDGE
Physical Description: Male has rufous crown and ear coverts, black eye patch and eye
stripes, white neck sides streaked with black and white collar. Female has a black barring
on mantle and rufous orange foreneck lacks black lower boarder. Both sexes are about 28
cm in length and have grey or brown legs and feet (Grimmett et al. 2000).
Distribution: Hill Partridge is native to India, Nepal, Bhutan, China, Myanmar and
Vietnam. Sub species torqueola is found in Nepal. It is fairly common and quite
widespread resident found from 1830m to 3200m (Grimmet at al. 2000). This bird is
reported from KNP, RNP, LNP, ACA, MBNP and KCA (Bhuju et al. 2007).
Habitat: The bird is seen in ravines and slopes in damp, dense forests and other
evergreen trees and shrubs (Inskipp and Inskipp 1991). It prefers oak forest, with mix of
laurel and rhododendron; chiefly in heavy undergrowth, such as stunted forest in ravines
(Madge and McGowan 2002).
Habit: This gregarious bird keeps in coveys of 5-10 birds in dense undergrowth
scratching for food. Trusts its legs for escape but when in danger, it suddenly flies.
Roosts in trees but generally the covey sits huddled together along a branch. A single
low mournful whistle is repeated every two or three seconds repeated two or three times
followed by a series of three to six double whistles (Grimmett et al. 2000). It sounds like
do-eat, do eat, do eat (WPA India 2008).
Food: This bird prefers seeds, shoots, tubers berries, insects and their larvae, grubs and
tiny mollusces and feeds amongst humus on the forest floor (Inskipp and Inskipp 1991).
Breeding: The breeding season is April to June though it is earlier at lower elevation.
The nest is a rough scrape in the ground sparsely lined with grass to a deeper cup, well
padded with grass. The nest is generally placed in dense ringle or scrub undergrowth in a
forest. About 3-5 eggs are laid which white, glossy and with a fine texture (Madge and
McGowan 2002).
Threats: Habitat loss and fragmentation and degradation of primary forest is a major
threat.
14
© Daniel Cole
15
3. Study area
Intensive studies were conducted in seven sites of Setikhola valley in Annapurna
Conservation Area. They were (1) Khumai forest, (2) Thulokhobang, (3) Pipar, (4) Kalki
forest, (5) Nhirgu-Pamche Kharka, (6) Dhije and (7) Khuine-Namsung. These areas lie in
the Lwang Sector of Annapurna Conservation Area. The first five lie west from Seti
River and the last two lie in the east. The Annapurna Conservation Area is managed by
the National Trust for Nature Conservation under the legislative Act of National Parks
and Wildlife Conservation and its Regulations. This Conservation Area has been
described as the most geographically and culturally diverse conservation area in the
world (UNEP 1995).
Figure 1: Pipar and Santel Forests Showing Intensive Study Sites
16
3.1 Annapurna Conservation Area
Background History
Annapurna Conservation Area (ACA) was gazetted in 1992 as a protected area under the
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973 and the KMTNC - King Mahendra
Trust for Nature Conservation (now the National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC)
was given the authority to manage the designated Conservation Area (KMTNC 1997).
Being the largest protected area of Nepal, the ACA encompasses 7629 km2. Prior to
official declaring the protected area, ACA Project was implemented in Ghandruk Village
Development Committee (VDC) with an area of 200 km2 in 1986; and was expanded to
16 VDCs in 1990 with an area of 1500 km2.
Physical Attributes
ACA is located in the north central Nepal covering the whole of Mustang District and
some parts of other four districts namely Kaski, Lamjung, Myagdi and Manang. It lies
between 28º15' - 28º50' latitudes and 83º34' - 84º25' longitudes. The altitude ranges from
1000 to over 8000 meters above sea level within a horizontal distance of less than 35km
(Gurung 2003). It is bounded by the Marsyangdi valley in the east, the Kali Gandaki
River in the west, the dry alpine desert of Tibet (China) in the north and the valleys and
foothills of Pokhara in the south. The main mountains are Annapurna peaks, Nilgiri
south, Nilgiri north, Tilicho peak, Himchuli, Machhapuchhre, Gangapurna, Lamjung
Himal and Tukuche peak. Kaligandaki and Marsyangdi are two major river systems and
Modikhola, Setikhola and Madikhola are other rivers which drain ACA.
Ecological Attributes
The Annapurna region provides sub-tropical to arctic climate. The climate varies with
altitude and aspect. There is a 6ºC drop in temperature for every 1,000 m rise in
elevation. The average daily temperature decreases between the months of December
and February and reaches a maximum between May and July. The seasonal climate is
dominated by the southerly monsoon, which occurs between June and September.
The southern Annapurna region, with 3,000mm of annual rainfall, has the highest
precipitation in the country. The northern Annapurna receives 25-500 mm of
precipitation annually. The rainfall type is mainly related to aspect, altitude, and the
presence of a rain shadow effect.
17
Annapurna Conservation Area supports a wide range of biodiversity which is nationally
and globally important. Due to the wide range of climatic conditions and altitude, ACA
supports 22 different forest types with 1233 plant species (BCDP 1994). At the lowest
levels there are subtropical broadleaved forests of Schima wallichii, Castanopsis indica,
Pinus roxburghii and Alnus nepalensis. Higher up at the altitude of 1500-3000m these
are replaced by mixed broadleaved temperate forests of Quercus and Rhododendron
species; and coniferous forests of Abies spectabilis, Pinus wallichiana and Tsuga
dumosa. Betula utilis, Pinus wallichina and Juniper species are lie in the sub alpine
zone (3000-4000m); and Rhododendron and Juniper scrub grow in the alpine zone above
4000m (Inskipp and Inskipp 2001). The area to the north to the Himalayas, there are
deserts, small scattered bushes and Juniper forests.
A total of 101 species of mammals, 32 species of reptiles and 21 species of amphibians
have been recorded so far from the area (KMTNC 1997). The Conservation Area
harbours Endangered species including Asiatic Wild Dog Cuon alpinus, Red Panda
Ailurus fulgens, Particolored Flying Squirrel Hylopetes alboniger, Tibetan Antelope
Pantholops hodgsonii, Snow Leopard Uncia uncia; Vulnerable species Irrawaddy
Squirrel Callosciurus pygerythrus, Serow Capricornis sumatraensis, Himalayan Tahr
Hemitragus jemlahicus, Malayan Porcupine Hystrix brachyuran, Smooth-Coated Otter
Lutrogale perspicillata, Assamese Macaque Macaca assamensis, Clouded Leopard
Neofelis nebulosa, Argali Ovis ammon and Marbled Cat Pardofelis marmorata (Inskipp
and Inskipp 2001, IUCN 2007).
A total of 486 species of birds has been recorded including 9 globally threatened species
(Baral and Inskipp 2005, IUCN 2007). The reserve contains critically endangered Whiterumped Vulture Gyps bengalensis and Red-headed Vulture Sarcogyps calvus;
Endangered Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnoptrus, and Vulnerable Cheer Pheasant
Catreus wallichi, Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca, Greater Spotted Eagle Aquila
clanga, Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni, Pallas's Fish-Eagle Haliaeetus leucoryphus and
Wood Snipe Gallinago nemoricola. Seven near threatened species occur, notably Satyr
Tragopan and Yellow-rumped Honeyguide Indicator xanthonotus that are both residents.
Administrative Division
The area has been divided into seven units for administrative and development purposes.
Of these seven units, Lomanthang occupies nearly one third (33.7 percent) of the ACA
18
followed by Manang (25.1 percent) and Jomsom (13.0 percent), whereas Bhujung is the
smallest unit (5%). Conservation Area management Committees (CAMCs) has been
formed in all the 57 VDCs. Under the umbrella of CAMC, other sub committees are
constituted and mobilized as per the need.
SN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Total
Unit
Ghandruk
Lwang
Sikles
Bhujung
Manang
Jomsom
Lomanthang
District
Kaski, Myagdi
Kaski
Kaski
Lamjung
Manang
Mustang
Mustang
Area (km2)
807.8
503.4
458.7
382.4
1914.7
994.5
2567.6
7629.0
Proportion of ACA
10.6
6.6
6.0
5.0
25.1
13.0
33.7
100.0
No of CAMCs
6
7
7
8
13
9
7
57
Anthropological Attributes
According to the 2001 population census, ACA provides home to nearly ninety thousand
people from 18680 households. The household size of the ACA ranges from a minimum
of 4.3 in Ghandruk to a maximum of 5.3 in Manang with 4.7 average.
Major ethnic groups of the ACA are Gurung, Thakali, Bhotia, Ethnic Tibetan, Magar,
Brahmin, Kshetri, Kami, Damai and Sarki. The former five groups belong to TibetoBurmese by race and dominate the ethnography of the region. The dominant ethnic
group of the ACA is the Gurungs, followed by others and Brahmin/Chetri. Gurung caste
group dominates in all the UCOs except in Lwang which is dominated by other caste
groups.
Photo: Machhapuchhare from Santel Forest
19
3.2 Intensive Studies Areas
Intensive studies were conducted in the eight sites of Setikhola valley which lie in the
Lawang Sector of the Annapurna Consrvation Area.
3.2.1
Khumai Forest
Khumai is a hill at 3260m altitude, 3.5 km North West of Mirsa village in the upper
Sitikhola valley. It is located at 26°23’29”N latitudes and 83°56’06”E longitudes. I
carried out the studies on the ridge top and low gradient forest on the eastern side of the
ridge. Trail walks were made only on the ridges. This area contains some Kharkas (goth
areas) and forests like Pipar area. The notable vegetations are Rhododendron arboreum,
R. barbatum, R. campanulatum, Betula alnoides and B. utilis.
Khumai forest seems
unhealthy in comparison than that of Pipar forest. We found 10-15 percentage of trees
had died.
3.2.2
Thulokhobang Forest
The Thulokhobang forests lie in the 2200-2500m altitudes. This area is located at
28°23’37”N latitudes and 83°58’02” E longitudes. This area dissects mixed broadleaved
forest and Rhododendron forests. Rhododendron forests start up from here. The main
species found in the mixed broad leaved forests are Rhododendron arboreum, Prunus
cerasoides, Lithocarpus elegans, Castanopsis tribuloides, Alnus nepalensis, Quercus and
Macaranga species.
3.2.3
Pipar
Pipar is a 3300m hill west of the Upper Setikhola valley south from Machhapuchhare
peak, 24km north from Pokhara city. It is located at 28°24’44”N latitudes and
83°57’34”E longitudes. I carried out the studies on the eastern facing slopes of the Pipar
area generally known as Pipar Bowl and western slopes known as Pipar kharka. Pipar
Bowl is mainly covered with Rhododendron forests which consist of Rhododendron
arboreum, Quercus semecarpifolia, Alnus nepalensis, Betula alnoides, Acer campbelli,
A. pectinatum, Sorbus cospidata and Juniperus. Rhododendron barbatum and R.
campanulatum are found in the upper areas.
The shrub layer mainly comprises
Arundinaria species which form large stands. The uphill ridges are characterized by
scrubs and tussock grasslands.
3.2.4
Kalki Forest
Kalki forest is located at 28°26’07”N Latitudes and 83°57’56”E Longitudes, at 3300m
altitude 2.5Km north from Pipar Bowl. We reached there just after crossing the Kalki
danda. The easterly facing terrain is undulating terrain and there is a small area of flat
20
land. After crossing the Kalki hill there was no route/ trail to go ahead, so we were
escorted by local guides pushing and cutting through the bushes. The main vegetation
consists of Rhododendron barbatum, R. campanulatum, Betula utilis, and Viburnum spp.
The Jarbutta nigalo (Arundinaria) is sparsely distributed. There is very little presence or
probably absent of Berberis species which was a major species of undergrowth in PiparBowl.
3.2.5 Nhirgu
Nirgu is located at 28°26’49”N latitudes and 83°58’18”E longitudes at 3350m altitude
and 1.6 km further north from Kalki forest. To reach Nhirgu from Kalki it takes about 4
hours walk pushing and cutting through the bushes in the rolling terrain. In the north
there is Dangdunge khola and Tinchuli khola in the south. After crossing the Tinchuli
khola, there is a steep slope and comes flat land which is densely covered by bamboo
stands.
Between Dangdunge and Tinchuli, Nirgu-Pamche khola temporarily runs
towards Dangdunge khola. Dangdunge and Tinchuli run towards east and make Sadhu
khola. The vegetations comprise Rhododendron barbatum, R. campanulatum, Betula
utilis, Viburnum spp, Tsuga dumosa. Jarbutta nigalo (Arundinaria spp) is very densely
distributed.
3.2.6
Dhije
Dhije Kharka lies at 2035m altitude in the lower altitudes of Santel forest area. This area
is located at 28°24’06”N latitudes and 83°59’46”E longitudes. The area consists mainly
of mixed broadleaved forest. Notable species are Alnus nepalensis, Rhododendron
Arboreum, Quercus, Michelia, viburnum and Berbersi species.
3.2.7
Khuine and Namsung
Khuine and Namsung area are the higher altitudes of Santel forest which lies east from
the Seti River. Kuhine is located at 28°23’58”N latitude and 84°01’27”E longitude at
3070m altitude. Namsung is located further higher at 3250m at 28°23’26”N latitudes and
84°01’11”E longitudes. The area is covered by temperate broadleaved forests. The
notable tree species in these areas are Alnus nepalensis, Daphniphyllum himalense,
Rhododendron arboreum, R. campanulatum, R. barbatum, Quercus semicarpifolia, Q.
lamellosa, Betula alnoides, B. utilis, Acer campbelli, A. pectinatum, Sorbus cospidata,
Lyonia ovalifolia cotoneaster spp and the shrub layer includes Berberis asiatica,
Viburnum grandiflorum and Arundinaria species.
21
4. Methods
All surveys were carried out in the altitudinal range 1600m to 3200m in winter (19
February -5 March) and 2000m to 4000m in spring (28 April– 21 May) in Setikhola
Valley of Annapurna Conservation Area. All the statistical tests were conducted using
Excel and SPSS 11.5 and the analysis where confidence interval applies calculations
were done at 95% confidence limit.
4.1 Relative Abundance
WINTER SURVEY
There were routes from Karuwa to Pipar and Karuwa to Dhije along the altitudinal
gradient. Trail walks were made in these routes. Furthermore, some trails were
temporarily created to walk in the forests as possible as along the contour on the right
and left of the existing trails. Altogether 9027m distance was walked of which existing
trails were 6060m and newly created trail was 2967m. The walks were replicated three
times. Pheasants and partridges were counted along the trails.
Table 2: Winter Trails of the Study Area (* Denotes newly created trails)
SN Trail Description
Length (meter)
1
Sano Khabang- Bhajaudi
Elevations
Vegetations
Lower Higher
878 (450+428*) 1673
1858
Mixed forest
2
Sano Khabang- Seti Khola
912 (443+469*) 1748
3
Sano Khabang-thulo Khabang 907
4
Thulo Khabang Seti khola
5
2045
Mixed forest
1684
2198
Mixed forest
1800*
2280
2392
Mixed forest
Thulo Khabang -Bhedi goth
896
2327
2828
Rhododendron forest
6
Bhedigoth-Bhajaudi Khola
705
2750
2820
Rhododendron forest
7
Bhaisikharka area
270*
2620
2723
Rhododendron forest
8
Bhedi goth -pipar kharka
1200
2820
3227
Rhododendron forest
9
Pipar pond-pipar kharka
593
3252
3314
Open area
10
Dhije Area
866
2035
2173
Mixed forest
Encounter rate or detection rate of pheasants and partridges were calculated by summing
up the total number of individual counted per unit effort in the trail walk. This was
obtained using the formula, Encounter Rate = n/L, where n = number of birds sighted
and L= Distance walked.
22
Kalij Pheasant and Hill Partridge were taken into account in all the trails. Satyr Tragopan
was not taken into account in the Sanokhobang- Bhajaudi trail as this was below 2000m.
Koklass and Himalayan Monal were taken into account from two trails only i.e.
Bhedigoth Pipar kharka and Pipar pond- Pipar Kharka trails. Other trails were considered
unsuitable for these two species due to lower altitudinal range. As Rufous throated
Partridge was found only at lower altitudes, only four trails of lower altitudes were taken
into account for this species.
SPRING SURVEY
Dawn call counts were conducted using methods developed by Gaston (1980). Satyr
Tragopan, Koklass Pheasant and Hill Partridge were counted using this method. Call
counts were carried out at previously established listening stations at Pipar Bowl (6
stations), Thulokhobang (3) and Santel forests (3 Dhije, 4 Khuine and 3 Namsung).
Further three new call count stations at Khumai, two at Kalki forest and four at Nhirgu
were established. The audible range of the calls of pheasants was estimated 300m from
listening stations.
The protocol for data collection was the same as that used in many studies on Himalayan
pheasant species (e.g Gaston and Singh 1980, Yonzon 1987, Garson 1983, Picozzi 1984,
Duke 1990, Howman and Garson 1993, Khaling et al. 1998). Counts were made of
calling birds at dawn from which a minimum number of calling birds can be calculated.
The assumption is that the male produces characteristics loud calls at dawn during their
breeding season, as a display mechanism to defend their territory or to attract females for
mating (Ramesh 2003).
The field protocol involves positioning observers at pre-determined points (point count
stations or listening stations) where the apparent position of a calling individual can be
plotted on a data recording sheet. Calls of the Galliformes species present in the study
area are distinctive.
Duplicate counts between adjacent observation points were
eliminated by comparison of these recording sheets and noting time and direction of
calling individuals.
The counts were translated into an abundance index expressed as the number of calling
males per listing stations or point. An estimate of density was also derived from the data.
It was assumed that each calling male is likely to be associated with one female bird, and
hence, the density estimate was converted for the breeding pair.
23
After conducting dawn call counts every morning, trail walks were made to see other
Gallifromes- Himalayan Monal, Blood Pheasant and Snow Partridge. Altogether we
walked 6893m distance in spring for trail walks. The walks and dawn counts were
replicated three times whereas the dawn counts at lower altitudes at Dhije and
Thulokhobang were replicated only two times. Mean encounter rate of the trail counts
was calculated as in winter we did.
Analytical Method
The descriptive analysis was done to represent the collected call count/trail count data for
further interpretation. Since the sampling plots were repeated so that pooled mean,
standard deviation and variance were preferred to represent the overall status of
abundance of the Galliformes species in the study areas. The following formula was used
to calculate the pooled mean and variance.
x=
n1 x1 + n2 x 2 + n3 x3 + ........................ + n N x N
n1 + n 2 + n3 + ........................ + n N − N
Where,
n =Number of repeated measures in each station
x = Mean of each plot
σ =
σ2 =
Σ( x − x )
N
2
( n1 − 1)σ 12 + ( n2 − 1)σ 22 + ..... + ( n N − 1)σ N2
n1 + n2 + .... + n N − N
ER= x ±
σ
N
x = pooled mean or mean of the mean
σ = Standard deviation
σ 2 =Variance
ER=Detection rate at 95% confidence limit
* 1.96
We obtained mean value per station representing the number of callers heard from eight
study sites every three consecutive mornings. These data were subjected to one way
ANOVA plus LSD to test for differences in the number of birds of either species in
different sites. One way ANOVA was also performed to see whether the numbers of
Satyr Tragopan and Koklass Pheasants were changed over seven successive surveys at
Pipar since 1979.
4.2 Habitat use
Broad details on vegetation characteristics such as what were the vegetation types,
canopy cover, tree cover, shrub cover and herb cover, litter, rock, moss and bare ground
24
percentage, elevation range, aspect, slope of the area were obtained in the bird calling
sites in the spring and trail walking areas in the winter. Data were collected on 10m*10m
for trees, 5*5 for plot for shrubs and 1*1 for herbaceous species. Data were collected
from 56 plots in winter and 28 plots in spring. Tree canopy coverage, shrub coverage,
and ground coverage (herbaceous plants, leaf litter, rock, moss and bare ground) were
estimated in percentage. The numbers of trees and shrubs were counted in the plots.
Euclidean distance model was created by using SPSS-NMDS (Non Metric
Multidimentional Scaling) and bivariate correlation coefficients were calculated to know
the relationship among different habitat variables such as canopy cover, shrub cover, tree
number, shrub number, ground coverage, elevation and slope.
4.3 Spatial Analysis and Habitat Modeling
Digital Topographic maps (1:50,000 scale) published by the Survey Department of
Nepal were used to delineate transects and plots as well as for habitat preference
modeling. The Landsat Image was projected on the projection system Modified UTM,
Spheroid Everest 1830, central meridian 84°East, false easting 500000 meter and scale
factor 0.9999. The Normalized Differential Vegetation Index (NDVI) was derived from
the image. Based upon NDVI value, the land cover is classified as following
1. Snow cover,
4. Rhododendron and Scrub
2. Barren area
5. Mixed Broadleaved Forest
3. Open forest
6. Dense Forest
Digital Elevation Model (DEM) with grid size 100x100m was created by interpolation of
contours. Aspect, slope and hillshade were derived from DEM. The habitat variables
considered for modeling were landcover, elevation, aspect and slope (Table 3).
According to habitat preferences of each species and on the basis of call count data as
well as researcher’s expertise, the values were assigned for each class of land cover,
slope, aspect and elevation (Table 4). The values were given from 0 (least preferred) to
10 (most preferred). By using raster calculator land cover, slope, aspect and elevation
classes were multiplied. Multiplying the layers we got values 0 to 10000. The higher the
value the more was the preference of species for the area. Arc/Info was used to create
DEM. Erdas Imagine was used to derive NDVI. ArcGIS and ArcView were used to
further analysis and display. DNR Garmin was used to create shapefile from GPS data.
25
Table 3: Variable Considered for Habitat Suitability Modeling
SN
Primary
Variable
1
Aspect
2
Land Cover
Dummy Variable
Measurement Unit
North East (23-68), East (68-112),
South East (113-157), South (158202), South West (203-247), West
(248-292), North West (293-337),
North (0-22, 338-360)
Snow cover, Barren, Open forest,
Scrub, Rhododendron forest, Mixed
broadleaf forest, Dense forest
Degree (0-360)
Slope
Degree (0-90)
4
NDVI
Index (-1 to +1)
5
Elevation
Meter (1040-7520)
3
Table 4: The Range and Type of Habitat Variables Incorporated in the Habitat Suitability Model
Himalayan Monal
Hill Partridge
Koklass Pheasant
Satyr Tragopan
Species
Assigned
Value
10
Slope
Elevation
Aspect
Land Cover
20-40
3000-3500
NE, E
8
6
4
10-20
00-10
40-50
SE
S
-
2
50-60
2500-3000
2000-2500
3500-4000
-
Scrub and Rhododendron
Forest
Open forest
Mixed Broadleaf forest
Dense Forest
0
10
60-90
20-40
3000-3500
8
6
4
2
0-10
10-20
40-50
50-60
2500-3000
-
0
10
60-90
20-40
2500-3000
8
6
4
2
10-20
00-10
40-50
50-60
3000-3500
2000-2500
1500-200
-
0
10
8
60-90
-
6
4
2
0
-
3500-4000
3000-3500
4000-4500
-
N,SW, W,
NW
NE, E
SE
S
N,SW, W,
NW
NE, E
SE
S
N,SW, W,
NW
SW
EWS
-
Snow, Barren
Scrub and Rhododendron
Forest
Open forest
Mixed Broadleaf forest
Dense Forest
Snow, Barren
Scrub and Rhododendron
Forest
Open forest
Mixed Broadleaf forest
Dense Forest
Snow, Barren
Barren
Open forest
-
26
Figure 2: Flow Chart of the GIS Works
Landsat Image
Topographic Map
DEM
Slope
Aspect
NDVI
Elevation
Land Cover
Values assigned according to field data
and expertise (Table 4)
Output Map
Figure 3: Equipment Used
27
5. Results
5.1 Relative Abundance
5.1.1
Winter Survey
Seven Galliformes species were observed during the winter survey; they were Rufousthroated partridge (1 sighting), Hill Partridge (11 sightings), Kalij Pheasant (9 sightings),
Satyr Tragopan (4 sightings), Koklass Pheasant (1 sighting), Blood pheasant (fecal
materials only) and Himalayan Monal (7 sightings). The mean encounter rate obtained
for each species is given in the Table 5.
Himalayan
Monal
Koklass
Pheasant
R Throated
Partridge
Satyr
Tragopan
Hill
Partridge
Kalij
Pheasant
Altitude in
Meter
Length km
Trail
Table 5: Mean (±SD) Encounter Rate of Different Species at Setikhola Valley During Winter of 2008
Sano KhoBhajaudi
Sano KhoSeti Khola
Sano Khothulo
Khobang
Dhije Area
0.878 1673- 1.52±1.74
1858
0.76±1.32
0.76±1.32
0.912 1748- 0.73±0.63
0.00±0.00 0.00±0.00
1.83±1.67
2045
0.907 1684- 0.37±0.64
0.37±0.64
2198
0.00±0.00
2.57±2.77
0.866 2035- 0.77±1.33
0.38±0.67
2173
0.00±0.00
1.15±2.00
Thulo Kho- 1.800 2280- 0.19±0.32
0.00±0.00
Seti khola
0.56±0.96
2392
Thulo Kho - 0.896 2327- 0.00±0.00
0.74±0.64
Bhedi goth
0.74±1.29
2828
Bhasikharka 0.270 2620- 0.00±0.00
1.23±2.14
area
0.00±0.00
2723
Bhedigoth- 0.705 2750- 0.00±0.00
0.47±0.82
Bhajaudi
0.47±0.82
2820
Bhedi goth - 1.200 2820- 0.00±0.00
0.56±0.96
0.00±0.00
pipar
3227
1.11±0.48
kharka
0.00±0.00
Pipar pond- 0.593 3252- 0.00±0.00
0.00±0.00
1.12±1.95
pipar
3314
12.37±2.58
kharka
0.00±0.00
Pooled Mean ± SD
0.36±0.76 0.81±1.39 0.42±0.91 0.19±0.66 0.56±1.37 6.74±1.85
28
Rufous-throated Partridge: We saw two birds at altitude of 1673m when we walked
towards Bhajaudikhola from Sanokhobang on 21 February. We heard calls but did not
observe this bird again in this trip.
The encounter rate was 2.30 (n=2, L= 0.866) individual per kilometer excluding the trails
where the birds were not observed at all. It was 0.56 (n=2, L= 3.563) birds per kilometer
including all four trails that were considered for this species. Mean encounter rate
obtained for the Rufous-throated Partridge was 0.76 (±1.32 SD) birds per kilometer with
a pooled mean of 0.19 (±0.66 SD, n=4).
Hill Partridge: 24 individuals were observed during the trail walks. The calls of the
birds were heard time to time but observers did not take account of call counts.
The encounter rate was 3.45 (n=24, L= 6.964) individual per kilometer excluding the
trails where the birds were not observed at all. It was 2.66 (n=24, L= 9.027) birds per
kilometer including 10 trails. Mean encounter rate obtained for the Hill Partridge ranged
between 0.47 (±0.82 SD) and 2.572 (±2.77 SD) birds per kilometer in different trails
with a pooled mean of 0.8 (±1.39 SD, n=10).
Kalij Pheasant: We observed 11 individuals (9 male and 2 female) during the trail walk
observations. A pair was seen at Sanokhobang area (1854m) on 21st February and next
pair was seen at Dhije area at 2035m on 3rd March. A Kalij was observed same time and
place where we observed a pair of Rufous-throated partridge.
The encounter rate was 2.051 (n=11, L= 5.363) individual per kilometer excluding the
trails where the birds were not observed at all. It was 1.21 (n=11, L= 9.027) birds per
kilometer including 10 trails. The mean encounter rate obtained for the Kalij Pheasant
ranged between 0.19 (±0.32 SD) and 1.52 (±1.74 SD) birds per kilometer in different
trails with a pooled mean of 0.36 (±0.76 SD, n=10).
Satyr Tragopan: Eight birds were observed in seven sightings during the trail walks.
We observed a male on the way of Karuwa to Pipar at 2623m on 25 February. There was
a Goth where people of Karuwa take buffaloes in summer. This area is meeting place of
rhododendron and mixed broadleaved forest. A pair was seen at 2850m on 28th February
in pure rhododendron forest in eastern aspect. The birds were feeding / playing, escaped
flying downward while they felt disturb. A female was seen at 2799m on 26th February
in pure rhododendron forest in western aspect. It was seen in a short flight while it
29
escaped from our disturbance. A male was observed at Santel forest (Dhije area) at
2078m altitude on 4th March. We found fecal materials of this species (2084m, 2649m,
2789m, 2820m) and feathers (2115m) during our trail walk. We saw some footprints
above Pipar Bowl at 3497m. Two tragopans were heard at Pipar Bowl (3100-3200m) on
29th February and two were at Dhije (2100-2200m) on 3rd March.
The encounter rate was 1.65 (n = 8, L = 4.844) individual per kilometer excluding the
trails where the birds were not observed at all. It was 0.98 (n=8, L=8.149) birds per
kilometer including all the nine trails. The mean encounter rate obtained for the Satyr
Tragopan ranged between 0.37 (±0.64 SD) and 1.23 (±2.14 SD) birds per kilometer in
different trails with a pooled mean of 0.42 (±0.91 SD, n=9).
Koklass Pheasant: Two Koklass Pheasants were observed at 3289m altitude at western
slope of Pipar Kharka in the edge of rhododendron forest and grassland on 29th February.
These birds escaped after a few seconds observation and we confirmed a male. We didn’t
able to confirm that it was a pair of both male and female or not. Five Koklass Pheasants
were heard at dawn on 29th February at Pipar Bowl.
The encounter rate was 3.37 (n=2, L= 0.593) individual per kilometer excluding the trails
where the birds were not observed at all. It was 1.12 (n=2, L= 1.793) birds per kilometer
including all two trails that were considered for this species. Mean encounter rate
obtained for the Koklass Pheasant was 1.12 (±1.95 SD) birds per kilometer with a pooled
mean of 0.56 (±1.37 SD, n=2).
Himalayan Monal: Himalayan Monals were observed mainly at Pipar kharka area. A
dead male was seen at altitude of 3012m at the cliff area. That was absent next day,
probably vultures or other prey bird species took it away. Altogether 26 individuals were
observed in 6 sightings. Two flocks of 4 (2♂2♀) and 3 (2♂1♀) were seen at Pipar
Kharka at altitude of 3252 and 3289m altitudes on 29th February morning. Two flocks of
6 (4♂2♀) and 3 (1♂2♀) were observed on the same area in the next visit of same day.
Two flocks of 9 (5♂4♀) and 6 (2♂4♀) were observed on the same places on 1st March
morning. The habitat type was westerly faced open grassland and cliff area.
The encounter rate was 14.50 (n=26, L= 1.793) individual per kilometer. Mean
encounter rate obtained for the Himalayan Monal ranged between 1.11 (±0.48) and 12.37
(±2.58 SD) birds per kilometer in different trails with a pooled mean of 6.74 (±1.8 SD,
n=2).
30
5.1.2
Spring Survey
Calls of the Satyr Tragopan, Koklass Pheasant and Hill Partridge were heard at dawn.
Blood Pheasant, Himalayan Monal and Snow Partridge were observed during the trail
walk. Table 6 shows the mean number of individuals per listening stations in different
sites and Table 7 shows the mean encounter rate of the species during the trail walk in
different trails.
Satyr Tragopan: Calls of the Satyr Tragopan were heard from the all sites except Dhije.
The mean number of birds heard from each listening stations ranged between 0.50 (±0.41
SE) and 5.25 (±1.08 SE) with a pooled mean of 3.64 (±0.93 SE, n=28). The number of
calling birds was higher in Khuine followed by Kalki, Nhirgu, Pipar, Khumai and
Namsung. The bird density was estimated 1.31-2.23 males per square kilometer at
Thulokhobang, 11.19-13.18 at Namsung, 11.84-14.10 at Khumai, 13.28-15.01 at Pipar,
14.35-16.31 at Nhirgu, 16.89-18.49 at kalki and 17.51-19.63 at Khuine. A male and a
female Satyr Tragopan were sighted on 4th May near a stream under a rhododendron tree
during call count time at Pipar. A male was seen at Khuine-Namsung area on a Juniperus
tree during call count time on 19th May.
The mean number of Satyr Tragopan per listening station heard from different sites differ
significantly (One Way ANOVA, P-value 0.006). There is significant difference between
Khumai and Kalki, Khumai and Khuine, Pipar and Namsung, Kalki and Namsung,
Nhirgu and Khuine, and Khuine and Namsung (LSD test, P<0.05). The mean number
birds calling from station 1-4 at Pipar has not varied significantly across seven surveys
since 1979 (Oneway ANOVA, P-value 0.85). We did not consider Dhije and
Thulokhobang areas for statistical test as these areas were observed only to see lower
range of the birds.
Koklass Pheasant: Calls of the Koklass Pheasant were heard from five sites out of eight
sites surveyed. The mean number of birds heard from each listening stations ranged
between 0.67 (±1.15 SE) and 2.78 (±1.25 SE) with a pooled mean of 1.37 (±0.99 SE,
n=28). The number of calling birds was higher in Pipar followed by Namsung, Khumai
and Khuine. The bird density was estimated 1.23-3.49 males per square kilometer at
Nhirgu, 3.78-5.65 at Khuine, 5.04-7.54 at Khumai, 5.55-7.81 at Namsung and 8.83-10.82
at Pipar. Koklass Pheasants were not heard from Dhije, Thulokhobang and Kalki forest.
31
The mean number of Koklass Pheasant per listening station heard from different sites
differ significantly (One Way ANOVA, P-value 0.005). There was significant difference
between all stations except Khumai and Khuine, Khumai and Namsung, Pipar and
Namsung, and Nhirgu and Khuine (LSD test, P<0.05). The mean number birds calling
from station 1-4 at Pipar didn’t vary significantly across seven surveys since 1979
(Oneway ANOVA, P-value 0.90).
Hill Partridge: Of the Galliformes recorded in the dawn call count the Hill Partridge
was the only species recorded from all survey sites. The mean number of birds heard
from each listening stations ranged between 1.33 (±0.47 SE) and 4.42 (±1.32 SE) with a
pooled mean of 2.99 (±1.05 SE, n=28). The number of calling birds was higher in
Khuine followed by Pipar, Thulokhobang, Kalki, Nhirgu, Namsung and Dhije. The bird
density was estimated 4.18-5.25 males per square kilometer at Khumai, 6.42-7.73 at
Dhije, 7.45-9.84 at Namsung, 8.58-10.28 at Nhirgu, 8.30-10.56 at Kalki, 10.40-12.00 at
Thulokhobang, 12.05-14.28 at Pipar and 14.33-16.92 at Khuine. Three Hill Partridges
were seen at Khuine-Namsung area on 17th May.
The mean number of Hill Partridge per listening station heard from different sites differ
significantly (One Way ANOVA, P-value 0.0002). There was significant difference
between all stations except Pipar and Khuine, Kalki and Nhirgu, Kalki and Namsung,
and Nhirgu and Namsung (LSD test, P<0.05).
Himalayan Monal: Himalayan Monals were seen at Khumai, Pipar, Nhirgu, and
Namsung areas. Altogether 127 individuals were seen in 12 sightings. We observed
11(7♂4♀), 14 (9♂5♀) and 9 (6♂3♀) Himalayan monals at Khumai in three consecutive
trail walks. Similarly, 7 (5♂2♀), 10(5♂5♀) and 9(5♂4♀) Himalayan monals at Pipar; 9
(6♂3♀), 7(5♂2♀) and 11(7♂4♀) at Nhirgu; and 16(9♂7♀), 11 (6♂5♀) and 9(3♂6♀) at
Namsung were recorded in three repeated trail walks in each site. I couldn’t observe any
Himalayan monals at Pipar kharka near listening station six.
The encounter rate was 20.16 (n=127, L=6.3) individual per kilometer excluding Pipar
pond-Piparkharka trail where the birds were not observed at all. It was 18.42 (n=127, L=
6.893) birds per kilometer including all five trails. Mean encounter rate obtained for the
Himalayan Monal ranged between 5.42 (±0.95 SD) and (7.56±1.68 SD) birds per
kilometer in different trails with a pooled mean of 5.21 (±1.40 0.8 SD, n=4).
32
Figure 4: Galliformes Density at Different Sites
Galliformes Density at Diffrerent Sites (error bars show stansard error)
20
Satyr Tragopan
18
16
Hill Partridge
Koklass Pheasant
14
Density
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Khumai
Pipar
Kalki
Nhirgu
Khuine
Namsung
Place
Figure 5: Calls of Pheasants in Pipar Since 1979
Calls of Pheasants in Pipar Since 1979 (Error bars show Standard Deviation)
11
10
Satyr Tragopan
Encounter Rate Per Station
9
Koklass Pheasant
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1979
1985
1987
1991
1998
2005
2008
Year
33
Table 6: Mean (±SE) Number of Individuals per Listening Stations in Different Survey Sites
Site
Dhije (n = 3)
Elevation
(meter)
2111-2175
Satyr Tragopan
Thulokhobang (n = 3)
2358-2451
0.00±0.00
0.50±0.41
Khuine (n=4)
2947-3103
Namsung (n = 3)
3146-3272
Koklass
Pheasant
0.00±0.00
Hill Partridge
2.00±0.58
0.00±0.00
3.17±0.71
5.25±1.08
1.33±0.96
4.42±1.32
1.89±1.00
1.77±1.11
2.44±1.05
1.33±0.47
Khumai (n = 3)
3149-3265
3.44±0.88
3.67±1.00
Kalki (n=2)
3240-3293
5.00±0.58
0.00±0.00
2.67±0.82
Pipar (n=6)
3260-3299
4.00±1.08
2.78±1.25
3.72±1.39
Nhirgu (n=4)
3273-3382
4.33±1.00
0.67±1.15
2.67±0.87
Over all (n=28)
2111-3382
3.64±0.93
1.37±0.99
2.99±1.05
Table 7: Mean (±SD) Encounter Rate of Different Species at Setikhola Valley During Spring of 2008
Trail
Length Elevation
(km)
(Meter)
Namsung Area
1.800
3084-3378
Khumai Hill
1.500
3211-3281
Pond-Pipar Kharka
0.593
3252-3314
Pipar Uphillside
1.600
3345-3713
Nhirgu- Pamche
1.400
3367-3836
Pooled Mean ± SD
Himalayan
Monal
6.67±2.00
7.56±1.68
0.00±0.00
5.42±0.95
6.43±1.43
5.21±1.40
Blood
Pheasant
0.00±0.00
0.44±0.38
0.56±0.97
1.46±0.95
2.62±1.09
0.81±1.39
Snow
Partridge
0.00±0.00
0.00±0.00
0.00±0.00
0.00±0.00
1.19±2.06
0.24±0.92
Blood Pheasant: Altogether 21 Blood Pheasants were seen during the spring trail walks.
Four Blood Pheasants were observed in Pipar uphill area on 4th May and same birds or
different two were observed in the same area on next day’s walk. 4, 2 and 5 Blood
Pheasants were seen in different places of Nhirgu trail walks on 10, 11 and 12 May
respectively. Except the trail walk, two Blood Pheasants were encountered when we
were going towards Nhirgu on 9th May and same event happened when we backed form
Nhirgu on 12 May. Renji Sherpa saw a Blood Pheasant at Kalki forest during call count
time on 8th May.
The encounter rate was 4.12 (n=21, L=5.093) individual per kilometer excluding
Namsung area where the birds were not observed at all. It was 3.05 (n=21, L= 6.893)
birds per kilometer including all five trails. Mean encounter rate obtained for the Blood
Pheasant ranged between 0.44 (±0.38 SD) and 2.62 (±1.09 SD) birds per kilometer in
different trails with a pooled mean of 0.81 (±1.39 SD, n=5).
Snow Partridge: We observed five Snow Partridges in the open rocky areas about 100m
above from Pamche Kharka (3836m).
The encounter rate was 3.57 (n=5, L=1.4)
individual per kilometer excluding the trails where the birds were not observed at all. It
was 0.72 (n=5, L= 6.893) birds per kilometer including all five trails. Mean encounter
rate obtained for the Snow Partridge was 1.19 (±2.06 SD) with a pooled mean of 0.24
(±0.92 SD, n=5).
34
5.2 Habitat Availability
A habitat is an ecological or environmental area that is inhabited by a particular species.
It is the natural environment in which an organism lives, or the physical environment that
surrounds a species popualtion. Generally food, cover, water and space are considered as
four components of wildlife habitat. Above the human settlement in the Seti Khola
Valley, five habitat types viz. mixed forest, Rhododendron forest, scrub, Betula forest,
and moist alpine scrub were available in the Pipar forest (Poudyal et al. 2007).
Winter: Of the 10 trails walked in winter, different habitat variables were found
available for pheasants and partridges. Figure 6 shows the total plant cover, litter, rock,
moss and bare-ground in percentage in proportion to the total ground coverage and Table
8 shows the habitat availability in the Setikhola valley in winter 2008. The percentage of
tree canopy in different trails ranged between 17.0 and 69.4 with a pooled mean of 40.0
(±17.6 SD, n=56); and shrub coverage ranged 6.0 and 78.7 with a pooled mean of 32.3
(±22.7 SD, n =56). Total plant cover, litter, rock, moss and bare-ground in percentage in
proportion to the total ground coverage were estimated in each of the 1m2 plots. The
percentage of herbaceous plant coverage in different trails ranged between 10 and 52.0
with a pooled mean of 22.7 (±13.5 SD, n= 56), litter ranged between 2.0 and 60 with a
pooled mean of 30.2 (±16.8 SD, n=56), rock ranged 1.7 to 51.7 with a pooled mean of
22.9 (±16.2 SD, n= 56), moss ranged 2.00 to 16.7 with a pooled mean of 11.3 (±4.1 SD,
n=56); and bare ground ranged 8.0 to 36.0 with a pooled mean of 16.4 (±7.9 SD, n=56).
Spring: Of the eight sites surveyed in spring, different habitat variables were found
available for pheasants and partridges. Total plant cover, litter, rock, moss and bareground in percentage in proportion to the total ground coverage are shown in figure 7.
The percentage of tree canopy in sites ranged between 43.3 and 74.5 with a pooled mean
of 49.8 (±16.6 SD, n=28); and shrub coverage ranged 28.7 and 62 with a pooled mean of
40.2 (±13.7 SD, n =28). The percentage of herbaceous plant coverage in different sites
ranged between 12.5 and 66.7 with a pooled mean of 32.7 (±6.1 SD, n= 28), litter ranged
between 15.3 and 65.5 with a pooled mean of 30.1 (±8.8 SD, n=28), rock ranged 5.0 to
13.3 with a pooled mean of 7.3 (±3.5 SD, n= 28), moss ranged 6.7 to 26.3 with a pooled
mean of 20.3 (±6.6 SD, n=28); and bare ground ranged 2.5 to 15.0 with a pooled mean of
11.0 (±3.8 SD, n=28).
35
Figure 6: Ground Coverage Available in Winter
Ground Coverage Available in Winter
bare
16%
plant
22%
moss
11%
litter
30%
rock
21%
Figure 7: Ground Coverage available in Spring
Ground Coverage Available in Spring
plant
34%
bare
9%
moss
16%
rock
8%
litter
33%
36
Table 8: Mean (±SD) Habitat Variable Available for Different Galliformes in Winter
Trails
Canopy Coverage %
Tree
Shrub
Plant
Litter
Ground Coverage %
Rock
Moss
Bare
Numbers
Tree(100m2) shrub (25m2)
Kalij and Hill partridge
Sano Kho-Bhajudi (n=6)
SanoKho-Seti Kho (n=6)
San Kho-thulo Kho (n=3)
Dhije Area (n=7)
Thulo Kho-Seti kho (n=10)
Thulo Kho-Bhedigoth (n=6)
Bhasikharka area (n=3)
Bhedigoth-Bhajaudi (n=5)
Bhedigoth-piparkhark (n=5)
Pip pond-piparkharka (n=5)
Pooled Mean ± SD (n=56)
24.5±13.7
60.0±4.9
62.0±0.0
69.4±12.0
32.0±15.8
28.7±20.4
37.3±25.5
32.2±21.3
37.2±35.5
17.0±11.2
40.0±17.6
6.0±6.6
37.2±15.5
78.7±14.4
37.0±28.9
12.2±18.5
37.2±30.4
54.0±38.3
37.2±18.0
12.0±0.0
12.0±0.0
32.3±22.7
10.0±16.7
20.0±14.1
13.3±11.5
17.1±12.5
10.0±12.5
31.7±22.3
23.3±25.2
14.0±11.4
36.0±19.5
52.0±21.7
22.7±13.5
15.0±20.7
60.0±20.0
23.3±5.8
50.0±15.3
34.0±31.0
40.0±26.1
23.3±40.4
30.0±21.2
24.0±32.9
2.0±4.5
30.2±16.8
51.7±42.6
22.5±18.9
33.3±15.3
12.9±13.8
36.0±38.1
1.7±4.1
16.7±28.9
38.0±32.7
8.0±8.4
8.0±8.4
22.9±16.2
11.7±13.3
15.0±7.1
10.0±10.0
8.6±3.8
12.0±11.4
13.3±8.2
16.7±28.9
10.0±7.1
14.0±8.9
2.0±4.5
11.3±4.1
11.7±19.4
13.3±5.8
20.0±0.0
11.4±6.9
12.0±15.5
13.3±15.1
20.0±26.5
8.0±11.0
18.0±20.5
36.0±26.1
16.4±7.9
4.33±2.07
4.80±1.92
8.00±1.00
9.14±2.48
5.40±3.44
4.83±4.22
4.33±4.04
8.40±4.04
4.80±6.57
2.00±3.46
5.7±2.3
3.17±5.08
4.40±2.61
4.67±0.58
2.29±1.80
2.80±3.99
2.83±2.32
5.33±5.51
4.40±2.61
0.00±0.00
0.00±0.00
2.8±1.9
60.0±4.9
62.0±0.0
69.4±12.0
32.0±15.8
28.7±20.4
37.3±25.5
32.2±21.3
37.2±35.5
17.0±11.2
41.8±17.7
37.2±15.5
78.7±14.4
37.0±28.9
12.2±18.5
37.2±30.4
54.0±38.3
37.2±18.0
12.0±0.0
12.0±0.0
35.3±22.0
20.0±14.1
13.3±11.5
17.1±12.5
10.0±12.5
31.7±22.3
23.3±25.2
14.0±11.4
36.0±19.5
52.0±21.7
24.2±13.5
60.0±20.0
23.3±5.8
50.0±15.3
34.0±31.0
40.0±26.1
23.3±40.4
30.0±21.2
24.0±32.9
2.0±4.5
31.9±16.9
22.5±18.9
33.3±15.3
12.9±13.8
36.0±38.1
1.7±4.1
16.7±28.9
38.0±32.7
8.0±8.4
8.0±8.4
19.7±13.5
15.0±7.1
10.0±10.0
8.6±3.8
12.0±11.4
13.3±8.2
16.7±28.9
10.0±7.1
14.0±8.9
2.0±4.5
11.3±4.4
13.3±5.8
20.0±0.0
11.4±6.9
12.0±15.5
13.3±15.1
20.0±26.5
8.0±11.0
18.0±20.5
36.0±26.1
16.9±8.2
4.80±1.92
8.00±1.00
9.14±2.48
5.40±3.44
4.83±4.22
4.33±4.04
8.40±4.04
4.80±6.57
2.00±3.46
5.9±2.4
4.40±2.61
4.67±0.58
2.29±1.80
2.80±3.99
2.83±2.32
5.33±5.51
4.40±2.61
0.00±0.00
0.00±0.00
2.8±2.0
37.2±35.5
17.0±11.2
27.1±14.3
12.0±0.0
12.0±0.0
12.0±0.0
36.0±19.5
52.0±21.7
44.0±11.3
24.0±32.9
2.0±4.5
13.0±15.6
8.0±8.4
8.0±8.4
8.0±0.0
14.0±8.9
2.0±4.5
8.0±8.5
18.0±20.5
36.0±26.1
27.0±12.7
4.80±6.57
2.00±3.46
3.4±2.0
0.00±0.00
0.00±0.00
0.0±0.0
24.5±13.7
60.0±4.9
62.0±0.0
69.4±12.0
54.0±20.1
6.0±6.6
37.2±15.5
78.7±14.4
37.0±28.9
39.7±29.8
10.0±16.7
20.0±14.1
13.3±11.5
17.1±12.5
15.1±4.4
15.0±20.7
60.0±20.0
23.3±5.8
50.0±15.3
37.1±21.4
51.7±42.6
22.5±18.9
33.3±15.3
12.9±13.8
30.1±16.6
11.7±13.3
15.0±7.1
10.0±10.0
8.6±3.8
11.3±2.8
11.7±19.4
13.3±5.8
20.0±0.0
11.4±6.9
14.1±4.0
4.33±2.07
4.80±1.92
8.00±1.00
9.14±2.48
7.2±2.5
3.17±5.08
4.40±2.61
4.67±0.58
2.29±1.80
3.4±1.2
Satyr Tragopan
SanoKho-Seti Kho (n=6)
San Kho-thulo Kho (n=3)
Dhije Area (n=7)
Thulo Kho-Seti kho (n=10)
Thulo Kho-Bhedigoth (n=6)
Bhasikharka area (n=3)
Bhedigoth-Bhajaudi (n=5)
Bhedigoth-piparkhark (n=5)
Pip pond-piparkharka (n=5)
Pooled Mean ± SD (n=50)
Him Monal / Koklass
Bhedigoth-piparkhark (n=5)
Pip pond-piparkharka (n=5)
Pooled Mean ± SD (n=10)
R throated Partridge
Sano Kho-Bhajudi (n=6)
SanoKho-Seti Kho (n=6)
San Kho-thulo Kho (n=3)
Dhije Area (n=7)
Pooled Mean ± SD (n=22)
37
Table 9: Mean (±SD) Habitat Variables used by Different Galliformes in Winter 2008
Trails
Canopy Coverage %
Tree
Shrub
Plant
Litter
Ground Coverage %
Rock
Moss
Bare
Numbers
Tree(100m2) shrub (25m2)
Kalij Pheasant
Sano Kho-Bhajudi (n=6)
SanoKho-Seti Kho (n=6)
San Kho-thulo Kho (n=3)
Dhije Area (n=7)
Thulo Kho-Seti kho (n=10)
Thulo Kho-Bhedigoth (n=6)
Pooled Mean ± SD (n=31)
24.5±13.7
60.0±4.9
62.0±0.0
69.4±12.0
32.0±15.8
28.7±20.4
46.1±19.8
6.0±6.6
37.2±15.5
78.7±14.4
37.0±28.9
12.2±18.5
37.2±30.4
34.7±25.6
10.0±16.7
20.0±14.1
13.3±11.5
17.1±12.5
10.0±12.5
31.7±22.3
17.0±8.2
15.0±20.7
60.0±20.0
23.3±5.8
50.0±15.3
34.0±31.0
40.0±26.1
37.1±16.7
51.7±42.6
22.5±18.9
33.3±15.3
12.9±13.8
36.0±38.1
1.7±4.1
26.3±17.8
11.7±13.3
15.0±7.1
10.0±10.0
8.6±3.8
12.0±11.4
13.3±8.2
11.8±2.3
11.7±19.4
13.3±5.8
20.0±0.0
11.4±6.9
12.0±15.5
13.3±15.1
13.6±3.2
4.33±2.07
4.80±1.92
8.00±1.00
9.14±2.48
5.40±3.44
4.83±4.22
6.3±2.1
3.17±5.08
4.40±2.61
4.67±0.58
2.29±1.80
2.80±3.99
2.83±2.32
3.2±0.9
62.0±0.0
69.4±12.0
28.7±20.4
37.3±25.5
32.2±21.3
37.2±35.5
44.5±16.9
78.7±14.4
37.0±28.9
37.2±30.4
54.0±38.3
37.2±18.0
12.0±0.0
42.7±22.2
13.3±11.5
17.1±12.5
31.7±22.3
23.3±25.2
14.0±11.4
36.0±19.5
22.6±9.5
23.3±5.8
50.0±15.3
40.0±26.1
23.3±40.4
30.0±21.2
24.0±32.9
31.8±11.0
33.3±15.3
12.9±13.8
1.7±4.1
16.7±28.9
38.0±32.7
8.0±8.4
18.4±14.3
10.0±10.0
8.6±3.8
13.3±8.2
16.7±28.9
10.0±7.1
14.0±8.9
12.1±3.1
20.0±0.0
11.4±6.9
13.3±15.1
20.0±26.5
8.0±11.0
18.0±20.5
15.1±5.0
8.00±1.00
9.14±2.48
4.83±4.22
4.33±4.04
8.40±4.04
4.80±6.57
6.6±2.2
4.67±0.58
2.29±1.80
2.83±2.32
5.33±5.51
4.40±2.61
0.00±0.00
3.3±2.0
24.5±13.7
60.0±4.9
62.0±0.0
69.4±12.0
32.0±15.8
28.7±20.4
32.2±21.3
37.2±35.5
43.2±17.6
6.0±6.6
37.2±15.5
78.7±14.4
37.0±28.9
12.2±18.5
37.2±30.4
37.2±18.0
12.0±0.0
32.2±23.1
10.0±16.7
20.0±14.1
13.3±11.5
17.1±12.5
10.0±12.5
31.7±22.3
14.0±11.4
36.0±19.5
19.0±9.8
15.0±20.7
60.0±20.0
23.3±5.8
50.0±15.3
34.0±31.0
40.0±26.1
30.0±21.2
24.0±32.9
34.5±14.9
51.7±42.6
22.5±18.9
33.3±15.3
12.9±13.8
36.0±38.1
1.7±4.1
38.0±32.7
8.0±8.4
25.5±17.1
11.7±13.3
15.0±7.1
10.0±10.0
8.6±3.8
12.0±11.4
13.3±8.2
10.0±7.1
14.0±8.9
11.8±2.2
11.7±19.4
13.3±5.8
20.0±0.0
11.4±6.9
12.0±15.5
13.3±15.1
8.0±11.0
18.0±20.5
13.5±3.8
4.33±2.07
4.80±1.92
8.00±1.00
9.14±2.48
5.40±3.44
4.83±4.22
8.40±4.04
4.80±6.57
6.4±2.0
3.17±5.08
4.40±2.61
4.67±0.58
2.29±1.80
2.80±3.99
2.83±2.32
4.40±2.61
0.00±0.00
2.9±1.5
Pip pond-piparkharka (n=5)
Koklass Pheasant
17.0±11.2
12.0±0.0
52.0±21.7
2.0±4.5
8.0±8.4
2.0±4.5
36.0±26.1
2.00±3.46
0.00±0.00
Pipar pond-pipar kharka trai
17.0±11.2
12.0±0.0
52.0±21.7
2.0±4.5
8.0±8.4
2.0±4.5
36.0±26.1
2.00±3.46
0.00±0.00
13.7±6.0
6.0±6.6
6.6±10.0
10.0±16.7
16.7±15.0
15.0±20.7
20.7±51.7
51.7±42.6
Satyr Tragopan
San Kho-thulo Kho (n=3)
Dhije Area (n=7)
Thulo Kho-Bhedigoth (n=6)
Bhasikharka area (n=3)
Bhedigoth-Bhajaudi (n=5)
Bhedigoth-piparkhark (n=5)
Pooled Mean ± SD (n=50)
Hill Partridge
Sano Kho-Bhajudi (n=6)
SanoKho-Seti Kho (n=6)
San Kho-thulo Kho (n=3)
Dhije Area (n=7)
Thulo Kho-Seti kho (n=10)
Thulo Kho-Bhedigoth (n=6)
Bhedigoth-Bhajaudi (n=5)
Bhedigoth-piparkhark (n=5)
Pooled Mean ± SD (n=50)
Himalayan Monal
Rufous throated Partridge
Sano Khabang- Bhajaudi
24.5±13.7
38
5.2.1
Habitat Use in winter
Different Galliformes species were found to be use different level of habitat variables
(Table 9). Total plant cover, litter, rock, moss and bare-ground in percentage in
proportion to the total ground coverage are shown in figure 9. The Kalij Pheasant, Hill
Partridge and Satyr Tragopan were found using different level of habitat variables in
mixed and rhododendron forest between 1600 and 3200m elevation. Rufous throated
Partridge was found in the lower elevations and Himalayan Monal in the higher
elevations.
Hill Partridge: The habitats were mainly mixed broadleaved and rhododendron forests
between 1600-2800m altitudes. The percentage of tree canopy used by Hill Partridge in
different trails ranged between 24.5 (±13.7 SD) and 69.4 (±12.0 SD) with a pooled mean
of 43.2 (±17.6 SD, n=50); and shrub coverage ranged 6.0 (±6.6 SD) and 78.7 (±14.4 SD)
with a pooled mean of 32.2 (±23.1 SD, n =50). The tree number ranged 4.33 (±2.07 SD)
and 9.14 (±2.48) with a pooled mean of 6.4 (±2.0 SD, n =50) in 100m2 plots; and shrub
number ranged zero to 4.67 (±0.58 SD) with a pooled mean of 2.9 (±1.5 SD, n=50) in
25m2 plots.
Rufous-throated Partridge: It was observed in the dense broadleaved forest with closed
canopy. The ground coverage was fern, few bamboos, grasses and more than 70% leaf
litters. It was encountered only once, so any calculations on habitat variables were no
derived.
Kalij Pheasant: The habitats were mainly mixed broadleaved forest. We did not observe
this bird above 2200m. The percentage of tree canopy used by Kalij Pheasant in different
trails ranged between 24.5 (±13.7 SD) and 69.4 (±12.0 SD) with a pooled mean of 46.1
(±19.8 SD, n=31); and shrub coverage ranged 6.0 (±6.6 SD) and 78.7 (±14.4 SD) with a
pooled mean of 34.7 (±25.6 SD, n =31). The tree number ranged 4.33 (±2.07 SD) and
9.14 (±2.48) with a pooled mean of 6.3 (±2.1 SD, n =31) in 100m2 plots; and shrub
number ranged 2.29 (± 1.80 SD) to 4.67 (±0.58 SD) with a pooled mean of 3.2 (±0.9 SD,
n=31) in 25m2 plots.
Satyr Tragopan: The habitat type was mixed broadleaved forest comprising Alnus
nepalensis, Betula alnoides, Lyonia ovalifolia and Rhododendron arboreum. Mixed
forest of Dhije area (2078m) was the lowest altitude that we observed Satyr Tragopan in
our winter survey. The percentage of tree canopy used by Satyr Tragopan in different
trails ranged between 28.7 (±20.4 SD) and 69.4 (±12.0 SD) with a pooled mean of 44.5
39
(±16.9 SD, n=29); and shrub coverage ranged 12.0 (±0.0 SD) and 78.7 (±14.4 SD) with a
pooled mean of 42.7 (±22.2 SD, n =29). The tree number ranged 4.33 (±2.07 SD) and
9.14 (±2.48) with a pooled mean of 6.6 (±2.2 SD, n =29) in 100m2 plots; and shrub
number ranged zero to 5.33 (±5.51 SD) with a pooled mean of 3.3 (±2.0 SD, n=29) in
25m2 plots.
Koklass Pheasant: the habitat was edge of rhododendron forest and grassland in the
western slope. It was encountered only once, so any calculations on habitat variables
were no derived.
Himalayan Monal: The birds were observed mainly at Pipar kharka area and cliff area.
Except one dead male at Bhedigoth Piparkharka trail, all the encounters were in Pipar
pond Pipar Kharka trail. The percentage of tree canopy and shrub coverage used by
Himalayan Monal was very less. The tree canopy was 17.0 (±11.2 SD) and Shrub
Coverage was 12 (±0.00 SD).
5.2.2
Habitat Use in Spring
The Euclidean distance model (Figure 8 and Table 10) shows there is co existence
between the three species i.e Satyr Tragopan, Koklass Pheasant and Hill Partridge. Bare
ground, tree number, moss, rock are highly related between each other. Herb, shrub, litter
and canopy are isolated. Figure 10 shows total plant cover, litter, rock, moss and bareground in percentage in proportion to the total ground coverage used by the birds in
spring.
Satyr Tragopan is correlated significantly with Koklass and Hill Partridge but there is no
significant correlation between the Koklass Pheasant and Hill Partridge. Satyr Tragopan
has significant relationship with elevation and positive correlation with shrub cover, litter
and moss whereas negative correlation with canopy cover, tree numbers, herb, bare
ground and slopes.
Koklass Pheasant is significantly correlated with elevation. It has strong positive
relationship with moss and weak positive correlation with herb, canopy; whereas
negatively correlated with tree number, shrub canopy, shrub number, litter, rock, bare
ground and strong negative correlation with slope. Hill partridge has positive correlation
with shrub, herb, litter, moss and negative correlation with canopy, tree number, rock
bare ground and slope.
40
Figure 8: Euclidean Distance Model
Derived Stimulus Configuration
Bare ground,
Euclidean distance model
Koklass
2.0
Pheasant,
herb
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
1.5
Hill Partridge,
1.0
Satyr Tragopan,
Tree Number,
shrub
.5
Shrub Number,
slope
open hp_mn
st_mn
kok_mn
treeno
rock
shruno
elev
0.0
Rock,
litter
moss
-.5
canopy
2
-1.0
-3
-2
-1
0
1
Dimension 1
Tree No
Shrub
cover
Shrub no
Herb
.398*
-.085
-.270
.361
-.031
-.302
.380*
1
.128
.002
-.186
-.145
-.290
.040
-.187
.398*
.128
1
-.172
-.219
.168
-.166
.054
.170
-.085
.002
-.172
1
.410*
-.126
.197
-.362
.276
-.270
-.186
-.219
.410*
1
-.309
.048
-.331
.170
Shrub
Cover
Shrub
No
Herb
.361
-.145
.168
-.126
-.309
1
.150
-.115
.376*
-.031
-.290
-.166
.197
.048
.150
1
-.234
.414*
-.302
.040
.054
-.362
-.331
-.115
-.234
1
Litter
.296
-.187
.170
.276
.170
.376*
.414*
.64**
-.283
.64**
1
-.197
-.179
-.097
.113
-.206
-.242
.295
.261
.034
.293
.156
.066
.072
Bare
-.135
-.045
-.312
-.024
-.110
-.300
.299
Elevation
.765**
.393*
.101
-.123
-.137
.077
.210
Slope
-.158
-.354
-.053
.138
.201
-.198
.265
.206
.242
.283
.056
1
.066
-.056
.396*
-.044
-.008
.460*
-.042
.290
-.300
.088
Bare
-.252
Moss
.252
.197
.179
.097
.113
Moss
Rock
.296
Slope
Canopy
Cover
.380*
Elevation
Hill
Partridge
1
Rock
Koklass
Pheasant
Satyr
Tragopan
Koklass
Pheasant
Hill
Partridge
Canopy
Cover
Tree No
Litter
Satyr
Tragopan
Table 10: Correlations Between Species and Habitat Variables
.295
.135
.045
.312
.024
.110
.300
.299
.765**
.044
.300
.211
-.460*
-.011
.165
.268
.012
.231
.349
.006
1
.261
.034
.293
.156
.072
.396*
-.008
-.364
-.123
.158
.354
.053
.138
-.137
.201
.077
.198
.265
.393*
.101
.210
.290
.364
.211
1
-.005
.005
1
.011
.165
.268
.231
1
.012
.349
-.006
.042
.088
41
Figure 9: Ground Coverage used by Galliformes in Winter
Ground Coverage Used by Galliforms in Winter
60
55
50
45
40
Percentage
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
S Tragopan
H Monal
Kalij
H Partridge
-5
plant
litter
rock
moss
bare
-10
Figure 10: Ground Coverage used by Galliformes in Spring
Ground Coverage Used by Galliformes in Spring
55
50
45
40
Percentage
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
H Partridge
plant
S Tragopan
litter
rock
Koklass
moss
bare
42
5.3 Spatial Analysis and Habitat Modeling
Habitat suitability index model delineated the preferred and potential area of distribution
for Satyr Tragopan, Hill Partridge, Koklass Pheasant and Himalayan Monal (figures 11
and 12). The areas predicted in the map indicate that the species will be restricted within
the predicted area of preferred plus potential habitat in the Lawang Sector of Annapurna
Conservation Area. Estimated preferred and potential habitat is shown in the Table 11
Estimated numbers of Galliformes in the preferred and potential habitat of Setikhola
valley is given in the Table 12.
Table 11: Estimated Area (km2) of Distribution of the Galliformes in the Setikhola Valley.
Parentheses are the Proportion to the Total Area of Lawang Sector which is 525.75 km2
Species
Satyr Tragopan
Koklass Pheasant
Himalayan Monal
Hill Partridge
Suitable Habitat
Preferred
14.87(2.83)
13.91 (2.65)
29.16 (5.55)
14.68 (2.79)
Potential
24.81 (4.72)
19.47 (3.70)
50.05 (9.53)
34.04 (6.47)
Total
39.68 (7.55)
33.38 (6.35)
79.21 (15.08)
48.72 (9.27)
Unsuitable
Area
486.07 (92.45)
492.36 (93.65)
446.06 (84.92)
477.03 (90.73)
Table 12: Estimated Numbers of Galliformes in the Setikhola Valley
Species
Satyr Tragopan
Koklass
Pheasant
Hill Partridge
Estimated numbers of males in the area
Preferred Habitat Potential Habitat Preferred and Potential
Habitat
186-196
311-328
498-524
62-72
87-129
149-174
149-160
349-376
494-533
43
Figure 11: Predicted area of Distribution for Satyr Tragopan and Hill Partridge
44
Figure 12: Predicted area of Distribution for Satyr Tragopan and Hill Partridge
45
6. Discussion
6.1 Relative Abundance
Out of twelve species of Galliformes considered to be found in the Setikhola Valley,
only the eight species were recorded in this study. We didn’t walk in the trails in the
altitudinal range above 4000m. This may be the reason for the absence of
Tibetan
Partridge and Himalayan Snowcock and the very low detection of Snow Partridge. There
were previous records of Chukar and these three species in this area (Picozzi 1987, Kaul
and Shakya 1998, Mahato et al. 2006). Only one encounter of the Rufous throated
Partridge suggests the very low population of this species.
Detection probability is significantly variable across space and time. This is often the
case as the visibility in different habitats is likely to vary. The forest areas I visited in
winter were dense and difficult to observe clearly and even in some areas the newly
created trails were push through. The behavioral response of the species, for instance
secretive birds, also hinders equal probability of being sighted. During the trail walks the
detection rate was very low for all the species except Himalayan Monal.
Though the Pipar Pond- Pipar Kharka trail
Yarsagumba Collection in Setikhola Forests
was the famous for Himalayan Monal
Yarsagumba (Cordyceps sinensis) collection
time at Pipar and Santel area is May June.
People of Karuwa, Kopuche, Bharabhuri and
Rumja go to high altitudes to collect
yarsagumba. Every year’s May-June, about
100 people go to people and Santel area to
collect Yarsa gomba. Yarsa gomba can be
found Kharka area, grasslands and forest
area also. It can be found ground area of
Jabutta nigalo (Arundinaria spp) also. Our
expedition
party
members
searched
Yarsagumba one morinig of our field trip at
Khuine goth area and found 31 pieces at
50m2 area. On the same day three local
people of a same family collected 63
Yarsagumba at 50 m2 which was also a goth
area at Khuine.
sightings in previous surveys, this was my
first time that I couldn’t observe any
Himalayan Monal out of five visits at Pipar
since 2004. I had seen flocks of this bird in
this area in winter survey and previous
year’s surveys in spring 2005. I observed
that there was pressure on Yarsagumba
Cordyceps sinensis collection during our
survey period. Presence and activity of
people at that area hindered the detection
probability of this bird. We met 19 people at
Pipar Bowl in the spring time.
It seems yarsagumba can uplift the local
people’s livelihood. Scientists should study
the cultivation possibilities.
46
Calls of the Satyr Tragopan were heard from the all sites except Dhije. Presence of fecal
material and feathers and also an encounter with the birds at Dhije area at 2078m altitude
suggest that this species occurs down to 2000m in winter in the Setikhola valley. The
detection rate per listening station at Pipar was found to be lower (4.00) in 2008 than the
previous study (4.59) in 2005. But this was higher in Santel forest (4.48) in 2008 than the
previous survey (3.86) in 2005. The detection rate varied across six sites we surveyed.
But across the seven different surveys conducted at Pipar since 1979 the differences are
not statistically significant. Thus the population of Satyr Tragopan has been stable at
Pipar for three decades.
Calls of Koklass Pheasant were not heard from Dhije, Thulokhobang and Kalki forest.
The Dhije and Thulokhobang areas lie in the lower altitudes. In these areas there were no
records of this bird in previous surveys too. The Kalki forest is potential habitat for the
species and I had believed the presence of this bird in this area before going there. This
area is only 2.5 kilometer north from Pipar Bowl. Interesting thing is that we didn’t find
Berberis species which were frequent in Pipar. By the general observation I also suppose
that this area harbours lower numbers of plant species than in Pipar. The detection rate of
Koklass Pheasant per listening station at Pipar and Santel areas were found to be higher
(2.78 in Pipar and 1.57 in Santel) in 2008 than the previous study (2.67 in Pipar and 1.05
in Santel) in 2005. The detection rate varied across five sites we surveyed. But across the
seven different surveys conducted at Pipar since 1979 the differences are not statistically
significant. Thus the population of Koklass Pheasant is stable at Pipar for three decades.
The spring calls and winter encounter of Hill Partridge from the most areas suggest a
good population of this species in the Setikhola valley. The detection rate per listening
station at Pipar was found to be lower (3.72) in 2008 compared to the previous study
(4.33) in 2005. But this was higher in Santel forest (3.37) in 2008 than the previous
survey (2.71) in 2005. In the winter the birds were not encountered in two trails, so the
deviation on the mean winter encounter rate appeared very high.
Bird Species Richness
We recorded 125 bird species during the field survey (Appendix 3). Eight species are
new to this area that were not recorded before. They are Eurasian Griffon, Snowybrowed Flycatcher, Slaty-backed Flycatcher, Rusty-tailed flycatcher, White-throated
Redstart, Eurasian Tree Creeper, Oriental Skylark and Brandt’s Mountain Finch. There
47
was a compiled record of 290 bird species in Setikhola valley including Pipar and Santel
(Mahato et al. 2006) which are the two areas out of six forest areas have been identified
as the most important bird areas in the Annapurna Conservation Area (Inskipp and
Inskipp 2003).
The Setikhola valley is also important for other bird species as much as it is important
for Galliformes species. This area provides shelter for many bird species that are of
conservation importance and host a bird assemblage that is exceptionally rich compared
with other places in Nepal (Baral and Inskipp 2005). The species identified as nationally
threatened have been found in the area are Barred Cuckoo Dove, Long billed Thrush,
Grey sided Laughingthrush, Blue winged Laughing Thrush, Golden Babbler, Cutia,
Black headed shrike Babbler, Golden breasted Fulvetta, Great Parrotbill, Brown
Parrotbill, Fulvous Parrotbill, Asian Emeralled Cuckoo, Rufous throated Partridge, Pale
blue Flycatcher, Rusty fronted Barwing. The globally threatened and near threatened
species found in the area include Lesser Kestrel, White-rumped Vulture, Egyptian
Vulture, Wood Snipe, Yellow rumped Honeyguide, Cinereous Vulture and Red headed
Vulture.
6.2 Habitat use
Satyr Tragopan's positive correlation with shrub cover, litter and moss and negative
correlation with canopy cover, tree numbers, herb, bare ground and slopes indicates that
this bird prefers the habitat with more shrub cover, litter and moss but not prefer the
habitat with high canopy cover, more tree number, herb cover, bare ground and the
steeper slopes.
The positive correlation of Koklass Pheasant with moss, herb and canopy; and negative
correlation with tree number, shrub canopy, shrub number, litter, rock, bare ground and
slope showed that this bird prefers habitat having high moss, herb and canopy cover. It
does not like the habitat having more number of trees, rock, bare ground, shrub cover,
litter and steeper slopes.
Positive correlation of Hill Partridge with shrub, herb, litter, moss and negative
correlation with canopy, tree number, rock, bare ground and slope showed that this bird
is more likely to be found on the area with high shrub cover, herb cover, litter, and moss
48
whereas it does not prefer to live on the areas with more canopy cover, tree number,
rocky area, bare ground and steeper slopes.
6.3 Spatial Analysis and Habitat Modeling
Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) Model delineated preferred and potential area of
distribution for four Galliformes species. Both preferred and potential habitats were
suitable for these species. The term preferred was given for more suitable and potential
was for less suitable. One can estimate the total population of a Galliformes species on
that area by the extrapolation of acquired density indices.
The habitat modeling work for pheasant species has not been in Nepal before. This work
was inspired from Ramesh (2003) where he prepared two types of model viz. (1) The
rule based model, where potential areas of distribution of pheasants predicted and (2)
Autologistic model, where probability of a species occurrence on that area was predicted.
HSI Model which I prepared for Himalayan Monal, Koklass Pheasant, Satyr Tragopan
and Hill Partridge was also applied for Gray Partridge in USA (Allen 1984). This model
is very close to the rule based model of Ramesh (2003). The data inputs in my works
were affected from the researcher’s expertise. The values which were assigned for
different habitat variables for raster calculation were based on call count data, trail walk
data and description of a species available in different literature.
The values which I gave 0 (least preferred) to 10 (most preferred) were in relative terms.
Except altitudinal range, the values for all habitat variables were assigned on the basis of
researcher’s perception. Image processing and visual interpretation of satellite data for
vegetation characteristics may differ if another researcher wants to carry out the same
works. This may also differ during the land cover classification. I classified six land
cover types; other people may classify the land cover more or less than this.
The HSI model identified the maximum possible area where the species are expected to
be found in Lwang Sector of Annapurna Conservation Area. This includes manly
Setikhola and some part of the Mardikhola valley. Though the work was coarse, the
distribution maps represent the baseline data and can be used in future monitoring works.
49
6.4 Conclusion
Out of twelve species of Galliformes considered to be found in the Setikhola Valley,
eight species were recorded in 2008. They were five Himalayan Pheasants: Satyr
Tragopan, Koklass Pheasant, Himalayan Monal, Blood Pheasant and Kalij Pheasant, and
three partridges: Rufous throated Partridge, Hill Partridge and Snow Partridge. Satyr
Tragopan was recorded as low as 2078m altitude in winter.
Of the eight Galliformes recorded, Rufous throated Partridge was the rarest species in the
area. The distribution pattern of Hill Partridge was good; the calls were heard from 1600
to 2800m in winter and up to 3300m in spring. This was the only species recorded from
all survey areas.
The dawn call count method was the more reliable than the trail walk method to calculate
the density of the Galliformes. Of the three Galliformes species considered for the dawn
call count, the Satyr Tragopan had the higher population compared to Koklass Pheasant
and Hill Partridge (Satyr Tragopan >Hill Partridge > Koklass Pheasant). The population
of Koklass Pheasant and Satyr Tragopan has been stable at Pipar since 1979.
The detection rate of Himalayan Monal was very high in the trail walk compared to other
species (Himalayan Monal > Hill Partridge > Blood Pheasant > Satyr Tragopan > kalij
Pheasant). This was due to very clear visibility in the rocky and grass covered slopes and
low visibility and disturbances in the forest covered areas.
Rhododendron forest, Scrub, open forest and mixed broadleaf forest were the main
habitat types used by the Galliformes except Himalayan Monal, which was found in the
rocky and grass covered slopes. Koklass Pheasant, Satyr Tragopan and Hill Partridge
were coexisted with each other. All these three species preferred mosses. Furthermore,
Satyr Tragopan preferred more shrub cover and litter; Koklass Pheasant preferred more
canopy cover and herb; and Hill Partridge preferred more shrub, herb and litter coverage
on the ground.
The habitat suitability index model predicted the potential habitat for Galliform species
at a landscape level. The maximum suitable area was greater for Himalayan Monal
(15.08% in proportion to the total area of Lwang Sector) followed by Hill Partridge
(9.27%), Satyr Tragopan (7.55%) and Koklass Pheasant (6.35%). Further studies are
suggested in the forests North-West of Mardikhola as habitat suitability map indicated
the presence of Galliform there as at Pipar and Santel forests.
50
7. References
Acharya, R. 2004. Survey of Cheer Pheasant in Lower Kaligandaki Valley, Mustang,
Nepal. A final report submitted to King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation
(KMTNC), Annapurna Conservation Project, World Pheasant Association, UK
and School of Environmental Science and Sustainable Development, Nepal.
Unpublished.
Ali, S. and Replay S.D. 1978. Handbook of Birds of India and Pakistan Vol. 2. Oxford
University Press. Oxford.
Allen, A. W. 1984. Habitat Suitability Index Models: Gray Partridge. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. Biological report 82 (10.73).23 pp
Baral, H.S. and C. Inskipp. 2005. Important Bird Areas in Nepal: Key sites for
conservation. Bird Conservation Nepal, Kathmandu and Birdlife International,
Cambridge, UK.
Baral, H.S. 1998. Status distribution and habitat preference of Swamp Francolin
Francolinus gularis in Nepal. IBISBILL (1): 35-70.
Baral, H.S. 2005. Status and conservation of Nepal's Galliformes: An update. Pp. 1-4 in:
Fuller, R.A. & Browne, S.J. (eds), Galliformes 2004. Proceedings of the 3rd
International
Galliformes
Symposium.
World
Pheasant
Association,
Fordingbridge, UK.
Baral, H.S., P.C. Gurung, R. Kaul and K. Ramesh. 2001. Santel Galliformes Survey: a
possible extension of Pipar Pheasant Reserve, Annapurna Conservation Area,
Central Nepal. A report to the World Pheasant Association (UK) and Annapurna
Conservation Area Project, Nepal. Unpublished.
BCN 2008. Bird Conservation Nepal News Release: New Bird Species found in Koshi
Tappu. Accessed from www.birdlifenepal.org on 2008-07-18
BCDP. 1994. Biodiversity Conservation Database Project Report. King Mahendra Trust
for Nature Conservation, Jawalakhel. Nepal.
Bhandary, H.R., S.D. Schemnitz and N. Picozzi.1986. Autumn foods of forest pheasants
of Pipar, Central Nepal. Journal of the World Pheasant Association 11:29-33.
Bhuju, U.R., P.R. Shakya, T.B. Basnet and S. Shrestha. 2007.
Nepal Biodiversity
Resource Book: Protected Areas, Ramsar Sites, and World Heritage Sites.
51
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Ministry of
Environment, Science and Technology, Government of Nepal, Kathmandu.
Bird Conservation Nepal. 2006. Birds of Nepal: an official checklist. Department of
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation and Bird Conservation Nepal,
Kathmandu.
Biswas, B. 1974. Zoological results of the Daily mail Himalayan Expedition 1954. Notes
on some birds of Eastern Nepal. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society
71:456-495.
CITES. 2008. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora Appendices I, II and III valid from 1 July 2008, Geneva, Switzerland
downloaded from http://www.cites.org on 12 July 2008.
Dahal, B.R. 2000. Status and conservation of Swamp Francolin francolinus gularis in
Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal: a preliminary study. Proceeding of the
International Galliformes Symposium 2000.
Duke, G. 1990. Using call counts to compare western tragopan populations in Pakistan’s
Himalaya. Pages 116-123 in Hill, D.A., Garson, P.J. and Jenkins, D. (eds.),
Pheasants in Asia 1989. World Pheasant Association, Reading, U.K.
Emmanuel, M., C. Robert and M. Marc. 1997. Nepal Trip in the Pheasant Study Area,
Pipar, 15 april 1997 –2 May 1997. Unpublished manuscript.
Fleming, R.L. Sr., R.L. Fleming Jr. and L.S. Bangdel. 1984. Birds of Nepal with
reference to Kasmir and Sikkim, Avalok Publishers, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Forster, J.A. 1982. Planning for the Management of a Himalayan Pheasant Reserve.
Pages 18-24 in C.D.W. Savage and M.W Ridley (eds) Pheasants in Asia 1982:
Proceedings of the Second International Pheasant Symposium held in Srinagar
Kasmir, September 1982. World Pheasant Association, Reading, UK.
Forster, J.A. and A.D. Lelliott. 1981. Pipar Wildlife Reserve, Nepal: Management
Proposals. World Pheasant Association, UK.
Fuller, R.A. and P.J. Garson (eds.). 2000. Pheasants. Status and Conservation Action
Plan 2000-2004.WPA/Birdlife/SSC Pheasant Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland.
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK and the World Pheasant Association, Reading,
UK.
Garson, P. and H.S. Baral. 2007. Cheer Pheasant Conservation Summit in Kathmandu,
Danphe 16(1):24-25
52
Garson, P.J. 1983. The cheer pheasant Catreus wallichii in Himachal Pradesh, western
Himalayas: an update. Journal of the World Pheasant Association 8: 29-39.
Gaston, A.J. 1980. Census techniques for Himalayan pheasants including notes on
individual species. Journal of World Pheasant Association 5: 40-53.
Gaston, A.J. and J. Singh. 1980. The status of Cheer pheasant Catreus wallichii in the
Chail Wildlife Sanctuary, Himachal Pradesh. Journal of World Pheasant
Association 5: 68-73
Gautam, R. and N. Baral. 2002. Habitat utilization by Nepal Kalij Lophura leucomelanos
leucomelanos in Kaski district, Nepal. Danphe 11 (3): 19-21.
Grimmett, R., C. Inskipp and T. Inskipp. 2000. Birds of Nepal. Prakash Books Depots,
New Delhi, India.
Gurung, G. B. 2003. An Overview of the Annapurna Conservation Area Project. Pages
17-28 in Thapa G. J. and Karky B.S. (eds.) Water Knowledge – Experiences from
the Annapurna Conservation Area. King Mahendra Trust for Nature
Conservation, Kathmandu.
Gyawali, N. 2004. Study on impact of summer grazing and collection of non-timber
forest products in Pipar, Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. A Report to the
World Pheasant Association (UK). Unpublished.
Howman, S. and P.J. Garson. 1993. Pheasant survey at Pipar Nepal (1979-91). Abstract
and poster. In: D.Jenkins (ed.) Pheasants in Asia 1992. World Pheasant
Association. Reading. UK.
Inskipp, C. 1989. Nepal’s forest birds: their status and conservation. ICBP Monograph
No 4. International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK.
Inskipp, C. and T.P. Inskipp. 2001. A Popular Guide to the Birds and Mammals of the
Annapurna Conservation Area. King Mahendra Trust for Nature ConservationAnnapurna Conservation Area Project, Kaski, Nepal.
Inskipp, C. and T.P. Inskipp. 2003. Bird Conservation Priorities of the Annapurna
Conservation Area. Report to UNEP-WCMC/King Mahendra Trust for Nature
Conservation/Annapurna Conservation Area Project, Nepal.
Inskipp, C. and T.P. Inskipp. 1991. A guide to the Birds of Nepal. Second edition,
Chrisstopher Helm, London
IUCN. 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. <www.iucnredlist.org>.
Downloaded on 12 July 2008.
53
Johnsgard, P.A. 1986. The Pheasants of the World. Oxford University Press, New York,
USA.
Kaul, R. 1995. Report on visit to Nepal, 9-23 October, 1995 Annual Review of the World
Pheasant Association 1994/95: 35-39.
Kaul, R. and S. Shakya. 1998. A wildlife survey of the Pipar Sanctuary, Central Nepal,
28 April – 5 May 1998. Unpublished report to World Pheasant Association,
Reading, UK.
Kaul, R. and S. Shakya. 2001. Spring call counts of some Galliformes in the Pipar
Reserve, Nepal. Forktail 17: 75-80
Khaling, S., R. Kaul and G.K. Saha. 1998. Survey of the Satyr tragopan Tragopan satyra
in the Singhalila National Park, Darjeeling, India using spring call counts. Bird
Conservation International 9:361-371
KMTNC, 1997. Annapurna Conservation Area Management Plan. King Mahendra Trust
for Nature Conservation, Jawalakhel, Nepal.
Lelliott, A. D. 1981. Studies of Himalayan pheasants in Nepal with reference to their
conservation. Unpublished MSc thesis, University of Durham, UK.
Lelliott, A. D. and P. B.Yonzon. 1980a. Studies of Himalayan Pheasants in Nepal.
Journal of World Pheasant Association 5: 11-30.
Lelliott, A. D. and P.B. Yonzon. 1980b. Pheasant studies in the Annapurna Himal I: field
studies. Pages 53-55 in Christopher Savage (ed) Pheasants in Asia 1979:
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Pheasants in Asia. World
Pheasant Association, Exning, UK.
Madge, S. and P. McGowan. 2002. Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse. Christopher Helm,
London.
Mahato, N.K., L.P. Poudyal, P. Subedi, and P.B. Singh. 2006. 2005 spring survey of
Galliformes in the Pipar Reserve and of Santel, Annapurna Conservation Area,
Central Nepal: a World Pheasant Association Report. World Pheasant
Association, Fordingbridge, UK
McGowan, P.J. 2004. WPA’s longest running project: 25 years involvement at Pipar,
central Nepal Himalayas. Tragopan 20/21:30-37
Picozzi, N. 1987. Pipar Pheasant Trek, April1987. Unpublished.
Picozzi, N. 1984. An ecological survey of a proposed reserve for Himalayan Pheasants
at Pipar, Nepal in November in 1983. A report to World Pheasant Association,
UK
54
Picozzi, N. 1986. Human Impact on Pheasant Habitat and Numbers of Pheasants on
Pipar, Central Nepal. Pages 24-31 in Proceeding of WPA Third International
Pheasant Symposium, Chiengmai, Thailand.
Poudyal, L.P. 2005. A Study of Floral Diversity and Grazing Impacts in Pipar Pheasant
Sanctuary, Nepal. Dissertation for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Forestry.
Tribhuvan University, Institute of Forestry, Pokhara Campus, Pokhara, Nepal.
Unpublished.
Poudyal, L.P., H.S. Baral and P. McGowan. 2007. Study of Vegetation and grazing
impacts on pheasants in Pipar Reserve Nepal. Tigerpaper 34(1):12-17
Poudyal, L.P., N. Mahato, P.B. Singh, P. Subedi, P.J. McGowan and H.S. Baral.
2008. Spring call count of some Galliformes in Pipar Pheasant Reserve and
the adjoining Santel area in Annapurna Region in Central Nepal.
Manuscript submitted for the International Journal of Galliform
Conservation, World Pheasant Association, Fordingbridge, UK.
Ramesh, K. 2003. An Ecological Study on Pheasants of the Great Himalyayan National
Park, Western Himalaya. PhD Thesis. Forest Research Institute – Deemed
University, Dehra Dun. Unpublished.
Roberts, J. 1980. Status of the pheasants of Nepal. Pages 22-26 in Christopher Savage
(ed) Pheasants in Asia 1979: Proceedings of the First International Symposium
on Pheasants in Asia. World Pheasant Association, Exning, UK.
Shakya, K. 1980. Reports on the status of pheasants: Nepal Introductory Paper. Pages
21-22 in Christopher Savage (ed) Pheasants in Asia 1979: Proceedings of the
First International Symposium on Pheasants in Asia. World Pheasant
Association, Exning, UK.
Shakya, S., A. Shrestha and R.S. Kalsi. 2000. Distribution of Swamp Francolin
Francolinus gularis in the terai grasslands of Nepal. Proceeding of the
International Galliformes Symposium 2000.
Singh, P.B. 2005. Population status and habitat utilization of Swamp Francolin
Francolinus gularis in Royal Suklaphanta Wildlife Reserve, Nepal. Report
submitted to the Oriental Bird Club, UK (Unpublished).
Singh, P.B. 2007. Status of Swamp Francolin Francolinus gularis in Suklaphanta
Wildlife Reserve. Danphe 16 (1): 68-69.
Singh, P.B., L.P. Poudyal and S. Sharma. 2006. Survey of cheer pheasant Catreus
wallichi in and around Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Western Nepal. Report
55
submitted to the World Pheasant Association and Oriental Bird Club, UK.
Unpublished.
Stapleton, C. and S. Tamrakar. 1984. Report on the bamboos of Pipar. Unpub. mimeo,
7pp
Subedi, B. 2006. Population status, habitat use and conservation threats of Kalij
Lophura leucomelanos in Hemja, Kaski. MSc Thesis submitted to the Tribhuvan
University.
Subedi, P., S.K. Shrestha, H.S. Baral, P.J. Garson and K. Ramesh. 2005. Status and
distribution of cheer pheasant Catreus wallichii in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve,
Nepal. Page 93-101 in: Fuller, R.A. & Browne, S.J. (eds) 2005. Galliformes
2004. Proceedings of the 3rd International Galliformes Symposium. World
Pheasant Association, Fordingbridge, UK.
Tamrakar, J.K. and A.D. Lelliott. 1982. The Pipar area, Kaski district. Report to the
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Department, HMG. Manuscript.
UNEP. 1995. Global Biodiversity Assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK.
WPA. 2004. Pipar Conservation Plan. World Pheasant Association, Annapurna
Conservation Area Project and Bird Conservation Nepal. Kathmandu.
WPA. 2008. http://www.pheasant.org.uk sighted on 19 July 2008.
WPA-India. 2008. About Pheasants in WPA India www.wpaindia.org downloaded on
2008/7/16
Yonzon, P.B. 1987. Nepal-Himalayan Pheasant Survey at Pipar, Machhapuahare. Pages
55-57 in CDW Savage and MW Ridley (eds) Pheasants in Asia 1982:
Proceedings of the second International Symposium on Pheasants in Asia. World
Pheasant Association, Reading, UK.
Yonzon, P.B. and A.D. Lelliott. 1980. Pheasant studies in the Annapurna Himal II: field
studies. Pages 56-62 in Christopher Savage (ed) Pheasants in Asia 1979:
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Pheasants in Asia. World
Pheasant Association, Exning, UK.
Yonzon, P.B. and A.D. Lelliott. 1981. Food Habits and Feeeding of Himalayan
Pheasants. Journal of Natural History Museum 5(4):93-95.
56
Appendix 1: Number of Calling Birds heard during the field survey.
Satyr Tragopan
Place
Stations
Khumai
1
2
3
Total
Thulokhobang
1
2
3
Total
Pipar
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Kalki forest
1
2
Total
Nhirku
1
2
3
4
Total
Dhije
1
2
3
Total
Khuine
1
2
3
4
Total
Namsung
1
2
3
Total
30 April
3
2
4
9
3 May
0
0
1
1
4 May
3
4
5
5
2
5
24
7 May
4
6
10
10 May
5
4
5
4
18
14 May
0
0
0
0
16 May
5
7
5
4
21
19 May
6
4
1
11
Dates
1 May
2
3
7
12
13 May
1
0
1
2
5 May
4
6
7
4
0
4
25
8 May
5
6
11
11 May
6
3
5
4
18
15 May
0
0
0
0
17 May
6
4
6
6
22
20 May
5
2
3
10
2 May
3
3
6
12
6 May
4
7
5
3
1
3
23
9 May
4
5
9
12 May
4
3
3
6
16
18 May
5
6
4
5
20
21 May
5
3
2
10
57
Koklass Pheasants
Place
Stations
Khumai
1
2
3
Total
Thulokhobang
1
2
3
Total
Pipar
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Kalki forest
1
2
Total
Nhirku
1
2
3
4
Total
Dhije
1
2
3
Total
Khuine
1
2
3
4
Total
Namsung
1
2
3
Total
30 April
0
3
0
3
3 May
0
0
0
0
4 May
7
5
2
1
3
0
18
7 May
0
0
0
10 May
0
0
0
0
0
14 May
0
0
0
0
16 May
1
0
1
0
2
19 May
4
3
0
7
Dates
1 May
1
2
3
6
13 May
0
0
0
0
5 May
3
7
5
0
1
1
17
8 May
0
0
0
11 May
0
2
1
0
3
15 May
0
0
0
0
17 May
2
1
4
0
7
20 May
2
3
1
6
2 May
2
3
2
7
6 May
4
6
3
0
2
0
15
9 May
0
0
0
12 May
0
1
4
0
5
18 May
3
1
3
0
7
21 May
1
2
1
4
58
Hill Partridge
Place
Stations
Khumai
1
2
3
Total
Thulokhobang
1
2
3
Total
Pipar
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Kalki forest
1
2
Total
Nhirku
1
2
3
4
Total
Dhije
1
2
3
Total
Khuine
1
2
3
4
Total
Namsung
1
2
3
Total
30 April
0
2
2
4
3 May
4
3
2
9
4 May
2
4
4
1
1
8
20
7 May
2
3
5
10 May
1
4
2
2
9
14 May
1
2
2
5
16 May
5
5
4
2
16
19 May
2
4
2
8
Dates
1 May
0
1
2
3
13 May
3
4
3
10
5 May
3
6
2
3
0
7
21
8 May
2
2
4
11 May
2
3
1
4
10
15 May
2
2
3
7
17 May
4
4
4
5
17
20 May
4
1
2
7
2 May
0
2
3
5
6 May
5
3
6
4
1
7
26
9 May
3
4
7
12 May
2
4
3
4
13
18 May
3
7
6
4
20
21 May
3
2
2
7
59
Appendix 2: Pheasants of the World
SN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Common Name
Scientific Name
Double-Banded Argus
Bornean Peacock-Pheasant
Vietnamese Pheasant
Edwards's Pheasant
Aceh Pheasant
Elliot's Pheasant
Green Peafowl
Malaysian Peacock-Pheasant
Mountain Peacock-Pheasant
Wattled Pheasant
Palawan Peacock-Pheasant
Reeves's Pheasant
Western Tragopan
Salvadori's Pheasant
Sclater's Monal
Crestless Fireback
Congo Peafowl
Blyth's Tragopan
Brown Eared-Pheasant
Cabot's Tragopan
Cheer Pheasant
Chinese Monal
Crested Argus
Germain's Peacock-Pheasant
Hume's Pheasant
Satyr Tragopan
Crested Fireback
Copper Pheasant
Great Argus
Mikado Pheasant
Siamese Fireback
Swinhoe's Pheasant
Tibetan Eared-Pheasant
White Eared-Pheasant
Blue Eared-Pheasant
Golden Pheasant
Grey Junglefowl
Lady Amherst's Pheasant
Temminck's Tragopan
Bronze-Tailed Peacock-Pheasant
Blood Pheasant
Green Junglefowl
Common Pheasant
Grey Peacock-Pheasant
Himalayan Monal
Indian Peafowl
Kalij Pheasant
Koklass Pheasant
Red Junglefowl
Silver Pheasant
Sri Lanka Junglefowl
Imperial Pheasant
Argusianus bipunctatus
Polyplectron schleiermacheri
Lophura hatinhensis
Lophura edwardsi
Lophura hoogerwerfi
Syrmaticus ellioti
Pavo muticus
Polyplectron malacense
Polyplectron inopinatum
Lophura bulweri
Polyplectron napoleonis
Syrmaticus reevesii
Tragopan melanocephalus
Lophura inornata
Lophophorus sclateri
Lophura erythrophthalma
Afropavo congensis
Tragopan blythii
Crossoptilon mantchuricum
Tragopan caboti
Catreus wallichi
Lophophorus lhuysii
Rheinardia ocellata
Polyplectron germaini
Syrmaticus humiae
Tragopan satyra
Lophura ignita
Syrmaticus soemmerringii
Argusianus argus
Syrmaticus mikado
Lophura diardi
Lophura swinhoii
Crossoptilon harmani
Crossoptilon crossoptilon
Crossoptilon auritum
Chrysolophus pictus
Gallus sonneratii
Chrysolophus amherstiae
Tragopan temminckii
Polyplectron chalcurum
Ithaginis cruentus
Gallus varius
Phasianus colchicus
Polyplectron bicalcaratum
Lophophorus impejanus
Pavo cristatus
Lophura leucomelanos
Pucrasia macrolopha
Gallus gallus
Lophura nycthemera
Gallus lafayetii
Lophura imperialis
IUCN Redlist Category.
2008
Extinct
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Near Threatened
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Least Concern
Data Deficient
60
Appendix 3: Birds Recorded During the Field Survey 2008
S.N.
Common Name
Scientific Name
9.
10.
11.
GALLIFORMES
Phasianidae
Koklass Pheasant
Blood Pheasant
Satyr Tragopan
Kalij Pheasant
Himalayan Monal
Hill Partridge
Snow Partridge
Rufous throated Tapridge
PICIFORMES
Picidae
Crimson-breasted Woodpecker
Darjeeling Woodpecker
Rufous-bellied Woodpecker
12.
13.
14.
Megalamidae
Blue-throated Barbet
Golden-throated Barbet
Great Barbet
Megalaima asiatica
Megalaima franklinii
Megalaima virens
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
CUCULIFORMES
Cuculidae
Lesser Cuckoo
Large Hawk-Cuckoo
Indian Cuckoo
Eurasian Cuckoo
Oriental Cuckoo
Cuculus poliocephalus
Cuculus sparverioides
Cuculus micropterus
Cuculus canorus
Cuculus saturatus
20.
21.
COLUMBIFORMES
Columbidae
Oriental Turtle-Dove
Spotted Dove
Streptopelia orientalis
Streptopelia chinensis
22.
CICONIIFORMES
Scolopacidae
Eurasian Woodcock
Scolopax rusticola
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Accipitridae
Crested Serpent-Eagle
Mountain Hawk-Eagle
Lammergeier
Himalayan Griffon
Eurasian Griffon
Besra
Hen Harrier
Spilornis cheela
Spizaetus nipalensis
Gypaetus barbatus
Gyps himalayensis
Gyps fulvus
Accipiter virgatus
Circus cyaneus
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Pucrasia macrolopha
Ithaginis cruentus
Tragopan satyra
Lophura leucomelanos
Lophophorus impejanus
Arborophila torqueola
Lerwa lerwa
Arborophilarufogularis
Dendrocopos cathpharius
Dendrocopos darjellensis
Dendrocopos hyperythrus
61
S.N.
30.
Common Name
PASSERIFORMES
Eurylaimidae
Long-tailed Broadbill
Scientific Name
31.
Laniidae
Long tailed Shrike
Lanius schach
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Corvidae
Rufous Treepie
Grey Treepie
Large-billed Crow
Ashy Drongo
Yellow billed Blue Magpie
Scarlet Minivet
Long-tailed Minivet
Short-billed Minivet
Yellow-bellied Fantail
White-throated Fantail
Dendrocitta vagabunda
Dendrocitta formosae
Corvus macrorhynchos intermedius
Dicrurus leucophaeus
Urocissa flavirostris
Pericrocotus flammeus
Pericrocotus ethologus
Pericrocotus brevirostris
Rhipidura hypoxantha
Rhipidura albicollis
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
Muscicapidae
Rufous-bellied Niltava
Small Niltava
Snowy-browed Flycatcher
Rufous-gorgeted Flycatcher
Slaty-backed Flycatcher
Red throated Flycatcher
Little Pied-Flycatcher
Rusty-tailed Flycatcher
Verditer Flycatcher
Dark-throated Thrush
Grey-winged Blackbird
White-collared Blackbird
Eurasian Blackbird
Blue Whistling-Thrush
Orange flanked Bush Robin
Chestnut-bellied Rock-Thrush
Blue-fronted Redstart
White-throated Redstart
Black Redstart
Blue-capped redstart
Plumbeous Water-Redstart
White-capped Water-Redstart
Grandala
Grey Bushchat
Niltava sundara
Niltava macgrigoriae
Ficedula hyperythra
Ficedula strophiata
Ficedula hodgsonii
Ficedula parva
Ficedula westermanni
Muscicapa ruficauda
Eumyias thalassina
Turdus ruficollis
Turdus boulboul
Turdus albocinctus
Turdus merula
Myophonus caeruleus
Tarsiger cyanurus
Monticola rufiventris
Phoenicurus frontalis
Phoenicurus schisticeps
Phoenicurus ochruros
Phoenicurus coeruleocephalus
Rhyacornis fuliginosus
Chaimarrornis leucocephalus
Grandala coelicolor
Saxicola ferrea
66.
Sittidae
White-tailed Nuthatch
Sitta himalayensis
Psarisomus dalhousiae
62
S.N.
67.
68.
Common Name
Certhiidae
Eurasian Treecreeper
Rusty-flanked Treecreeper
Scientific Name
69.
70.
71.
72.
Paridae
Balck lored Tit
Green backed Tit
Rufous-vented Tit
Grey-crested Tit
Parus xanthogenys
Parus monticolus
Parus rubidiventris
Parus dichrous
73.
Aegithalidae
Black-throated Tit
Aegithalos concinnus
74.
Hirundinidae
Nepal House-Martin
Delichon nipalensis
75.
76.
77.
78.
Pycnonotidae
Himalayan Bulbul
Red-vented Bulbul
Striated Bulbul
Black Bulbul
Pycnonotus leucogenys
Pycnonotus cafer
Pycnonotus striatus
Hypsipetes leucocephalus
79.
Cisticolidae
Striated Prinia
Prinia criniger
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
Sylviidae
Aberrant Bush-Warbler
Grey-sided Bush-Warbler
Chestnut-crowned Bush-Warbler
Blyth's Leaf-Warbler
Greenish Warbler
Chestnut-crowned Warbler
Black-headed Shrike-Babbler
White-browed Shrike-Babbler
Nepal Wren-Babbler
Black-faced Laughingthrush
Spotted Laughingthrush
Striated Laughingthrush
White-crested Laughingthrush
White-throated Laughingthrush
Variegated laughingthrush
Red-billed Leiothrix
Hoary-throated Barwing
Cutia
Chestnut-tailed Minla
Whiskered Yuhina
Rufous-vented Yuhina
Brown Parrotbill
Fulvous Parrotbill
Cettia flavolivacea
Cettia brunnifrons
Cettia major major
Phylloscopus reguloides
Phylloscopus trochiloides
Seicercus castaniceps
Pteruthius rufiventer
Pteruthius flaviscapis
Pnoepyga immaculata
Garrulax affinis
Garrulax ocellatus
Garrulax striatus
Garrulax leucolophus
Garrulax albogularis
Garrulax variegatus
Leiothrix lutea
Actinodura nipalensis
Cutia nipalensis
Minla strigula
Yuhina flavicollis
Yuhina occipitalis
Paradoxornis unicolor
Paradoxornis fulvifrons
Certhia familiaris
Certhia nipalensis
63
S.N.
103.
104.
105.
106.
Common Name
Great Parrotbill
White-browed Fulvetta
Rufous-winged Fulvetta
Rufous Sibia
Alaudidae
107. Oriental Skylark
Scientific Name
Conostoma oemodium
Alcippe vinipectus
Alcippe castaneceps
Heterophasia capistrata
Alauda gulgula
108.
109.
110.
111.
Nectariniidae
Mrs Gould’s Sunbird
Fire-tailed Sunbird
Black-throated Sunbird
Green-tailed Sunbird
Aethopyga gouldiae
Aethopyga ignicauda
Aethopyga saturata
Aethopyga nipalensis
112.
113.
114.
115.
Passeridae
Olive-backed Pipit
Rosy Pipit
Yellow Wagtail
Grey Wagtail
Anthus hodgsoni
Anthus roseatus
Motacilla flava
Motacilla cinerea
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
Fringillidae
Common rosefinch
Dark-breasted Rosefinch
Brandt’s Mountain Finch
Crimson-browed Finch
Yellow breasted Greenfinch
Brown Bullfinch
Red-headed Bullfinch
Chestnut-eared Bunting
Crested Bunting
Collared Grosbeak
Carpodacus erythrinus
Carpodacus nipalensis
Leucosticte brandti
Pinicola subhimachalus
Cardueles spinoides
Pyrrhula nipalensis
Pyrrhula erythrocephala
Emberiza fucata
Melophus lathami
Mycerobas affinis
64
Appendix 4: List of Acronyms
ACA
ANOVA
BCDP
BCN
CAMC
CITES
DEM
DHR
ER
GIS
GPS
IUCN
KCA
KNP
LNP
LSD
MBNP
NDVI
NMDS
NTFP
NTNC
RNP
SD
SE
SNP
SPNP
SPSS
TU
UCO
UNEP
UTM
VDC
WPA
Annapurna Conservation Area
Analysis of Variance
Biodiversity Conservation Database Project
Bird Conservation Nepal
Conservation Area Management Committee
Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
Digital Elevation Model
Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve
Encounter Rate
Geographic Information Ssystem
Global Positioning System
International Union for Conservation of Nature
Kanchhanjungha Conservation Area
Khaptad National Park
Langtang National Park
Least Significant Difference
Makalu Barun National Park
Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
Non Metric Multidimentional Scaling
Non Timber Forest Product
National Trust for Nature Consevation
Rara National Park
Standard Deviation
Standard Error
Sagarmatha National Park
Shey Phoksundo National park
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
Tribhuvan University
Unit Conservation Office
United Nations Environment Programme
Universal Transverse Mercator
Village Development Committee
World Pheasant Association
65
For further information
Laxman Prasad Poudyal
Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation
Post Box # 860, Babarmahal, Kathmandu,
NEPAL
or
Dhapakhel Village Development Committee
Ward # 1, Khumaltar, Lalitpur,
NEPAL
Email: [email protected]
66