The state of Nepal birds 2010

Acknowledgements: We are very grateful to the Jensen Foundation, Darwin Initiative and BirdLife International for generously supporting this study. Special thanks go to Hum Gurung, Chief Executive Officer, Bird Conservation Nepal (BCN) who managed the State of Nepal Birds 2010 project and to Ishana Thapa, Jyotendra Thakuri, Menuka Basnyat, Sushma Shrestha, Anand Chaudhary and Mitra Pandey from BCN and Tris Allinson, Jenny Birch and Mike Crosby from BirdLife International for their contributions. Compiling the data would not have been possible without the generous donation of unpublished records by numerous observers and many other people provided useful comments on the draft results. We warmly thank the reviewers of the manuscript, Dr Rajan Amin, Dr Will Duckworth and Laxman Poudyal for their very useful comments. The results of this study are also presented in a more popular form in a report published in Nepal by BCN and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, and is available from the BirdLife International website www.birdlife.org. A complete list of names of all those who contributed records or who made comments is given in this report.


INTRODUCTION
Nepal is renowned internationally for its rich diversity of bird species.Although the country possesses an area of just 147,181km 2 (0.1% of the world's total landmass), it accounts for about 8% of the world's bird species, with 867 species recorded up to the end of 2010, including about 800 species that are regularly recorded (Bird Conservation Nepal 2011, unpubl. data).In terms of globally threatened bird species, 36 have been recorded in Nepal based on the categorisation in BirdLife International (2010), 25 of which occur regularly and are included in this study.
A total of 27 Important Bird Areas (IBAs) has been identified in Nepal covering forests (22 IBAs), grasslands (four) and freshwater ecosystems (10); some IBAs contain more than one of these ecosystems (Baral & Inskipp 2005).Important Bird Areas are key sites for bird conservation which have been identified using standardised global criteria (BirdLife International 2011).In Nepal 24 IBAs support globally threatened species, 13 have restricted-range species, 24 have biome-restricted species and eight qualify as IBAs because they hold large congregations of waterbirds (Baral & Inskipp 2005).
The first assessment of the threat status of Nepal's birds: Threatened Birds of Nepal was published in 1996 (Baral et al. 1996).This report was succeeded by The State of Nepal's Birds 2004 (Baral & Inskipp 2004) eight years later.Better documentation on species' status enabled the latter report to be much more detailed than the 1996 report.It included an account of the threats to Nepal's birds, an assessment of national threat status for individual species considered to qualify at national level for IUCN Categories Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered categories and a comprehensive review of all Endangered and Critically Endangered species.
This paper presents an assessment of national threatened species conducted in 2010, a review of current pressures on Nepal's birds and responses already taken, and some recommendations for actions by NGOs to address the status of Nepal's nationally threatened birds.A more detailed account of this assessment is given by Bird Conservation Nepal (BCN) and Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC) (2011).

METHODS
The national status of Nepal's birds was determined using the IUCN Red List criteria, and following IUCN's regional guidelines in their application.This involved considering a few issues that are not encountered at the global level, for example species that do not reproduce in the country, but are still dependent upon its resources for their survival (IUCN 2003).A number of species on the national threatened list falls into this category, for example Black Stork Ciconia nigra, Pied Harrier Circus melanoleucos, Greater Spotted Eagle Aquila clanga, Baillon's Crake Porzana pusilla, White-throated Bushchat Saxicola insignis and Yellow-breasted Bunting Emberiza aureola.It is possible to consider species that are nonnative but have been introduced to the country (IUCN 2003), but no species occurring in Nepal fall into this category.
The status of Nepal's birds in 2010 was assessed by first undertaking a literature search to update a comprehensive bibliography of Nepal's birds (Inskipp & Inskipp 2010).An initial list of potentially high risk species was drawn up.Records of these species, including number of individuals, date and location were extracted from all relevant references in the bibliography and compiled on species forms.Numerous previously undocumented and valuable records were obtained from observers in Nepal, some of whom completed species records forms.The forms provided details of the location and dates of records, and the numbers of each species recorded, as well as any information that was available on threats.Records from observers outside Nepal had already been acquired from reports or were located by research online.As records accumulated some species were found to be better off than expected and were dropped from the initial list of potentially threatened species.A few species were added to the initial list as other observers alerted us to their rarity.
Only resident species and summer and winter visitors were assessed (755 species in total), not passage migrants (29 species), vagrants (74 species), nor extinct or extirpated species (nine species).
Literature reviews were made of current pressures on Nepal's birds and also responses to these pressures that have already been made, as well as those that are recommended for the future by NGOs.
A comprehensive summary table was compiled for

State of Nepal's birds
Comparison of results in 2004 and 2010: The 2010 assessment of the status of Nepal's birds showed that an alarming 149 bird species (17%) are threatened at the national level (Table 1).As many as 99 species are thought to be Critically Endangered or Endangered, meaning there is an extremely high or very high risk of their extirpation in Nepal in the near future.
An additional 16 species are considered nationally threatened compared with the 2004 assessment of 133 threatened species (Baral & Inskipp 2004) (Fig. 1).No species assessed as threatened in 2004 was considered non-threatened in 2010.There is a much higher number of Critically Endangered species (61) in 2010 than in 2004 (40 species) and also a higher number of Endangered species (38) compared with the 2004 total of 32 species.The number of species categorised as Vulnerable was higher in 2004 (61) than in 2010 (50) (Fig. 2).There was also one Data Deficient species in 2004 (Baral & Inskipp 2004) but none in 2010.Near Threatened species were not assessed due to lack of time available for the necessary research.
When all species regularly occurring in Nepal are considered, 233 species (29%) are only found in the lowlands (75-1000 m).A total of 250 species (31%) occur in the lowlands as well as the middle hills (75-3050 m), 115 species (14%) only in the middle hills (1000-3050 This means that lowland species are the most threatened (36% of all lowland species), followed by species only occurring in the middle hills (17%), 11% of species in the lowlands as well as the middle hills, 5% of species only at high altitudes, and 4% of species in the middle hills and higher latitudes (Fig. 4).
Globally threatened species: All the globally threatened species regularly occurring in Nepal met the criteria for being nationally threatened.

Pressures on Nepal's birds
Effects of habitat losses and damage: Human activities are putting enormous pressure on Nepal's bird populations.The 2010 study revealed that those leading to habitat loss and damage were the major threat affecting a total of 128 (86%) of the species of birds at risk nationally, at least to some degree.
Impacts of agriculture: A recent study of the impacts of agriculture on Nepal's birds concluded that the spread of agriculture and changes in agricultural practices are the major root causes of loss and damage to natural habitats (Inskipp & Baral 2011).
Conversion for agriculture is the chief cause of deforestation, while over-grazing by livestock and overharvesting for fodder are the main causes of forest degradation (South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme 2010).
Overgrazing presents major problems to lowland reserves, which protect almost all of Nepal's remaining lowland grasslands (Baral 2001).Furthermore, the level of livestock grazing is considered one of the most serious threats to the ecological integrity of the mid-hill and highland protected areas (HMGN/MFSC 2002).Livestock overgrazing is said to be responsible for damage to wetlands (IUCN 2004) and the low biodiversity of upland grasslands (MoEST 2006).In addition, heavy grazing and browsing promote the spread of an invasive alien creeper, Bittervine Mikania micrantha, which is now a particularly dangerous threat in Nepal (Siwakoti 2007).
(a) Pesticides: Pesticides are widely and increasingly used in agriculture, especially in the lowlands (Atreya 2008) and could be a significant threat to many species (Inskipp & Baral 2011).
Proof of pesticide impacts on birds, which can only be determined by analysis of eggs or bodies, has not been carried out on Nepal's birds till date.In this study pesticide poisoning is considered a possible threat to 21 nationally threatened species, mainly birds of prey and large wading birds; however, many more species could be affected.
(b) Fertilisers: Trend analysis and the opinion of traders show that fertiliser use has increased by about 11.5kg per ha every year in recent years (Thapa 2006).Widespread contamination of agricultural run-off by nitrogen and phosphate nutrients from fertilisers has led to eutrophication of lowland wetlands.Eutrophication has eventually resulted in low oxygen levels in water and the death of invertebrate and fish food supplies for birds (Kafle et al. 2007(Kafle et al. , 2008)).
(c) Poisoning by diclofenac: Poisoning by diclofenac, a drug used for livestock ailments has led to drastic declines in vulture populations in the Indian subcontinent, including Nepal (Oaks et al. 2004;Shultz et al. 2004).For example, White-rumped Vulture Gyps bengalensis, formerly the most common Nepal vulture up to 1000m (Inskipp & Inskipp 1991), and the once fairly common and widespread Slender-billed Vulture G. tenuirostris have declined to such a level and so sharply that both species are now categorised as nationally Critically Endangered.

Pressures on forest birds
The high proportion of forest bird species nationally at risk can be partly attributed to forest depletion being one of the major environmental issues in the country (South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme 2010) and also because forests comprise the major natural habitat in Nepal.
According to the 2005 FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment, 25% of Nepal was covered in forest in 2005.This forest includes plantations, but these form a very small proportion of forest cover in Nepal (53,000ha).The total loss of forest area between 1990 and 2005 was 25%.During the same period degraded forest (wooded areas with tree canopy 5-10 %), increased from 1,180,000-1,897,000 ha (Forestry Nepal 2005).
Conversion of land to agriculture is the major cause of deforestation in Nepal.Other causes of deforestation are the growth of settlements and infrastructure, illicit tree-felling and the transboundary timber trade (South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme 2010).
The majority of Nepalis depend on the country's forests for their essential requirements for fuel, livestock fodder and other basic materials.
The 2010 assessment found that most threatened forest birds inhabit the tropical and subtropical and lower temperate zones where forests have been most depleted; for instance Yellow-vented Warbler Phylloscopus cantator, Abbott's Babbler Malacocincla abbotti and White-naped Yuhina Yuhina bakeri.Many of the threatened forest birds require dense, moist conditions, a well-developed understorey or epiphytic growth, for example Broad-billed Warbler Tickellia hodgsoni, Rufous-throated Wren Babbler Spelaeornis caudatus and Himalayan Cutia Cutia nipalensis.
A total of 14 forest species from these zones have not been recorded for at least ten years: Pale-headed A high proportion (47%; 37 species) of threatened forest birds was found to inhabit broadleaved evergreen forests, an especially threatened habitat, and 32% of forest birds (25 species) (for example Ruddy Kingfisher Halcyon coromanda), are largely confined to evergreen forests in the tropical and/or subtropical zones, where these forests are of very limited extent.
Suitable habitat for some threatened forest species may still be unexplored, especially in upper temperate and subalpine forests and so these species may be less threatened than currently believed.
Besides habitat loss, some forest species, especially Galliformes and owls, suffer from hunting and trapping.

Loss of invaluable habitat linkages
Despite losses and degradation, there is still forest cover on steep slopes, and this is likely to be untouched if access remains difficult; thus providing protection for birds and potential reservoirs of bird populations for recolonisation.However, the continuation of forest cover on steep slopes will not help to protect species which winter in the lowlands if forest cover in the lowlands is cleared.
The review of pressures on birds found that forest losses have been so widespread and extensive in the lower and middle hills that invaluable habitat linkages between forests in the high Himal and lowlands or lower hills have been lost.As a result many bird species no longer have available the continuum of habitats that they require to move altitudinally with the seasons and their distributional range is therefore restricted e.g.Barred Cuckoo Dove Macropygia unchall, Dark-sided Thrush Zoothera marginata, and Lesser Shortwing Brachypteryx leucophrys.
Furthermore, the loss of a continuum of habitats across a high altitudinal gradient means that many species are much less able to shift their distribution according to climate change and are therefore more at risk.

Pressures on wetland birds
Wetland birds were found to be the most threatened in Nepal (35% of wetland species are nationally threatened).
Threats have significantly increased since 2004.Widespread threats include drainage for agriculture, unsustainable harvesting of resources, diversion and abstraction of water for farmland irrigation, overgrazing of shorelines and marshes, and mining of gravel from river beds.Many species are suffering from water pollution, hunting, trapping, disturbance and destruction of feeding and nesting sites.Water pollution from agricultural chemicals has been identified as a particularly serious threat to lowland wetlands (Kafle et al. 2007(Kafle et al. , 2008)).
Overfishing and fish-poisoning: Overfishing and fishpoisoning are major threats to large fish-eating birds.All these species have declined in Nepal's wetlands almost certainly because overfishing has significantly reduced their food supply.Almost all of them are now included in Nepal's nationally threatened list, for example Pallas's Fish Eagle Haliaeetus leucoryphus, Grey-headed Fish Eagle Ichthyophaga ichthyaetus, Brown Fish Owl Ketupa zeylonensis, Black-bellied Tern Sterna acuticauda, River Tern S. aurantia, and Indian Skimmer Rynchops albicollis.
Some important wetlands, for instance Jagdishpur Reservoir (which is a Ramsar site as well as an IBA) and Gaidahawa Tal, are contracted to commercial fishermen by the relevant authorities at each site, resulting in significant threats to wetland dependent birds.Disturbance caused by commercial fishermen results in birds flying away from relatively safe habitats and to sites where they are more at risk from hunting or trapping.The introduction of carnivorous fish species by the fishermen may impact on the survival of native fish ultimately affecting bird populations.
As a result of this onslaught of threats, a large percentage of Nepal's wetland birds (29 species, 25%) is considered Critically Endangered or Endangered.Some wetland species have shown precipitous declines over recent years, for example Brahminy Kite Haliastur indus, Caspian Tern Sterna caspia, Black-bellied Tern S. acuticauda and River Tern S. aurantia (Fig. 5).

Pressures on grassland birds
A large percentage (23%) of grassland birds is nationally threatened.The spread of cultivation in Nepal's lowlands has led to the once extensive lowland grasslands becoming greatly reduced and fragmented.Nepal's specialist grassland birds are now almost entirely confined to protected areas, where their populations are isolated (Baral 2001).Some sedentary species e.g.Slender-billed Babbler Turdoides longirostris and Jerdon's Babbler Chrysomma altirostre may therefore face long-term viability problems.
Within protected areas some bird species, for instance the globally threatened Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis, Swamp Francolin Francolinus gularis and White-throated Bushchat Saxicola insignis, are suffering from inappropriate grassland management, including ploughing, intensive annual cutting and burning, which alter grass species composition and are aimed at the conservation of mammals, not birds (Baral 2001).
Lowland grasslands are traditionally exploited by local communities for their daily needs: grass for thatching roofs and weaving mats, as well as fodder for their livestock (Baral 2001).The Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation has struck a compromise between conservation and the survival needs of local people by allowing them to harvest grass for a limited period every year.As a result, 95% of grassland is believed to be disturbed in Nepal's lowland protected areas during the grass-cutting season (H.S. Baral pers. obs. 2010).
Controlling illegal grazing and cutting activities is a difficult task for Nepal's park managers.Illegal overgrazing by livestock is by far the greatest threat to lowland grasslands in protected areas (Baral 2001); these domestic ungulates are at densities far higher than were formerly reached by wild species.Overall, a total of 14 species (61%) of nationally threatened grassland species is in the Critically Endangered and Endangered categories.
Although upland grasslands occupy a far greater area than those in the lowlands, they support only two globally and nationally threatened species: Cheer Pheasant Catreus wallichii and Wood Snipe Gallinago nemoricola.Grasslands in the hills and mountains are both natural and human-made in origin.Above the tree line they are mainly naturally occurring alpine meadows up to the limit of vegetation.Below the tree line on south-facing slopes burning and livestock grazing, which mainly took place a very long time ago, have created and maintained grassy areas.These grasslands are poor in bird species diversity.

Pressures on other specialist bird species
Some nationally threatened birds have other specialist habitat needs and are now only locally distributed because of habitat losses.
Seven threatened species occur mainly in pure bamboo stands, for instance, Fulvous Parrotbill Paradoxornis fulvifrons and Golden-breasted Fulvetta Alcippe chrysotis.Eleven other species depend on or favour forests with a bamboo understorey, including Satyr Tragopan Tragopan satyra and Broad-billed Warbler Tickellia hodgsoni and are threatened to at least some degree by bamboo losses.Bamboo is a highly useful forest product; large quantities of bamboo Arundinaria spp.and Bambusa spp.are cut for weaving mats and baskets and for construction work.Overgrazing by livestock is also reducing bamboo in many areas e.g.Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve (Subedi 2008).
Great Hornbill Buceros bicornis and Great Slaty Woodpecker Mulleripicus pulverulentus require mature trees for feeding and nesting, but these are frequently and selectively felled as they are of high economic value.

Hunting and trapping
Around 43 nationally threatened species were found to be affected to some degree by hunting or trapping including the collection of nest contents (29% of the total threatened).Recently two packs of feral dogs have been seen in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve and feral dogs are known to threaten larger mammals in Bardia National Park, so they could also be a problem for birds.Wetland birds are especially at risk in all parts of Nepal.At Koshi, hunting and trapping birds for food and for sale at the market regularly takes place (Shakya 1995;Giri 2002).Bird hunting, including netting and egg collecting have also been identified as serious threats on Chitwan's rivers (Roberts et al. 2002;Tyabji 2002).Hunting is also threatening some grassland birds at risk, notably Swamp Francolin Francolinus gularis (Baral 1998), as well as some forest species, for instance Great Hornbill Buceros bicornis.A 2008/09 owl study in 22 out of Nepal's 75 districts revealed widespread hunting and trading of owls, especially Rock Eagle Owl Bubo bengalensis (Acharya & Ghimirey 2009).
Pheasants are popular targets for hunters and trappers in some parts of Nepal.For example, hunting is a major threat to Cheer Pheasant Catreus wallichii in the upper Kali Gandaki valley, Annapurna Conservation Area (Acharya et al. 2006) and in Rara National Park (Budhathapa 2006).
However, hunting was not considered an important threat to Nepal's known key populations of Cheer Pheasant in and around Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve by Singh et al. (2006).The degree of threat caused by hunting and trapping often depends on traditional attitudes.For example Himalayan Monal Lophophorus impeyjanus is hardly hunted in Sagarmatha National Park where the large majority of the human population are Sherpas who are Buddhist and traditionally do not hunt.However, in Kanchenjunga Conservation Area the species is heavily hunted as the local people have hunted for generations and in an April 2008 survey, only one individual was located despite extensive suitable habitat (Inskipp et al. 2008).

Impacts of alien weeds
Serious threats are posed by some invasive alien weeds, notably Water-hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes, which was first reported in Nepal in 1966 and is now widely distributed in most protected areas ranging up to 1500m.Free-floating mats of Water-hyacinth in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve have caused a sharp decline in the number of pure open water dwelling bird species, especially Oriental Darter Anhinga melanogaster, cormorants, and grebes, as well as reducing feeding areas for some ducks and other wetland birds (Dahal 2007).
More recently another alien, Bittervine Mikania micrantha, has invaded tropical and subtropical ecosystems from the far east to west-central Nepal (Siwakoti 2007) and has had devastating effects in some areas, notably in Chitwan National Park and Koshi Tappu  1984 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 (Baral 2002a).Mikania is a climber that can very quickly cover trees and shrubs as well as the entire forest floor, thus making it impossible for bird species to feed on the ground.Terrestrial-feeding species, such as thrushes, pipits, as well as some babblers that require open forest floors, with or without decaying leaves, are all affected (Baral 2002a).

Climate change
The impacts of climate change on birds in Nepal are unknown, although are believed to be significant.Climate change is already having a significant impact on the Himalayan environment.Glacial melt is increasing as temperatures rise and will lead to increased summer flows in some river systems for a few decades, followed by a reduction in flows as the glaciers disappear (Baral 2002b).Ibisbill Ibidorhyncha struthersii, which breeds in braided river channels with shingle banks in glacial valleys, is likely to be directly threatened (Baral 2002b).A preliminary study of an Ibisbill breeding population in Kyanjin, upper Langtang in 2010 recorded 25 individuals, which included the very low number of only seven subadults.The researchers considered that the birds' poor breeding success resulted from landslides that have swept away an important portion of their habitat (Ghimire & Thakuri 2010).
Some of Nepal's threatened birds are largely confined to protected areas, for example a number of grassland species.As the climate changes, habitats in these protected areas may eventually become unsuitable for these species.However, as natural habitats outside protected areas have been converted to agriculture or developed, these birds have nowhere to go.
Forktails, dippers, wagtails and river redstarts rely on invertebrate food supplies.It is possible that they could be indicators for understanding climate change impacts in the Himalaya because, as river flows are reduced, the birds' invertebrate prey will decline (Baral 2002b).
Many forest birds, including a high proportion of threatened forest species, depend on moist forests and are likely to be affected if the climate becomes drier.

Conserving and protecting sites
Nepal's protected area system: Nepal's protected Limited or insufficient resources and capacity has impeded the ability of both the DNPWC and NTNC to adequately conserve protected areas and species.While Nepal's protected area network is impressive in coverage, of Nepal's 27 IBAs only 13 are fully protected, with 12 unprotected and two partially protected.However, the Nepal Government's Fourth Report to the CBD in 2009 clearly stated that some management status would be given to three unprotected IBAs (Phulchoki Mountain Forest, Farmlands of Lumbini and Mai Valley).
Government legislation and policy: There are many government policies that support conservation efforts in Nepal, including the National Conservation Strategy for Nepal (National Planning Commission Secretariat, His Majesty's Government of Nepal 1988) that was endorsed as policy in 1988.
The recommendations of the Sustainable Development Agenda for Nepal (His Majesty's Government of Nepal, National Planning Commission and Ministry of Population and Environment 2003) build on proven, successful programmes at grassroots level.The national Community Forestry Programme (Ojha et al. 2009) demonstrates the high potential of participatory management as a means to promote sustainable development, for example.
The CBD has been enforced since February 1994.In 2002, a comprehensive Nepal Biodiversity Strategy was developed to fulfil Nepal's obligations to the CBD.This serves as an overall framework for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and biological resources in the country.
The Nepal Biodiversity Strategy Implementation Plan was developed in 2006; its overall goal is to achieve the NBS objectives during the period 2006-2010.
Since 2004, the Bird Education Society (BES) has been carrying out successful annual conservation awareness programmes for farmers who live in Chitwan National Park buffer zone.Many birds which inhabit the National Park also feed in the agricultural fields in the park's buffer zone, where they are at risk from pesticide use, notably the globally threatened Lesser Adjutant Leptoptilos javanicus.The BES programmes focus on providing farmers with the necessary knowledge and skills to practice effective micro-organism (EM) technology and learn about IPM (Subedi 2007).
Improving awareness more generally: A wide range of educational and conservation awareness activities are carried out by NGOs in Nepal.These include producing materials on birds and conservation, organising birdwatching for the general public, and running clubs for schools.
Another example is BCN's radio programme "Panchi Sansar" which conveys a bird conservation message to about 10% of Nepal's population every fortnight.The programme has proved a very effective communication tool, enabling BCN to reach the general public (BCN 2010).
An impressive campaign to raise awareness of the plight of owls has been carried out by Raju Acharya since 2008.At least four million people were informed about the campaign by local, regional and national newspapers, radio and television.A total of 166 owl conservation awareness camps in six districts had been carried out up to the end of 2010 (Acharya 2011).

DISCUSSION
The generosity of many more bird observers in Nepal in providing their unpublished records has led to the 2010 study being a more complete assessment of species' threat status than was possible previously.
Limitations of this study and the two previous assessments of Nepal's threatened birds are that not all species have been comprehensively assessed to identify those that might qualify for Near Threatened status.Passage migrants and vagrants were excluded because it was considered that the main threats to these species in particular may lie elsewhere.However, some passage migrants may use important stop-over sites where threats may be high, such as Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve.A new study is currently underway, as part of DNPWC's commitment to prepare animal red data lists under the auspices of the Zoological Society of London and National Trust for Nature Conservation, which is considering the threat status of all bird species recorded in Nepal to produce a National Red Data Book of Nepal's Birds.The work undertaken in this study will be used for this more comprehensive review.
Since 2004, more research work has been carried out to identify threats and the extent of their impact on Nepal's birds, and so we understand them better: for example, the impacts of diclofenac on White-rumped Vulture Gyps bengalensis and Slender-billed Vulture G. tenuirostris (Gautam & Baral 2009, 2010); finding new vulture nesting sites, including in Arghakhanchi District where five vulture species breed (Bhusal 2010); research work on owls which has revealed the threats from trade (Acharya & Ghimirey 2009); and a recent desk study which has shown the high impacts of agricultural changes (Inskipp & Baral 2011).
Declines are not taking place as quickly as a simple comparison of the figures between the two assessments, in 2004 and 2010, indicates.More time was available for the 2010 study and, significantly, more records have been received from a larger number of contributors, revealing a truer picture of the state of Nepal's birds.With the improved knowledge resulting from the more detailed analysis carried out in 2010 it has been realised that in 2004 some species were more threatened than considered at that time, and should have been categorised as Critically Endangered or Endangered instead of Vulnerable; also that some species not picked up as Nationally Threatened in 2004, actually were.
Nevertheless a comparison between the results of the 2004 and 2010 assessments shows that the status of Nepal's birds has deteriorated.It is clear that some threats have certainly worsened, for example loss and degradation of forests, pressure on grasslands, the spread and intensification of agriculture and, most especially, the wide range of threats facing wetlands.However, positive responses have increased too, for instance the raising of conservation awareness, spread of community forestry and some projects benefiting local livelihoods.
Nepal is fortunate, compared with many developing countries, in that long-term and continuing interest in its bird life has provided a solid basis for recording and interpreting the changes that are taking place.Such documentation raises awareness of the importance of conservation and helps to focus on the highest priorities.As a result, there are more effective interventions than in places without such interest, for example targeted at species with the highest risk of global extinction (e.g.vultures) and at sites which are most important for biodiversity.That said, resources and capacity are still limiting factors, and many priorities remain that need to

Figure 3 .Figure 4
Figure 3. Proportion of nationally threatened birds occurring in different habitat types N.B.Figures are not cumulative because several species are found in more than one habitat type.For instance, Grey-headed Fish Eagle Ichthyophaga ichthyaetus and Lesser Fish Eagle I. humilis require both forests and wetlands as they breed in forests close to rivers or lakes.

in addition to Nepal) Occurrence status Habitats Main altitudinal range Globally threatened status Population Nationally threatened status Reason Key threats Research needs Key conservation interventions needed
Carol Inskipp pers.obs.December  2010).Within five years Mikania engulfed a large chunk of the reserve's marshes and terrestrial habitats at Koshi area system (except buffer zones) covers over 20% of the country and includes 10 national parks, four reserves and six conservation areas.Since 2004 the government has established four new protected areas.Most protected areas have buffer zones which cover nearly 4% of the country's total land area.A total of 16 of Nepal's 20 protected areas are managed by the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC), Government of Nepal.Annapurna, Gaurishankar and Manaslu Conservation Areas are managed by the National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC).The NTNC was established in 1982 as a not-for-profit organisation, working in Nepal for nature conservation.Kanchenjunga Conservation Area is managed by a Council, the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area Management Council (KCAMC), which is a local body formulated from user groups and committees.