Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:12:40.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

First census of the white-shouldered ibis Pseudibis davisoni reveals roost-site mismatch with Cambodia's protected areas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2012

Hugh L. Wright*
Affiliation:
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK.
Nigel J. Collar
Affiliation:
BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK
Iain R. Lake
Affiliation:
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK.
Net Norin
Affiliation:
BirdLife International in Indochina Cambodia Programme, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Rours Vann
Affiliation:
Northern Plains Project, Wildlife Conservation Society Cambodia Program, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Sok Ko
Affiliation:
WWF Cambodia Country Programme, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Sum Phearun
Affiliation:
People Resources and Conservation Foundation, Banlung, Cambodia
Paul M. Dolman
Affiliation:
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK.
*
(Corresponding author) E-mail hugh.wright@uea.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The population size of the Critically Endangered white-shouldered ibis Pseudibis davisoni has always been poorly known. The first-ever census across Cambodia in 2009–2010 using simultaneous counts at multiple roost sites found substantially more birds than previously estimated, with a minimum of 523 individuals. The census allowed us to make a revised global population estimate of 731–856 individuals, increasing hope for the species' long-term survival. However, the largest subpopulations are imminently threatened by development and c. 75% of the birds counted in Cambodia were outside protected areas.

Type
Short Communications
Copyright
Copyright © Fauna & Flora International 2012

Cambodia is a stronghold for threatened biota in South-East Asia (CEPF, 2007), with a protected-area system covering 31% of the country's land area (FAO, 2010). However, with status and distributional data lacking for much of Cambodia's wildlife (Neou, Reference Neou2004), protected areas may not provide adequate coverage for certain key species, a common problem elsewhere (Brooks et al., Reference Brooks, Bakarr, Boucher, Da Fonseca, Hilton Taylor and Hoekstra2004; Rodrigues et al., Reference Rodrigues, Andelman, Bakarr, Boitani, Brooks and Cowling2004; Beresford et al., Reference Beresford, Buchanan, Donald, Butchart, Fishpool and Rondinini2010). The first ever census of the Critically Endangered white-shouldered ibis Pseudibis davisoni reveals a new instance of this issue.

Considered one of the most threatened waterbirds in Indochina (BirdLife International, 2001), the white-shouldered ibis was widespread in the region until the 20th century. Now confined to Cambodia and adjacent southern Laos, plus one river in Indonesian Borneo (BirdLife International, 2011), in 2000 it was categorized as Criti-cally Endangered, with the population assessed at only 330 mature individuals in 2010 (BirdLife International, Reference Bird, Mulligan and Gilroy2011). Four major subpopulations were identified in Cambodia as biodiversity surveys achieved greater coverage of the country (BirdLife International, 2006; Timmins, Reference Timmins, Bezuijen, Timmins and Seng2008). However, population assessments remained informal, with no previous coordinated censuses.

In 2009 we implemented the first coordinated census to quantify subpopulations throughout Cambodia. White-shouldered ibises are solitary dry-season breeders, becoming gregarious in the wet season (July–October) when they roost together in trees. Simultaneous wet-season roost counts can therefore provide minimum population numbers. We located roosts in and around the four sites known to hold most ibises: Kulen Promtep Wildlife Sanctuary, Lomphat Wildlife Sanctuary, the central section of the Mekong River between Kratie and Stung Treng towns, and Western Siem Pang Important Bird Area (Fig. 1). Although complete coverage of these sites (totalling more than 960,800 ha) could not be achieved, all locations known or believed to hold important numbers of ibises were prioritized and intensively searched with assistance from local informants.

Fig. 1 Known white-shouldered ibis Pseudibis davisoni subpopulations in Cambodia and their recorded/estimated size. Pie-charts are scaled to population size and show percentage of birds occurring within protected (dark grey) and unprotected (pale grey) areas. Figures inside pie-charts were obtained from roost counts, figures beside are estimates. Stippled polygons represent protected areas. Rectangle on inset indicates the location of the main map. 1Roost count September 2010; 2roost count October 2010; 3roost count October 2010; 4roost count September 2010; 5Timmins (Reference Timmins2006); 6,8T. Gray pers. comm., 2011; 7Bird et al. (Reference Bird, Mulligan and Gilroy2007); 9H. Wright, unpubl. data; 10,11Wildlife Conservation Society, unpubl. data.

Nine coordinated counts took place over July–December 2009 and July–October 2010 at approximately monthly intervals. Observers remained a suitable distance from roosts to avoid disturbance, although this prevented distinguishing immatures from adults. Knowledge of roost locations steadily improved (from 18 in July 2009 to 39 in October 2010), making the counts increasingly comprehensive.

The largest total count was 523 in October 2010, the final census; however, few additional birds were accumulated in the final three censuses. Despite only including four areas, this new minimum number exceeds the global population estimates of 330 mature individuals (BirdLife International, 2011) and < 500 individuals of all ages (Timmins, Reference Timmins, Bezuijen, Timmins and Seng2008). However, 74% of the ibises were at roosts outside the boundaries of protected areas. Western Siem Pang and the central section of the Mekong River, currently unprotected, together accounted for 58% of the ibises censused. At Lomphat 46% of birds were at roosts outside the demarcated Sanctuary.

Peak site counts provide a preliminary indication of the relative size of the four subpopulations (Fig. 1): 226 birds in Western Siem Pang, 187 at Lomphat, 124 on the central section of the Mekong River and 34 at Kulen Promtep. Although these peaks were not obtained simultaneously, all were in September–October 2010. The minimum distance between sites is 47 km, and as yet we have no evidence that the ibises move this far. Count fluctuations within sites appeared unrelated to counts at other sites, being attributable instead to short-distance movements and changes in favoured roosts.

Combining roost census data with estimates for other, smaller populations of white-shouldered ibis, we propose that there is a minimum Cambodian population of 691–736 (Fig. 1). Other populations have not yet been counted accurately but available data (for the north section of the Mekong River) and expert judgement (for Eastern Siem Pang, Mondulkiri Protected Forest, Rovieng district, Phnom Prich Wildlife Sanctuary, Seima Protection Forest and Tonle Sap floodplain) allow estimates to be made.

Given the increasingly comprehensive coverage of biodiversity inventories it is unlikely that further large subpopulations will be discovered in Cambodia. However, fuller coverage of the central section of the Mekong River could potentially reveal 100–200 more birds (R. J. Timmins, pers. comm., 2011) and diffuse, lower-density populations may remain undetected elsewhere, particularly in Mondulkiri and Ratanakiri provinces. These putative populations are not included in our estimates.

The Indonesian population of white-shouldered ibis has been estimated at only 30–100 (BirdLife International, 2011) and is decreasing (Meijaard et al., Reference Meijaard, Van Balen and Nijman2005); with no recent surveys its current size is uncertain. Although no records have come from Laos since the 1990s the proximity of Western Siem Pang to Xe Pian National Protected Area (across the border), plus minimal survey effort at the latter, suggests small numbers could still persist. We provisionally estimate there are 10–20 white-shouldered ibises in Laos. In Vietnam sightings have gone from few to almost none since the 1990s (R. Craik, pers. comm., 2011). The species is now probably only a non-breeding visitor from Cambodia and thus Vietnam does not contribute to our figures. We therefore estimate a minimum global population of 731–856 birds.

This total is larger than previously estimated, providing hope that the long-term future of the species can still be secured. Nevertheless, these increased numbers reflect improved coverage and rigour of surveys rather than population recovery, and the species is still greatly threatened. Only 25.9–28.4% of white-shouldered ibises occur in legally protected areas in Cambodia; globally the percentage is 25.9–26.8. Western Siem Pang, currently the most important site, is unprotected and plantations will convert the majority of habitat by 2020 (BirdLife International, 2010). Proposed dams threaten Lomphat Wildlife Sanctuary (BirdLife International, 2010) and the unprotected central section of the Mekong River, which also faces encroaching human settlement (Timmins, Reference Timmins, Bezuijen, Timmins and Seng2008). With 63–73% of the known global population in three imminently threatened sites and probably continuing declines in other areas, the white-shouldered ibis is still Critically Endangered. Securing the Western Siem Pang and central Mekong subpopulations is now essential.

Given the large proportion of Cambodia already in reserves, the distributional mismatch between white-shouldered ibis roosts and the country's protected area system is unfortunate. Protected area designations have prioritized the least impacted habitats furthest from settlements, whereas the ibis requires human-influenced habitats, feeding in seasonal pools grazed by livestock and in traditional agricultural fallows (Wright et al., Reference Wright, Buckingham and Dolman2010a,Reference Wright, Bou, Collar, Gray, Lake and Sumb). If establishment of further protected areas are not possible, then special management zones (integrating human use and biodiversity protection) and conservation concessions, not yet attempted in Cambodia, could provide alternatives.

However, the white-shouldered ibis is not the only threatened species inadequately served by Cambodia's protected areas. The Critically Endangered Gyps and Sarcogyps vultures and Bengal florican Houbaropsis bengalensis also have close association with humans through traditionally managed habitat and resources (Houston, Reference Houston, Bird, Varland and Negro1996; Gray et al., Reference Gray, Ro, Seng, Hong, Collar and Dolman2009). Such habitats and resources will be the first to deteriorate with economic development, putting these species at great risk of extinction. With the intensification of agriculture and expansion of cash-crop cultivation already a major threat in Cambodia, as across much of Indochina (CEPF, 2007), such species urgently need attention to ensure their survival.

Acknowledgements

We thank Bou Vorsak (BirdLife), Gordon Congdon (WWF), Ea Sokha (WCS), Jonathan Eames (BirdLife), Mark Grindley (PRCF) and Hugo Rainey (WCS) for support and manuscript review. Special thanks go to field staff who undertook censuses, and to Men Phymean of Forestry Administration and H.E. Chay Samith of GDANCP, Ministry of Environment of Cambodia. For funding we thank the British Ornithologists' Union, Natural Environment (NERC) and Economic and Social Research Councils (ESRC), British Birdfair/BirdLife Preventing Extinctions Programme and BirdLife/Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF). CEPF is a joint initiative of l'Agence Française de Développement, Conservation International, the Global Environment Facility, Government of Japan, MacArthur Foundation and World Bank.

Biographical sketches

Hugh L. Wright studies the conservation ecology of the white-shouldered ibis and the role of low-impact agriculture in maintaining landscapes for threatened species. Nigel J. Collar promotes research on threatened birds and currently co-manages projects in Angola, Ethiopia and Uzbekistan. Iain R. Lake is a quantitative geographer with research interests varying from ecology to social science and human health. Net Norin undertakes conservation work in Western Siem Pang Important Bird Area to monitor and protect five Critically Endangered bird species. Rours Vann implements biodiversity monitoring in and around Kulen Promtep Wildlife Sanctuary, monitoring and protecting a suite of threatened species. Sok Ko works in the central section of the Mekong, monitoring threatened dry forest and riverine species. Sum Phearun researches the ecology of ibis and undertakes conservation in Lomphat Wildlife Sanctuary. Paul M. Dolman leads researchers examining the conservation ecology of threatened species in human-modified ecosystems including ibises, bustards, farmland passerines, bats and invertebrates.

References

Beresford, A.E., Buchanan, G.M., Donald, P.F., Butchart, S.H.M., Fishpool, L.D.C. & Rondinini, C. (2010) Poor overlap between the distribution of protected areas and globally threatened birds in Africa. Animal Conservation, 14, 99107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, J.P., Mulligan, B. & Gilroy, J. (2007) A report from a BOU supported project: Cambodia Ornithological Expedition summary of findings. Ibis, 149, 650651.Google Scholar
BirdLife International (2001) Threatened Birds of Asia: The BirdLife International Red Data Book. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
BirdLife International (2006) Record numbers of white-shouldered ibis found by conservationists in Cambodia. The Babbler, 20, 23.Google Scholar
BirdLife International (2010) Largest ever white-shouldered ibis count. The Babbler, 35, 35.Google Scholar
BirdLife International (2011) Species Factsheet: Pseudibis davisoni. Http://birdlife.org/datazone/home [accessed 28 May 2011].Google Scholar
Brooks, T.M., Bakarr, M.I., Boucher, T., Da Fonseca, G.A.B., Hilton Taylor, C., Hoekstra, J.M. et al. (2004) Coverage provided by the global protected-area system: is it enough? BioScience, 54, 10811091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CEPF (Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund) (2007) Indo-Burma Biodiversity Hotspot, Indochina Region: Ecosystem Profile. Http://www.cepf.net/resources/publications/Pages/ecosystem_profiles.aspx [accessed 28 May 2011].Google Scholar
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN) (2010) Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010 Main Report. FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Gray, T.N.E., Ro, B., Seng, K.H., Hong, C., Collar, N.J. & Dolman, P.M. (2009) Generality of models that predict the distribution of species: conservation activity and reduction of model transferability for a threatened bustard. Conservation Biology, 23, 433439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Houston, D.C. (1996) The effect of altered environments on vultures. In Raptors in Human Landscapes: Adaptations to Built and Cultivated Environments (eds Bird, D., Varland, D. & Negro, J.), pp. 327336. Academic Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
Meijaard, E., Van Balen, S.B. & Nijman, V. (2005) The former status of the white-shouldered ibis Pseudibis davisoni on the Barito and Teweh Rivers, Indonesian Borneo. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology, 53, 277279.Google Scholar
Neou, B. (2004) Status of biodiversity researches in Cambodia. ASEAN Biodiversity, 4, 1316.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, A.S.L., Andelman, S.L., Bakarr, M.I., Boitani, L., Brooks, T.M., Cowling, R.M. et al. (2004) Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature, 428, 640643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timmins, R. (2006) An Assessment of the Biodiversity Conservation Significance of the Mekong Ramsar Site, Stung Treng, Cambodia. Mekong Wetlands Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Programme, Stung Treng, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Timmins, R. (2008) Birds. In Biological Surveys of the Mekong River between Kratie and Stung Treng Towns, Northeast Cambodia, 2006–2007 (eds Bezuijen, M.R., Timmins, R. & Seng, T.), pp. 5380. WWF Greater Mekong—Cambodia Country Programme, Cambodia Fisheries Administration and Cambodia Forestry Administration, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Wright, H.L., Bou, V., Collar, N.J., Gray, T.N.E., Lake, I.R., Sum, P. et al. (2010b) Establishing a national monitoring programme for white-shouldered ibis in Cambodia. Ibis, 152, 206208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, H.L., Buckingham, D.L. & Dolman, P.M. (2010a) Dry season habitat use by Critically Endangered white-shouldered ibis in northern Cambodia. Animal Conservation, 13, 7179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Known white-shouldered ibis Pseudibis davisoni subpopulations in Cambodia and their recorded/estimated size. Pie-charts are scaled to population size and show percentage of birds occurring within protected (dark grey) and unprotected (pale grey) areas. Figures inside pie-charts were obtained from roost counts, figures beside are estimates. Stippled polygons represent protected areas. Rectangle on inset indicates the location of the main map. 1Roost count September 2010; 2roost count October 2010; 3roost count October 2010; 4roost count September 2010; 5Timmins (2006); 6,8T. Gray pers. comm., 2011; 7Bird et al. (2007); 9H. Wright, unpubl. data; 10,11Wildlife Conservation Society, unpubl. data.