Data Zone
The site was identified as important in 2004 because it was regularly supporting significant populations of the species listed below, meeting ('triggering') IBA criteria.
Populations meeting IBA criteria ('trigger species') at the site:| Species | Red List1 | Season | Year(s) | Size | IBA criteria |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eurasian Coot Fulica atra | LC | resident | 2004 | present | A4i |
| Sarus Crane Grus antigone | VU | resident | 2004 | present | A1, A4i |
| Pallas's Fish-eagle Haliaeetus leucoryphus | EN | resident | 2004 | present | A1 |
| A4iii Species group - waterbirds | n/a | unknown | 2004 | min 20,000 individuals | A4iii |
1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2004) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2004. The most recent assessment (2013) is shown below.
| IBA conservation assessment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
| 2013 | favourable | very high | low |
| Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
| yes | habitat | good | |
| State (condition of the trigger species' habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Habitat | Quantity (% remaining) | Quality (% carrying capacity) | Result |
| Artificial/Aquatic & Marine | good (> 90%) | good (> 90%) | favourable |
| Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
| Pollution | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
| Residential and commercial development | likely in long term (beyond 4 years) | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | medium |
| Natural system modifications | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
| Agricultural expansion and intensification | past (and unlikely to return) and no longer limiting | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | low |
| Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Protected areas | Management plan | Other action | Result |
| Some of site covered (10-49%) | Unknown | Some limited conservation initiatives are in place | low |
| Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1979 | Van Vihar | National Park | - |
| 2002 | Bhoj Wetland | Ramsar Site, Wetland of International Importance | - |
| Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial/Aquatic & Marine | - | |
| Artificial/Terrestrial | - | |
| Grassland | - | |
| Shrubland | - |
| Land use | % of IBA |
|---|---|
| fisheries/aquaculture | - |
| tourism/recreation | - |
| water management | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Bhoj wetland (India). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/bhoj-wetland-iba-india on 22/11/2024.