Data Zone
The site was identified as internationally important for bird conservation in 2003 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:Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2003. The most recent assessment (2009) is shown below.
| IBA conservation assessment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
| 2009 | very poor | high | medium |
| Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
| yes | population | good | |
| State (condition of the trigger species' populations) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Actual vs Reference (units) | % remaining | Result | ||
| Sarus Crane Grus antigone | 87 / 87 (birds) | 100 | good | ||
| Lesser Adjutant Leptoptilos javanicus | 338 / 338 (birds) | 100 | good | ||
| Giant Ibis Thaumatibis gigantea | 14 / 69 (birds) | 21 | very poor | ||
| Red-headed Vulture Sarcogyps calvus | 19 / 19 (birds) | 100 | good | ||
| White-rumped Vulture Gyps bengalensis | 43 / 62 (birds) | 70 | moderate | ||
| Slender-billed Vulture Gyps tenuirostris | 11 / 11 (birds) | 100 | good | ||
| Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
| Transportation and service corridors | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Biological resource use | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
| Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | few individuals/small area (<10%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | low |
| Residential and commercial development | happening now | few individuals/small area (<10%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | low |
| Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Designation | Planning | Action | Result |
| Whole area (>90%) covered by appropriate conservation designation | No management plan exists, but the management planning process has begun | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented, but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity | medium |
| Year | Protected Area | Designation (management category) | % coverage of IBA |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1993 | Preah Vihear Temple | Protected Landscape (V) | 2 |
| 1999 | Preah Vihear | Protected Forest (IV) | 64 |
| Habitat | % of IBA | Habitat detail |
|---|---|---|
| Forest | major (>10) | Lowland evergreen rain forest (tropical); Semi-evergreen rain forest (tropical); Dry deciduous forest (tropical) |
| Artificial/Terrestrial | minor (<10) | Rice paddies; Perennial crops, orchards and groves; Small settlements, rural gardens |
| Grassland | minor (<10) | Edaphic grassland |
| Shrubland | minor (<10) | Secondary scrub |
| Wetlands (inland) | minor (<10) | Freshwater lakes and pools; Riverine floodplains; Rivers and streams; Ephemeral wetlands |
| Land use | % of IBA |
|---|---|
| agriculture | - |
| forestry | - |
| military | - |
| nature conservation and research | - |
| other | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Chhep (Cambodia). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/chhep-iba-cambodia on 23/12/2024.