The site was identified as important in 2005 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:1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2005) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2005. The most recent assessment (2011) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2011 | very unfavourable | high | medium |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
yes | habitat | medium |
State (condition of the trigger species' habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Habitat | Quantity (% remaining) | Quality (% carrying capacity) | Result |
Grassland | poor (40-69%) | moderate (70-90%) | very unfavourable |
Forest | moderate (70-90%) | moderate (70-90%) | unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Biological resource use | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | slow but significant deterioration | high |
Residential and commercial development | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | slow but significant deterioration | high |
Transportation and service corridors | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Energy production and mining | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Protected areas | Management plan | Other action | Result |
Whole area of site (>90%) covered by appropriate conservation designation | A management plan exists but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Some limited conservation initiatives are in place | medium |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
1998 | Kanchanjunga | संरक्षण क्षेत्र | 100 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Artificial/Terrestrial | - | |
Forest | - | |
Grassland | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Kanchenjungha Conservation Area (Nepal). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/kanchenjungha-conservation-area-iba-nepal on 22/11/2024.