• Summary
• Text account
• Data table and detailed info
• Map
• Reference and further resources

The site was identified as important 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:

Species	Red List1	Season	Year(s)	Size	IBA criteria
Green Peafowl Pavo muticus	EN	resident	1998	rare	A1, A3
Masked Finfoot Heliopais personatus	CR	breeding	1998	rare	A1, A3
Sarus Crane Grus antigone	VU	resident	1998	common	A1
Greater Adjutant Leptoptilos dubius	NT	non-breeding	1998	rare	A1
Lesser Adjutant Leptoptilos javanicus	NT	resident	1998	common	A1
White-shouldered Ibis Pseudibis davisoni	CR	resident	1998	rare	A1
Giant Ibis Thaumatibis gigantea	CR	resident	1998	rare	A1, A4i
Red-headed Vulture Sarcogyps calvus	CR	non-breeding	1998	rare	A3
White-rumped Vulture Gyps bengalensis	CR	non-breeding	1998	rare	A1, A3
Slender-billed Vulture Gyps tenuirostris	CR	non-breeding	1998	present	A1
Rufous-winged Buzzard Butastur liventer	LC	resident	1998	present	A3
White-rumped Pygmy-falcon Neohierax insignis	NT	resident	1998	rare	A3
Common Woodshrike Tephrodornis pondicerianus	LC	resident	1998	common	A3
Indochinese Bushlark Mirafra erythrocephala	LC	resident	1998	common	A3
Mekong Wagtail Motacilla samveasnae	NT	resident	1998	common	A2

1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2003) may differ.

Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2003. The most recent assessment (2016) is shown below.

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%)	very rapid to severe deterioration	very high
Agricultural expansion and intensification	happening now	some of area/population (10-49%)	very rapid to severe deterioration	high
Energy production and mining	likely in short term (within 4 years)	some of area/population (10-49%)	moderate to rapid deterioration	medium
Transportation and service corridors	happening now	small area/few individuals (<10%)	moderate to rapid deterioration	low

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	No management plan exists but the management planning process has begun	Some limited conservation initiatives are in place	low

Year	Protected Area	Designation	% overlap with IBA
1993	Lomphat	Wildlife Sanctuary	44

Habitat1	Habitat detail	% of IBA
Forest	Lowland evergreen rain forest (tropical), Semi-evergreen rain forest (tropical), Dry deciduous forest (tropical)	-
Shrubland	Secondary scrub	-
Wetlands (inland)	Rivers and streams, Riverine floodplains, Freshwater lakes and pools, Ephemeral wetlands	-

1. IUCN Habitat classification.

Land use	% of IBA
agriculture	-
fisheries/aquaculture	-
forestry	-
urban/industrial/transport	-

---

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Lomphat (Cambodia). Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/lomphat-iba-cambodia on 22/11/2024.