The site was identified as important in 2002 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Black-faced Spoonbill Platalea minor | EN | winter | 1993-1997 | 21-41 individuals | A1, A4i |
Chinese Egret Egretta eulophotes | VU | passage | 1993-1994 | 2-3 individuals | A1 |
Spot-billed Pelican Pelecanus philippensis | NT | non-breeding | 1994 | 4 individuals | A1 |
Charadrius mongolus | NR | passage | 1994 | 2,000 individuals | A4i |
Spoon-billed Sandpiper Calidris pygmaea | CR | passage | 1994 | 7 individuals | A1 |
Spotted Redshank Tringa erythropus | LC | passage | 1994-1996 | 700-750 individuals | A4i |
Spotted Greenshank Tringa guttifer | EN | passage | 1994-1996 | 2-5 individuals | A1 |
Saunders's Gull Saundersilarus saundersi | VU | winter | 1994-2001 | 104-260 individuals | A1, A4i |
A4iii Species group - waterbirds | n/a | passage | 1994 | 30,000 individuals | A4iii |
1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2002) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2002. The most recent assessment (2016) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2016 | very unfavourable | very high | negligible |
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 |
Marine Coastal/Supratidal | - | very poor (< 40%) | very unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
Biological resource use | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
Natural system modifications | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
Transportation and service corridors | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Protected areas | Management plan | Other action | Result |
Little/none of site covered (<10%) | No management planning has taken place | Very little or no conservation action taking place | negligible |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
2004 | Red River Delta | UNESCO-MAB Biosphere Reserve | 100 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Artificial/Aquatic & Marine | 24 | |
Forest | Mangrove forest (tropical) | 21 |
Marine Intertidal | 20 | |
Marine Neritic | 20 | |
Marine Coastal/Supratidal | 15 |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
fisheries/aquaculture | 74 |
not utilised | 20 |
other | 6 |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Nghia Hung (Vietnam). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/nghia-hung-iba-vietnam on 22/11/2024.