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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis | CR | resident | 2002 | abundant | A1, A3 |
Greater Adjutant Leptoptilos dubius | NT | non-breeding | 2002 | rare | A1 |
Lesser Adjutant Leptoptilos javanicus | NT | resident | 2002 | uncommon | A1, A4i |
Asian Openbill Anastomus oscitans | LC | non-breeding | 2002 | abundant | A4i |
White-shouldered Ibis Pseudibis davisoni | CR | non-breeding | 2002 | rare | A1 |
Intermediate Egret Ardea intermedia | LC | non-breeding | 2002 | abundant | A4i |
Spot-billed Pelican Pelecanus philippensis | NT | non-breeding | 2002 | abundant | A1 |
Greater Spotted Eagle Clanga clanga | VU | non-breeding | 2002 | uncommon | A1 |
White-browed Reed-warbler Acrocephalus tangorum | VU | winter | 2002 | uncommon | A1 |
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 (2009) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2009 | very unfavourable | high | low |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
no | 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 |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Biological resource use | 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 |
Most of site (50-90%) covered (including the most critical parts for important bird species) | No management planning has taken place | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity | low |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
1993 | Tonle Sap Biosphere | Multiple Use Management Area | 34 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Artificial/Terrestrial | Rice paddies, Perennial crops, orchards and groves, Small settlements, rural gardens | - |
Grassland | Edaphic grassland | - |
Wetlands (inland) | Ephemeral wetlands, Rivers and streams, Freshwater lakes and pools, Permanent swamps | - |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
agriculture | - |
forestry | - |
other | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Veal Srongae (Cambodia). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/veal-srongae-iba-cambodia on 23/11/2024.