Data Zone
Justification of Red List category
This species has a large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (extent of occurrence <20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population trend is suspected to be declining but only slowly, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size has not been quantified but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
Population justification
Previous population estimates put this species at below 20,000 mature individuals however a more recent analysis puts the population size of this species substantially higher, possibly in the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands. It is generally common (if elusive) in suitable habitat across its large range. For example, at Singhalila National Park, India, Khaling et al. (1999) counted 28 groups of calling birds in 1995, 19 in 1996 and 24 in 1997 with mean density estimates (groups/km2) of 6.19/km2, 4.52/km2 and 5.46/km2 respectively. At Pipar-Santel (Nepal), similar densities were recorded of 17.0 calling birds/km2 at Pipar and 18.3 birds/km2 at Santel in 2005 (Poudyal et al. 2007).
The area of forest cover in its elevational range is c.34,000km2 (data from Jung et al. [2020], analysed using sRedList [2023]). An approximate calculation estimating population size from published densities suggests a maximum population of hundreds of thousands of birds. Due to a lack of census data from across the species' range, as well as incomplete knowledge on occupancy (e.g. an apparent avoidance of north-west slopes in parts of the range: Norbu et al. 2016), the population size is not estimated here, but is thought to probably number at least in the high tens, if not hundreds, of thousands, even if only a small part of the range is occupied.
Trend justification
Poorly known owing to a lack of comprehensive monitoring across its range. Monitoring data are available only from Pipar-Santel, Nepal, but from here results are inconclusive. In a comparison of dawn call count between 1979 and 2014, recording rate dropped by 25% (Poudyal et al. 2016) but the sample size was small, and rate fluctuated between this time period. Another study by Poudyal et al. (2007), however, found a higher number of birds calling in 2005 than 2001. Additionally, Poudyal et al. (2011) found no evidence of a decline in the Pipar bowl from 2005 to 2011. The principal threats to this species across its range are habitat loss and degradation (particularly driven by buffalo and sheep grazing, collection of firewood and timber, and harvesting of medicinal plants and bamboo) and some local hunting and trapping. In the past three generations (18 years), forest cover loss in its range has been minimal (<1%, Global Forest Watch [2024] based on data from Hansen et al. [2013] and methods therein) and while degradation (e.g. understorey clearance and selective logging) may be having additive impacts not detectable by remote sensing, this is also likely to be minimal given this species' vast and mostly inaccessible range. Similarly, while there is no quantification of the threat of hunting, this too is likely to be driving only local population declines. Overall therefore, T. satyra is precautionarily suspected to be declining, but only at a slow rate equivalent to 1-9% over three generations.
Tragopan satyra occurs in the Himalayas of Nepal (uncommon), India (uncommon), Bhutan (fairly common) and China (local, with a limited range in south and south-east Tibet) (BirdLife International 2001).
The species occurs in moist oak and rhododendron forest with dense undergrowth and bamboo clumps, mixed forest, scrub and densely vegetated ravines, and is a partial altitudinal migrant. They occur from 1,800 m (where they are sometimes recorded down to in winter) to 4,500 m, with most sightings occurring within the elevation band of 2,300 to 3,900 m (Namgay and Thinley 2017).
Migratory tragopans use all forest types across their annual cycles, using mostly high-elevation fir and mixed conifer forests in the summer and cool broadleaved forests in the winter. Residents and a few migrants continue to use mixed conifer forests during winter (Norbu et al. 2016).
Changes in habitat use from summer to winter is not a simple transition to lower elevation forests and vice versa during spring; there seems to be a complex pattern which differs between individuals. Some migrate within a single habitat type (e.g. higher elevation mixed conifer forest to lower elevation mixed conifer forest), whereas others were found to migrate to lower elevations within a forest transition complex consisting of mixed conifer and cool broadleaved forests. One female and male were found to migrate to higher elevation fir forests from mixed-conifer forests during the winter. The species was found to prefer oak forests in the winter months and move according to food availability and snowfall. After oak, fir forests and then juniper were found to have the next highest frequency of occurrence (Norbu et al. 2016).
Canopy cover, plant diversity and shrub cover does not seem to influence the abundance and distribution of the species (Namgay and Thinley 2017). A previous study found the species in both open and closed habitats, with closed habitats being possibly preferred for roosting and cover, and open areas preferred for calls and display activities (Khaling et al. 1999).
Threats include hunting as well as habitat clearance and degradation due to timber harvesting, unplanned fires, fuelwood and fodder collection, and livestock grazing (BirdLife International 2001, Poudyal et al. 2009). Some areas, such as the Pipar-Santel area of Nepal, might be opened up for the commercial extraction of medicinal and culinary plants (Poudyal et al. 2009).
The migration of the species mostly involves walking, interspersed with short bursts of running or flight within forests. While primarily altitudinal migrants, they also traverse multiple mountains, emphasising the need for intact habitat connectivity. Concerns arise over land use changes potentially hindering migration, though their ability for short flights reduces susceptibility to barriers like fences (Norbu et al. 2016).
In Jigme Dorji National Park, habitat disturbances stem from developmental activities like road construction and electrification. Similar developmental activities are known to have attributed to population declines of this species elsewhere. Tree felling and bird trapping pose significant threats, with poaching linked closely to logging and firewood collection. A 2017 study in the Hindu Kush Mountain range just west of the Himalayas reveals significant forest cover losses at elevations: 1,500-2,400 m (1100 km2), 2,400-3,200 m (600 km2), and 3,200-4,000 m (425 km2), accompanied by fragmentation (Das et al. 2017). This highlights the potential impact of deforestation at elevations occupied by Tragopan satyr, however represents only a very small proportion of the range. Overall, forest cover loss in its range has been minimal (<1%, Global Forest Watch [2024] based on data from Hansen et al. [2013] and methods therein), with deforestation observed primarily at lower elevations. While degradation (e.g. understorey clearance and selective logging) may be having additive impacts not detectable by remote sensing, this is also likely to be minimal given this species' vast and mostly inaccessible range.
Additionally, musk deer traps pose serious threats to ground-dwelling birds like the Tragopan satyra, despite not being the intended target (Dendup et al. 2021).
Conservation Actions Underway
None is known.
Text account compilers
Taylor, J., Mahood, S., Benstead, P., Chad, E.
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Satyr Tragopan Tragopan satyra. Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/satyr-tragopan-tragopan-satyra on 22/12/2024.
Recommended citation for factsheets for more than one species: BirdLife International (2024) IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/search on 22/12/2024.