Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 August
2019 | 11(10): 14268–14278
The status
of waterbird populations of Chhaya Rann
Wetland Complex in Porbandar, Gujarat, India
Dhavalkumar Vargiya
1 & Anita Chakraborty 2
1 School of Pharmacy, RK
University, Rajkot-Bhavnagar Highway, Kasturbadham, Rajkot, Gujarat 360020, India.
2 Department of
Botany, SSLNT Mahila Mahavidyalay,
BBMK University, Dhanbad, Jharkhand 826001, India.
1 dhaval.mwcc@gmail.com
(corresponding author), 2 anitagcenator@gmail.com
Abstract: The present investigation was undertaken to study the
diversity of wetland birds in Chhaya Rann (Gujarati: Deserted land) wetland complex, situated in
the urban setting of Porbandar City, in the western state of Gujarat,
India. Almost 70 species belonging to 21
families of wetland birds have been reported from here with an estimated count
of 35,747 and 20,981 in the year 2016 and 2015 respectively. Anatidae and Scolopacidae represent the higher number of species (11
each) followed by Ardeidae (eight species) and Laridae (seven species).
The wetland complex supports one IUCN Red Listed Vulnerable species
(Common Pochard Aythya ferina),
six Near Threatened species (Lesser Flamingo Phoeniconaias
minor, Oriental Darter Anhinga melanogaster, Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus,
Black-headed Ibis Threskiornis melanocephalus, Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa and River Tern Sterna
aurantia), and 63 Least Concern
species. The wetland meets the Criteria
5 and 6 for listing as a wetland of international importance under the Ramsar Convention.
Keywords: Asian Waterbird Census, Gosabara-Mokarsagar Wetland Complex, Gujarat, IUCN Red
List, Porbandar, wetland birds.
doi: https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3466.11.10.14268-14278 | ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:022B2518-CD19-40D1-97CA-BAA0F19223D5
Editor:
Taej Mundkur, Wetlands
International, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Date of
publication: 26 August 2019 (online & print)
Manuscript
details: #3466 | Received 13
September 2018 | Final received 29 June 2019 | Finally accepted 15 July 2019
Citation: Vargiya, D. & A. Chakraborty (2019). The
status of waterbird populations of Chhaya Rann Wetland Complex in Porbandar, Gujarat, India. Journal
of Threatened Taxa
11(10): 14268–14278. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3466.11.10.14268-14278
Copyright: © Vargiya & Chakraborty 2019. Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction,
and distribution of this article in any medium by adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: Field work was self funded by Dhavalkumar Varagiya.
Competing interests: The authors
declare no competing interests.
Author details: Dhavalkumar Vargiya is working
for Porbandar wetlands since last five years. Through Mokarsagar
Wetland Conservation Committee, he tries to push agencies to protect Porbandar
wetlands especially Mokarsagar. He is also studying courtship behaviour of flamingos in non-breeding areas. He is doing
his PhD on pesticide toxicity evaluation in Porbandar wetlands. Dr.
Anita Chakraborty has worked with Wetland International-South Asia as an
Technical adviser. She has visited many important wetlands and Ramsar sites of India. She later worked as Senior Technical
Officer, Centre for Environmental Management and Participatory Development,
West Bengal. Currently she is working as Assistant Professor, Department of
Botany, SSLNT Mahila Mahavidlaya,
Luby Circular Road, Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
Author contribution: DV—field work, data
collection and correspondence with publisher.
AC—prepared first draft and provided inputs as and when required.
Acknowledgements: Acknowledgements: We
thank Mr. Lalit Parmar, then DCF, Porbandar Forest Division- Porbandar for
continuous support, encouragement and participation. We are very grateful to
Ashraf Ali, Chirag Tank, Dr. Kamlesh Mehta, Jagdish Thanki, Jaydeep Katbamna, Jaypalsinh Jadeja, Kamlesh
Kotecha, Karan Karavadra, Mahendra
Modi, Nayan Thanki , Nitin Makvana, Paresh Pitroda, Punit Kariya, IG Rajesh Makwana, Vikrantsinh
Zala, and Vivek Bhatt who joined us in the Asian Waterbird Census 2015.
Our sincere thanks to Dr. Taej
Mundkur, Wetlands International for technical support
and the founding members of Mokarsagar Wetland
Conservation Committee, Mr. Kishor Joshi and Mr. Bhaskar Thankey
as well as Dr. Bhavbhuti Parasharya, Gujarat State AWC co-ordinator, for assisting
in planning the annual AWC activities.
The authors are indebted to Dr. Ritesh Kumar, Conservation Programme Manager, Wetlands
International South Asia, New Delhi for his valuable advice in drafting the
article. The authors express their
gratitude to Mr. Kishore Joshi Co–founder, Mokarsagar
Wetland Conservation Committee. The
authors are also thankful to Vikrant Rana, Aditya Gajjar,
Paresh Pitroda, Chirag Tank, Vivek
Bhatt, and Nilesh Makwana for volunteering during the waterbird
censuses.
Introduction
Wetlands are the
most precious life sustaining water resource of this planet. Some of the vital functions are surface water
storage, groundwater recharge, storm water retention, flood control, shoreline
stabilization, erosion control, and retention of carbon, nutrients, sediments,
and pollutants. Apart from these
wetlands are the repository of rich flora and fauna, however, these complex
ecosystems only constitute 4% of the earth’s ice-free land surface (Panigrahy et al. 2012).
Birds which are
fully dependent on wetlands for their physiological and behavioral
characters are termed as waterbirds. Natural wetlands are the mainstay of the waterbirds; they are also regarded as the custodian of huge
avifauna populations (Weller 1999; Stewart 2001). At present, wetlands in India face tremendous
anthropogenic pressure. Almost 38% of
inland wetlands in India have been lost during 1971–2001 (Prasad et al.
2004). This has resulted in loss of
biodiversity affecting the overall functioning of the wetland ecosystem.
Gujarat occupies
6.2% of the total geographic area in India and has the longest coastline
(almost 1,600km) of any state. It is
bestowed with 17% of wetlands including intertidal mudflats, mangroves, coral
reefs ,
rivers/streams, reservoirs/barrages, creeks and salt marsh (National Wetland
Atlas: Gujarat 2010).
The Chhaya Rann wetland complex,
situated in an urban setting of the coastal Porbandar town, comprises an
important part of the Porbandar Bird Sanctuary (officially designated in 1988),
however, very few scientific investigations have been published on its birds
(Anonymous 2016).
As part of the
results of the Asian Waterbird Census conducted in
January 2016 in the area, Vargiya et al. (2016) refer
to loss of connectivity of the Chhaya Rann wetland complex with the parent wetland and ingress of
factory effluents, rapid urbanization, and encroachment inside the wetlands,
lack of conservation initiatives and a wetland management authority. They also include images of birds being
struck by power lines, affected by fire crackers and DDT spraying.
This paper presents
results of baseline information of the waterbirds of
the Chhaya Rann wetland
complex between January 2015 and January 2016.
Study
area
Porbandar is a
coastal district of Gujarat and covers an area of 2,294km2. It lies in a semi-arid climatic zone with
average daily temperatures ranging 21.6–40.4°C, with maximum temperatures being
recorded from May to June and minimum from December to January. The average rainfall in Porbandar is 629mm,
mainly during July–September. A total of
226 wetlands are mapped in the district by the Indian Space and Research
Organization, including 95 small wetlands (< 2.25ha) with a total area of
22,199ha. Inland wetlands contribute
27.3% of the total wetland area while coastal wetlands contribute 72.7%. The major wetland categories of the district
are lagoons, rivers/ streams, reservoirs and sand/beach (National Wetland
Atlas: Gujarat 2010). Physiogeographically, Porbandar District has two regions,
i.e., the Barda Hills forested region and the river
plains. The major rivers of the district
are Bhadar, Ojat, Minsar and Madhuvanti. Porbandar District is enclosed by Arabian
Ocean on the west, by Jamnagar and Devbhumi Dwarika
districts on the north, and Junagadh from the east and the south.
The Mokarsagar–Gosabara Wetland
Complex in and around Porbandar is a complex of several coastal intertidal and
brackish to freshwater wetlands, namely, Medha Creek,
Kuchhadi, Chhaya Rann, Subhashnagar, Zavar, Kurly I, Karly II, Vanana, Dharampur, Gosabara, Mokarsagar, and Amipur.
Of these, the Chhaya Rann Wetland Complex (here
after Chhaya Wetlands) is a narrow strip of brackish
wetland habitat, about 4.5km long and 0.5km wide (2.25km2) and
comprises of Porbandar Rann, Chhaya
1, Chhaya 2 and Chhaya 3
wetlands. Historically, the Chhaya Wetlands were known as the Birla Rann
where sea salt was produced several decades ago. Locally the Chhaya
and Mokarsagar wetlands are known as ‘Rann’, i.e., ‘Chhaya nu rann’ and ‘Mokar nu rann’, as rann means deserted and
non-productive land (a reference to when the wetland dries in summer and looks
like barren land).
Over time, much of
the wetland area was filled in for construction of housing societies, roads,
shops, petrol pumps and educational buildings as part of the urban expansion of
Porbandar. With the development of
roads, this wetland was fragmented into several small wetlands now named
Porbandar Bird Sanctuary (declared in 1988), Porbandar Rann,
Chhaya 1, Chhaya 2 and Chhaya 3 near Balwy colony (Map 1
and Table 1). These wetlands are now
separated from each other and surrounded by housing colonies and industrial
areas. The Porbandar Bird Sanctuary is
also separated from the rest of the Chhaya
Wetlands. Water can flow between Chhaya 1, Chhaya 2 and Chhaya 3 and none are connected to the sea. Chhaya 3 dries out
in summer while the other wetlands always retain some water during this
period. As Chhaya
3 was previously managed as a salt pan it retains features like bunds, barriers
and quadrates which provide roost sites for waterbirds.
The water depth was
not measured in any wetland, however, by observing the foraging habits of
Lesser Flamingo Phoeniconaias minor, which
have the longest leg length and by considering the average leg length (as per Mascitti & Castañera 2006),
it was possible to roughly calculate the maximum water depth to be about
50cm. Lesser Flamingo can forage at a
water depth of 02 to 50cm. Complete legs
of the Lesser Flamingo was seen when feeding at the periphery of the wetlands,
while in the middle, the flamingos appeared to be floating with their entire
legs out of view; here we assume the water depth to be about or at least 50cm
in the Chhaya 2 wetland.
Porbandar Bird
Sanctuary is a relatively deep water habitat compared to the Chhaya 2 wetland.
The state forest department has created around 40 islets within the
waterbody to encourage roosting of waterbirds and has
planted the Indian Tulip Tree (Thespesia populnea) along the periphery of the sanctuary. There are no plantation or habitat creation
activities in the Chhaya 1, 2 and 3 wetlands.
Due to increase in
salinity in nearby farm areas, salt production was stopped and as a
consequence, the wetland currently is maintained by inflows of urban domestic
drainage water from the Chhaya municipality area and
a limited quantity of rain water during the annual monsoon. In an attempt to combat the breeding of
mosquitoes in the area, the Chhaya wetlands was
filled with waste material locally called ‘datt’ from
a nearby factory by local municipality (Kishore Joshi, pers. comm.
2016). This dumping created a shallow
water wetland and salinity of the datt when mixed
with rain water created an algal bloom which appears to have attracted
flamingos. The first flock of Lesser
Flamingo was seen in the winter of the 1960s (Kishore Joshi, pers. comm. 2016).
Methods
The Chhaya Wetlands were visited once a month between January
2015 and January 2016 during which a total of 13 counts of birds were
made. Surveys were conducted in the
mornings at 07.00–10.00 h and in the evenings at 16.00–18.00 h. The species were identified using Grimmett et al. (2015) and birds were counted using block
count and individual count methods. The
January 2015 and January 2016 counts were linked to the Asian Waterbird Census coordinated nationally by Wetlands
International and the Bombay Natural History Society.
Results
A total of 70
species of 21 families of waterbird and wetland bird
species were reported in this wetland complex during 2015–2016 (Table 2 and
Image 1). Anatidae
and Scolopacidae represent the higher number of
species (11 each), followed by Ardeidae (eight) and Laridae (seven) (Fig. 2).
The Chayya Wetlands support one (1.4% of all
species) Vulnerable species (Common Pochard Aythya
ferina) as per the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species (IUCN 2018), six (8.5%) Near Threatened species
(Lesser Flamingo, Oriental Darter Anhinga melanogaster, Dalmatian
Pelican Pelecanus crispus,
Black-headed Ibis Threskiornis melanocephalus, Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa, and River Tern
Sterna aurantia), and 63 (82.9%) species
listed as of Least Concern (Fig. 3).
Out of 70 species
recorded, seven breed in Chhaya Wetlands, while 27
are resident in the district and have not been recorded to breed here, and 36
are migratory. The estimated counts of waterbird and wetland bird species of the entire wetland
complex are 20,981 and 35,747 in January 2015 and January 2016, respectively
(Table 2). The Lesser Flamingo was the most abundant species, with 14,649 and
21,611 individuals recorded in 2015 and 2016, respectively. And the species diversity remains the same
for the Porbandar Rann for both the survey years
(2015 and 2016), i.e., 21 species. While
in other sites, the number of species observed dropped from 2015 to 2016; Chhaya 1 & 2 from 39 species in 2015 to 31 in 2016 and
at Chhaya 3 from 27 in 2015 to 18 in 2016.
Flocks of 80 to 100
Lesser Flamingos were observed to fly from the Porbandar Rann,
Chhaya 2, and 3 to Chhaya 1
wetland only to bathe and after several minutes, to fly back to the other
wetlands. This phenomenon was only
observed during afternoons. Greater
Flamingo preferred Chhaya 1 for courtship while
Lesser Flamingo preferred Chhaya 2 for their
courtship activities.
Porbandar Bird
Sanctuary: A total of 41 waterbird and wetland bird
species were reported in January 2015 and 2016.
During the summer, the islets supported nesting of about five pairs of
Red-wattled Lapwings Vanellus
indicus and seven pairs of Black-winged Stilts Himantopus
himantopus.
Tall reeds towards the western side of the sanctuary provided roosting
sites for marsh birds like moorhens and waterhens. These reeds were also favored
by Demoiselle Cranes Anthropoides virgo and Common Cranes Grus grus
that were injured by kite flying threads and remained throughout the year at
the sanctuary as their ability to fly was hampered. The sanctuary appeared to support a number of
freshwater fishes, judging from the number of fish-eating birds that were
regularly seen feeding. The sanctuary
was also the roosting ground of Black-headed Ibis and in summer, a maximum of
around 150 were recorded. A pair of
Great Cormorants Phalacrocorax carbo
was observed building a nest although nesting was not successful. In April
2019, inflow of municipal sewage water into the sanctuary was stopped and this
reduced the water level of the wetland.
These conditions appeared to have been suitable for more than 800 Lesser
flamingos that were observed to feed here after a gap of 30 years.
The water at the
shallow periphery dried out in Chhaya 1 and 2 which
supported roosting birds. Though only 37
Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus were
recorded during the January waterbird count, their
number was observed to increase up to 500 individuals in Chhaya
1 and Porbandar Rann wetlands after March. One pair of Kentish Plover and two pairs of
Little Ringed Plover were recorded nesting in Chhaya
3 wetland in 2016.
The Chhaya wetlands
were observed to face various threats, including dumping of solid waste,
domestic sewage and garbage. The wetland
annually receives a spray of DDT along the periphery to control mosquitoes
(Table 1).
The main threats to
waterbirds were injury from kites being flown around
the wetlands, predation by feral dogs, fire crackers, and injury &
electrocution when flying into power lines.
During the study period, a total of 15 flamingos (Lesser and Greater
Flamingo) were injured due to kite-flying in the Uttarayan
festival celebrated annually on 14 January.
The festival was celebrated with rockets and other fire crackers in the
evening causing the birds to take flight and risk injury and electrocution from
nearby powerlines or injury by flying directly into blast area of rockets. Feral dogs were regularly observed to feed on
injured flamingos. A Dalmatian Pelican
was also observed to have died after electrocution on a power line at the Chhaya Wetlands in February 2016.
Discussion
The Chhaya Rann Wetland Complex is a
natural-cum-man-made wetland located within Porbandar City. This study provides baseline information on
the high diversity of waterbirds and wetland birds
recorded during two years. This high
diversity can be corroborated with the varied microhabitats that appear to
provide ideal foraging and roosting sites for migratory and resident
species. Studies elsewhere have
demonstrated that shallow depth and heterogeneity of habitats often results in
higher diversity and abundance (Velasquez 1992; Elphick
& Oring 1998, 2003; Svingen
& Anderson 1998; Edwards & Otis 1999; Colwell & Taft 2000;
Fairbairn & Dinsmore 2001; Riffel et al. 2001;
Isola et al. 2002; Taft et. al. 2002; Darnell & Smith, 2004; Zárate–Ovando et al. 2008; Datta 2011).
The main threats
observed at these wetlands are similar to those reported from other wetlands in
the Indian subcontinent. For example,
siltation, eutrophication, risk of DDT and pesticide intoxication, excessive
weed infestation and degradation of water quality, encroachment by agriculture
and urbanisation were some the main threats to wetlands and waterbirds
of Shallabug Wetland in Kashmir (Dar & Dar
2009). While at Rupa Lake in Pokhara,
Nepal, threats of habitat destruction by soil erosion, sedimentation and
agricultural conversion, human disturbance, water pollution and eutrophication,
as well as trapping/hunting and fish farming using nets are reported (Kafle et. al.
2008).
Similarly, the
major threats to some of the main waterbird species
at the Chhaya Wetlands are reflective of those at
other sites. For example, the main
threats to the Lesser Flamingo across its global range are the loss and/or the
degradation of its specialised habitat at key sites through altered hydrology
and water quality, wetland pollution, collision with man-made structures, human
disturbance at non-breeding sites and predation (Childress 2008). The recently produced single species action
plan for the Dalmatian Pelican lists habitat degradation and collision with
powerlines as high threats to the species (Catsadorakis
& Portolou 2018) and both threats are recognised
at the Chhaya Wetlands.
These wetlands are
formed of a single stretch of a wetland that is now separated by roads. Holistically for better management, they
should be treated as a single wetland complex and not as separate
wetlands. The importance of this is
borne out by the observations of the flamingos moving between all four wetlands
for feeding, bathing and other behavioural aspects.
Rehabilitation and
release of Near Threatened Lesser Flamingos and other species injured due to
powerlines and kite-flying threads, habitat restoration and removal of
encroachment from the wetlands, control of poaching of birds, removal of solid
waste, treatment of sewage water before entry into the wetlands, controlling
population of feral dogs, removal of invasive species, especially Prosopis
and Water Hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes, and avoiding spraying of DDT are some of the
conservation actions that can be taken to preserve and improve management of
the Chhaya Wetlands and its biodiversity.
Additionally, from
a management point of view, the lack of formal conservation status (such as a
protected area) and absence of comprehensive baseline information on waterbirds may deter science-based decision-making of these
internationally important wetlands.
Additional studies are required to improve understanding of the ecology
of these wetlands and factors to maintain and enhance waterbird
diversity and abundance.
The Chhaya Rann wetland complex has
been influenced by salt and soda ash from the past salt production. In recent years, the main source of water has
been domestic sewage and rain water. As
it appears that these conditions are still conducive to attract the flamingos
and other waterbirds and in internationally important
numbers (>20,000 individuals) as per Criterion 5 of the Ramsar
Convention on Wetlands, it is important for the state and national authorities
to propose formal designation of the area as a Ramsar
site. Development and implementation of
a comprehensive management plan is needed to conserve this unique suite of
wetlands with such high diversity in the face of rapid urbanization of the
city.
Additionally, the Chhaya Wetlands qualify as an Important Bird and
Biodiversity Area (IBA). According to
global IBA criteria (BirdLife International 2018),
criterion A1 states “a site is known or thought regularly to hold significant
numbers of a globally threatened species” and criterion A4, “the site is known
or thought to hold congregations of ≥1% of the global population of one or more
species on a regular or predictable basis”.
Finally it should
be noted that Lesser Flamingos attempted nesting in Chhaya
Wetlands in the 1980s, with around 180 nests; unfortunately heavy rain were
reported to have destroyed the colony.
It was later identified that they may have been “play-nesting”. More recently, in 2015, Lesser Flamingos were
seen mating here although they did not nest (Vargiya
2015). It is quite possible that if
management of the area is strengthened with conditions created that are
conducive for nesting, such as the construction of a flat island for the Lesser
Flamingo and disturbance from feral dogs and people is stopped, the Chhaya Wetlands could even provide a unique and safe urban
breeding site for the species; as has been demonstrated at the Kampers Dam in Kimberley, South Africa (BirdLife
International 2019). Breeding of the
flamingo here could provide a unique opportunity for the municipal and state
authorities to demonstrate management of urban wetlands and environmental
protection can go hand in hand.
The beauty and
importance of the Chhaya Wetlands and its flamingos
has been highlighted to the local community through various activities, notably
‘Pink Celebration’ that is organised every year since 2015 by the Mokarsagar Wetland Conservation Committee (Vargiya 2018).
Organisation of such activities into the future can help to enhance the
local awareness, interest and support for the management of the Chhaya Wetlands.
Table 1. Description of Chhaya
Rann Wetland Complex and observed threats to
wetlands.
|
Site No. |
Name of wetland |
Location (lat. & long.) |
Observed threats |
Conservation action |
Governance |
|
1 |
Porbandar Bird Sanctuary and associated area |
21.6360N & 69.6180E |
Pollution by domestic sewage and
garbage Wetland as inflow of sewage
water and no outflow has resulted in an increase in water depth which is not
suitable for many wader species. A new municipal sewage system is expected to
address this pollution issue. |
In April 2019, inflow of municipal sewage water has
been reduced. As a result, the water level of the wetland dropped and after
30 years more than 800 Lesser flamingos were seen feeding here. |
Porbandar Forest Division & Municipality of
Porbandar |
|
2 |
Porbandar Rann |
21.6320N & 69.6230E |
Pollution by domestic sewage and
garbage Dumping zone of waste materials Industrial effluents Feral dogs killing birds |
|
Municipality of Chhaya |
|
3 |
Chhaya 1 & 2 |
21.6300N & 69.6260E |
Fragmentation and filling of
wetland for illegal commercial development and houses Dumping zone of waste materials Pollution by domestic sewage and
garbage Invasion of Prosopis juliflora on fringes Annual spraying with DDT along
the wetland periphery aimed at controlling mosquitoes |
In November 2018, City Survey Porbandar issued 85
notices for illegal construction. |
Municipality of Chhaya |
|
4 |
Chhaya 3 |
21.6220N & 69.6360E |
|
Table 2. Wetland bird diversity recorded in Chhaya Rann Wetland Complex
during assessment period (with numbers during January 2015 and January 2016).
|
|
English
name |
Scientific
name |
Gujarati
name |
Family |
IUCN
Conservation status (1) |
Status in Study area (2) |
AWC
January 2015 count |
AWC
January 2016 count |
|
1 |
Lesser Whistling-duck |
Dendrocygna javanica (Horsfield,
1821) |
Nani sisoti batak |
Anatidae |
LC |
R |
11 |
10 |
|
2 |
Comb Duck |
Sarkidiornis melanotos (Pennant, 1769) |
Nakto |
Anatidae |
LC |
R |
2 |
4 |
|
3 |
Ruddy Shelduck |
Tadorna ferruginea (Pallas, 1764) |
Bhagvi surkhab |
Anatidae |
LC |
M |
4 |
7 |
|
4 |
Gadwall |
Mareca strepera (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Luhar |
Anatidae |
LC |
M |
0 |
8 |
|
5 |
Eurasian Wigeon |
Mareca penelope (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Piyasana |
Anatidae |
LC |
M |
0 |
20 |
|
6 |
Indian Spot-billed Duck |
Anas poecilorhyncha Forster, 1781 |
Teelavali batak |
Anatidae |
LC |
R |
57 |
40 |
|
7 |
Northern Shoveler |
Spatula clypeata (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Gayno |
Anatidae |
LC |
M |
3292 |
1190 |
|
8 |
Northern Pintail |
Anas acuta Linnaeus, 1758 |
Singpar |
Anatidae |
LC |
M |
184 |
12 |
|
9 |
Garganey |
Spatula querquedula (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Chetva |
Anatidae |
LC |
M |
0 |
5 |
|
10 |
Common Teal |
Anas crecca Linnaeus, 1758 |
Murghabi |
Anatidae |
LC |
M |
157 |
45 |
|
11 |
Common Pochard |
Aythya ferina (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Rakhodi Karchiya |
Anatidae |
VU |
M |
7 |
14 |
|
12 |
Greater Flamingo |
Phoenicopterus roseus (Pallas, 1811) |
Moto hanj |
Phoenicopteridae |
LC |
R |
37 |
0 |
|
13 |
Lesser Flamingo |
Phoeniconaias minor (Geoffroy
Saint-Hilaire, 1798) |
Nano hanj |
Phoenicopteridae |
NT |
R |
14649 |
21621 |
|
14 |
Little Grebe |
Tachybaptus ruficollis (Pallas, 1764) |
Nani dubki |
Podicipedidae |
LC |
R |
25 |
80 |
|
15 |
Osprey |
Pandion haliaetus (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Matsya bhoj |
Pandionidae |
LC |
M |
1 |
0 |
|
16 |
Little Cormorant |
Microcarbo niger (Vieillot, 1817) |
Nano Kajoyo |
Phalacrocoracidae |
LC |
R |
10 |
50 |
|
17 |
Indian Cormorant |
Phalacrocorax fuscicollis Stephens, 1826 |
Kajiyo |
Phalacrocoracidae |
LC |
R |
0 |
24 |
|
18 |
Great Cormorant |
Phalacrocorax carbo (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Moto Kajiyo |
Phalacrocoracidae |
LC |
R |
0 |
4 |
|
19 |
Oriental Darter |
Anhinga melanogaster Pennant, 1769 |
Sarpa griva |
Anhingidae |
NT |
R |
0 |
2 |
|
20 |
Dalmatian Pelican |
Pelecanus crispus Bruch, 1832 |
Chotili Pen |
Pelecanidae |
NT |
M |
2 |
2 |
|
21 |
Grey Heron |
Ardea cinerea Linnaeus, 1758 |
Kabut Baglo |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
2 |
2 |
|
22 |
Purple Heron |
Ardea purpurea Linnaeus, 1766 |
Nadi baglo |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
0 |
1 |
|
23 |
Great Egret |
Ardea alba (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Moto baglo |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
25 |
40 |
|
24 |
Intermediate Egret |
Egretta intermedia (Wagler, 1829) |
Dhola bagalo |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
24 |
0 |
|
25 |
Little Egret |
Egretta garzetta (Linnaeus, 1766) |
Nano Baglo |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
18 |
10 |
|
26 |
Western Reef Heron |
Egretta gularis (Bosc, 1792) |
Dariyai baglo |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
4 |
2 |
|
27 |
Eastern/western Cattle Egret |
Bubulcus ibis (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Dhor baglo |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
53 |
73 |
|
28 |
Indian Pond-heron |
Ardeola grayii (Sykes, 1832) |
Kani bagli |
Ardeidae |
LC |
R |
33 |
24 |
|
29 |
Glossy Ibis |
Plegadis falcinellus (Linnaeus, 1766) |
Pan/nani kakansar |
Threskiornithidae |
LC |
M |
21 |
0 |
|
30 |
Black-headed Ibis |
Threskiornis melanocephalus (Latham, 1790) |
Dholi kakansar |
Threskiornithidae |
NT |
RB |
65 |
54 |
|
31 |
Red-naped Ibis |
Pseudibis papillosa (Temminck,
1824) |
Kali kakansar |
Threskiornithidae |
LC |
RB |
1 |
23 |
|
32 |
Eurasian Marsh-Harrier |
Circus aeruginosus (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Pan pattai |
Accipitridae |
LC |
M |
2 |
1 |
|
33 |
White-breasted Waterhen |
Amaurornis phoenicurus(Pennant, 1769) |
Davak |
Rallidae |
LC |
RB |
8 |
0 |
|
34 |
Grey-headed Swamphen |
Porphyrio poliocephalus (Latham, 1801) |
Nil jalamurgho |
Rallidae |
LC |
R |
4 |
14 |
|
35 |
Eurasian Moorhen |
Gallinula chloropus (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Jal kukadi |
Rallidae |
LC |
R |
5 |
8 |
|
36 |
Eurasian Coot |
Fulica atra (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Bhagatdu |
Rallidae |
LC |
R |
100 |
200 |
|
37 |
Demoiselle Crane |
Anthropoides virgo Linnaeus, 1758 |
Karkaro |
Gruidae |
LC |
M |
7 |
10 |
|
38 |
Common Crane |
Grus grus (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Kunj |
Gruidae |
LC |
M |
11 |
7 |
|
39 |
Black-winged Stilt |
Himantopus himantopus (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Gajpau |
Recurvirostridae |
LC |
RB |
240 |
312 |
|
40 |
Pied Avocet |
Recurvirostra avosetta Linnaeus, 1758 |
Ulti chanch |
Recurvirostridae |
LC |
M |
78 |
0 |
|
41 |
Pacific Golden-plover |
Pluvialis fulva (Gmelin, 1789) |
Soneri batan |
Charadriidae |
LC |
M |
2 |
15 |
|
42 |
Red-wattled Lapwing |
Vanellus indicus (Boddaert, 1783) |
Titodi |
Charadriidae |
LC |
RB |
159 |
108 |
|
43 |
Kentish Plover |
Charadrius alexandrinus Linnaeus, 1758 |
Bhulamani dhongili |
Charadriidae |
LC |
RB |
11 |
0 |
|
44 |
Little Ringed Plover |
Charadrius dubius Scopoli, 1786 |
Vilayati jini titodi |
Charadriidae |
LC |
RB |
1 |
21 |
|
45 |
Terek Sandpiper |
Xenus cinereus (Güldenstädt,
1775) |
Chanchal tutvari |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
6 |
0 |
|
46 |
Common Sandpiper |
Actitis hypoleucos Linnaeus, 1758 |
Samanya tutvari |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
23 |
9 |
|
47 |
Common Greenshank |
Tringa nebularia (Gunnerus,
1767) |
Lilapag |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
6 |
1 |
|
48 |
Marsh Sandpiper |
Tringa stagnatilis (Bechstein,
1803) |
Gandapag tutvari |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
241 |
11 |
|
49 |
Wood Sandpiper |
Tringa glareola Linnaeus, 1758 |
Van tutvari |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
1 |
4 |
|
50 |
Common Redshank |
Tringa totanus (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Ratapag |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
11 |
33 |
|
51 |
Black-tailed Godwit |
Limosa limosa (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Kali punchh gadero |
Scolopacidae |
NT |
M |
45 |
21 |
|
52 |
Ruff |
Calidris pugnax (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Tiliyo |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
177 |
361 |
|
53 |
Little Stint |
Calidris minuta (Leisler, 1812) |
Kalapag kichadiyo |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
119 |
21 |
|
54 |
Red-necked Phalarope |
Phalaropus lobatus (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Laldok chanchal |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
1 |
0 |
|
55 |
Common Snipe |
Gallinago gallinago (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Pankhapunch garkhod |
Scolopacidae |
LC |
M |
1 |
4 |
|
56 |
Black-headed Gull |
Larus ridibundus Linnaeus, 1766 |
Kali pith dhomado |
Laridae |
LC |
M |
848 |
1100 |
|
57 |
Brown-headed Gull |
Chroicocephalus brunnicephalus (Jerdon, 1840) |
Ladakhi dhomado |
Laridae |
LC |
M |
140 |
1100 |
|
58 |
Gull sp. |
Larinae sp. |
Dhomado |
Laridae |
LC |
M |
13 |
8000 |
|
59 |
Little Tern |
Sternula albifrons (Pallas, 1764) |
Nani dhomdi |
Laridae |
LC |
M |
8 |
0 |
|
60 |
River Tern |
Sterna aurantia Gray, 1831 |
Kenchipunch vabagali |
Laridae |
NT |
R |
11 |
40 |
|
61 |
Whiskered Tern |
Chlidonias hybrida (Pallas, 1811) |
Kashmiri vabagali |
Laridae |
LC |
R |
0 |
21 |
|
62 |
Gull-billed Tern |
Gelochelidon nilotica (Gmelin,
1789) |
Dhomada dhomadi |
Laridae |
LC |
M |
2 |
0 |
|
63 |
Peregrine Falcon |
Falco peregrinus Tunstall, 1771 |
Kalo shaheen |
Falconidae |
LC |
M |
1 |
0 |
|
64 |
White-throated Kingfisher |
Halcyon smyrnensis (Linnaeus,
1758) |
Safed chhati kalkaliyo |
Alcedinidae |
LC |
R |
0 |
4 |
|
65 |
Wire-tailed Swallow |
Hirundo smithii Leach, 1818 |
Tarpunch tarodiyu |
Hirundinidae |
LC |
R |
20 |
550 |
|
66 |
Red-rumped Swallow |
Cecropis daurica (Laxmann,
1769) |
Kanchipunch tharodiyu |
Hirundinidae |
LC |
R |
0 |
400 |
|
67 |
Western Yellow Wagtail |
Motacilla flava Linnaeus, 1758 |
Rakhodi mathano pilakiyo |
Motacillidae |
LC |
M |
2 |
1 |
|
68 |
White-browed Wagtail |
Motacilla maderaspatensis Gmelin, 1789 |
Khanjan |
Motacillidae |
LC |
R |
0 |
3 |
|
69 |
Citrine Wagtail |
Motacilla citreola Pallas, 1776 |
Pila mathano pilakiyo |
Motacillidae |
LC |
M |
5 |
0 |
|
70 |
White Wagtail |
Motacilla alba Linnaeus, 1758 |
Diwali ghodo |
Motacillidae |
LC |
M |
1 |
0 |
IUCN Red List status: VU—Vulnerable | NT—Near Threatened
| LC—Least Concern. Status in study
area: R—Resident | M—Migrant | RB—Resident and Breeding.
For
figures & images – click here
References
Anonymous (2016). Porbandar Bird
Sanctuary. https://forests.gujarat.gov.in/porbandar-sanctuary.htm
Downloaded on 15 November
2016.
BirdLife International.
(2018). Global IBA
Criteria. http://datazone.birdlife.org/site/ibacritglob
Downloaded on 5 November
2018.
BirdLife International
(2019). Important
Bird Areas factsheet: Kamfers Dam. http://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/kamfers-dam-iba-south-africa
Downloaded on 5 June 2019.
Catsadorakis, G. & D. Portolou (2018). International Single Species Action Plan the
Conservation of the Dalmatian Pelican (Pelecanus
crispus). CMS Technical Series No. XX, AEWA
Technical Series No. XX. EAAFP Technical Report No. 1. Bonn, Germany and
Incheon, South Korea, 46pp.
Childress, B., S.
Nagy, & B. Hughes (2008). International Single Species Action Plan for the
Conservation of the Lesser Flamingo (Phoeniconaias
minor). CMS Technical Series No. 18, AEWA Technical Series No. 34. Bonn,
Germany, 59pp.
Colwell, M.A. &
O.W. Taft (2000). Waterbird communities in managed wetlands
of varying water depth. Waterbirds 23(1):
45–55.
Darnell, T. &
E.H. Smith (2004). Avian use of natural and created salt marsh in Texas, USA. Waterbirds 27(3): 355–361.
Dar, I.A. &
M.A. Dar (2009). Seasonal
variations of avifauna of Shallabug wetland, Kashmir.
Journal of Wetlands Ecology 2(1–2): 20–34. https://doi.org/10.3126/jowe.v2i1.1853
Datta, T. (2011). Human interference
and avifaunal diversity of two wetlands of Jalpaiguri,
West Bengal, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 3(12): 2253–2262. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2739.2253-62
Edwards, N. &
D. Otis (1999). Avian communities and habitat relationships in South Carolina
Piedmont beaver ponds. American Midland Naturalist 141(1): 158–171.
Elphick, C.S. & L.W. Oring (1998). Winter management of Californian rice fields for Waterbirds.
Journal of Applied Ecology 35(1): 95–108.
Fairbairn, S. & J. Dinsmore (2001). Local and landscapelevel influences of
wetland bird communities of the praire pothole region
of Iowa, USA. Wetlands 21(1): 41–47.
National Wetland Atlas: Gujarat (2010). SAC/RESA/AFEG/NWIA/ATLAS/21/2010. Space Applications Centre (ISRO),
Ahmedabad, India, 198pp.
Grimmett, R., C. Inskipp & T. Inskipp (2015). Birds of the Indian
subcontinent. 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press, Delhi,
406pp.
IUCN (2018). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Version 2018-2.
http://www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 14 November 2018.
Isola, C.R., M.A.
Colwell, O.W. Taft & R.J. Safran (2002). Interspecific differences in habitat use
of shorebirds and waterfowl foraging in managed wetlands of California’s San
Joaquin Valley. Waterbirds 25(2): 196–203.
Kafle, G., M. Cotton,
J.R. Chaudhary, H. Pariyar, H. Adhikari, S.B. Bohora, A. Chaudhary, A. Ram & B. Regmi
(2008). Status of
and Threats to Water Birds of Rupa Lake, Pokhara, Nepal. Journal of Wetlands
Ecology 1(1/2): 9–12.
Mascitti, V. & M.B. Castañera (2006). Foraging depth of flamingos in single-species
and mixed-species flocks at Laguna de Pozuelos,
Argentina. Waterbirds. 29(3): 328–334.
Panigrahi, S., T.V.R.
Murthy, J.G. Patel & T.S. Singh
(2012). Wetlands
of India: inventory and assessment at 1:50,000 scale using geospatial
techniques. Current Science. 102(6): 852–856.
Prasad S.N.,
A.K. Jaggi, P. Kaushik, L. Vijayan, S. Muralidharan &
V.S. Vijayan (2004). Inland
wetlands of India, Conservation Atlas. Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and
Natural History, Coimbatore, India, 222pp.
Riffel, S.K., B.E. Keas
& T.M. Burton (2001). Area and habitat relationships of birds in great lakes coastal wet
meadows. Wetlands 21(4): 492–507.
Stewart, R.E.
(2001).Technical
Aspects of Wetlands – Wetlands as Bird Habitat. National Water
Summary on Wetland Resources. United States Geological Survey, USA. 86pp.
Svingen, D.N. & S.H. Anderson (1998).Waterfowl management on grass–sage stock ponds. Wetlands 18(1):
84–89.
Taft, O.W., M.A. Colwell, C.R. Isola & R.J. Safran (2002). Waterbird responses to experimental drawdown:
implications for multispecies management of wetland mosaics. Journal
of Applied Ecology 39(6): 987–1001.
Vargiya, D. (2015). Agnipankha:
Flamingos of Porbandar. BirdGuard Nature Stocks,
Porbandar, Gujarat, India, 28pp.
Vargiya, D. (2018). Five years of “Pink
Celebration for Flamingos” at Porbandar, Gujarat, India. Flamingo e1,
57-60.
Vargiya, D., N. Sahoo, S. Bhanuprakash, L. Parmar, R.
Makwana, K. Joshi, C. Tank & V. Bhatt (2015). Asian Waterbird Census (AWC) 2015 Porbandar.
Shree Sahajanand Swami District Community Science
Centre. Porbandar: 40pp.
Velasquez, C.R. (1992). Managing
artificial saltpans as a waterbird habitat: species waterbirds. Journal of Applied Ecology 35(1):
95–108.
Weller, M.W.
(1999). Wetland Birds: Habitat Resources and Conservation Implications. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 410pp.
Zárate–Ovando, B., E. Palacios & H. Reyes–Bonilla (2008). Community
structure and association of waterbirds with spatial
heterogeneity in the Bahia Magdalena–Almejas wetland
complex, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Revista
de Biologia Tropical 56(1): 371–389.