may-june 2008

Vol. 48 No. 3 May - June 2008

Dr. A.M.K. BharosHarish R. BhatDr. S.P. BhatnagarDr. A.K. ChakravarthyDr. Ranjan Kumar DasDr. S. DevasahayamB.S. KulkarniArvind MishraDr. Geeta S. Padate

Publisher : S. Sridhar

Editorial Board

Vol. 48 No. 3 May - June 2008

Address for Correspondence :Newsletter for Birdwatchers

No 10, Sirur Park B Street, Seshadripuram,Bangalore 560 020, India. Tel. 080 2356 1142, 2346 4682

E-mail : <[email protected]>

Printed and Published bi-monthly by S. Sridhar atNavbharath Enterprises, Seshadripuram, Bangalore - 560 020, India

for Private Circulation Only.

CONTENTS Note from the Publisher

Birds and People; Bonds in a Timeless Journey

Articles

Checklist of birds of Chirang-Ripu Reserve Forests,Assam, India, by Naba K Nath, Hilloljyoti Singha, JyotiP Das, Namita Brahma, Santanu Dey, Bibhuti P Lahkarand Firoz Ahmed.

A new habitat for Lesser Whistl ing-duckDendrocygna javanica, in Malda district, West Bengal,by Arunayan Sharma.

Rare winter migrants of Asan Conservation Reserve,

by M.Vijay and P.T. Bhutia.

Urban bird nest survey in Bongaigaon Municipalityarea, Assam during summer, by Hilloljyoti Singha,Kaustoov Gopal Goswami, Banita Roy, RimpulHazarika and Amarjit Narayan Dev.

Habitat quality estimation of Porphyrio porphyrio, byP.K. Thakur and P.C. Bhattacharjee.

Correspondence

A tragic death of an avian day-tripper, by Vinod Kumar,

Sighting of Yellow-Bellied Prinia (Prinia flaviventris) -First Record In Gujarat, by Ashok Mashru and MedhirPandya

Manuscript for publication should be sent(in duplicate) by post or courier to :

Newsletter for BirdwatchersNo 10, Sirur Park B Street, Seshadripuram,

Bangalore 560 020, India.along with a soft copy (in MS Word format only) via

E-mail to <[email protected]>

Note from the Publisher

Dear fellow Birdwatchers,

Birds and People; Bonds in a Timeless Journey

On the cover of this issue we have reproduced Nigel Collar�sphilosophical and thought provoking statement: - �The fate of

the birds is the fate of the earth; the fate of the earth is the fateof the humanity�.

Nigel Collar, the celebrated ornithologist from the BirdlifeInternational, has issued this edict through his publication�Birds and People; Bonds in a Timeless Journey�, co-authored

with A.J. Long, P. Robles Gill and J. Rojo. This book �Unfolds

the history of our relationship with the most colourful andfamiliar of the groups of organisms we share our planet with�.Incidentally, the Birdlife International�s catchphrase � �Together

for birds and people� coined in 1999, had emphasized the

deeply serious mission of the organization in those few buoyantwords � to preserve or create, through institutional unity of

purpose and vision, the environments where the human andavian inhabitants of the planet already do and potentially cancoexist in both harmony and plenty.

At a glance, one can witness the authors� anguish firsthand,

when they lament about the people of the developed world whoare out of touch with reality and have all but forgotten � dramatic

manifestations of global climate change as yet not withstanding� that there is a bond between man and nature. �By contrast, our

bond, if we think we have one at all, seems instead to be with thetechnology which actually insulates us from nature, from theanimals, the weather, hunger and physical hardship. Even so,the majority of us are shut away behind glass for most of theyear, kept within comfortable temperature limits by heating andcooling systems, seated all day before our computer, televisionand dashboard screens� grieve the authors.

The authors have developed their arguments in a coherent andcomprehensive manner, while discussing the myriad myths andlegends about the birds, just how much human society andcivilization owe to birds for their invaluable contribution tomankind both directly and indirectly; as food, as biologicalcontrollers of crop damaging insect populations, as rodentcontrol agents, as pollinators, and as seed dispersal couriers.Indeed the biological science has hugely developed throughthe study of birds. �What about recognition of birds as barometers

of environmental change. Indeed, all the less narrative arts �music, dance, painting, sculpture and poetry � have made play

with birds as great symbols of freedom and naturalness,innocence and passion. For the same reasons businesses,states, and nations have adopted birds as logos, brands andsymbols, seeking to unify people through their appreciation ofbeauty and their sense of local pride� asserts Nigel Collar.

We certainly need to articulate these views, in a fresh forwardlooking perspective and highlight the myriad roles and thelimitless services provided by these prodigious featheredfriends. And we ought to do this urgently by garnering supportfrom all concerned about the fate of the birdsand the humanity.

Thanking you,Yours In Bird Conservation,S. Sridhar, Publisher, NLBW

Prof. S. RangaswamiK. Mrutumjaya RaoA.N. Yellappa ReddyDr. Rajiv SaxenaDr. A.B. ShanbhagArunayan SharmaS. SridharDr. Abraham Verghese, FRES (London)

mailto:[email protected]>

mailto:[email protected]>

Newsletter for Birdwatchers 48 (3), 2008 33

mostly tropical semi-evergreen forests, tropical moist anddry deciduous forests and alluvial dry and wet grasslands(Jacob, 1939).

Methodology

The survey was conducted randomly for 60 days duringSeptember 2005-September 2006 except the peak monsoonmonths of June-August. We followed existing trails withvariable lengths in different habitats as mentioned in thestudy area. Birds were observed following encounter methodduring mornings (7:00am to 9:00am) and late afternoons(4:30pm to 6:30pm). However, some birds were also recordedduring other time of the day when occasionally met. Directvisual sighting method was followed to identify the birdswith the help of 8X40 binoculars, however, in certainoccasions when sighting was not possible identification wasmade following bird calls. We recorded sighting of each birdspecies only once per trip even if the number of sighting ofthat species was more than once on the same trip. Weaccumulated the cumulative records of the species toprepare this checklist. For identification and distribution ofthe species we followed standard field guides (Grimmett etal., 1999; Choudhary, 2000) and nomenclature andclassification was followed according to Manakadan & Pittie

(2001).

Result

A total of 133 species belonging to 101 genera, 42 familiesand 16 orders were recorded (Table 1). The highest speciesrepresentation was that of the order Passeriformes including15 families, 33 genera, and 49 species followed by orderCoraciiformes including 5 families, 8 genera, 12 speciesand Falconiformes including 2 families, 10 genera and 12species, respectively. Of these 86.47% (115 species) waswidespread resident, 10.53% (14 species) winter visitor and3% (4 species) was summer visitor (Fig. 1).

During the study we recorded some notable species likethe critically endangered Indian White-backed Vulture Gypsbengalensis on four occasions; thrice (on 05.09.05, 25.11.05and 28.10.05) soaring in the sky (3 to 6 individuals) andonce (06.01.06) perching in the upper canopy of a Bombaxceiba tree (two individuals) near the forest edge. LesserAdjutant Stork Leptoptilos javanicus, a vulnerable as wellas globally threatened and restricted range species (Islam& Rahmani, 2004) was also sighted thrice (on 23.11.05,29.11.05 and 12.07.06) foraging in paddy field near forest

Checklist of birds of Chirang-Ripu Reserve Forests, Assam, IndiaNaba K Nath*, Hilloljyoti Singha, Jyoti P Das, Namita Brahma, Santanu Dey, Bibhuti P Lahkar and Firoz Ahmed.

Aaranyak, 50, Samanwoy Path, Survey, Guwahati-781028, Assam, India, *E-mail: [email protected]

Introduction

Chirang-Ripu Reserve Forests (CRRF) (N 26040` E 89053` )is situated in the submontane tract of the Assam Himalyaswithin Chirang-Ripu Elephant Reserve (2600km2) that fallswithin Bhutan Biological Conservation Complex in theEastern Himalaya Biodiversity Hotspot (CEPF, 2005). Beingsituated at the confluence of Indian, Ethiopian and Indo-Chinese realms, CRRF is one of the richest biodiversityareas which represents diverse ecosystems like grasslands,woodlands, rivers, wetlands, and hills contiguous with theBhutan Himalayas. The civil unrest in the recent past (duringmid 1980s till late 1990s) however, caused considerabledamage to the entire forests, because of which scientificresearch work remained overhanging for almost a decade,and flow of conservation information came to a standstill.The impact of the unrest has completely devastated theinfrastructure of the region and information vacuum hasfurther hampered the management of key lifeline thatprotects the sanctity of the Reserve. Now the political unrestproblem has been solved by the Government. throughcreation of more polit ical power to the Bodo ethniccommunity, which in turn has stimulated scientific research.

The present paper is a by-product and corresponds to theconcurrent bird observations made alongside a one-yearsurvey �Assessment of the conservation status, habitatutilization pattern and Human-elephant conflict of the AsianElephant in Chirang-Ripu Elephant Reserve� accomplished

during 2005-2006. This paper happens to be the firstscientific documentation on avifauna in this particular area.

Study area

The study was conducted mainly in two reserve forestsnamely Chirang (59254.12 ha) and Ripu (60528 ha) thatcome under Kachugaon, and Haltugaon Divisionsrespectively. The general topography of the region is lowlying and more or less flat, except few undulating stumpyfoothills that slope gently towards the south. The climate iswarm and humid characterized by �sub-tropical withpronounced monsoon� with three distinct seasons, viz.,winter, summer and monsoon (Borthakur, 1986). The meanannual rainfall is 3000 mm with an average temperature rangebetween 06°C to 37°C. A number of rivers both annual and

perennial crisscross the area along with some standingwaterbodies locally known as �beel� and several streams as

well. The key source of water of majority of these beels,rivers and streams is the annual monsoon rainfall. However,during the dry season (December-March) most of the smallwaterbodies dry up. The forest types of this region comprise

mailto:[email protected]

34 Newsletter for Birdwatchers 48 (3), 2008

edge. Though, breeding was not recorded, CRRF seems tobe a good refuge for these species. Another remarkablesighting was a rare Green Cochoa Cochoa viridis, whichwas less reported earlier (Grimmett et al., 1999). Moreover,we also recorded 10 species of birds that were reporteduncommon in Assam (Choudhury, 2000) (Table 1).

Acknowledgment

We gratefully acknowledge the Assam State ForestDepartment, specifically Mr. M.C. Malakar, the Chief WildlifeWarden of Assam for granting us permission to work in thearea and for providing logistic facilities. We are thankful toMr. B. N. Patiri and Mr. C. R. Bhobora, DFO, KachugaonDivision, and Mr. R. Chaudhary, DFO, Haltugaon Divisionfor their help and assistance during the study. We also thankthe range officers, local NGO people, and the entire foreststaff for their support.

References

Borthakur, M. (1986). Weather and Climate of North East India. The Northeast Geographer, 18 (1&2): 20-27.

CEPF (2005). Critical ecosystem partnership fund, Ecosystem Profile,Eastern Himalayas Region, Final Version.

Choudhury, A. (2000). The birds of Assam. Guwahati: Gibbon Books &WWF-India.

Grimmett R., C. Inskipp and T. Inskipp (1999). Pocket guide to the birdsof the Indian subcontinent. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Islam, M. Z. and Rahmani, A. R. (2004). Important Bird Areas in India:Priority Sites for Conservation. Mumbai: Indian Bird ConservationNetwork: Bombay Natural History Society & BirdLife International(UK).

Jacob, M.C. (1939). A working Plan for the Forest Reserves of theKachugaon Division, 1939-40 to 1948-49. Shillong: AssamGovernment Press.

Manakadan, R. and A. Pittie (2001). Standardized common and scientificnames of the birds of the Indian subcontinent. Buceros 6(1): i-ix, 1-37

Fig 1. Graph depicting the distribution status of the bird

species recorded in Chirang-Ripu Reserve Forests (2005-06).

Table 1. Checklist of the birds recorded in Chirang-RipuReserve Forests during 2005-06.

Family & species Scientific name Status

Pelecaniformes, Phalacrocoracidae1. Little Cormorant Phalacrocorax niger R, C

Ciconiiformes, Ardeidae2. Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis R, C3. Little Egret Egretta garzetta R, C4. Large Egret Casmerodius albus R, C5. Median Egret Mesophoyx intermedia R, C6. Indian Pond Heron Ardeola grayii R, C7. Black-crowned Night-Heron Nycticorax nycticorax R, C8. Black Bittern Dupetor flavicollis R, U

Ciconiidae,9. Asian Openbill-Stork Anastomus oscitans R, C *10. Lesser Adjutant-Stork Leptoptilos javanicus R, C

Anseriformes, Anatidae11. Lesser Whistling-Duck Dendrocygna javanica R, C12. Brahminy Shelduck Tadorna ferruginea W, C13. Cotton Teal Nettapus coromandelianus R, L, C14. Mallard Anas platyrhynchos W, C15. Tufted Pochard Aythya fuligula W, C16. Common Merganser Mergus merganser W, C

Falconiformes, Accipitridae17. Black Kite Milvus migrans R18. Shikra Accipiter badius R, C (*19. Crested Goshawk Accipiter trivirgatus R, (*20. Common Buzzard Buteo buteo W, U21. Crested Serpent-Eagle Spilornis cheela R, C22. Greater Grey-headed Fish-Eagle Ichthyophaga ichthyaetus R, C *23. Indian White-backed Vulture Gyps bengalensis R, C *24. Pied Harrier Circus melanoleucos M, W, C25. Black Eagle Ictinaetus malayensis R, U

Falconidae26. Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus W, C27. Collared Falconet Microhierax caerulescens R, U28. Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus W, (*

Galliformes, Phasianidae29. Rain Quail Coturnix coromandelica R, L30. Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus R, C31. Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus R, U (*

Gruiformes, Rallidae32. White-breasted Waterhen Amaurornis phoenicurus R, C33. Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus R,W, C

Charadriiformes, Jacanidae34. Pheasant-tailed Jacana Hydrophasianus chirurgus R, C35. Bronze-winged Jacana Metopidius indicus R, C

Charadriidae36. Red-wattled Lapwing Vanellus indicus R, C37. River Lapwing Vanellus duvaucelii R, U

Recurvirostridae38. Ibisbill Ibidorhyncha struthersii W, U


Scolopacidae39. Green Sandpiper Tringa ochropus W, C40. Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos W, C

Glareolidae41. Small Pratincole Glareola lactea R, L, C

Columbiformes, Columbidae42. Emerald Dove Chalcophaps indica R, C43. Spotted Dove Streptopelia chinensis R, C44. Oriental Turtle-Dove Streptopelia turtur R, C45. Eurasian Collared-Dove Streptopelia decaocto R, C46. Red Collared-Dove Streptopelia tranquebarica R, C47. Blue Rock Pigeon Columba livia R, C48. Yellow-legged Green-Pigeon Treron phoenicoptera R, C49. Pin-tailed Green-Pigeon Treron apicaudata R, L, C50. Wedge-tailed Green-Pigeon Treron sphenura R, L, C51. Green Imperial-Pigeon Ducula aenea R, C

Psittaciformes, Psittacidae52. Rose-ringed Parakeet Psittacula krameri R, C53. Red-breasted Parakeet Psittacula alexandri R, C54. Alexandrine Parakeet Psittacula eupatria R, C

Cuculiformes, Cuculidae55. Asian Koel Eudynamys scolopacea R, L, C56. Pied Crested Cuckoo Clamator jacobinus Bm57. Brainfever Bird Hierococcyx sparverioides R, Bm58. Large Green-billed Malkoha Phaenicophaeus tristis R, C59. Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis R, C

Strigiformes, Tytonidae60. Barn Owl Tyto alba R, C

Strigidae61. Asian Barred Owlet Glaucidium cuculoides R, L, C62. Spotted Owlet Athene brama R, C

Caprimulgiformes, Caprimulgidae63. Longtailed Nightjar Caprimulgus macrurus R, L

Apodiformes, Apodidae64. Asian Palm-Swift Cypsiurus balasiensis R65. House Swift Apus affinis R, L, C

Coraciiformes, Alcedinidae66. White-breasted Kingfisher Halcyon smyrnensis R, C67. Rudy Kingfisher Halcyon coromanda R, U68. Lesser Pied Kingfisher Ceryle rudis R, C69. Small Blue Kingfisher Alcedo atthis R, C70. Stork-billed Kingfisher Halcyon capensis R, C

Meropidae71. Chestnut-headed Bee-eater Merops leschenaulti R, C72. Small Bee-eater Merops orientalis R, C73. Blue-tailed Bee-eater Merops philippinus R, L, C

Coraciidae74. Indian Roller Coracias benghalensis R, L, C

Upupidae75. Common Hoopoe Upupa epops R, L, W, C

Bucerotidae76. Oriental Pied Hornbill Anthracoceros albirostris R, C (*77. Great Pied Hornbill Buceros bicornis R, U (*

Piciformes, Capitonidae78. Coppersmith Barbet Megalaima haemacephala R, C79. Blue-throated Barbet Megalaima asiatica R, C80. Great Barbet Megalaima virens R, C81. Lineated Barbet Megalaima lineata R, C

Picidae82. Rufous Woodpecker Celeus brachyurus R, C83. Fulvous-breasted

Pied Woodpecker Dendrocopos macei R, C84. Lesser Golden-backed

Woodpecker Dinopium benghalense R, C

Passeriformes, Pittidae85. Hooded Pitta Pitta sordid R, L, C

Motacillidae86. White Wagtail Motacilla alba W, C87. Citrine Wagtail Motacilla citreola W, C88. Grey Wagtail Motacilla cinerea W, C

Campephagidae89. Common Woodshrike Tephrodornis pondicerianus R, C90. Large Woodshrike Tephrodornis gularis R, C91. Scarlet Minivet Pericrocotus flammeus R, C92. Rosy Minivet Pericrocotus roseus R, L93. Long-tailed Minivet Pericrocotus ethologus R

Pycnonotidae94. Red-vented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer R, C95. Red-whiskered Bulbul Pycnonotus jocosus R, C96. Black-crested Bulbul Pycnonotus melanicterus R, C97. White-throated Bulbul Alophoixus flaveolus R, L, C

Irenidae98. Common Iora Aegithina tiphia R, C99. Asian Fairy-Bluebird Irena puella R, L, C

Laniidae100. Grey-backed Shrike Lanius tephronotus W, C

Muscicapidae101. Oriental Magpie-Robin Copsychus saularis R, C102. Jungle Babbler Turdoides striatus R, C103. Red-throated Flycatcher Ficedula parva W, C104. White-rumped Shama Copsychus malabaricus R, C105. Common Stonechat Saxicola torquata W,R, C106. Green Cochoa Cochoa viridis R, U *107. Blue Whistling-Thrush Myiophonus caeruleus R, L, C108. Grey-winged Blackbird Turdus boulboul R,W, C109. Plumbeous Redstart Rhyacornis fuliginosus R,W, C110. Black-naped

Monarch Flycatcher Hypothymis azurea R, L,C111. Yellow-bellied

Fantail-Flycatcher Rhipidura hypoxantha R, L,C

Paridae112. Great Tit Parus major R, C113. Sultan Tit Melanochlora sultanea R, CNectariniidae114. Streaked Spiderhunter Arachnothera magna R, L, C115. Black-throated Sunbird Aethopyga saturata R,L,W,C116. Crimson Sunbird Aethopyga siparaja R, L, C

Passeridae117. Baya Weaver Ploceus philippinus R, L, C


Sturnidae118. Common Myna Acridotheres tristis R, C119. Jungle Myna Acridotheres fuscus R, C120. Common Hill-Myna Gracula religiosa R, C121. Grey-headed Starling Sturnus malabaricus R, C122. Asian Pied Starling Sturnus contra R, C

Oriolidae123. Black-headed Oriole Oriolus xanthornus R, C124. Maroon Oriole Oriolus traillii R, C

Dicruridae125. Black Drongo Dicrurus macrocercus R, C126. Spangled Drongo Dicrurus hottentottus R, C *127. Bronzed Drongo Dicrurus aeneus R, C128. Greater Racket-tailed DrongoDicrurus paradiseus R, C

Table. Waterbirds of Chandrahar Dighi, 18-1- 2008

Species Nos.

Lesser Whistling-duck Dendrocygna javanica 2216Cotton Pygmy-goose Nettapus coromandelianus 56Gadwall Anas strepera 19Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope 37Spot-billed Duck Anas poecilorhyncha 2Common Teal Anas crecca 23Northern Pintail Anas acuta 6Common Pochard Aythya ferina 15White-breasted Waterhen Amaurornis phoenicurus 11Watercock Gallicrex cinerea 3Purple Swamphen Porphyrio porphyrio 5Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus 9Common Coot Fulica atra 21Pintail Snipe Gallinago stenura 3Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago 5Spotted Redshank Tringa erythropus 2Common Redshank Tringa tetanus 3Pheasant-tailed Jacana Hydrophasianus chirurgus 7Bronze-winged Jacana Metopidius indicus 5Grey-headed Lapwing Vanellus cinereus 2Red-wattled Lapwing Vanellus indicus 4Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis 18Darter Anhinga melanogaster 2Little Cormorant Phalacrocorax niger 23Indian Cormorant Phalacrocorax fuscicollis 11Little Egret Egretta garzetta 27Grey Heron Ardea cinerea 3Purple Heron Ardea purpurea 1Great Egret Casmerodius albus 6Intermediate Egret Mesophoyx intermedia 12Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis 31Indian Pond Heron Ardeola grayii 36Asian Openbill Anastomus oscitans 7

Species Total = 33 Waterbirds Total = 2631

A new habitat for Lesser Whistling-duckDendrocygna javanica, in Malda district, West Bengal

Arunayan Sharma, Centre for Ecological Engineering, Netaji Subhash Road, In front of T.O.P,Malda � 732 101, West Bengal. Email : [email protected]

During January 2008, I visited as many interior villages ofMalda district as possible to create awareness about �Bird

Flu�. I was also surveying the area for any tell-tale signs of

the dreaded disease among the migratory birds visiting WestBengal. On 18th January 2008, I visited the Chandahar villagein the Gazole block of Malda district, West Bengal. In thevillage I found a large freshwater wetland known asChandahar Dighi. This water hyacinth infested wetland islocated about 3km away from National Highway 34 and isabout 25km north from the Malda Town.

During my survey, I found a large number of LesserWhistling Ducks foraging in the Chandahar Dighi. Aftercompleting of my �Bird Flu� awareness campaign, I began

to count the Lesser Whistling Ducks. In all I counted 2216individual Lesser Whistling Ducks in the Chandrahar Dighi.A also counted other waterbird species which are listed inthe Table. Altogether 33 waterbirds species totaling to 2631individuals were recorded in the Dighi. Among them weretwo Daters Anhinga melanogaster, which is now a GloballyThreatened species. A solitary Purple Heron Ardeapurpurea was also recorded. Enquiries with the localvillagers revealed that this is the first time such a largenumbers of ducks, especially the Lesser Whistling Ducksare visiting this wetland.

The Chandrahar Dighi is actually a fish farming waterbody.But over the last few years fishing activities have ceased inthis waterbody and water hyacinth has spread across thiswetland turning it into a safe refuge for small species likeLesser Whistling Duck.

Artamidae129. Ashy Woodswallow Artamus fuscus R, C

Corvidae130. House Crow Corvus splendens R, C131. Jungle Crow Corvus macrorhynchos R, C132. Indian Treepie Dendrocitta vagabunda R, C133. Common Green Magpie Cissa chinensis R, C

Status in Assam (Choudhury, 2000):C = Common,L = Local and altitudinal migrantM = Migrant, but some breed here,R = ResidentU = Uncommon,W = Winter visitor,Bm = Breeding migrant (summer)



However it should be noted that the a large number ofdomestic ducks are also allowed to forage in the Dighi.Later in the evening, the domestic ducks are taken backto the village, where they are allowed to freely minglewith the chickens, reared in the backyard poultry.However no symptoms of Avian Influenza were noticedeither in the domestic ducks, or the poultry or thewaterbirds of the Chandrahar Dighi.

But I was informed by the locals that poachers from otherareas are frequenting the Dighi to trap and hunt the Lesser

The Asan Conservation Reserve (300 25� 60" N and 770 42�00"E) covering an area around 445 ha is located along thecourse of the rivers Yamuna and Asan. The reserve lies at400m above sea level (asl) is an Important Bird Area (IBASite code: IN-UT-01) (Islam et al.2004). Every year manyintercontinental migrants come to Asan CR from theirbreeding grounds to spend their winter for food and shelter.During the winter months of 2007-2008 rare winter migrantswere observed for the first time in Asan CR viz., CommonGolden Eye (Bucephala clangula), Lesser White-frontedGoose (Anser erythropus), and Greater White-fronted Goose(Anser albifrons).

Two Common Golden Eyes were observed in Asan CR, bothwere males with a clear white cheek patch at the base ofupper mandible. On 26.xii.2007, a single common GoldenEye was observed among the flock of Tufted Pochard insouth-western part of the reservoir. Again, on 16.i.2008 twocommon golden eyes were observed and were seenseparately among the flocks of Gadwalls and Tufted Pochardin the open water of Asan CR. Three White-fronted Goose,

Rare Winter Migrants of Asan Conservation ReserveM.Vijay and P.T. Bhutia, Northern Regional Station, Zoological Survey of India, Dehradun 248 195

two Greater and one Lesser were observed on 16.i.2008 inshallow marshes on the eastern end of the lake. All had avery conspicuous white face on the forehead but the GreaterWhite-front lacked the yellow eye-ring and the white facialblaze did not extend upwards so far as in Lesser. TheCommon Golden Eye and the White-fronted Goose are rarewinter migrants to North and North Eastern India.

References:

Ali, S. and Ripley, S.D. (1983) Handbook of the Birds of India and Pakistan(Compact Edition) Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Grimmet, R. Inskipp, C. and Inskipp, T. (1999) Pocket Guide to the Birds ofthe Indian Subcontinent Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Islam, M.Z. and Rahmani A.R. (2004): Important Birds Area in India: Prioritysites for conservation. Indian Bird Conservation Network: BombayNatural Society and Bird Life International (UK).

Rasmussen, P.C. and Anderson , J.C. (2005) Birds of South Asia: TheRipley Guide. Vols. 1&2, Smithsonian Institution & Lynx Edition.Washington D.C. and Barcelona.

Hilloljyoti Singha*, Kaustoov Gopal Goswami, Banita Roy, Rimpul Hazarika and Amarjit Narayan Dev.Department of Zoology, Birjhora Mahavidyalaya, Bongaigaon, Assam.

· *Corresponding author�s address: Publicity Secretary, Aaranyak. [email protected], [email protected].

Introduction

Urbanization can be defined as concentrated human presencein residential and industrial settings and their associatedeffects (Cringan and Horak, 1989; Marzluff, 1997). Thecomposition of bird communities of an urban area is notexactly similar to that of a forest habitat. Although many workshave been done on various urban birds (Abdulali 1980; Ali1963; Bhalla & Mann 1989), but till now very few works onurban nesting have been reported (Abdulali 1954, 1983;Altevogt & Davis 1979, 1971) from India. Lister (1953)

Whistling Ducks for their flesh, which according to themwas disease-free and safe for consumption.

Moreover, there was a scarcity of domestic chickens in theirvillages, due to large scale culling of poultry after the outbreakof bird flu and therefore, they were hunting the LesserWhistling Ducks. However, I tried my best to createawareness about the need for conservation of Birds, amonglocal villagers and students of the Chandrahar School andurged them to protect this excellent waterbird habitat of theregion.

Urban bird nest survey inBongaigaon Municipality area, Assam during summer

Abstract

We did a survey of bird nest and their nesting ecology duringsummer nesting season in Bongaigaon Municipality area intwo successive years i.e., 2003 & 2004. Twentyfour birdspecies were found to build 1078 and 1114 nests in 2003and 2004, respectively. House Crow was the most successfulbird species using 29 species of trees. The difference innumber of nests built between the two years (2003 & 2004)was found not significant (U = 185897; P = 0.0548; Mann-Whitney U-Test).


mailto:[email protected].


describes six cities in pre-independent India and makes acomparative account of the avifauna he recorded therein.These records are useful at present to know that some of thebirds which had been found in all the old cities in India, e.g.,Whiterumped Vulture, now have become rare or at the vergeof extinction. Therefore it is equally important to study urbanwildlife and to monitor the changing ecology. The presentinvestigation includes survey of bird nest and their nestingecology during summer nesting season in BongaigaonMunicipality Area in two successive years i.e., 2003 & 04.

Study Area

The study area was confined to the Bongaigaon MunicipalityArea in Bongaigaon district (90°28' to 90°50' E, 26°15' to

26°30' N), in west Assam, which is divided into11 wards.

Though the area is totally urbanized, is covered by mixedplantations as well as natural vegetations of mixed moistdeciduous type with few patches of semi-evergreen typeincluding bamboo brackets. The human population ofmunicipality area is approximately 60000.

Methods

Our survey duration was from 3 April to 30 June 2003, whichwas repeated from 9 April to 3 July 2004. We conducted oursurvey six days in a week covering all wards. After completionof the first round survey, each ward was repeated to countthe late nests in the second round.

We started our survey in the morning at 0800 h and continuedit up to 1300 h. We followed all the main roads and byelanes on foot, and counted nests on both sides of the roadsup to 20 m distance. We noted the position of the nests atdifferent canopy layers including the abandoned nests. Weidentified the tree species where birds built nest. We alsorecorded nesting sites besides trees. We compared bothyears� data by non-parametric Mann-Whitney Test, because

the data were not normally distributed.

Results

Twentyfour bird species were found to build 1078 and 1114nests in 2003 and 2004, respectively. House Crow was themost successful bird species with 403 (37.38%) and 301(27.02%) nests in two successive years, respectively (Table1). They are also found to be more adaptive bird speciesusing 29 species of trees and even houses. It is noticedthat houses have also been used for nesting by five speciesof birds (Common Myna, Greyheaded Myna, House Sparrow,Blue Rock Pigeon and House Crow), though electric post,telephone post were also not far neglected (Table 2). Mangowas the mostly used tree species for nesting, where ninebird species in the first year and 10 species in the secondyear made their nest (Table 3). We found three species oftrees (Coconut, Jackfruit and Mango), where at least fivespecies of birds built nest. During our nest survey, we alsosurveyed trees and found that there were 491 Coconut, 424Jackfruit and 278 Mango trees within 20 m on either side ofour survey routes. The highest number of nests was mainlyfound in upper canopy only (Fig.1). Though the total numberof nests built in 2003 (1078) was less than that of 2004

(1114), but number of nest in trees (except the hole nests)was more in 2003 (Fig. 2). However, number of trees usedfor nesting was more in 2003 (613) than that of 2004 (473).The difference in number of nests built between the twoyears (2003 & 2004) was found not significant (U = 185897;P = 0.0548; Mann-Whitney U-Test).

Discussion

This survey provides the status of nests of various urbanbirds in Bongaigaon Municipality area during summer. Morethan 1000 nests built in two successive breeding seasonsindicate that an urban area also can support a good numberof birds. The factors determining which species can coexistwith human settlement include: the presence and patch sizeof remnant (native) vegetation (Catterall et al., 1991), andthe structure and floristic attributes of planted vegetation(Tweit and Tweit, 1986; Green et al., 1989). Though we didnot survey vegetation in the study area in detail, but basedon our estimate of the nest tree species it was found thatthere exists diverse flora to support nesting of differentspecies of birds. However, we could not see bird nests inthe shrubs and in other vegetations which were far from oursurvey routes. This suggests that number of nests might bemore than we counted.

Maximum nests were found in the upper canopies may bedue to convenience, for to and fro accessibility. Among thethree tree species where five or more than five species ofbirds built nest, number of mango trees was the highest.Therefore, mango seemed to be preferred by large number ofbird species, may be due to more nesting sites in that treespecies. However, a thorough vegetation survey also shouldbe done to analyze the preference of tree species.

In an urban area, House Crow seems to be the mostsuccessful bird to utilize all resources for its breeding. Sohet al. (2002) also find that Corvids often have positiveassociations with urban environments suggesting that theirreproductive success is equal or higher in the urban thanlocal wildlands.

It is to be noted that houses play an important role in urbannesting ecology as 10 % of the total nests was built inhouses. One more interesting finding of the study was tofind out 93 and 58 nests of House Sparrows in the twosuccessive summers, respectively. Sodhi et al. (1999) alsohave found that higher abundance of human commensalspecies (e.g. house swift and common myna) is associatedwith increases in built areas in the tropical city of Singapore.

This study provides baseline information about the urbanbird nesting. Total breeding bird density is often higher inurban areas than in the surrounding native habitat (Beissingerand Osborne, 1982). Based on this importance, furtherstudies in different seasons as well as monitoring of nestingalso could be done. However, only two years� data, which

show no significance difference of nest number betweenthe years, are not sufficient to bring a conclusion of thestudy. Long term monitoring of the common bird specieswill be a tool to study urban nesting ecology.


Table 1. Number of nests of different species of birds during summer of 2003 & 2004 in Bongaigaon municipality area, Assam.

Sl.No Species No. of nest % No. of nest %(2003) (2004)

Family: CORVIDAE1 House Crow Corvus splendens 403 37.38 301 27.02

Family: PHALACROCORACIDAE2 Little Cormorant Phalacrocorax niger 34 3.15 54 4.85

Family: ARDEIDAE3 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis 67 6.22 227 20.384 Little Egret Egretta garzetta 43 3.99 51 4.585 Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax 12 1.11 71 6.37

Family: COLUMBIDAE6 Blue Rock Pigeon Columba livia 8 0.74 1 0.097 Eurasian Collared-Dove Streptopelia decaocto 1 0.09 0 0.008 Spotted Dove Streptopelia chinensis 0 0.00 3 0.27

Family: CORACIIDAE9 Indian Roller Coracias benghalensis 3 0.28 1 0.09

Family: CAPITONIDAE10 Blue-throated Barbet Magalaima asiatica 15 1.39 5 0.45

Family: PICIDAELesser Golden-backedWoodpecker Dinopium benghalense 1 0.09 0 0.00

Family: DICRURIDAE.12 Black Drongo Dicrurus macrocercus 1 0.09 1 0.09

Family: STURNIDAE13 Common Myna Acridotheres tristis 151 14.00 110 9.8714 Jungle Myna Acridotheres fuscus 1 0.09 1 0.0915 Asian Pied Starling Sturnus contra 128 11.87 131 11.7616 Grey-headed Starling Sturnus malabaricus 3 0.28 3 0.27

Family: PYCNONTIDAE17 Redvented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer 9 0.83 8 0.72

Family: MUSCICAPIDAE18 Jungle Babbler Turdoides striatus 2 0.19 1 0.0919 Oriental Magpie-Robin Copsychus saularis 2 0.19 1 0.09

Family: NECTARINIIDAE20 Purple Sunbird Nectarinia asiatica 1 0.09 0 0.00

Family: PASSERIDAE21 House Sparrow Passer domesticus 93 8.63 58 5.222 Baya Weaver Ploceus philippinus 70 6.49 62 5.57

Family: ESTRILDIDAE23 Spotted Munia Lonchura puntulata 6 0.56 7 0.63

Family: PSITTACIDAE24 Alexandrine Parakeet Psittacula eupatria 3 0.28 1 0.09


Table 2. Number of nests excluding trees during 2003 &2004 summer in Bongaigaon municipality area, Assam.Number in parentheses indicates number of bird species.

Year House Nest Electric Telephonehole post post

2003 106 (4) 28 (6) 7 (2) 6 (3)

2004 71 (4) 9 (6) 4 (3) 1 (1)

Table 3. Tree species most used by birds during 2003 &2004 summer in Bongaigaon municipality area, Assam.

Sl. Tree species No. bird Spp. inNo 2003 2004

1 Mango Mangifera indica 9 10

2 Jackfruit Artocarpus heterophyllus 5 5

3 Coconut Cocos nucifera 8 6

ReferencesAbdulali, H. 1980. Sparrow helping nesting Bulbuls. JBNHS 77 (3): 513.

Altevogt, R. & T.A. Davis 1979. Urbanisation nest building of Indian housecrows. JBNHS. 76 (2): 283-290.

Altevogt, R. & T.A. Davis 1971. Baya weaver bird nesting on humanhabitations. JBNHS, 68 (1): 246-248.

Ali, S. 1963. Nesting habitats of Purple Sunbird. Newsletter forBirdwatchers 3 (8): 7.

Abdulali, H. 1983. Pigeon Nesting on ground. JBNHS. 80 (1): 215-217.

Abdulali, H. 1954. Sparows nersting in colonies in trees. JBNHS 52 (2-3): 601.

Beissinger, S.R., D.R. Osborne 1982. Effects of urbanization on aviancommunity organization. Condor 84, 75�83.

Bhalla J.S. & G.S. Mann 1989. Housparrow as predators of army wormat Ludhiana. JBNHS 86 (2): 247.

Catterall, C.P., R.J. Green and D.N. Jones. 1991. Habitat use by birdsacross a forest-scrub interface in Brisbane: implications for corridors.In: Saunders, D.A., Hobbs, R.J. (Eds.), Nature Conservation. 2: TheRole of Corridors. Surrey and Beatty and Sons Pty Ltd, ChippingNorton, NSW, pp. 247�258

Cringan, A.T., G.C. Horak. 1989. Proceedings of the Western RaptorManagement Symposium and Workshop, National Wildlife Federation,Washington, DC. Effects of urbanization on raptors in the westernUnited States., 219�228.

Green, R.J., C.P. Catterall, D.N. Jones. 1989. Foraging and other behaviourof birds in subtropical and temperate suburban habitats. Emu 89,216�222.

Lister, M. D. 1953. Some bird associations of Indian built-up areas. Journalof the Bombay Natural History Society 51 (2): 369�377.

Marzluff, J.M., 1997. Effects of urbanization and recreation on songbirds.In: Block, W. M., Finch, D.M. (Eds.), Songbird Ecology in SouthwesternPonderosa Pine Forests: A Literature Review. Gen. Tech. Re RM-GTR-292. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, RockyMountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp.89�102.

Sodhi, N.S., C. Briffett, L. Kong, B. Yuen. 1999. Bird use of linear areasof a tropical city: implications for park connector design andmanagement. Landscape Urban Plan. 45, 123�130.

Soh, M.C.K., N.S. Sodhi, R.K.H. Seoh, B.W. Brook. 2002. Nest site selectionof the house crow (Corvus splendens) an urban invasive bird speciesin Singapore and implications for its management. Landscape UrbanPlan. 59, 217�226.

Acknowledgement

We offer our thanks to Bongaigaon Municipality Board andBongaigaon Town Planning for providing us basic informationabout the municipality area. We thank Mr. Aasheesh Pittieand Bombay Natural History Society for literature information.Fig. 2. Comparative account of total

number of nests in trees (excludingthehole nests) between two

summers

No

. of n

ests

613

1037

473

10291200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

TreeNest

2003 2004Year

Fig. 1. Different canopy layers used by birds for nestingin Bongaigaon municipality area during 2003 & 2004

summer

Upper Canopy Middle Canopy Lower Canopy

811

892

122 130

11 14

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

2003

2004

Num

ber

of n

est


Life requisite values (food and reproduction); and over all liferequisite of values of the species.

Study areaThe experiments were carried out in Pungani beel(unprotected) of Dergaon Revenue circle of Golaghat Districtof Assam during the breeding period of the species (April-August). The wetland covers an area of 12.11 acres (49069.7sq. meters) and is a perrineal and composite wet land. Thewestern, eastern and northern sides of the beel are low lyingareas where paddy in cultivated.

Methodology

The study area was divided into four zones and demarcatedon the basis of

(a) Vegetation cover (b) water depth (c) breeding and (d)feeding sites of the evaluated species.

The parameters for HQE (Habitat Quality Estimation) wererecorded as follows-

1. Population of the species was recorded for seven daysusing a binocular covering the total day length period(twelve hours) during the breeding period of the birdspecies

2. Vegetation coverage was estimated in percentage forthe different zones of the wetland.

3. Food items were recorded by direct observation. Theitems were also collected and identified.

4. Edge indexes (El) of different zones were estimatedfollowing the standard methods of USFWLS, 1980 andPatten 1975.

DI = A

L

2

Where L =length of the edge of zone and emergentvegetation.

A =Area of the zone

DI =Edge index.

5. Water depth and vegetation height of different zoneswere measured.

6. HSI values for all the four zones were determinedby using the Formula,

HSI = RSI + FSI = (SIV1 x SIV2) 21 × SIV3

Where, RSI = Reproductive suitability index.

Habitat quality estimation of Porphyrio porphyrioP.K. Thakur1 and P.C. Bhattacharjee2

1 Lecturer Deptt. of Zoology D.K.D. College, Dergaon., 2 Prof. Deptt. of Zoology, Gauhati UniversityE-mail: [email protected]

Habitat is the complex physical variable in which speciesexists (Whittaker, Levin and Root, 1973). Habitat selectionis a choice by which species search for certain habitat forbreeding, feeding and roosting. The habitat preference of aspecies implies the choice of one habitat over anotherwithout regard to whether one may be available or not, buthabitat use implies occupation of a habitat without anyconnotation of preference (Peek et. al. 1976). Habitat is theplace occupied by a specific population within a community(Smith, 1974) and often can be characterized by a dominantplant form or some physical characteristics (Ricklefs, 1973).Selection of habitat by a species is indeed a force forachieving competitive coexistence (Rosenzweig, 1981).

The study of the habitat utilization pattern provides authenticinformation about the various uses of the differentcomponents of the habitat. Habitat evaluation procedure(HEP) is a �species habitat� approach which helps to assess

the habitat quality for a selected evaluation species andcan be documented with an index - the Habitat suitabilityindex (HSI).

Vegetation is the most important biological parameter of ahabitat and is inseparable from animal communities becauseof the fact that vegetation has both food as well as covervalue. In Assam the wetlands provide a good habitat for waterbirds and fishes. The wetlands have come to be realized asextremely important and highly dynamic ecological pocketscapable of harbouring a rich and diverse avifaunal population(Reddy et. al. 1996.).

There are as many as 3,536 wetlands distributed throughout the state of Assam, most of which are naturally createdwhile a few are man made (Assam Remote sensingapplication center survey report, 1997). The wetlands occupyan area of 1030.76 sq. km. constituting 1.31 percent of thetotal geographical area of the state.

Porphyrio porphyrio is a rail species belonging to the familyRallidae of the order Gruiformes found in the wetlands ofAssam (Ali and Ripley, 1983) and considered to be a seriouspest of paddy-crop irrespective of variety.

Objectives

The present piece of work was aimed to evaluate the habitatof the rail species purple swamphen Porphyrio porphyrio toidentify the habitat requirements which in turn will providethe reasons why the species being attracted towards theagricultural crops.

The work deals with the study of Habitat Suitability Index(HSI); Habitat Units (HU); vegetation cover (VC) of the area,



FSI = Food suitability index.

Dependable variables SIV1, and SIV2 are multiplied byindependent variable SIV3

7. HIlabitat unit (HU) was calculated by multiplying HSI ofdifferent zones with the area of the available Habitat.

8. Life requisite values of the species for food andreproduction for different zones were calculated byusing the formula (FWLS 1981, ESM-3)

For food (V12 × V2 × V3)

41

For reproduction (V1 × V2 × v3)

In order to qualify the Habitat a survey of vegetation wasconducted in all the zones of the wetland in the followingway.

400 random quadrats (1m×1m) were used to quantify each

species of vegetation in each zone. Water depth measuredwith a calibrated bamboo pole (Thomas, 1980).

Results and Discussion

The zone I (western side of the beel) covers an area of 13920sq. meter. Vegetation covered area was 85 percent and highlyinfested by the weed Eichornia crassipes and 15 percentopen water (11832 sq. meter covered by vegetation and 2086sq. meter covered by open water)

The zone II (Northern side of the beel) is a paddy cultivatedarea and inundated by water during summer. It covers anarea of 8000 sq. meter. 90 percent (7200 sq. meter) iscovered by vegetation and 10 percent (800 sq. meter) inopen water.

The zone III is the southern part of the beel covered byHymanachanae sp. and E. crassipes as dominantvegetation. It covers an area of 6020 sq. meter with 75percent vegetation and 15 percent open water.

The zone IV is on the eastern part of the beel covering anarea of 4280 sq. meter. It is covered by Ipomea aquaticaand E. crassipes sp. Vegetation covered area was 70 percent(2995 sq. m) and open water 30 percent (1284 sq. m).

The middle part of the beel (16849.7 sq. m) was remainedopen and not considered in the study since this area wasnot utilized by the species.

Of the entire habitat 28.36 percent was convered by zone I,16.30 percent by zone 11, 12.26 percent by zone 111, 8.72percent by zone IV, and 34.33 percent remained asopen water.

The species prefers shoots of paddy (Bao and Shali), shootsand leaves of E. crassipes, Hymanachanae sp. And Scirpussp. and also takes seeds of paddy, grass and water lily etc.

Aquatic Vegetation (SIV)The aquatic vegetation in different zones are shown in thetable 1.1.

Zone I Zone II Zone III Zone IV

A B A B A B A B

1 Eichornia sp 87.75% 93.31% 16.25 0.85% 37.5% 25.06% 25.75% 16.22%(351) (2193) (65) (126) (150) (750) (103) (309)

2 Ipomea sp 5.25% 1.87% 19.75% 0.88% 24% 5.28% 28% 29.77%(21) (44) (79) (130) (96) (152) (112) (567)

3 Oryza sp Nil Ni l 93.75% 91.50 Nil Ni l Ni l Ni l(375) (13500)

4 Hymanachanae sp 1.75% 0.25% 9.5% 0.20% 77.75% 32.88% 23% 14.39%(7) (6) (28) (30) (311) (946) (92) (274)

5 Jussaiea sp. 3.25% 0.85% 16.75% 0.95% 25.5% 10.18% 8.5% 5.56%(13) (20) (67) (106) (102) (141) (34) (293)

6 Scirpus sp. 6 % 1.36% 9.25% 0.46% 14.25% 4.41% 15.5% 6.19%(24) (32) (37) (690) (57) (127) (62) (118)

7 Salvinia sp. 6.75% 1.14% 32.50% 4.05% 31.75% 12.44% 22.75% 9.40%(27) (27) (130) (597) (127) (358) (91) (179)

8 Merrimea sp. 5.25% 1.19% 7.0% 0.25% 8.75% 2.53% 11.5% 5.14%(21) (28) (28) (38) (35) (73) (46) (98)

9 Nymphaea sp. Nil Ni l 8.25% 0.29% 18% 3.58% 21% 6.35%(33) (43) (72) (103) (84) (121)

10 Trapa sp. Nil Ni l 9.25% 0.53% 12.25% 2.6% 14% 6.93%(37) (79) (49) (75) (56) (132)

Table 1.1 Relative percentage frequency and individual percentage frequency of vegetation in different zones. Figures inparentheses in A indicate number of quadrats and in B indicates number of species in 400 quadrats.

A = Relative percentage frequency, B = Individual species percentage

Sl.No.


In zone I the dominant vegetation was E. crassipes, in zoneII oryza was the dominant species whereas in zone III & IVHymanachanae and Ipomea sp. were dominant respectively.(Table 1.1)

The height of the dominant vegetation and average populationof the species in different zones were shown in the table1.2. The suitability index was also given which indicatesthe vegetation preference of the species.

Table 1.2 Suitability against vegetation preference

Zone Dominant Height Average bird Suitability

vegetation in cm. population Index(Sl)

I Eichornia crassipes 13 cm-105 cm. 181.42 1.00

I I Oryza sativa 13 cm. - 95 cm. 106.00 0.75

II I Hymanachanae sp 13 cm.-90 cm. 42.42 0.50

I V Ipomea aquatica 13 cm. 45 -cm 22.42 0.25

Edge Index (SIV2)Edges and ecotones always develop better habitat than theadjoining area (Thomas et.al., 1979) Edges reflect the totaldiversity in an area. When the edges are more per unit areaa higher production of population is always achieved. Thesuitability indexes are shown in table 1.3.

Water regime (SIV)3)Peak water level during the study period was 4 meter. In thenorthern part of the wetland where Bao and Shali Paddycrop are cultivated a huge area was inundated. The averagedepth of water of different zones and suitable index areshown in the table 1.3.

Habitat Suitability Index (HSI)Porphyrio porplyrio is a residential bird and use the samehabitat for breeding and feeding. SIV1 (cover of vegetation).SIV2 (edge index) and SIV3 (water depth) are the mainfundamental variables where the first two are dependant andthe third one is independent variable. The qualities of thesevariables ultimately determine the suitability of the habitatof the species.

The four zones of the wetland were used by the bird fornesting, resting and feeding purposes. The zones were madeon the basis of feeding habit (Leidy and Jenkins, 1977) andreproductive habits (Balon 1975, Balon et. al. 1977) HSIvalues and ranks of different zones are shown in thetable 1.4.

Determination of life requisite valuesLife requisite values for different zones of the wetland areshown in the table 1.5

ConclusionThe study revealed that the rail species Porphyrio porphyrioselect different habitats of the wetland on the basis ofvegetation cover, food supply, availability of nest sites andwater depth. Medows and Champbell (1972) also supportedthat bird select habitat on the basis of these parameters.

The height and density of vegetation has profound influence

on the species and hence HIS values are more in zone I.Barman (1997) reported that vegetation is a crucialcomponent for the ultimate management of water bodies inAssam from avifaunal angle.

The edges of the vegetation are mostly used for feeding,resting and nesting. It was observed that value of suitabilityindices of each zone increased with respect to the increaseof the value of the edge index. Depth of the water(independent variable) was found to be the most suitable inzone I which is higher than the other three zones. Thespecies never used zone IV of the wetland for reproduction.

They select zone II which is a paddy cultivated area andfeed upon the stems and seeds of the crops. It is regardedas a serious pest of paddy in Assam.

They prefer composite wetlands where large amount ofEichornia (90 percent or more) with considerable amount ofHymanachanae sp., Ipomea sp. and Scirpus sp. are present.Over all suitability for the species equals to the suitabilityfor food or reproduction which ever is less. Thus 0.000976,the suitability for the food in the studied habitat of the wetlandcan be described as the over all suitability of the species

Porphyrio porphyrio was found to co-exist with other wetlandavifaunal species such as Metopidius indicus. Gallinulachloropus, Gallicrex cinerea, Amaurornis phoenicurus andFulica atra etc.

Thakur and Bhattacharjee (1999) reported that 83.33 percentwetland of Assam indicates their presence and they arefound in the wetlands where killing activities, fishing, eggand nestling predation are less or occasional.

Study also revealed that the wetlands of Assam havepotentials to meet the necessary life requisites of this railspecies. The most widely prevalent weed Eichorniacrassipes provides a good breeding habitat. The Bao andShali paddy crops cultivated on the wetland margins areinvaded by the species both for breeding and feeding.

The ecological threats and anthropogenic activities affectingthe wetland at various levels may lead to the decline of thespecies in near future though at present it is not a threatenedspecies. Vyas (1996), Vijayan (1998) and Rahmani (1991)emphasized the importance of conservation of unprotectedwetlands for the survival of the water bird.

Table 1.5 Life requisites values

Zones Life requisites Aggregation Life requisite

function values

I Food (12×1×1) ¼ 0.25Reproduction (1×1×1) 1.0

II Food (.752×.75×.75)1/4 0.079Reproduction (.75×.75×.75) 0.4218

III Food (.502×.50×.50)1/4 0.0156Reproduction (.50×.50×.50) 0.125

IV Food (.252×.25×.25)1/4 0.000976Reproduction not used for breeding


References

1. Ali, S and SD Ripley 1983, hand book of birds of India and Pakistan.Oxford University press (2): 127140

2. Assam remote sensing application center survey report, 19973. Barman, R 1997, An Ecological analysis of the wetland in relation to

water bird diversity of Brahmaputra Valley, Assam Ph. D thesissubmitted to Gauhati University.

4. Barman R and P.C Bhattacharjee 1996. Habitat quality estimation byhabitat suitability index in Metopidius indicus. Bird conservationstrategies for nineties and beyond Ed. A. Verghese, S. Sridhar andA.K. Chakravarthy. Pub: Ornithological survey of India. 116-120.

5. Bhupathy, S. 1001. Population and resource utilization of waterfowlin Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur, Ph.D Thesis submitted toUniversity of Rajasthan.

6. Bolen, E.G. and Rylander, M.K. 1975: Notes on the morphology andecology of the lesser whistling teal (Dendrocygna javanica): J. ofB.N.LL society. 72 (3); 648-654.

7. Division of ecological services. U.K. Fish and wild life service.Department of interior, Washington D.C. 1998. Habital EvaluationProcedu ESM 102.

8. Peek, J.M.; Urich, D.L and Mackie, R.J. 1976. Moose habitat selectionand relationship to forest management in North Eastern Minnesota.Wild life Monograph No. 48:65.

9. Thakur, P.K. and P.C. Bhattacharjee, 1999. An ecological study ofprophyrio porphyrio with reference to crop depredation inBrahmaputra Valley, Assam Ph.D thesis Submitted to GauhatiUniversity.

10. Rosenzweig M.L. 1981. A theory of habitat selection. Ecology, 62(2):327-335.

11. Vyas, R. 1996: Population and wetland habitat preference ofwaterfowl at Kota. Bird conservation strategies for nineties andbeyond. Ed. A Varghese, S. Sridhar and A.K. Chakravarthy. Pub;Ornithological survey of India; 33-30.

12. Weller, W.M. 1978 wetland habitats; wetland functions and values;the state of our understanding American water research association:210-234.

13. Whittaker, R H.; Levin S.A. and Root R.B. 1973; Niche habitat andEcotype. American Nat. Vol 107(955); 321-338.

Table 1.4 HSI values and ranks for different zones

Sl. Zone Values of Values of different species Total Value HSI value Ranks No. S

1V

1,S

1V

2of vegetation (Total values for

and S1V

3(S

1V

1xS

1V

2)1/2 x S

1V

3different species/4)

1 I 1.00 1. Eichornia sp.=0.5 1.25 0.3125 Excellent2. Oryza sp.=.0375 (HSI I -0.3125)3. Hymanachanae sp.=0.254. Ipomea sp.=0.125

2 II 0.75 1. Oryza sp.=0.210 0.7021 0.175 Good2. Eichornia sp.=0.2812 (HSI 0.30-.175)3. Hymanachanac sp.=0.14064. Ipomea sp.=0.0703

3 III 0.50 1. Hymanachanae sp.=0.0625 0.3125 0.0781 Average2. Eichornia sp.=0.125 (HSI 0.16-.078)3. Oryza sp.=0.93754. Ipomea sp.=0.03125

4 IV 0.25 1. Ipomea sp.=0.0070 0.078115 0.0195 Below average2. Eichornia sp.=0.03125 (HSI 0.077-0.00)3. Hymanachanae sp.=0.015624. Oryza sp.=0.02343

Habitat units (HU) determination

It was determined by multiplying the HSI values with the total area of the habitat

For zone I, HU = 1.00×49069.7 Sq.m = 49069.7 For zone II, HU = 0.75×49069.7 Sq.m = 36802.27

For zone III, HU = 0.50×49069.7 Sq.m = 24534.85 For zone IV, HU = 0.25×49069.7 Sq.m = 12267.42

Table 1.3 Suitability against Edge index and water regime

Sl. No. Zones Area in sq. m Length of the edge Edge index Average water SIV2 and

(L) in m. DI = . depth in m. SIV3

1 I 13920 307 0.734 2.44 1.00

2 II 8000 211 0.66 1.22 0.75

3 III 6020 125.2 0.455 1.68 0.35

4 IV 4280 98.5 0.42 1.57 0.25


CORRESPONDENCE

A TRAGIC DEATH OF AN AVIAN DAY-TRIPPER. VINODKUMAR, Pathakkal House, Tattamanagalam. P.O. Palakkad

� 678 102, Kerala. Email: [email protected]

On 14th November, 2003 at around 16.30, I was riding mycar behind a bus towards Chittur, Palakkad. When it reacheda place called Thannirpanthal there adjacent to the road, Iobserved a small pond full of lotus and other weeds.Suddenly I saw something hitting the front side of the busand falling on the car bonnet. It was a bird. I stopped my carat once and rushed back and saw the hapless birdshuddering with pain on the middle of the road. It was aWhite breasted Waterhen. I took the bird and gave somewater; it drank fully and drooped its head listlessly. I checkedthe bird thoroughly for any bleeding or external injuriessustained; but there were none. The bird couldn�t flap its

wings or stand up. It was totally paralyzed! After sometime,I placed it on the bank of the pond and it remainedmotionlessness for awhile. Later, it jumped into the pondbut still it couldn�t raise its head, for I suspect the bird had

sustained internal injuries in its neck region. There was nochance of the survival of that poor bird. Road kills havebecome a common phenomenon near the wetlands of ruralareas.

e e e e e

SIGHTING OF YELLOW-BELLIED PRINIA (Priniaflaviventris) - FIRST RECORD IN GUJARAT. ASHOKMASHRU, A-7 Alap Heritage, Kalawad Road, Rajkot-360005,[email protected] and MEDHIR PANDYA, A-92,�Pruthvi�,Jodhpur Road, Satelli te, Ahmedabad-15,

[email protected]

On 27/04/08 we visited the Thol Bird Sanctuary (Latitude:23°7�51"N Longitude: 72°22�57"E), about 25 km northwest

of Ahmedabad city, on our Sunday birdwatching trip. Thol isan irrigation purpose reservoir. Looking at its characteristicof attracting thousands of migratory birds of good diversityin winter along with native birds through out the year, theGovt has declared Thol as Bird Sanctuary in 1988. Accordingto latest bird census by Forest Department in 2008; thesanctuary has more than 22000 birds at the time of census.It has many bird habitats like wetland, reed beds and bushesalong sides of earthen bund, tall Desi Babul trees andcultivation composing good diversity of birds.

Fellow bird watchers Dhaivat Hathi, Shivangi Patel and NikhilMehta were accompanying us. We reached the sanctuaryaround 7.00 am and began walking on the right side bundfrom the entry point. At 7.15 am, we observed strangerestless behavior with constant wing snapping (flappingsound) of two warblers in the bush closer to the reservoir,making it even difficult to trace them through the binocular.Finally after considerable effort we were able to spot one ofthem through the binoculars. The bird has a bright lemonyellow belly, blackish crown with white supercelium, milky

white throat, and loose, long, staggered typical prinia tailflickering up-down. It was constantly moving with wingsnapping. We referred to �Pocket Guide to the Birds of Indian

Subcontinent �by Richard Grimmett, Carol Inskipp & Tim

Inskipp, the bird was matching the description of Yellow-Bellied Prinia but not mapped in Gujarat and hence wereferred to another field guide by Krys Kazmierczak, theoutcome was same. We identified clearly it as Yellow-Bellied Prinia (Prinia flaviventris) and thought of checkingin the bird list of Gujarat.

Dr. Salim Ali writes about field characteristics of this bird � Atypical wren-warbler with longish, graduated loosely insertedtail and bright yellow underparts..forecrown and sides of headdark grey.. a short supercillium..� About its habit �A sprightly

restless bird, hopping and climbing about in grasses whereit finds food�As a rule difficult to see.� About habitat �Affects

humid grassland mixed with bushes..reeds..near tanks,lakesand swamps, occasionally in thin secondary growth� and

About its call � Also snaps wings�. All these descriptions

matcheed our observation of the bird, its field characteristics,habits and habitat.

While referring to the Checklist of Birds of Gujarat, publishedby Bird Conservation Society of Gujarat, we were surprisedat not finding the bird in the checklist. Following are thereferences about its distribution in western and northern partparticularly the Prinia flaviventris sindiana race.

1.Pakistan, Punjab, plains of Indus river system, from Bannuand Ambala south through sind�� Handbook by Dr.

Salim Ali

2.C Pakistan,N and NE India� Birds of Indian Subcontinent.�

by Richard Grimmett, Carol Inskipp & Tim Inskipp

3.Sind and Indus rivers, part of Punjab & Haryana�(From

Distribution Map) �Birds of India�� by Krys Kazmierczak

In addition to the above records we found few online datashowcasing many photographic records of this bird atYamuna river, Delhi, Okhla and Dudhva national Park.

Looking at all the above references, Gujarat has never beenin its distribution range. So this is the very first record of thebird in Gujarat and which is important. Incidentally, our co-birdwatcher Nikhil Mehta could take only one photograph ofthis restless bird against light and without a zoom lens.

Front Cover : Golden Oriole (Oriolus oriolus). One of theloveliest birds, attired in dazzling golden yellow and black.Its harsh call chee-ah is replaced in summer months withclear liquid fluty notes pee-lo-lo....pee-lo-lo; a delightfulreminder of the finest voice possessed by this elegant bird.Orioles are particularly fond of the flower nectar of �flames

of the forest� � Erythrina and Butea tree sps.Photo: S. Sridhar, ARPS

Inset : Nigel Collar of Birdlife International with his edict.




may-june 2008

Documents