Wildlife of Lao PDR: 1999 Status Report - IUCN

National risk status categories are based upon ‘The conservation
status of birds in Laos: a review of key species’
(Thewlis et al. 1998), issued as a special supplement of the
journal Bird Conservation International. Species are categorised
into At Risk in Lao PDR, Potentially At Risk in Lao
PDR and Little Known in Lao PDR. Some species were considered
by Thewlis et al. (1998) to be Not At Risk in Lao
PDR, but many species were not assessed. Their analysis was
limited to species of global conservation concern (in Collar
et al. 1994, or its predecessor Collar and Andrew 1988), those
highlighted by Round (1988) and/or Treesucon and Round
(1990) as being At Risk or Rare in Thailand, and those for
which, within remaining habitat in Lao PDR, a clear decline
was perceptible when recent records were compared with
those in historical sources.
Thewlis et al. (1998) did not consider information gathered
after 31 December 1996. Therefore the present work
modifies their list to incorporate information and insights up
to 28 February 1999. Only 11 presumed resident species
recorded historically in Lao PDR have not been found in the
field since 1990 and were not listed by Thewlis et al. (1998)
as key species. All 11 are categorised here as Little Known
in Lao PDR. While for some of these species there is no a
priori reason to assume that they are not secure in Lao PDR
(particularly montane species), listing as Little Known is intended
to stimulate publication of any recent records so that
a considered judgement can be made in future. This policy is
confined to resident species, as many non-breeding visitors
to Lao PDR occur only irruptively or irregularly. Little purpose
would be served by designating as key species all those
lacking recent records. Other key species newly listed as such
here have populations which seem at lower density than would
be expected and/or (using the criteria in Thewlis et al. 1998)
a clear threat is operating. Limited Lao range alone has not
been considered a sufficient criterion, because for some such
species (e.g. Yellow-vented Bulbul) there is no evidence that
they are at risk. All unclassified species are considered to be
Not At Risk in Lao PDR, but this categorisation is stated
explicitly in the species accounts only for those species
considered to be Globally Threatened or Near-Threatened
by Collar et al. (1994).
Assessments are made only for species. The limited information
available on threat levels for subspecies has been
included and referenced to source, but no original synthesis
has been attempted here. A revised list of key species in Lao
PDR is given in Annex 6. Table 10 details changes to the
classification from that of Thewlis et al. (1998).
Several species are still recorded frequently and are under
no immediate threat, but if apparent or likely recent declines
continue, they may merit conservation attention. The
historical and recent status of these should be reviewed in
the style of Thewlis et al. (1998) as soon as possible. These
species include: Lesser Whistling-duck, Oriental Pied
Hornbill, Red-breasted Parakeet, Grey-headed Parakeet, Red
Birds
Collared Dove, Red-wattled Lapwing and Large-billed Crow.
The status of several other species remains unclear, and they
could plausibly be under decline. These include: Brown Wood
Owl, Savanna Nightjar, Wedge-tailed Green Pigeon, Mountain
Imperial Pigeon, Slaty-breasted Rail, Ruddy-breasted
Crake, Greater Painted-snipe, Collared Falconet, Vinousbreasted
Starling and Hwamei. Additionally, the status of
Ratchet-tailed Treepie and Hill Myna should be assessed at
regular intervals. Compilers of future survey reports could
usefully detail information on these species to aid future
review.
A status summary, usually with detail for less widely
available records, is included under each key species account.
Key species occurrence in each recent survey area is given
in Table 11. Thewlis et al. (1998) detailed all records, historical
and recent, of which they were aware for all species
included in their review, and information for the 1992-1996
period is specifically referenced to this source only where
necessary to prevent ambiguity. It is envisaged that a similar
treatment will be published elsewhere for the species newly
designated here as key species. Therefore, information here
is merely in sufficient detail to validate the categorisation.
Proposed Conservation Management and Research
Measures
A synopsis of conservation requirements is given for key
species. Major needs for action are usually summarised by
group. As well as the specific recommendations, there is a
general need for further information on (1) the distribution,
abundance and particularly the seasonality of many species
and (2) trade in all species, to allow refinement of conservation
measures. Many species require active management of
Lao PDR’s protected area system to maintain viable
populations. National species conservation priorities are identified
in Table 6.
CITES-listed and Restricted-range Species
CITES information is from WCMC (1998). Species are
indicated as being listed in Appendices I or II as appropriate
(see Conventions). As many CITES-listed species are common
and widespread, surveyors have not specifically detailed
field records of all species in survey reports. Therefore, comprehensive
review of status information of the latter species
is impracticable and anyway would be of limited use. All
species in these appendices which are known from Lao PDR
are listed in Annex 3.
Breeding ranges are given for resident species with restricted
global ranges (local or regional endemics), to indicate
the significance of the Lao range to the conservation of
the species. Extralimital ranges are not therefore given for
other species, which are all more widespread. World ranges
are taken from Sibley and Monroe (1990) with modifications.
Indochina indicates Lao PDR, Cambodia and Vietnam. Southeast
Asia includes Myanmar, Thailand and peninsular Malaysia
as well as Indochina.
75