Hydro Power Development and Its Impacts on the Habitats and Diversity of Montane Birds of Western Himalayas

Open access


The montane forest ecosystems of Western Himalayas are under severe anthropogenic pressure because of hydro-electric project (HEP) development. Several studies have highlighted downstream effects of HEP, but there is no information on the effects of HEP-building activities on upstream fauna. In particular, studies on upstream Himalayan montane ecosystems and fauna around dams are lacking. I investigated effects of dam-building activities on bird communities in Indian Western Himalayas. I studied the response of bird communities along a disturbance gradient with the aim to identify key factors influencing their distribution. I surveyed primary and secondary montane forests, agricultural lands, and dam-affected (disturbed) habitats. Response variables included total avifaunal and woodland species richness and abundance, which were estimated by point-count surveys. Explanatory variables included tree and shrub density, canopy cover, disturbance intensity, and elevation. Bird species richness was higher in undisturbed and lesser disturbed sites, lower in agricultural sites, and lowest in HEP-affected sites. Canonical correspondence analysis revealed that canopy cover, shrub density, and disturbance influenced species distribution; woodland birds significantly negatively responded to dam-building activities. Th e study has shown that dam-building activity has negatively affected montane birds. I propose that increasing shrub and tree cover in dam-disturbed sites would minimise losses of avian habitats.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Acharya B. K. Sanders N. J. Vijayan L. Chettri B. 2011. Elevational Gradients in Bird Diversity in the Eastern Himalaya: An Evaluation of Distribution Patterns and Th eir Underlying Mechanisms. PLoS ONE 6(12): e29097. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Ali S. Ripley S. D. 1983. Hand Book of the Birds of India and Pakistan Compact Edition. Oxford Univ. Press New Delhi.

  • Austin M. P. Cunningham R. B. Flemming P. M. 1984. New approaches to direct gradient analysis using environmental scalars and statistical curve fitting procedures. Vegetatio 55 11-27.

  • Bibby C. J. Burgess N. D. Hill N. D. Mustoe S. H. 2000. Bird Census Techniques. Academic Press London 3-36.

  • Birdlife International. 2003. Saving Asia’s Threatened Birds: A Guide for Government and Civil Society. Cambridge 1-256.

  • Birdlife International. 2011. Data zone 11 February http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/home

  • Canaday C. 1996. Loss of insectivorous birds along a gradient of human impact in Amazonia. Biological Conserv. 77 63-77.

  • Chapman K. Reich P. 2007. Land use and habitat gradients determine bird community diversity and abundance in suburban rural and reserve landscapes of Minnesota USA’ Biol. Conserv. 15 527-541.

  • CISMHE. 2000 a. Environment Impact Assessment Studies of Parvati Stage-II Hydro-electric Project Himachal Pradesh CISMHE. Univ. of Delhi New Delhi India.

  • CISMHE. 2000 b. Environment Management Plan of Parvati Stage-II Hydro-electric Project Himachal Pradesh CISMHE Univ. of Delhi. New Delhi India.

  • Colwell R. K. Coddington J. A. 1994. Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B 345 101-118.

  • Colwell R. K. 1994-present. EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. http://viceroy.eeb.uconn.edu/estimates.

  • Conservation International. 2014. http://sp10.conservation.org/where/priority_areas/hotspots/asia-pacific/Himalaya/Pages/default.aspx downloaded on 20th Nov 2014.

  • Clergeau P. Croci S. Jokimaki J. Kaisanlahti-Jokimaki M. L. Denetti M. 2006. Avifaunna homogenization by urbanization: analysis at diff erent European latitudes. Biol. Conserv. 127 336-344.

  • Collar N. J. Crosby M. J. Stattersfi eld A. J. 1994. Birds to Watch 2 - the world list of Th reatened Birds. Birdlife International Cambridge 1-407.

  • Forest and Birds. 2013. Hydro-electric schemes: “Our rivers are not renewable”. Downloaded on 15th December 2013. http://www.forestandbird.org.nz/saving-our-environment/threats-and-impacts-/hydro-electricschemes.

  • Gaston A. J. Garson P. J. Hunter M. L. 1983. Th e status and conservation of forest wildlife in Himachal Pradesh Western Himalayas. Biol. Conserv. 27 291-314.

  • Grimmett R. Inskipp C. Inskipp T. 2009. Pocket guide to the Birds of Indian subcontinent. Oxford University Press New Delhi 1-384.

  • Grumbine R. E. Pandit M. K. 2013. Threats from India’s Himalaya Dams. Science 339 (6115) 36. DOI:10.1126/science.1227211

  • Gotelli N. J. Colwell R. K. 2001. Quantifying biodiversity: Procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecology Letters 4 379-391.

  • Gutzwiller K. J. Barrow W. C. 2002. Does bird community structure vary with landscape patchiness? A Chihuahuan Desert perspective. Oikos 98: 284-298.

  • Hammer O. Harper D. A. T. Ryan P. D. 2001. PAST: Paleontological statistical soft ware package for education and data analysis. Paleontological Electronica 4 (1) 9.

  • Hortal J. Borges P. A.V. Gaspar C. 2006. Evaluating the performance of species richness estimators: sensitivity to sample grain size. Journal of Animal Ecology 75 274-287.

  • James F. C. Shugart H. H. 1970. A quantitative method of habitat description. Audubon Field-Notes 24 727-736.

  • Jefferies M. Clarbrough MM 1986. Mount Everest National Park. Sagarmatha Mother of the Universe. The Mountaineers Seattle USA 1-192.

  • Jolli V. 2014. Impact of Parvati Hydro Electric Project development on the cricital habitats of montane birds of Western Himalaya. Unpublished Thesis Department of Environmental Studies University of Delhi New Delhi India 1-132.

  • Kazmierczak K. Perlo V. B. 2009. Om field guide - Birds of India. Om Book International New Delhi India.

  • NHPC 2010. http://nhpcindia.com/Projects/English/Scripts/Prj_Features.aspx?Vid=67 site visited on September 16 2010.

  • Lande R. 1996. Statistics and partitioning of species diversity and similarity among multiple communities. Oikos 76 5-73.

  • Magurran E. A. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. Cambridge University Press Great Britain 78-79.

  • Oksanen J. 1997. Why the beta function cannot be used to estimate skewness of species responses. Journal of Vegetation Science 8 147-152.

  • Oksanen J. Laara E. Huttunen P. Merilainen J. 1988. Estimation of pH optima and tolerances of diatoms in lake sediments by the methods of weighted averaging least squares and maximum likelihood and their use for prediction of lake acidity. J. Paleolimnology 1 39-49.

  • Pandit M. K. Sodhi N. S. Koh L. P. Bhaskar A. Brook B. W. 2007. Unreported yet massive deforestation driving loss of endemic biodiversity in Indian Himalaya. Biodiver. and Conserv. 16 (1) 153-163.

  • Pandit M. K. Grumbine R. E. 2012. Potential Eff ects of Ongoing and Proposed Hydropower Development on Terrestrial Biological Diversity in the Indian Himalaya. Conserv. Biol. 26 (6) 1061-1071. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01918.

  • Pomeroy D. E. Dranzoa C. 1997. Methods of studying the distribution diversity and abundance of birds in East Africa - some quantitative approaches. African J. Ecology 35 110-123.

  • Raman T. R. S. 2003. Assessment of census techniques for interspecific comparisons of tropical rainforest bird densities: a field evaluation in the Western Ghats India. Ibis 145 9-21.

  • Ryals B. Dooling R. Westbrook E. Dent M. Mackenzie A. Larsen O. 1999. Avian species differences in susceptibility to noise exposure. Hearing Research 131 71-88.

  • Small M. F. Hunter M. L. 1988. Forest fragmentation and avian nest predation in forested landscapes. Oecologia 76 (1) 62-64.

  • Sorace A. Gustin M. Calvario E. Ianniello L. Sarrocco S. Carere C. 2000. Assessing bird communities by point counts: repeated sessions and their duration. Acta Ornithol. 35 197-202.

  • Sisk T. D. Launer A. E. Switky K. R. Ehrlich P. R. 1994. Identifying extinction threats. BioScience 44 592-604.

  • Slabbekoorn H. Ripmeester E. A. P. 2008. Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation. Molecular Ecology 17 72-83.

  • Snow D. W. Perrins C. M. 1998. Th e Birds of the Western Palearctic vol. 2: Passerines Concise Edition. Oxford Univ. Press Oxford 1-1830.

  • ter Braak C. J. F. 1988. CANOCO. Agricultural Mathematics Group. Technical Report LWA-88-02. Wageningen Netherlands 1-95.

  • Walther B. A. Moore J. L. 2005. Th e concepts of bias precision and accuracy and their use in testing the performances of species richness estimators with a literature review of estimator performance. Ecography 28 815-829.

  • White P. S. Pickett S. T. A. 1985. Natural disturbance and patch dynamics: an introduction. In: Th e Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. Academic Press New York 3-13.

  • Wood N. Langford T. 2013. Ecological impacts of hydro schemes on Scottish fresh waters. http://www.snh.org.uk/publications/on-line/advisorynotes/37/37.htm

  • World Heritage UNESCO Organisation. 2009. http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5445/ (accessed January 2010).

  • Zar J. H. 1996. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall International London.

Journal information
Impact Factor

Cite Score 2018: 0.41

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.324
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.422

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 407 176 7
PDF Downloads 201 100 3