sign in sign up
<<
Home , Abisara bifasciata, Athyma cama, Athyma nefte, Celastrina huegeli, Chandragiri Municipality, Chrysophlegma

European Journal of Ecology, 6.1, 2020, pp. 27-50

WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT OF THE CHANDRAGIRI HILLS, : POTENTIAL FOR ECOTOURISM

Hem Bahadur Katuwal1,2,3*, Hari Basnet3, Hari Prasad Sharma4, Sabina Koirala2,3,5, Bhaiya Khanal6, Kaustuv Raj Neupane3,7, Kul Bahadur Thapa8, Dibas Babu Panta9,10, Kanchan Parajuli3, Sandesh Lamichhane3,11, Mangkal Rai3, Tejab Pun3, Shruti Shakya4 and Suraj Baral3 1Center for Integrative Conservation, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Mengla, , 2University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, , China 3Small Conservation and Research Foundation, Kathmandu, 4Central Department of Zoology, Institute of Science and Technology, , , Kathmandu, Nepal 5Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chaoyang, Beijing, China 6Natural History Museum, Tribhuvan University, Swyombhu, Kathmandu, Nepal 7Department of Zoology, Trichandra Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal 8Himalayan Nature, Lazimpat, Kathmandu, Nepal 9Central Department of Environmental Science, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal 10Master of Project Management, University of Technology, Sydney Australia 11Institute of Forestry, Office of the Dean, School of Forestry and NRM, Kathmandu, Nepal

Abstract. Wildlife assessments can provide crucial information regarding richness, relative abundance and spatial, tem- poral, and ecological information on wildlife associations. The assessment’s information can in turn be used for developing management policies including for establishing touristic zones. We investigated wildlife occurrences in the Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu Nepal from 2015-2019 to provide baseline data to inform the potential sites for ecotourism. During the study period, we recorded 30 species, 199 species, 34 herpetofauna species and 77 species. The area harbors three globally and six nationally threatened mammal species, two globally and seven nationally threatened with one endemic bird species, one globally and nationally threatened herpetofauna, and one nationally threatened butterfly species. We also explored four potential hiking routes for observing wildlife and providing scenic views of the Himalayan range and Kathmandu city. Therefore, we expect Chandragiri Hills can become one of the hot spot for tourists to observe both common and threatened wildlife species in Nepal. Key words: bird; butterfly; herpetofauna; mammal; hiking route; threatened species.

Introduction tries, supporting nature conservation and the well-be- Wildlife assessments provide critical data on ing of local people (Donohoe and Needham 2006). species richness, abundance and spatial, temporal Hence, wildlife becomes an integral part of ecotour- and ecological knowledge of their habitat (Katuwal ism as people are demonstrating increased interest et al. 2018). Assessments can be used to analyze the towards wildlife-based tourism (Cong et al. 2014). of species and to develop conser- The Nepal government has established protected vation action programs (Thomas 1982; Inskipp et al. areas comprising about 24% of the total land area, 2016). In addition, data from assessments can ben- including National Parks, Wildlife Reserve, Hunting efit wildlife tourism through increased knowledge Reserve, Conservation Areas and Cultural Heritage and potential observations. Increased tourists flow sites to conserve wildlife and enhance ecotourism can also increase employment opportunities for lo- (Baral et al. 2012). Most of these protected areas cal people and communities. Therefore, nature-based are in lowland and high land physiographic regions tourism is an emerging industry in developing coun- with few exceptional areas in the mid-hills region

27 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu of Nepal (DNPWC 2018). Wildlife in protected ar- alensis, Schima wallichii, Castonopsis indica, Pinus eas of Nepal are well known (Jnawali et al. 2011; roxburghii, Quercus spp., Rhododendron spp., etc. Inskipp et al. 2016) and ecotourism has occurred The Chandragiri Hills contains natural and planted for decades (see Bookbinder et al. 1998). However, forests and is managed as a community forest land. there are many other potential sites outside the ex- isting protected areas, especially in mid-hills like near to (e.g., Phulchoki Moun- tain Forest) with diverse wildlife and natural beauty (Baral and Inskipp 2005; Jnawali et al. 2011; Katu- wal et al. 2018). These places are more popular as weekend destinations for tourists. The Chandragiri Hills, which occur in the mid-hills region southwest of Kathmandu Valley, has similar topography and vegetation to Shivapuri-Nagarjun National Park and Phulchoki Mountain Forest, and is expected to have diverse wildlife. However, a wildlife assessment has not yet been conducted in the Chandragiri Hills and the current information of wildlife is little known. We conducted a baseline assessment of wildlife in the Chandragiri Hills to understand the potential Figure 1: Boundary of Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu with for ecotourism near to Kathmandu, the capital city potential hiking routes. of Nepal. We emphasized our assessment on mam- mal, bird, herpetofauna, and butterfly species along 1.2 Study design potential hiking routes. This assessment will provide We used multiple methods to detect wildlife spe- a baseline data for conserving common and threat- cies including direct observation, remote cameras, ened species in this area (e.g., Higginbottom and live traps, and species’ sign observations. Surveys Tribe 2004; Larm et al. 2018), which potentially were conducted for 20 days in July 2015 during the may improve local livelihoods (KC et al. 2015), and monsoon season, which constrained our efforts to strengthens local guardianship of endangered species available trails (0.5–4 km long) due to hazardous and their (Bookbinder et al. 1998). conditions off-trail by monsoon. We used direct ob- servations and evidence of sign (e.g., tracks, scat, 1. Materials and Methods burrows) to identify mammal species along trails. We 1.1. Study area attached 10 cameras to trees along trails at locations We conducted this study in Chandragiri Hills considered likely to detect nocturnal species such as (Figure 1), comprising about 11 km2 (27.6672° N, near trails. Cameras were typically positioned 85.2058° E) in , Kathman- 40–50 cm above ground and operated from 18:00 to du, Nepal, with an elevational range of 1300 to 2540 7:00 am morning for 20 days, removing cameras dai- m. The Chandragiri Hills is about 16 km far from ly to avoid theft. We surveyed along these same the core area of the Kathmandu city and is connect- trails using line transect method (Bibby et al. 2000; ed with major road with regular bus services. It is Urfi et al. 2005; Siegel 2009) each morning from an historical place from where the Late King Prithivi 6:30 to 12:00 noon, recording all species observed Narayan Shah, the unifier of the Nepal Kingdom, or heard. In addition, we also observed butterfly and had designed a military attack on the Kathmandu herpetofauna along trails, open places and rivulets. Valley during the 18th century. The cable car is oper- We used field guides for mammals (Baral and Shah ating since December 2016. The area is also famous 2008), birds (Grimmett et al. 2000), (Smith for visiting the Bhaleshwor Mahadev temple which 1994; Khanal and Smith 1997), and herpetofauna lies at the top of the Hills, with views of the Kath- (Shah and Tiwari 2004) for species identification. We mandu Valley and Himalayan Range. The climate is took photographs of all unidentified sign and species sub-tropical to temperate which influences the - oc and consulted with experts for identification. Addi- currence of mixed vegetation including Alnus nep- tionally, we also placed 40 live traps (Sherman/tube/ local/pitfall) for small mammals systematically bait-

28 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu ed with balls of oatmeal, biscuit, carrot etc. in March 2019 for 25 days. We checked traps each morning and evening and released ’ onsite immedi- ately after identification. Besides, we also consulted some key informants and made several opportunistic visits to survey butterflies, herpetofuana, birds (also reviewed ebird list) and mammals till May 2019. We considered images from remote cameras tak- en >30 min apart as independent events (see O’Brien et al. 2003; Jenks et al. 2011; Katuwal and Dahal 2013) and plotted detections time for each species. We compiled the list of species detected along with their conservation and trade status using the Interna- tional Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species and the Convention on Figure 2: Frequency of mammals in camera traps at Chandra- International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild giri Hills in July 2015. Fauna and Flora (CITES) database, respectively. crowned Jay Garrulus bispecularis, and Gold-naped 2. Results Finch Pyrrhoplectes epauletta), one was endemic 2.1 Wildlife of Chandragiri Hills species (Spiny Babbler Acanthoptila nipalensis), and We recorded 30 mammal species (three species 27 were CITES-listed species (Appendix 2 and 3). identified at level only) of 16 families (Appen- We recorded 34 herpetofauna (10 amphibian dix 1). We detected three globally threatened species species from five families, 24 species from (Chinese Pangolin Manis pentadactyla, Leopard six families) (Appendix 2 and 4). The King Cobra Panthera pardus, and Himalayan Black Bear Ur- (Ophiophagus hannah) was the only globally and na- sus thibetanus), six nationally threatened species tionally threatened (Vulnerable) species among the (Leopard Cat Prionailurus bengalensis, Leopard, detected species in the Chandragiri Hills. We recorded Chinese Pangolin, Barking Deer Muntiacus vagina- 77 butterfly species from nine families (Appendix 2 lis, Himalayan Black Bear and Macaque Ma- and 5). The Golden Birdwing (Troides aeacus) was a caca assamensis), and 10 were CITES listed species CITES-listed species and the Common Siren (Diago- (Appendix 1 and 2). Through camera trapping, we ra persimilis) was a nationally threatened species. confirmed the first occurrence of Chinese Pangolin in the Chandragiri Hills (Appendix 2). Our results in- 2.2 Identifying potential hiking routes dicated that most mammals were active during dawn We identified four hiking routes in the Chandra- and dusk (Figure 2). Large Indian Civet (Viverra zi- giri Hills (see Figure 1): betha) was recorded most frequently (48 detections) while Yellow-throated Marten (Martes flavigula)was Route 1) -Bhanjyang-Chandrigiri Hills: detected only once. Among bats, we identified only Visitors can start from Laglage Community the Woolly Horseshoe Bat (Rhinolophus luctus) and Forest located in Thankot around 1300 m of el- Greater Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx). evation at the base of Kathmandu Valley. It is We recorded 199 bird species from 47 families a well-managed hiking route for one hour and (Appendix 3). Most birds were resident (159 species) small trail afterward where visitors have op- while some were winter (23 species) and summer (17 portunity to observe the Critically Endangered species) visitors. Among these bird species, we iden- Chinese Pangolin and their burrows, other mam- tified two globally threatened bird species (Steppe mals like Wild Boar (Sus scrofa), Barking Deer Aquila nipalensis and Red-headed Vulture Sar- (Muntiacus vaginalis) along with the signs of fe- cogyps calvus), seven nationally threatened species lid species like Leopard, forest birds and soaring (Common Barn-owl Tyto alba, Brown Wood-owl raptors, butterflies, and herpetofauna along the Strix leptogrammica, Steppe Eagle, Red-headed Vul- trail. In addition, visitors can enjoy the scenery ture, Himalayan Griffon Gyps himalayensis, Plain- of Kathmandu valley along the eastern side and

29 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

beautiful mountain landscape on the western side The wildlife inventory and the potential tourist travel at an elevation of 2260 m in the Bhanjyang area routes identified from this study can be served as a within 3 hours walk from the starting point. After baseline data for developing ecotourism planning in a 30-45 min walk from Bhanjyang, visitors can Chandragiri Hills. reach the Chandragiri peak (2540 m). From the The observed species diversity in the Chandra- top of the Chandragiri Hills, visitors can enjoy giri Hills seems similar to that found in the nearest views of the Kathmandu Valley and panoramic protected area, Shivapuri-Nagarjun National Park in view of the Himalayan Range from Mt. Anna- mid-hills of Kathmandu (DNPWC 2020). For mam- purna I (8091 m) to Mt. Everest (8848 m) in clear mal species, most are widely distributed in Nepal days. except the Chinese Pangolin, which occurs predom- inantly from eastern to central Nepal (Sharma et al. Route 2) Godam-Bhanjyang-Chandgiri Hills: 2020a). The local communities of Chandragiri areas Visitors can drive from Godam (Thankot area) to are willing to protect threatened species like Chi- Bhanjyang to the top of Chandragiri, or can walk nese Pangolin because these communities have more which takes 3–4 hours. It is one of the ancient knowledge on the importance of the species (Sharma routes that connect the Kathmandu with Terai re- et al. 2020b). As Leopards appear abundant in this gion of Nepal. The road also goes to the Chitlang area, human-leopard conflict is frequent (see the re- village from Bhanjyang which is a famous for cent killing of the Leopard https://english.khabarhub. homestays. Due to open space, this area is more com/2020/07/94225/). It is also not surprising that suitable for observing birds, butterflies, primates, many local people have experienced injuries, live- squirrels, and mammal signs (e.g., leopard, civet). stock and pets depredations from leopard. For exam- Route 3) Chandragiri cable car station-Chandra- ple, people put spiked collars on their dogs to mitigate giri Hills: This is also the historic and most diffi- attacks from Leopard. Interestingly, the frequently cult hiking trail used by local people to reach the detected Large Indian Civet and Yellow-throated Bhaleshwor Mahadev temple at top of Chandra- Marten in Chandrgiri Hills may provide good op- giri. The route starts from cable car station pass- portunities for wildlife observers. These species are ing through dense forest and is around 2-3 hours hardly recorded in the Kathmandu Valley probably hike to the top of Chandragiri. There is a higher due to their often nocturnal and crepuscular behavior chance of observing Chinese Pangolin and its (Hunter 2011; Appel et al. 2013) or limited studies of burrows, civets and Barking Deer, along with their occurrence. Records of both summer and winter many forest birds, butterflies and herpetofauna. birds suggest the Chandragiri Hills could be a poten- Visitors can also use a cable car and see the sce- tial site for bird watchers throughout the year. The nic beauty of the Himalayan Range. Chandragiri Hills could also serve as an appropriate site for watching bird migrations (especially Steppe Route 4) -Chandragiri Hills: There is a and other raptors) during winter season in the drivable road till Chakhel Deurali and then hik- Kathmandu Valley (V. Thapa and A.V. Rissen per- ing trail to the Chandragiri top. However, the vis- sonal communications), similar to Thoolakharka in itors can directly use the hiking trail to reach the Pokhara, Nepal (Subedi and Gurung, 2018). Due to Chandragiri within 3–4 hours from Matatirtha. the presence of fewer water sources in the study area, This hiking route provides excellent views of the amphibian diversity and distribution was limited. Kathmandu Valley and Himalayan range. This However, the King Cobra, most often recorded from area is the best for bird watching and observing the low lands in Nepal, is now widely reported from different butterflies, herpetofauna, and mammals. the mid-hills region (Thapa et al. 2019), probably due to more studies. Diversity of butterflies also suggests 3. Discussion that the Chandragiri Hills provide suitable habitat This study outlined the relevance of Chandragiri for these species. Although anthropogenic land-use Hills for the conservation of different faunal groups. change and ongoing climate change are impacting the Though presently it is not part of any protected area, occurrence, distribution and diversity of many herpe- it holds a very rich faunal diversity, which may be tofauna and butterflies (Lütolf et al. 2009; Wanger et considered for both global and national importance. al. 2010; Acharya and Chettri 2012), IUCN has not

30 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu assessed the conservation status of most of these spe- Acknowledgements cies. Therefore, we suggest that regular monitoring We thank the Department of Forests and Soil Con- of habitat, threatened species found in this area, and servation of Nepal for providing permission. This reducing all kinds of threats (for example, hunting study was supported by HIMAWANTI-Nepal, Small and poaching of the species as we recorded several Mammals Conservation and Research Foundation, snares used to capture pheasants and observed chil- and self-funding by co-authors. We thank Bird Con- dren collecting the pheasant eggs and young, habitat servation Nepal and Friends of Bird for conducting loss and fragmentation, and unplanned construction bird watching programs in the Chandragiri Hills and activities) and associated conflicts should be a prior- to all the people from the community forests for their ity for community forest members and local govern- support and suggestions during fieldwork. Addition- ment to conserving their biodiversity. ally, we thank Vimal Thapa, Arend van Rissen, Ha- Although charismatic species are often the than Chaudhary, Omkar Bhatt, Aditya Pal and Yam main attractions for ecotourism, tourists are show- Bahadur Katuwal for updating some of the species ing increasing interest toward readily-accessible and providing valuable suggestions, Jerrold L. Be- landscapes with greater diversity of plants, birds, lant for revising the English and two anonymous re- herpetofuana, and butterflies, as well as rare, less viewers for providing constructive comments on the easily-observed, or less high-profile mammal species manuscripts. (Loubser et al. 2001; Lindsay et al. 2007; Kurnianto et al. 2016; Hausmann 2016). As Chandragiri Hills Corresponding Author is a largely intact system with unique landscapes and [email protected] biodiversity ranging from sub-tropical to the temper- ate, it has potential for wildlife-based ecotourism. References Local communities can develop lodging for visitors Acharya, B.K., and Chettri, B. (2012) Effect of climate interested to explore this area. In addition, local/re- change on Birds, Herpetofauna and Butterflies. gional government should take the responsibility for In Arrawatia, M.L. and Tambe, S. (Eds.) its regulation and promotion and simultaneously pre- Himalaya: a preliminary investigation. Climate cautions should be taken to mitigate potential nega- Change in Sikkim Patterns, Impacts and Initia- tive impacts of tourism on the vegetation, watershed, tives, Information and Public Relations Depart- and wildlife, especially threatened species. A code ment, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok. of conduct should be developed for tourists against Appel, A., Werhahn, G., Acharya, R., Ghimirey, Y., the possible impacts on wild animals thorough direct and Adhikary, B. (2013) Small carnivores in the mortality (e.g., vehicle collision), providing food to Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Vertebrate attract species, degrading crucial habitats, introduc- Zoology, 63, 11-121. ing of exotic species, and transmission of infectious Baral, H.S. and Inskipp, C. (2005) Important Bird diseases (Shannon et al. 2017). Areas in Nepal: Key sites for conservation. Bird Conservation Nepal and Birdlife International, 4. Conclusions Kathmandu and Cambridge. The Chandragiri Hills near to Kathmandu is one Baral, H.S., and Shah, K.B. (2008) Wild mammals of of the potential areas for wildlife observation of na- Nepal. Himalayan Nature, Kathmandu. tional to global significance, as well as providing Baral, N., Stern, M.J., and Hammett, A.L. (2012) scenic Himalayan views for Nepalese and foreigners Developing a scale for evaluating ecotourism by or people who have short stay at Kathmandu. The ex- visitors: A study in the Annapurna conservation tent of open areas in Kathmandu is declining (Ishti- area, Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20, aque et al. 2017); therefore the Chandragiri Hills can 975-989. provide unique opportunities to observe wildlife near Bibby, C.J., Burgess, N.D., Hill, D.A., and Mustoe, the capital city. We recommend local government S. (2000). Bird Census Techniques Second Edi- consider promoting through national and internation- tion. Great Britain: Academic Press. al media of this area, as well as additional actions to Bookbinder, M.P., Dinerstein, E., Rijal, A., Cauley, promote the conservation of nationally and globally H., and Rajouria, A. (1998) Ecotourism’s support threatened species and their habitats.

31 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

of biological conservation. Conservation Biolo- ries, Department of National Parks and Wildlife gy, 12, 1399-1404. Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal. Cong, L., Newsome, D., Wu, B., and Morrison, A.M. Katuwal, H. B. and Dahal, S. (2013) Golden Jackals (2014) Wildlife tourism in China: A review of in human dominated landscape of the Manaslu the Chinese research literature. Current Issues in conservation Area, Nepal. Vertebrate Zoology, Tourism, 20, 1116-1139. 63, 315-319. Donohoe, H.M. and Needham, R.D. (2006) Ecotour- Katuwal, H.B., Sharma, H.P., Shaner, P.J.L., Gurung, ism: the evolving contemporary definition. Jour- R., Thapa, V., Magar, T.G., et al., (2018) Updat- nal of Ecotourism, 5, 192-210. ing spatial information of 27 mammal species in DNPWC. (2018) Protected Areas of Nepal (Nepali Nepal. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 28, version). Department of National Parks and 1735-1745. Wildlife Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal. KC, A., Rijal, K., and Sapkota, R. P. (2015) Role of DNPWC. (2020) Shivapuri-Nagarjun National Park. ecotourism in environmental conservation and http://www.dnpwc.gov.np/en/conservation-ar- socioeconomic development in Annapurna con- ea-detail/70/. servation area, Nepal. International Journal of Grimmett, R., Inskipp, C., and Inskipp, T. (2000) Sustainable Development of World, 22, 251-258. Birds of Nepal. Helm Field Guide, Prakash Khanal, B., and Smith, C. (1997) Butterflies of Kath- Books, New Delhi. mandu Valley, Tec Press Books, Bangkok, Thai- Hausmann, A., Slotow, R., Fraser, I., and Di Minin, land. E. (2016) Ecotourism marketing alternative to Kurnianto, A.S., Wafa, I.Y., Alifianto, F., and -Kur charismatic megafauna can also support biodi- niawan, N. (2016) The potential of butterflies versity conservation. Animal Conservation, 20, in tourism diversification product: Case study at 91-100. Coban Rais waterfall, Batu, East Java. Journal of Higginbottom, K. and Tribe, A. (2004) Contribu- Indonesian Tourism and Development Studies, tions of wildlife tourism to conservation. In Hig- 2016, 4, 115-122. ginbottom, K. (Eds.) Wildlife tourism – impacts, Larm, M., Elmhagen, B., Granquist, S.M., Brun- management and planning, Common Ground din, E., and Angerbjörn, A. (2018) The role of Publishing Ground Pty, Ltd, Australia. wildlife tourism in conservation of endangered Hunter, L. (2011) Carnivores of the world. Princeton species: Implications of safari tourism for con- University Press. servation of the Arctic fox in Sweden. Human Inskipp, C., Baral, H.S., Phuyal, S., Bhatt, T.R., Ka- Dimension of Wildlife, 23, 257-272. tiwada, M., Inskipp, T., et al., (2016) The state Lindsey, P.A., Alexander, R., Mills, M.G.L., Ro- of Nepal’s bird: the national red list series. U.K: mañach, S., and Woodroffe, R. (2007) Wildlife Zoological Society of London. viewing preferences of visitors to protected areas Ishtiaque, A., Shrestha, M., and , N. (2017) in South Africa: Implications for the role of eco- Rapid urban growth in the Kathmandu Valley, tourism in conservation. Journal of Ecotourism, Nepal: Monitoring land use land cover dynamics 6, 19–33. of a Himalayan city with Landsat imageries. En- Loubser, G.J.J., Mouton, P. le F.N., and Nel, J.A.J. vironments, 4, 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/envi- (2001) The ecotourism potential of herpetofau- ronments4040072 na in the Namaqua National Park, South Africa. Jenks, K.E., Chanteap, P., Damrongchainarong, K., South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 31, Cutter, P., Redford, T., Lynam, A.J., et al., (2011) 13-23. Using relative abundance indices from camera Lütolf, M., Guisan, A., and Kienast, F. (2009) Histo- trapping to test wildlife conservation hypotheses ry matters: Relating land-use change to butterfly – an example from KhaoYai National Park Thai- species occurrence. Environment Management, land. Tropical Conservation Science, 4, 113-131. 43, 436-446. Jnawali, S.R., Baral, H.S., Lee, S., Subedi, N., Acha- O’Brien, T.G., Kinnaird, M.F., and Wibisono, H.T. rya, K.P., Upadhyay, G.P., et al., (2011) The sta- (2003) Crouching tigers, hidden prey: Sumatran tus of Nepal’s mammals: the national red list se- tiger and prey populations in a tropical forest landscape. Animal Conservation, 6, 131-139.

32 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Shah, K.B., and Tiwari, S. (2004) Herpetofauna of NRR—2009/074. National Park Service, Fort Nepal: A Conservation Companion – Kathman- Collins, Colorado. du. IUCN Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal. Smith, C. (1994) Butterflies of Nepal, Craftsman Shannon, G., Larson, C.L., Reed, S.E., Crooks, K.R., Press, Bangkok. and Angeloni, L.M. (2017) Ecological Conse- Subdedi, T. and Gurung, S. (2018) Raptor Migration quences of Ecotourism for Wildlife Populations Summary Thoolakharka Nepal – Autumn 2018. and Communities. In: Blumstein, D., Geffroy, B., Report submitted to Nepal Raptor Conservation Samia, D., Bessa, E. (Eds.) Ecotourism’s Prom- Program, Himalayan Nature and Nepal Ornitho- ise and Peril. Springer, Cham. logical Union, Nepal. Sharma, H.P., Rimal, B., Zhang, M., Sharma, S., Thapa, K.B., Rana, N., and Shah, K.B. (2019) Distri- Poudyal, L.P., , S., et al., (2020a) Po- bution of King Cobra in Nepal. Himalayan Nat- tential distribution of the Critically Endangered uralist, 2, 26-33. Chinese Pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) in differ- Thomas, J.W. (1982) Needs For and Approaches To ent land covers of Nepal: Implications for con- Wildlife Habitat Assessment, USDA Forest Ser- servation. Sustainability, 12, 1282. doi:10.3390/ vice / UNL Faculty Publications. http://digital- su12031282 commons.unl.edu/usdafsfacpub/81 Sharma, S., Sharma, H.P., Katuwal, H.B. and Belant, Urfi, A.J., Sen, M., Kalam, A., and Meganathan, T. J.L. (2020b) Knowledge of the Critically Endan- (2005). Counting birds in : Methodologies gered Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) by and trends. Current Science, 89, 1997-2003. local people in Sindhupalchok, Nepal. Global Wanger, T.C., Iskandar, D.T., Motzke, I., Brook, Ecology and Conservation, 23, e01052. B.W., Sodhi, N.S., Clough, Y., et al., (2010) Ef- Siegel, R.B. (2009). Methods for monitoring land fects of land-use change on community com- birds: a review commissioned by Seattle City position of tropical amphibians and in Lights Wildlife Research Advisory Committee Sulawesi, . Conservation Biology, 24, (2000). Natural Resource Report NPS/NCCN/ 795-802.

33 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Appendix 1: Mammals recorded in Chandragiri Hills where DD is Data Deficient, LC is Least Concern, NT is Near Threatened, VU is Vulnerable, CR is Critically Endangered.

Conservation Status CITE S. N. Order/Family/Common Scientific Name Sighting S Name Method National IUCN Carnivora Felidae 1 Jungle Cat Felis chaus Direct LC LC II 2 Leopard Panthera pardus Sign VU VU I Prionailurus II 3 Leopard Cat bengalensis Camera trap VU LC

Mustelidae Direct, III 4 Yellow-throated Marten Martes flavigula Camera trap LC LC

Ursidae Key I 6 Asiatic Black Bear Ursus thibetanus informant EN VU Viverridae Camera trap, III 7 Large Indian Civet Viverra zibetha Sign NT NT Direct, 5 Masked Palm Civet Paguma larvata Camera trap LC LC Canidae 8 Golden Jackal Canis aureus Direct LC LC III Artiodactyla

Cervidae Direct, Camera trap, 9 Barking Deer Muntiacus vaginalis Sign VU LC

Suidae Direct, Camera trap, 10 Wild Boar Sus scrofa Sign LC LC Chiroptera

Rhinolophidae

11 Woolly Horseshoe Bat Rhinolophus luctus Direct LC LC

Pteropodidae 12 Greater Shortnosed Fruit Bat Cynopterus sphinx Direct LC LC

Vespertilionidae 13 Pipistrellus Bat Pipistrelle spp. Direct Soricomorpha

Soricidae Direct, Live 14 Asian House Shrew Suncus murinus trap LC LC 15 Himalayan Shrew Soriculus nigrescens Live trap LC LC Pholidota

Manidae Camera trap, I 16 Chinese Pangolin Manis pentadactyla Sign EN CR 34 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Primates

Cercopithecidae 17 Rhesus Macaque Macaca mulatta Direct LC LC II 18 Assam Macaque Macaca assamensis Direct VU NT II Rodentia

Muridae Direct, Live 19 House Rat rattus trap LC LC 20 Himalayan Rat Rattus pyctoris Live trap LC LC Rattus 21 Indo-Chinese Rat/ Sikkim Rat andamanensis Live trap DD LC 22 Fawn-colored Mouse Mus cervicolor Live trap LC LC 23 House Mouse Mus musculus Live trap LC LC 24 Soft-furred Rat Millardia meltada Live trap LC LC 25 Rat Rattus sp. Live trap 26 Mouse Mus sp. Live trap

Sciuridae Callosciurus 27 Irrawaddy Squirrel pygerythrus Direct LC LC 28 Particoloured Flying Squirrel Hylopetes alboniger Direct LC LC Orange-bellied Himalayan 29 Squirrel Dremomys lokriah Direct LC LC

Hystricidae 30 Indian Crested Procupine Hystrix indica Sign DD LC

35 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Appendix 2: Wildlife of Chandragiri Hills: a-e mammals (a-Chinese Pangolin, b-Wild Boar, c-Leopard Cat, d-Large Indian Civet, e-Masked Palm Civet), f-j birds (f-Golden-throated Barbet, g-Fire-breasted Flower- pecker, h-Gold-naped Finch, i-Steppe Eagle, j-Kalij Pheasant), k-o herpetofauna (k-King Cobra, l-Darjeeling Worm , m-Variegated Mountain Lizard, n- Marbled Toad, o- Pelobatid Toad), p-t butterflies (p-Himalayan Jester, q- Grey Count, r-Colour Sergent, s-Large Silver Stripe, t-Indian Fritillary.

36 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Appendix 3: Birds recorded in Chandragiri Hills where DD is Data Deficient, LC is Least Concern, NT is Near Threatened, VU is Vulnerable, EN is Endangered.

Order/Family/Commo Migration Conservation Status S. N Scientific Name CITES n Name Status National IUCN Galliformes Phasianidae Arborophila 1 Hill Partridge Resident LC LC torqueola Lophura 2 Kalij Pheasant Resident LC LC III leucomelanos Columbiformes Columbidae 3 Rock Dove Columba livia Resident LC LC Columba 4 Speckled Woodpigeon Resident LC LC hodgsonii Streptopelia 5 Oriental Turtle-dove Resident LC LC orientalis Spilopelia 6 Western Spotted Dove Resident LC LC suratensis Grey-capped Emerald Chalcophaps 7 Resident LC LC Dove indica Wedge-tailed Green Treron 8 Resident LC LC Pigeon sphenurus Caprimulgiformes Apodidae 9 House Swift Apus nipalensis Resident LC LC Cuculiformes Cuculidae Resident/Su Centropus 10 Greater Coucal mmer LC LC sinensis migrant Phaenicophaeus 11 Green-billed Malkoha Resident LC LC tristis Eudynamys 12 Western Koel Resident LC LC scolopaceus 13 Cuculus canorus Resident LC LC Cuculus Summer 14 Oriental Cuckoo LC LC saturates migrant Hierococcyx 15 Large Hawk-cuckoo Resident LC LC sparverioides Cacomantis Summer 16 Grey-bellied Cuckoo LC LC migrant Cuculus Summer 17 Lesser Cuckoo LC LC poliocephalus migrant Fork-tailed Drongo- Surniculus Summer 18 LC LC cuckoo dicruroides migrant Pelecaniformes Ardeidae 19 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Resident LC LC 20 Indian Pond-heron Ardeola grayii Resident LC LC 21 Little Egret Egretta garzetta Resident LC LC

37 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Strigiformes Tytonidae 22 Common Barn-owl Tyto alba Resident VU LC II Strigidae 23 Spotted Owlet Athene brama Resident LC LC II Otus 24 Mountain Scops-owl Resident LC LC II spilocephalus Glaucidium 25 Collared Owlet Resident LC LC II brodiei Strix 26 Brown Wood-owl Resident VU LC II leptogrammica Glaucidium 27 Asian Barred Owlet Resident LC LC II cuculoides Bubo 28 Rock Eagle-owl Resident VU LC bengalensis 29 Crested Serpent-eagle Spilornis cheela Resident LC LC II 30 Black Kite Milvus migrans Resident LC LC II 31 Shikra Accipiter badius Resident LC LC II Winter 32 Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis VU EN II migrant 33 Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis Resident LC LC II Nisaetus 34 Mountain Hawk-eagle Resident LC LC II nipalensis Ictinaetus 35 Black Eagle Resident LC LC II malaiensis Winter 36 Himalayan Buzzard refectus LC LC II migrant Winter 37 Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus LC LC II migrant 38 Red-headed Vulture Sarcogyps calvus Resident EN CR II Gyps 39 Himalayan Griffon Resident VU NT II himalayensis Oriental Honey- Pernis 40 Resident LC LC II buzzard ptilorhynchus Winter 41 Bonelli's Eagle Aquila fasciata LC LC II migrant Hieraaetus Winter 42 Booted Eagle LC LC II pennatus migrant Accipiter 43 Besra Resident LC LC II virgatus Bucerotiformes Upupidae 44 Common Hoopoe Upupa epops Resident LC LC Coraciiformes Alcedinidae 45 White-breasted Halcyon Resident LC LC

38 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Kingfisher smyrnensis Megalaimidae Psilopogon 46 Great Barbet Resident LC LC virens Golden-throated Psilopogon 47 Resident LC LC Barbet franklinii Psilopogon 48 Blue-throated Barbet Resident LC LC asiatica Picidae Scarlet-breasted Dryobates 49 Resident LC LC cathpharius Rufous-bellied Dendrocopos 50 Resident LC LC Woodpecker hyperythrus Darjeeling Dendrocopos 51 Resident LC LC Woodpecker darjellensis 52 Lesser Yellownape Resident LC LC chlorolophus Chrysophlegma 53 Greater Yellownape Resident LC LC flavinucha Grey-capped Picoides 54 Resident LC LC Woodpecker canicapillus Picumnus 55 Speckled Piculet Resident LC LC innominatus Cariamiformes Falconidae Passage 56 Eurasian Hobby Falco subbuteo LC LC II migrant Resident and Falco 57 Common Kestrel passage LC LC II tinnunculus migrant

58 Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Resident LC LC I

Psittaciformes Psittacidae Psittacula 59 Alexandrine Parakeet Resident LC NT II eupatria Psittacula 60 Rose-ringed Parakeet Resident LC LC krameri Psittacula 61 Slaty-headed Parakeet Resident LC LC II himalayana Passeriformes Oriolidae 62 Maroon Oriole Oriolus traillii Resident LC LC Summer 63 Indian Golden Oriole Oriolus kundoo LC LC migrant Vireonidae Erpornis 64 White-bellied Erpornis Resident LC LC zantholeuca

39 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Campephagidae Pericrocotus 65 Long-tailed Minivet Resident LC LC ethologus Pericrocotus 66 Scarlet Minivet Resident LC LC flammeus 67 Indian Cuckooshrike Coracina macei Resident LC LC Black-winged Lalage 68 Resident LC LC Cuckooshrike melaschistos Rhipiduridae Rhipidura 69 White-throated Fantail Resident LC LC albicollis Dicruridae Dicrurus 70 Black Drongo Resident LC LC macrocercus Resident and Dicrurus 71 Ashy Drongo partial LC LC leucophaeus migrant Dicrurus 72 Hair-crested Drongo Resident LC LC hottentottus 73 Bronzed Drongo Dicrurus aeneus Resident LC LC Lesser Racquet-tailed 74 Dicrurus remifer Resident LC LC Drongo Laniidae 75 Long-tailed Shrike Lanius schach Resident LC LC Lanius Winter 76 Grey-backed Shrike LC LC tephronotus migrant Winter 77 Brown Shrike Lanius cristatus LC LC migrant Corvidae Dendrocitta 78 Rufous Treepie Resident LC LC vagabunda Dendrocitta 79 Grey Treepie Resident LC LC formosae Garrulus 80 Plain-crowned Jay Resident EN LC bispecularis Garrulus Winter 81 Black-headed Jay LC LC lanceolatus migrant Corvus 82 House Crow Resident LC LC splendens Corvus 83 Large-billed Crow Resident LC LC macrorhynchos Red-billed Blue Urocissa 84 Resident LC LC Magpie erythroryncha Common Green 85 Cissa chinensis Resident LC LC Magpie Stenostiridae Yellow-bellied Fairy- Chelidorhynx 86 Resident LC LC fantail hypoxanthus Grey-headed Canary- Culicicapa Partial 87 LC LC flycatcher ceylonensis migrant Paridae

40 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

88 Great major Resident LC LC Parus 89 Green-backed Tit Resident LC LC monticolus Machlolophus 90 Black-lored Tit Resident LC LC xanthogenys Aegithalos 91 Black-throated Tit Resident LC LC concinnus Sylviparus 92 Yellow-browed Tit Resident LC LC modestus Cisticolidae 93 Striated Prinia Prinia crinigera Resident LC LC Orthotomus 94 Common Tailorbird Resident LC LC sutorius Pnoepygidae Scaly-breasted Pnoepyga 95 Resident LC LC Cupwing albiventer Hirundinidae 96 Red-rumped Swallow Cecropis daurica Resident LC LC Resident and 97 Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica summer LC LC migrant Pycnonotidae 98 Red-vented cafer Resident LC LC Pycnonotus 99 Himalayan Bulbul Resident LC LC leucogenys 100 Mountain Bulbul mcclellandii Resident LC LC Pycnonotus 101 Striated Bulbul Resident LC LC striatus 102 Black Bulbul Resident LC LC leucocephalus Phylloscopidae Tesia 103 Grey-bellied Tesia Resident LC LC cyaniventer Cettia 104 Chestnut-headed Tesia castaneocoronat Resident LC LC a Phylloscopus 105 Blyth's Leaf-warbler Resident LC LC reguloides Phylloscopus 106 Buff-barred Warbler Resident LC LC pulcher Summer and Phylloscopus 107 Greenish Warbler Passage LC LC trochiloides Migrant Phylloscopus 108 Ashy-throated Warbler Resident LC LC maculipennis Phylloscopus 109 Whistler's Warbler Resident LC LC whistleri Phylloscopus 110 Grey-cheeked Warbler Resident LC LC poliogenys Green-crowned Phylloscopus 111 LC LC Warbler burkii

41 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Chestnut-crowned Phylloscopus 112 LC LC Warbler castaniceps Phylloscopus 113 Grey-hooded Warbler Resident LC LC xanthoschistos Phylloscopus 114 Hume's Leaf-warbler Resident LC LC humei Lemon-rumped Leaf- Phylloscopus 115 Resident LC LC warbler chloronotus Abroscopus 116 Black-faced Warbler Resident LC LC schisticeps Sylviidae White-browed 117 Resident LC LC Fulvetta vinipectus Zosteropidae Yuhina 118 Whiskered Yuhina Resident LC LC flavicollis Zosterops 119 Oriental White-eye Resident LC LC palpebrosus Timaliidae Rusty-cheeked Erythrogenys 120 Resident LC LC Scimitar Babbler erythrogenys Streak-breasted Pomatorhinus 121 Resident LC LC Scimitar Babbler ruficollis Cyanoderma 122 Black-chinned Babbler Resident LC LC pyrrhops Stachyris 123 Grey-throated Babbler Resident LC LC nigriceps Pellorneum 124 Puff-throated Babbler Resident LC LC ruficeps Rufous-winged Schoeniparus 125 Resident LC LC Fulvetta castaneceps Leiotrichidae 126 Nepal Fulvetta Resident LC LC nipalensis Acanthoptila 127 Spiny Babbler Resident LC LC nipalensis White-throated Garrulax 128 Resident LC LC Laughingthrush albogularis White-crested Garrulax 129 Resident LC LC Laughingthrush leucolophus Striated Grammatoptila 130 Resident LC LC Laughingthrush striata Chestnut-crowned Trochalopteron 131 Resident LC LC Laughingthrush erythrocephalum Streaked Trochalopteron 132 Resident LC LC Laughingthrush lineatum 133 Red-billed Leiothrix Leiothrix lutea Resident LC LC Heterophasia 134 Rufous Sibia Resident LC LC capistrata Hoary-throated 135 Sibia nipalensis Resident LC LC Barwing

42 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Siva 136 Blue-winged Minla Resident LC LC cyanouroptera Certhiidae Rusty-flanked Certhia 137 Reident LC LC Treecreeper nipalensis Sittidae Chestnut-bellied Sitta 138 Resident LC LC Nuthatch cinnamoventris Velvet-fronted 139 Sitta frontalis Resident LC LC Nuthatch Sitta 140 White-tailed Nuthatch Resident LC LC himalayensis Sturnidae Acridotheres 141 Common Myna Resident LC LC tristis Acridotheres 142 Jungle Myna Resident LC LC fuscus Chestnut-tailed Sturnia 143 Resident LC LC Starling malabarica Sturnia 144 Brahminy Starling Resident LC LC pagodarum Turdidae Summer 145 Pied Thrush Geokichla wardii LC LC migrant Winter 146 Scaly Thrush Zoothera dauma LC LC migrant 147 Tibetan Blackbird Turdus maximus Resident LC LC Turdus Winter 148 Black-throated Thrush LC LC atrogularis migrant Grey-winged 149 Turdus boulboul Resident LC LC Blackbird White-collared Turdus 150 Resident LC LC Blackbird albocinctus Muscicapidae Copsychus 151 Oriental Magpie-robin Resident LC LC saularis Muscicapa Summer 152 Dark-sided Flycatcher LC LC sibirica migrant Rufous-gorgeted Ficedula 153 Resident LC LC Flycatcher strophiata Resident and Eumyias 154 Verditer Flycatcher partial LC LC thalassinus migrant Winter 155 Slaty-blue Flycatcher Ficedula tricolor LC LC migrant Ultramarine Ficedula Summer 156 LC LC Flycatcher superciliaris migrant Red-throated Ficedula Winter 157 LC LC Flycatcher albicilla migrant Myophonus 158 Blue Whistling-thrush Resident LC LC caeruleus Blue-capped Rock- Monticola Summer 159 LC LC thrush cinclorhyncha migrant

43 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Chestnut-bellied Monticola 160 Resident LC LC Rock-thrush rufiventris 161 Small Niltava Resident LC LC macgrigoriae 162 Rufous-bellied Niltava Niltava sundara Resident LC LC Larvivora 163 Indian Blue Robin Resident LC LC brunnea White-tailed Blue Myiomela 164 Resident LC LC Robin leucura Enicurus 165 Spotted Forktail Resident LC LC maculatus Enicurus 166 Slaty-backed Forktail Resident LC LC schistaceus Phoenicurus Winter 167 Hodgson's Redstart LC LC hodgsoni migrant Plumbeous Water- Phoenicurus 168 Resident LC LC redstart fuliginosus White-capped Water- Phoenicurus 169 Resident LC LC redstart leucocephalus Phoenicurus Winter 170 Blue-fronted Redstart LC LC frontalis migrant Phoenicurus Winter 171 Blue-capped Redstart LC LC coeruleocephala migrant Saxicola Passage 172 Common Stonechat LC LC torquatus migrant 173 Pied Bushchat Saxicola caprata Resident LC LC 174 Grey Bushchat Saxicola ferreus Resident LC LC Tarsiger 175 Himalayan Bush-robin Resident LC LC rufilatus Chloropseidae Orange-bellied Chloropsis 176 Resident LC LC Leafbird hardwickii Dicaeidae 177 Plain Resident LC LC minullum Fire-breasted Dicaeum 178 Resident LC LC Flowerpecker ignipectus Nectariniidae Aethopyga 179 Green-tailed Sunbird Resident LC LC nipalensis Black-throated Aethopyga 180 Resident LC LC Sunbird saturate Aethopyga 181 Crimson Sunbird Resident LC LC siparaja Aethopyga Summer 182 Fire-tailed Sunbird LC LC ignicauda migrant Ploceidae Ploceus Summer 183 Baya Weaver LC LC philippinus migrant Estrildidae Lonchura 184 Scaly-breasted Munia Resident LC LC punctulata

44 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Summer 185 White-rumped Munia Lonchura striata LC LC migrant Passeridae Passer 186 House Sparrow Resident LC LC domesticus 187 Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus Resident LC LC Motacillidae 188 Paddyfield Pipit Anthus rufulus Resident LC LC 189 Rosy Pipit Anthus roseatus Resident LC LC Winter 190 Olive-backed Pipit Anthus hodgsoni LC LC migrant Motacilla Winter 191 Grey Wagtail LC LC cinerea migrant Motacilla Summer 192 White-browed Wagtail LC LC maderaspatensis migrant Winter 193 White Wagtail Motacilla alba LC LC migrant Fringillidae Carpodacus Winter 194 Common Rosefinch LC LC erythrinus migrant Carpodacus Winter 195 Beautiful Rosefinch LC LC pulcherrimus migrant Dark-breasted Procarduelis Winter 196 LC LC Rosefinch nipalensis migrant Yellow-breasted Chloris Winter 197 LC LC Greenfinch spinoides migrant Pyrrhoplectes Winter 198 Gold-naped Finch VU LC epaulette migrant Emberizidae Emberiza Summer 199 Crested Bunting LC LC lathami migrant

45 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Appendix 4: Herpetofauna recorded in Chandragiri Hills where LC is Least Concern, VU is Vulnerable.

Class/Order/Family/Com Conservation Status S.N. CITES mon Names Scientific Name IUCN National Amphibia Anura Bufonidae Duttaphrynus 1 Himalayan Toad LC himalayanus Duttaphrynus 2 Black-spined Toad LC melanostictus 3 Marbled Toad Bufo stomaticus LC Microhylidae 4 Narrow-mouthed Frog Microhyla ornata LC Megophryidae 5 Myanmar Pelobatid Toad Megophrys parva LC Ranidae Euphlyctis 6 Skittering Frog LC cyanophlyctis Hoplobatrachus 7 Indian Bull Frog LC tigerinus Fejervarya 8 Nepalese Cricket Frog LC nepalensis Sphaerotheca 9 Indian Burrowing Frog LC breviceps Rhacophoridae Java Whipping Polypedates 10 LC Frog/Common Tree Frog leucomystax Reptilia Agamidae 11 Common Garden Lizard Calotes versicolor Three Keeled Mountain Japalura 12 LC Lizard tricarinata Variegated Mountain Japalura 13 Lizard variegata Laudakia 14 Kashmiri Rock Agama tuberculata Scincidae 15 Brahminy Skink Eutropis carinata LC Sphenomorphus 16 Spotted Forest Skink maculatus Asymblepharus 17 Sikkim Skink sikimmensis Varanidae Varanus I 18 Bengal Monitor Lizard LC Susceptible bengalensis Typhlopidae 19 Brahminy Blind Snake Indotyphlops

46 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

braminus Amphiesma 20 Boulenger's Kellback parallelum Amphiesma 21 Himalayan Keelback platyceps Amphiesma 22 Buff-striped Keelback stolatum Coelognathus 23 Common Trinket Snake helena Copper-headed Trinket Coelognathus 24 Snake radiatus Common Bronzeback Dendrelaphis 25 Tree Snake tristis Himalayan Trinket Orthriophis 26 Snake hodgsoni 27 Common Wolf Snake Lycodon aulicus 28 Indian Rat Snake Ptyas mucosa Susceptible II Trachischium 29 Darjeeling Worm Snake fuscum Elapidae 30 Indian/Common Cobra Naja naja II 31 Monocled Cobra Naja kaouthia LC II Ophiophagus II 32 King Cobra VU VU hannah 33 Mountain monticola LC Trimeresurus 34 White-lipped Pit Viper LC albolabris

47 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

Appendix 5: Butterfly recorded in Chandragiri Hills, where LC is Least Concern,VU is Vulnerable.

Order/Family/Co Conservation Status S.N. Scientific Name CITES mmon Name IUCN National 1. Common Tiger Danaus genutia 2. Glassy Tiger Parantica aglea Striped Blue 3. Crow 4. Chocolate Pansy Junonia iphita 5. Yellow Pansy Junonia hierta 6. Lemon Pansy Junonia orithya 7. Peacock Pansy Junonia almanac 8. Common Earl Tanaecia julii 9. Grey Count Tanaecia lepidea 10. Common Lascar Pantoporia hordonia 11. Yellow Coster Acraea issoria 12. Common Leopard Phalanta phalantha 13. Common Map Cyrestis thyodamas 14. Common Sailor Neptis hylas 15. Common Sergeant perius 16. Eastern Courtier Chandra 17. Grand Duchess Euthalia patala Himalayan 18. Athyma opalina Sergeant 19. Indian Fritillary Argyreus hyperbius Indian Red 20. Vanessa indica Admiral Indian 21. Aglais cashmirensis Tortoiseshell 22. Large Silverstripe Childrena childreni 23. Painted Lady Vanessa cardui LC 24. Red Lacewing Cethosia bibilis 25. Himalayan Jester Symbrenthia hypselis Orange Staff 25. Athyma cama Sergeant 27. Colour Sergeant Athyma nefte 28. Vagrant Vagrant egista LC 29. Common Siren persimilis VU Indian 30. Auzakia danava Commodore 31. Great Eggfly Hypolymnas bolina 32. Bluetail Jester Symbrenthia niphanda 33. Common Castor Ariadne merione

48 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

34. Gray Pansy Precis atlites 35. Sergeant Athyma jina White 36. Limenitis dudu Commodore 37. Yellow Sailor Neptis ananta Banded 38. Lethe confusa Treebrown Himalayan 39. sakra Fivering 40. Common Fivering Ypthima baldus 41. Large Three Ring Ypthima nereda Newar Three- 42. Ypthima newara Ring 43. Tiger Brown damaris 44. Peablue Lampides boeticus 45. Purple Sapphire Heliophorus epicles Silver Grey- 46. Spindasis nipalicus Silver Line Common 47. Actyolepis puspa Hedgeblue 48. Large Hedge Blue huegeli Common 49. Jamides celeno Cerulean 50. Dark Grassblue Zizeeria karsandra 51. Pale Grass Blue Pseudozizeeria maha Riodiniidae Double Banded 52. bifasciata Judy 53. Dark Judy Abisara fylla 54. Punchinello Zemoros flegyas 55. Striped Punch Dodona adonira 56. Tailed Punch Dodona eugenes 57. Lesser Punch Dodona dipoea 58. Plum Judy Papilionidae Common 59. Graphium serpedon LC Bluebottle 60. Common Mormon polytes LC 61. Common Mime Chilasa clytia dissimilis LC 62. Golden Birdwing Troides aeacus LC Susceptible II 63. Paris Peacock LC 64. Rose Windmill Byasa latreillei LC 65. Spangle Papilio protenor LC 66. Tailed Jay Graphium agamemnon LC

49 Hem Bahadur Katuwal et al. – Wildlife Assessment ofthe Chandragiri Hills, Kathmandu

67. Glassy Bluebottle Graphium cloanthus LC 68. Lime Swallowtail Papilio demoleus LC 69. Common Peacock Papilio polyctor LC 70. Red Helen Papilio helenus LC 71. Great Mormon Papilio memnon LC Pieridae 72. Great Blackvein Metaporia agathon Common 73. Catopsilia pomona Emigrant Indian Cabbage 74. Pieris canidia White Dark Clouded 75. Colias fieldii Yellow 76. Hill Jezebel Delias belladonna Hesperiidae 77. Fulvous Pied Flat dan

50