Data Zone
Year of most recent IBA criteria assessment: 2001
Populations of IBA trigger speciesNote: This table presents the IBA criteria triggered and the species that triggered then at the time of assessment, the current IUCN Red List category may vary from that which was in place at that time.
For more information about the IBA assessment process and criteria please click here
| Most recent IBA monitoring assessment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of assessment | Threat score (pressure) | Condition score (state) | Action score (response) |
| 2022 | very high | very unfavourable | low |
| Was the whole site covered? | Yes | State assessed by | Habitat |
| Accuracy of information | good | ||
| Threats to the site (pressure) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat Level 1 | Threat Level 2 | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
| Biological resource use | hunting & collecting terrestrial animals - unintentional effects (species is not the target) | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
| Biological resource use | logging & wood harvesting - intentional use: subsistence/small scale | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | low |
| Energy production and mining | mining and quarrying | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
| Human intrusions and disturbance | recreational activities | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | no or imperceptible deterioration | low |
| Residential and commercial development | commercial and industrial development | likely in short term (within 4 years) | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | high |
| Condition of habitat (state) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Habitat | Habitat Detail | Reference Area (ha) | Actual Area (ha) | % of habitat remaining | % of carrying capacity (overall) | Result |
| Artificial/Terrestrial | 0 | 0 | moderate (70-90%) | poor (40-69%) | very unfavourable | |
| Forest | 0 | 0 | moderate (70-90%) | moderate (70-90%) | unfavourable | |
| Conservation actions taken at site (response) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservation Designation | Management Planning | Conservation Action | Result |
| Most of site (50-90%) covered (including the most critical parts for important bird species) | A management plan exists but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Some limited conservation initiatives are in place | low |
| Protected Area | Designation | Area (ha) | Relationship with IBA | Overlap with IBA (ha) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atewa Range | Forest Reserve | 23,232 | is identical to site | 23,200 |
| IUCN Habitat | Habitat detail | Extent (% of site) |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial/Terrestrial | - | |
| Unknown | - | |
| Forest | - |
| Land-use | Extent (% of site) |
|---|---|
| forestry | - |
| water management | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2023) Important Bird Areas factsheet: Atewa Range Forest Reserve. Downloaded from
http://www.birdlife.org on 08/02/2023.
