PL020
Slupia River Valley


IBA Criteria

Year of most recent IBA criteria assessment: 2010

Populations of IBA trigger species
Species Current IUCN Red List Category Season Year(s) of estimate Population estimate IBA Criteria Triggered
Corncrake Crex crex LC breeding 2007 50-60 males C1

Note: 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


IBA Monitoring

Most recent IBA monitoring assessment
Year of assessment Threat score (pressure) Condition score (state) Action score (response)
2010 very high favourable low
Was the whole site covered? Yes State assessed by Population
Accuracy of information medium

Threats to the site (pressure)
Threat Level 1 Threat Level 2 Timing Scope Severity Result
Agricultural expansion and intensification annual & perennial non-timber crops - small-holder farming happening now majority/most of area/population (50-90%) moderate to rapid deterioration high
Biological resource use hunting & collecting terrestrial animals - intentional use (species being assessed is the target) happening now some of area/population (10-49%) slow but significant deterioration medium
Energy production and mining renewable energy happening now majority/most of area/population (50-90%) slow but significant deterioration high
Human intrusions and disturbance recreational activities happening now majority/most of area/population (50-90%) moderate to rapid deterioration high
Invasive and other problematic species and genes invasive non-native/alien species/diseases - unspecified species happening now whole area/population (>90%) moderate to rapid deterioration very high
Natural system modifications dams & water management/use - dams (size unknown) happening now majority/most of area/population (50-90%) very rapid to severe deterioration very high
Natural system modifications other ecosystem modifications likely in long term (beyond 4 years) some of area/population (10-49%) slow but significant deterioration medium
No known threats no known threats happening now small area/few individuals (<10%) no or imperceptible deterioration low
Pollution domestic & urban waste water - type unknown/unrecorded happening now some of area/population (10-49%) slow but significant deterioration medium
Residential and commercial development housing and urban areas happening now some of area/population (10-49%) slow but significant deterioration medium
Residential and commercial development tourism and recreation areas happening now majority/most of area/population (50-90%) moderate to rapid deterioration high
Transportation and service corridors roads and railroads happening now some of area/population (10-49%) slow but significant deterioration medium
Transportation and service corridors utility & service lines happening now majority/most of area/population (50-90%) moderate to rapid deterioration high

Condition of habitat (state)
Habitat Habitat Detail Reference Area (ha) Actual Area (ha) % of habitat remaining % of carrying capacity (overall) Result
Forest Broadleaved deciduous woodland 18500 18500 - poor (40-69%) unfavourable
Forest Native coniferous woodland 555 555 - moderate (70-90%) near favourable
Wetlands (inland) 6500 6500 - moderate (70-90%) near favourable

Condition of key/trigger populations (state)
Scientific Common TargetPop ActualPop Units Remaining Result
Aegolius funereus Boreal Owl 20 25 breeding pairs 100 favourable
Bubo bubo Eurasian Eagle-owl 5 5 breeding pairs 100 not assessed

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) No management plan exists but the management planning process has begun Substantive conservation measures are being implemented but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity low
For more information about IBA monitoring please click here

IBA Protection

Protected Area Designation Area (ha) Relationship with IBA Overlap with IBA (ha)
Źródliskowe Torfowisko Rezerwat Przyrody 8 protected area contained by site 0
Skotawskie Łąki Rezerwat Przyrody 55 protected area contained by site 0
Park Krajobrazowy Dolina Słupi Park Krajobrazowy 37,514 protected area overlaps with site 37,040
Mechowiska Czaple Rezerwat Przyrody 9 protected area contained by site 0
Jeziora Sitna Rezerwat Przyrody 40 protected area contained by site 0
Jeziora Lobeliowe koło Soszycy Site of Community Importance (Habitats Directive) 132 protected area contained by site 132
Grodzisko Borzytuchom Rezerwat Przyrody 27 protected area contained by site 0
Gołębia Góra Rezerwat Przyrody 7 protected area contained by site 0
Gniazda orła bielika Rezerwat Przyrody 11 protected area contained by site 0
Dolina Słupi Special Protection Area (Birds Directive) 37,472 protected area overlaps with site 37,260
Dolina Słupi Site of Community Importance (Habitats Directive) 6,991 protected area overlaps with site 0
Dolina Huczka Rezerwat Przyrody 13 protected area contained by site 0

Habitats

IUCN Habitat Habitat detail Extent (% of site)
Forest Broadleaved deciduous woodland, Native coniferous woodland, Mixed woodland, Alluvial and very wet forest -
Grassland Steppes and dry calcareous grassland, Humid grasslands, Mesophile grasslands -
Wetlands (inland) Standing freshwater, Rivers and streams, Raised bogs, Water fringe vegetation -
Artificial/Terrestrial Highly improved re-seeded landscapes, Arable land, Ruderal land -
For further information about the habitat classification please click here.

Land use

Land-use Extent (% of site)
agriculture -
forestry -
water management -
hunting -
For further information about the land use classification please click here.


Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2022) Important Bird Areas factsheet: Slupia River Valley. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 18/08/2022.