Data Zone
The site was identified as internationally important for bird conservation in 2001 because it was regularly supporting significant populations of the species listed below, meeting ('triggering') IBA criteria.
Populations meeting IBA criteria ('trigger species') at the site:Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2001. The most recent assessment (2019) is shown below.
| IBA conservation assessment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
| 2019 | not assessed | very high | very low |
| Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
| no | unset | medium | |
| Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
| Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | whole of population/area (>90%) | rapid decline (>30% over 3 generations) | very high |
| Energy production and mining | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | high |
| Biological resource use | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | high |
| Pollution | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | no or slight decline (<1% over 3 generations) | low |
| Residential and commercial development | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | no or slight decline (<1% over 3 generations) | low |
| Transportation and service corridors | happening now | few individuals/small area (<10%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | low |
| Agricultural expansion and intensification | likely in short term (<4 years) | most of population/area (50–90%) | no or slight decline (<1% over 3 generations) | low |
| Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Designation | Planning | Action | Result |
| Little/none of area covered (<10%) | No management planning has taken place | Very little or no conservation action taking place | very low |
| Year | Protected Area | Designation (management category) | % coverage of IBA |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1991 | Cross River | National Park (II) | 100 |
| Habitat | % of IBA | Habitat detail |
|---|---|---|
| Forest | 99 |
| Land use | % of IBA |
|---|---|
| agriculture | - |
| fisheries/aquaculture | - |
| forestry | - |
| hunting | - |
| nature conservation and research | - |
| tourism/recreation | - |
| water management | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Cross River National Park (Oban Division) (Nigeria). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/cross-river-national-park-(oban-division)-iba-nigeria on 22/12/2024.