The site was identified as important in 2022 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:Species | Red List1 | Season | Year(s) | Size | IBA criteria |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Greater Rhea Rhea americana | NT | resident | 2012-2017 | 30-50 individuals | B1a |
White-browed Guan Penelope jacucaca | VU | resident | 2012-2017 | 50-250 individuals | A1 |
Spix's Macaw Cyanopsitta spixii | EW | resident | 2022 | min 8 individuals | A1 |
Blue-winged Macaw Primolius maracana | NT | resident | 2012-2017 | 90-250 individuals | B1a |
1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2022) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2022. The most recent assessment (2022) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2022 | very unfavourable | very high | medium |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
no | habitat | medium |
State (condition of the trigger species' habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Habitat | Quantity (% remaining) | Quality (% carrying capacity) | Result |
Forest | very poor (< 40%) | very poor (< 40%) | very unfavourable |
Artificial/Terrestrial | moderate (70-90%) | very poor (< 40%) | very unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
Biological resource use | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | slow but significant deterioration | low |
Pollution | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | no or imperceptible deterioration | low |
Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Protected areas | Management plan | Other action | Result |
Whole area of site (>90%) covered by appropriate conservation designation | A management plan exists but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity | medium |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
2018 | 90641 | Área de Proteção Ambiental | - |
2018 | 29234 | Wildlife Refuge | - |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Artificial/Terrestrial | Perennial crops, orchards, groves, Improved pasture land, Abandoned or fallow farmland, disturbed ground | major (>10) |
Forest | Tropical deciduous forest | major (>10) |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
agriculture | major (>10) |
rangeland/pastureland | major (>10) |
energy production and mining | minor (<10) |
forestry | minor (<10) |
nature conservation and research | minor (<10) |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Curaçá (Brazil). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/curaçá-iba-brazil on 22/11/2024.