Data Zone
The site was identified as important in 1999 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fischer's Turaco Tauraco fischeri | NT | resident | 1999 | present | A1 |
| Southern Banded Snake-eagle Circaetus fasciolatus | NT | resident | 1999 | present | A1 |
| Spotted Ground-thrush Geokichla guttata | VU | non-breeding | 1999 | present | A1 |
| Plain-backed Sunbird Anthreptes reichenowi | NT | resident | 1999 | present | A1 |
1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (1999) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 1999. The most recent assessment (2021) is shown below.
| IBA conservation assessment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
| 2021 | very unfavourable | very high | low |
| Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
| yes | habitat | good | |
| State (condition of the trigger species' habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Habitat | Quantity (% remaining) | Quality (% carrying capacity) | Result |
| Forest | - | poor (40-69%) | very unfavourable |
| Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
| Residential and commercial development | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
| Biological resource use | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
| Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | very high |
| Climate change and severe weather | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | slow but significant deterioration | high |
| Transportation and service corridors | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
| Pollution | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
| Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Protected areas | Management plan | Other action | Result |
| Little/none of site covered (<10%) | A management plan exists but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Some limited conservation initiatives are in place | low |
| Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1992 | Kaya Ukunda | Other Area | 25 |
| 1995 | Diani Chale | Marine National Reserve | 38 |
| Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
|---|---|---|
| Forest | Lowland forest - dry deciduous | 100 |
| Land use | % of IBA |
|---|---|
| forestry | - |
| tourism/recreation | - |
| urban/industrial/transport | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Diani Forest (Kenya). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/diani-forest-iba-kenya on 23/11/2024.