The site was identified as important in 2007 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:1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2007) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2007. The most recent assessment (2006) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2006 | unfavourable | high | low |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
yes | habitat | poor |
State (condition of the trigger species' habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Habitat | Quantity (% remaining) | Quality (% carrying capacity) | Result |
Forest | moderate (70-90%) | moderate (70-90%) | unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | high |
Climate change and severe weather | likely in long term (beyond 4 years) | whole area/population (>90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Natural system modifications | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Biological resource use | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | slow but significant deterioration | low |
Residential and commercial development | likely in short term (within 4 years) | small area/few individuals (<10%) | slow but significant deterioration | low |
Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Protected areas | Management plan | Other 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 |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
- | Bath Mountain | Forest Reserve | - |
1950 | Dolphin Head | Forest Reserve | 6 |
1950 | Burnt Savannah | Forest Reserve | 1 |
1950 | Burnt Savannah Block A | Forest Reserve | - |
1961 | Geneva Mountain | Forest Reserve | 3 |
1961 | Raglan Mountain | Forest Reserve | 2 |
1965 | Quasheba Mountain | Forest Reserve | 7 |
1965 | Georges Plain Mountain | Forest Reserve | 1 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Caves and Subterranean Habitats (non-aquatic) | - | |
Forest | - |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
water management | major (>10) |
agriculture | minor (<10) |
nature conservation and research | minor (<10) |
rangeland/pastureland | minor (<10) |
tourism/recreation | minor (<10) |
forestry | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Dolphin Head (Jamaica). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/dolphin-head-iba-jamaica on 22/11/2024.