The site was identified as important in 2004 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 (2004) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2004. The most recent assessment (2015) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2015 | unfavourable | high | low |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
no | habitat | good |
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 |
Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Pollution | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Natural system modifications | likely in long term (beyond 4 years) | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | medium |
Geological events | likely in long term (beyond 4 years) | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | medium |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | likely in long term (beyond 4 years) | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Biological resource use | past (and unlikely to return) and no longer limiting | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | low |
Residential and commercial development | likely in short term (within 4 years) | small area/few individuals (<10%) | moderate to rapid 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(50-90%) covered (including the most critical parts for important bird species) | A management plan exists but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Very little or no conservation action taking place | low |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
- | Abdul Latief/ Sinjai | Taman Hutan Raya | 2 |
- | Gunung Lompobatang | Protection Forest | 100 |
1924 | Lompobattang | Protection Forest | 5 |
1991 | Malino | Taman Wisata Alam | 10 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Forest | 59 | |
Artificial/Terrestrial | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Karaeng - Lompobattang (Indonesia). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/karaeng--lompobattang-iba-indonesia on 22/11/2024.