Data Zone
The site was identified as internationally important for bird conservation in 2000 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 List | Season (year/s of estimate) | Size | IBA criteria |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus | LC | passage (1996) | 101–500 birds | B1i, C2 |
| Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus | LC | passage (1996) | 51–100 birds | A4i, B1i, C2 |
| Caspian Tern Hydroprogne caspia | LC | passage (1996) | 11–50 birds | B1i, C2 |
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2000. The most recent assessment (2010) is shown below.
| IBA conservation assessment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
| 2010 | very poor | high | medium |
| Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
| yes | population | medium | |
| State (condition of the trigger species' populations) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Actual vs Reference (units) | % remaining | Result | ||
| Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus | 100 / 200 (birds) | 50 | poor | ||
| Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus | 11 / 50 (birds) | 22 | very poor | ||
| Caspian Tern Hydroprogne caspia | 2 / 11 (birds) | 19 | very poor | ||
| Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
| Pollution | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Designation | Planning | Action | Result |
| Whole area (>90%) covered by appropriate conservation designation | A management plan exists, but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented, but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity |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 |
| Habitat | % of IBA | Habitat detail |
|---|---|---|
| Marine Coastal/Supratidal | 100 |
| Land use | % of IBA |
|---|---|
| hunting | 100 |
| fisheries/aquaculture | 50 |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Kirkon-Vilkkiläntura Bay (Finland). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/kirkon-vilkkiläntura-bay-iba-finland on 23/12/2024.