Data Zone
The site was identified as internationally important for bird conservation in 2001 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:Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2001. The most recent assessment (2011) is shown below.
| IBA conservation assessment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
| 2011 | poor | high | medium |
| 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 | moderate (70–90%) | moderate (70–90%) | poor |
| Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
| Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Transportation and service corridors | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Energy production and mining | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
| Biological resource use | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
| Natural system modifications | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
| Pollution | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
| Climate change and severe weather | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
| Residential and commercial development | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | no or slight decline (<1% over 3 generations) | low |
| Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Designation | Planning | Action | Result |
| Most of area (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 | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented, but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity | medium |
| Year | Protected Area | Designation (management category) | % coverage of IBA |
|---|---|---|---|
| - | Pugu | State Forest Reserve (-) | 5 |
| - | Ruvu South | Forest Reserve (-) | 78 |
| - | Pugu - Kisarawe | Forest Reserve (-) | 6 |
The Local Conservation Group(s) listed below are working to conserve this IBA.
| Name | Year formed |
|---|---|
| Community Conservation Banks Group (Cocoba) | 2001 |
| Habitat | % of IBA | Habitat detail |
|---|---|---|
| Forest | 68 | |
| Shrubland | 31 |
| Land use | % of IBA |
|---|---|
| forestry | - |
| nature conservation and research | - |
| urban/industrial/transport | - |
| water management | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Kisarawe District Coastal Forests (Tanzania). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/kisarawe-district-coastal-forests-iba-tanzania on 22/12/2024.