The site was identified as important in 2015 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 (2015) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2015. The most recent assessment (2014) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2014 | very unfavourable | high | low |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
yes | habitat | medium |
State (condition of the trigger species' habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Habitat | Quantity (% remaining) | Quality (% carrying capacity) | Result |
Forest | moderate (70-90%) | poor (40-69%) | very unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Biological resource use | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | slow but significant deterioration | high |
Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | slow but significant deterioration | high |
Natural system modifications | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | slow but significant deterioration | high |
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 | Very little or no conservation action taking place | low |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
1994 | Ngele Nature Reserve | Forest Nature Reserve | 10 |
2013 | Weza Protected Environment | Protected Environment | 1 |
2015 | Fort Nottingham Nature Reserve | Nature Reserve | 2 |
2015 | Dargle Nature Reserve | Nature Reserve | 1 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Forest | Montane forest - mixed | - |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
nature conservation and research | 100 |
fisheries/aquaculture | - |
tourism/recreation | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: KwaZulu-Natal Mistbelt Forests (South Africa). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/kwazulu-natal-mistbelt-forests-iba-south-africa on 23/11/2024.