The site was identified as important 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:1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2001) may differ.
Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2001. The most recent assessment (2019) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2019 | very unfavourable | high | medium |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
no | population | medium |
State (condition of the trigger species' populations) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Species | Reference | Actual | Units | % remaining | Result |
Black Tern Chlidonias niger | 3,900 | 5 | mature individuals | 1 | very unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Biological resource use | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Human intrusions and disturbance | likely in short term (within 4 years) | some of area/population (10-49%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | medium |
Residential and commercial development | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Transportation and service corridors | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Pollution | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | past (and unlikely to return) and no longer limiting | small area/few individuals (<10%) | no or imperceptible deterioration | low |
Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Protected areas | Management plan | Other action | Result |
Whole area of site (>90%) covered by appropriate conservation designation | A management plan exists but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Some limited conservation initiatives are in place | medium |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
- | Cape Mount | Nature Conservation Unit | 100 |
2003 | Lake Piso Multiple Sustainable Use Reserve | Multiple Sustainable Use Reserve | 96 |
2003 | Lake Piso | Ramsar Site, Wetland of International Importance | 100 |
The Local Conservation Group(s) listed below are working to conserve this IBA.
Name | Year formed |
---|---|
Piso Conservation Forum | 2006 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 31 | |
Marine Coastal/Supratidal | 30 | |
Forest | Lowland forest - undifferentiated, Mangrove | 22 |
Artificial/Terrestrial | 15 | |
Marine Intertidal | minor (<10) |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
forestry | - |
other | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Lake Piso (Cape Mount) (Liberia). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/lake-piso-(cape-mount)-iba-liberia on 22/11/2024.