The site was identified as internationally important for bird conservation in 1999 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 1999. The most recent assessment (2023) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2023 | poor | very high | low |
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 |
Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | whole of population/area (>90%) | rapid decline (>30% over 3 generations) | very high |
Biological resource use | 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 |
Natural system modifications | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
Climate change and severe weather | happening now | most of population/area (50–90%) | moderate decline (10–30% over 3 generations) | high |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
Pollution | happening now | few individuals/small area (<10%) | 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 |
Some of area covered (10–49%) | A management plan exists, but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented, but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity | low |
Year | Protected Area | Designation (management category) | % coverage of IBA |
---|---|---|---|
1976 | Tana River Primate | National Reserve (II) | 100 |
Habitat | % of IBA | Habitat detail |
---|---|---|
Forest | 100 | Lowland forest - riparian |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
agriculture | - |
fisheries/aquaculture | - |
forestry | - |
nature conservation and research | - |
tourism/recreation | - |
other | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Lower Tana River Forests (Kenya). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/lower-tana-river-forests-iba-kenya on 23/12/2024.