The site was identified as important 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:1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (1999) may differ.
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 | unfavourable | 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%) | unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Biological resource use | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | whole area/population (>90%) | very rapid to severe deterioration | very high |
Agricultural expansion and intensification | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Natural system modifications | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Climate change and severe weather | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Pollution | happening now | 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 |
Some of site covered (10-49%) | A management plan exists but it is out of date or not comprehensive | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity | low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 | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
1976 | Tana River Primate | National Reserve | 100 |
2010 | Ndera Community Conservancy | Community Nature Reserve | 31 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Forest | Lowland forest - riparian | 100 |
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 23/11/2024.