• Summary
• Text account
• Data table and detailed info
• Map
• Reference and further resources

The site was identified as important in 2010 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:

Species	Red List1	Season	Year(s)	Size	IBA criteria
Mediterranean Gull Larus melanocephalus	LC	breeding	2004-2009	7 breeding pairs	C6
Little Tern Sternula albifrons	LC	breeding	2004-2009	118-133 breeding pairs	C6
Common Tern Sterna hirundo	LC	breeding	2004-2009	282-350 breeding pairs	C6
Syrian Woodpecker Dendrocopos syriacus	LC	breeding	2004-2009	10-15 breeding pairs	C6

1. The current IUCN Red List category. The category at the time of the IBA criteria assessment (2010) may differ.

Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2010. The most recent assessment (2009) is shown below.

State (condition of the trigger species' populations)
Species	Reference	Actual	Units	% remaining	Result
Black-headed Gull Larus ridibundus	5,450	6,500	breeding pairs	100	favourable
Mediterranean Gull Larus melanocephalus	2	0	breeding pairs	0	very unfavourable
Common Tern Sterna hirundo	72	60	breeding pairs	84	near favourable

Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats)
Threat	Timing	Scope	Severity	Result
Pollution	happening now	some of area/population (10-49%)	very rapid to severe deterioration	high
Agricultural expansion and intensification	happening now	majority/most of area/population (50-90%)	slow but significant deterioration	high
Human intrusions and disturbance	happening now	majority/most of area/population (50-90%)	slow but significant deterioration	high
Transportation and service corridors	likely in short term (within 4 years)	some of area/population (10-49%)	moderate to rapid deterioration	medium
Biological resource use	happening now	some of area/population (10-49%)	slow but significant deterioration	medium
No known threats	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
Most of site (50-90%) covered (including the most critical parts for important bird species)	Not assessed	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
1979	Kazimierski Park Krajobrazowy	Park Krajobrazowy	6
1983	Solec nad Wisłą	Obszar Chronionego Krajobrazu	13
1989	Dolina rzeki Zwolenki	Obszar Chronionego Krajobrazu	6
1990	Chodelski Obszar Chronionego Krajobrazu	Obszar Chronionego Krajobrazu	15
1990	Kraśnicki Obszar Chronionego Krajobrazu	Obszar Chronionego Krajobrazu	8
1990	Wrzelowiecki Park Krajobrazowy	Park Krajobrazowy	2
1991	Krowia Wyspa	Rezerwat Przyrody	1
2001	Przełom Wisły w Małopolsce	Site of Community Importance (Habitats Directive)	81
2004	Małopolski Przełom Wisły	Special Protection Area (Birds Directive)	81

Habitat1	Habitat detail	% of IBA
Wetlands (inland)	Rivers and streams, Water fringe vegetation	80
Artificial/Terrestrial	Highly improved re-seeded landscapes	5
Grassland	Humid grasslands	5
Forest	Alluvial and very wet forest	3
Shrubland	Scrub	3

1. IUCN Habitat classification.

Land use	% of IBA
agriculture	80
tourism/recreation	20
hunting	-

---

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Malopolska Wisla river gap (Poland). Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/malopolska-wisla-river-gap-iba-poland on 23/11/2024.