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 | favourable | medium | medium |
Whole site assessed? | State assessed by | Accuracy of information | |
no | habitat | medium |
State (condition of the trigger species' habitats) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Habitat | Quantity (% remaining) | Quality (% carrying capacity) | Result |
Forest | good (> 90%) | good (> 90%) | favourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Transportation and service corridors | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Biological resource use | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Climate change and severe weather | likely in short term (within 4 years) | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Residential and commercial development | likely in short term (within 4 years) | 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 | No management plan exists but the management planning process has begun | Substantive conservation measures are being implemented but these are not comprehensive and are limited by resources and capacity | medium |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
- | Trans-Mara Forest Reserve | Forest Reserve | 13 |
- | Ol Pusimoru Forest Reserve | Forest Reserve | 6 |
- | Maasai Mau | Forest Reserve | 17 |
1932 | South-western Mau | Forest Reserve | 26 |
1932 | Londiani | Forest Reserve | 4 |
1932 | Western Mau | Forest Reserve | 8 |
1941 | Eastern Mau | Forest Reserve | 24 |
1941 | Transmara | Forest Reserve | 11 |
1957 | Ol-pusimoru | Forest Reserve | 6 |
1961 | South-Western Mau | Nature Reserve | 16 |
1967 | Mau Narok | Forest Reserve | <1 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Forest | Montane forest - undifferentiated | - |
Savanna | Bamboo - Montane | - |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
nature conservation and research | - |
forestry | - |
agriculture | - |
other | - |
urban/industrial/transport | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Mau forest complex (Kenya). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/mau-forest-complex-iba-kenya on 22/11/2024.