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 (2009) is shown below.
IBA conservation assessment | |||
---|---|---|---|
Year of assessment | State | Pressure | Response |
2009 | unfavourable | high | high |
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 |
Shrubland | moderate (70-90%) | moderate (70-90%) | unfavourable |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | majority/most of area/population (50-90%) | moderate to rapid deterioration | high |
Natural system modifications | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Climate change and severe weather | happening now | some of area/population (10-49%) | slow but significant deterioration | medium |
Residential and commercial development | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | no or imperceptible deterioration | low |
Transportation and service corridors | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | no or imperceptible deterioration | low |
Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | small area/few individuals (<10%) | no or imperceptible deterioration | low |
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 |
Whole area of site (>90%) covered by appropriate conservation designation | A comprehensive and appropriate management plan exists that aims to maintain or improve the populations of qualifying bird species | The conservation measures needed for the site are being comprehensively and effectively implemented | high |
Year | Protected Area | Designation | % overlap with IBA |
---|---|---|---|
1964 | Ruaha National Park | National Park | 100 |
2007 | Pawaga-Idodi WMA | Wildlife management area | 4 |
Habitat1 | Habitat detail | % of IBA |
---|---|---|
Artificial/Terrestrial | 45 | |
Grassland | 32 | |
Shrubland | 12 | |
Forest | 9 |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
nature conservation and research | - |
tourism/recreation | - |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Ruaha National Park (Tanzania). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/ruaha-national-park-iba-tanzania on 22/11/2024.