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 | high | medium |
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 |
Grassland | moderate (70–90%) | moderate (70–90%) | poor |
Forest | good (>90%) | good (>90%) | good |
Shrubland | good (>90%) | good (>90%) | good |
Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Threat | Timing | Scope | Severity | Result |
Climate change and severe weather | happening now | whole of population/area (>90%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | high |
Transportation and service corridors | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
Human intrusions and disturbance | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
Invasive and other problematic species and genes | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | slow decline (1–10% over 3 generations) | medium |
Residential and commercial development | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | no or slight decline (<1% over 3 generations) | low |
Natural system modifications | happening now | some of population/area (10–49%) | no or slight decline (<1% over 3 generations) | low |
Biological resource use | 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 |
Whole area (>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 (management category) | % coverage of IBA |
---|---|---|---|
1968 | Shimba Hills | National Reserve (II) | 89 |
The Local Conservation Group(s) listed below are working to conserve this IBA.
Name | Year formed |
---|---|
Shimba Hills Forest Guides Association (SHIFOGA) and Shimba Suppport Group | 0 |
Habitat | % of IBA | Habitat detail |
---|---|---|
Forest | 45 | Lowland forest - undifferentiated |
Shrubland | 35 | Scrub - forest |
Grassland | 16 |
Land use | % of IBA |
---|---|
nature conservation and research | 90 |
agriculture | 50 |
tourism/recreation | 20 |
urban/industrial/transport | 10 |
other | 5 |
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Shimba Hills (Kenya). Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/shimba-hills-iba-kenya on 23/12/2024.