Phases in IBA process in Kenya
Phase 1: Identification of the IBAs
Nature Kenya published Kenya’s Directory of IBAs Important
Bird Areas in Kenya, developed by Bennun and Njoroge in 1999. The
sixty sites, which meet global criteria relating to threatened species,
concentrations of species restricted in range and congregations
of birds include world famous national parks and forest reserves.
Others such as the central montane grasslands and coastal Kayas
are less well known and less well protected. Overall 25 sites are
not protected or only partly protected.
Phase
2: Enhancing biodiversity conservation action through advocacy
within local community-NGO-government partnerships i.e. conceptualizing
Important Bird Areas as Important Biodiversity Areas.
Phase
3: IBA monitoring
Protocols developed and monitoring schemes initiated at all sites
-including training for NGO, Government and community conservation
groups on the principles and importance of monitoring. A ‘pressure-state-response’
model is used to choose indicators appropriate to the conservation
goals of each site.
Pressure-threats
to IBAs, State-quantity and quality of IBAs, Response-conservation
efforts for IBAs
A
key feature of the IBA framework is that it is a two-tier approach:
Basic monitoring and detailed monitoring.
Basic
Monitoring takes place across all the 60 sites and is based on regular
review from the field. It forms an accepted, predictable and sustainable
system and the same set of indicators is used across all sites.
Ideally, it occurs once a year – representing an annual ‘status
report’ for a site. Site Support Groups, field officers, managers,
government and conservation staff, researchers and birdwatchers
submit data on simple forms. Forms can be completed on ad-hoc visits
or more systematically, for example, once per year depending on
opportunities and availability of surveyors. The ‘basic’
level of monitoring is a powerful conservation tool.
Detailed
Monitoring is sustainable at fewer sites because it is inevitably
more expensive, time consuming, and more complex. Detailed monitoring
takes place at Kinangop Grasslands, Mukurwe-ini Valleys, Kikuyu
Escarpment Forests, Dunga papyrus swamps, Kakamega Forest and Arabuko-Sokoke
Forest; with trained Site Support Groups. Indicators vary from site
to site, depending on local needs and conditions. Site selection
for detailed monitoring is based on: ongoing conservation interventions,
threats, and human resources available for site monitoring on site.
Informal
monitoring: additional information
Local groups, tour guides, management staff and casual visitors
can all contribute additional useful information on sites and their
condition. If it is complete enough, this information can be used
to make an overall assessment of status. However, it is difficult
to standardise. Observers are encouraged to send in any information
they may have gathered on particular IBAs, especially on conservation
problems and changes in status. However, because this cannot be
part of a systematic monitoring scheme, informal monitoring will
necessarily be opportunistic and is not likely to receive as much
attention or resources as formal monitoring.
Annual IBA Status and Trends Report
Each year (from 2004), annual monitoring data is analyzed by the
National Museums of Kenya and compiled into Kenya’s Important
Bird Areas Status and Trends Report. The report identifies &
communicates threats at site levels, provides recommendations for
highest priority conservation action, identifies institutional constraints
and justifies resource allocation/mobilization etc. It is a useful
tool to guide site management planning processes, identifies research
and funding priorities and forms part of national reporting to the
Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD), in particular Article
7 relating to identifying and monitoring key sites. The results
of this programme have been widely disseminated to other partners
in Kenya, Africa and the World, through the BirdLife International
Parnership. It is expected that the ultimate aim is to have data
from monitoring positively influence conservation, national strategy
and policy processes. In this regard, monitoring status and trends
of biodiversity should be part of institutional conservation areas
planning and management.
Programme coordination
A Project Team – comprising 2 Research Scientists
and 2 Research Fellows from the National Museums of Kenya, and 3
Technical Officers from Nature Kenya, was constituted to guide the
programme and activities. The team oversees overall implementation
of the project in Kenya, and meets at least once every month.
A Project Advisory Group was formed to provide guidance
and advice. The Advisory group comprises senior staff from Kenya
Wildlife Service (KWS), National Museums of Kenya (NMK), BirdLife
International, University of East Anglia, the Royal Society for
Protection of Birds (RSPB) & Nature Kenya.
A Monitoring Sub-committee with representatives from the
key Government agencies including Forest Department (FD) and Kenya
Wildlife Service (KWS) represented in the Important Bird Areas –
National Liaison Committee (IBA-NLC) has been established. Members
of this committee act as the institutional focal points for monitoring
activities – helping to co-ordinate basic monitoring.
Training of Trainers (ToTs)
Continuous training of government officials on the principles of
species and habitat monitoring for Kenya’s Important Bird
Areas have been carried out targeting staff at implementing agencies.
Site support groups and participating NGOs across the 60 IBAs have
also been trained. Site-level training: has been conducted at 6
IBAs where detailed monitoring takes place. Field equipment including
tents, binoculars, tape recorders/playback, measuring tapes, swimming
aids, GPS’, and guide books for use in monitoring activities
have been procured and distributed to various SSGs engaged in detailed
monitoring at their respective sites.
Lessons
Learnt
• Monitoring is a strong tool for conservation awareness among
communities
• Demonstrating “impact” through monitoring is
a powerful catalyst for positive action.
• A strong motivating factor can be the demonstration of the
linkages between good conservation and livelihood benefits
• Providing follow-up support/mentoring and ensuring regular
two way feedback is critical in achieving a common understanding
of the short and long-term objectives
• Immense capacity is built by participating in monitoring
• Making monitoring relevant to the needs of the partner institutions
is key to achieving institutionalization /sustainability
• Institutionalisation and integration are key features of
sustainability
• Data is used to inform conservation action and can justify
fundraising
Partners
Nature Kenya oversees this programme in close collaboration with
the National Museums of Kenya, Forest Department (now Kenya Forest
Service), Kenya Wildlife Service, the National Environment Management
Authority and other institutions represented on the Important Bird
Areas National Liaison Committee.
Seed funding came from the Darwin Initiative of the UK and technical
support and funding was provided by the Royal Society for the Protection
of Birds (BirdLife International in the UK) and the BirdLife International
Secretariat.
|
Action
