State of Conservation
28
Reports
28
Properties concerned
26
States Parties with SOC reports
Date Start:
2012close
Date end:2012close
| States Parties: |
 Spain France
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
| States Parties: |
 Uganda
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
| States Parties: |
 Nepal
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
| States Parties: |
 United Republic of Tanzania
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B.Add |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
| Other Threats: | Reduction of elephant population |
| States Parties: |
United Republic of Tanzania
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
| Other Threats: | b) Environmental pressures in relation with the Malindi port projectc) Natural disasters and lack of risk-preparedness |
| States Parties: |
 Lao People's Democratic Republic
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B.Add |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
| States Parties: |
 Azerbaijan
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B.Add |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
| States Parties: |
 United States of America
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties
Argentina Azerbaijan Brazil Bulgaria Ecuador France Haiti Honduras India Lao People's Democratic Republic Lebanon Lithuania Mauritania Mauritius Nepal Panama Peru Russian Federation Spain Thailand Uganda United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Zambia Zimbabwe
* :
The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).
** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.
