Distribution WHC-94/CONF.003/13
12 December 1994
Original: English/French
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION
OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE
BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR
Eighteenth extratraordinary session
Phuket, Thailand, 9 and 10 December 1994
I. INTRODUCTION
I.1 The eighteenth extraordinary session of the outgoing
Bureau of the World Heritage Committee was held in Phuket,
Thailand on 9 and 10 December 1994. The following members of the
Bureau attended: Ms Olga Pizano (Colombia), outgoing Chairperson,
and representatives of China, Oman, Senegal, Thailand and the
United States of America as Vice-Presidents. The Vice-President
of China, Mr Zhang acted as Rapporteur.
I.2 Representatives of the following States Parties to the
Convention attended the meeting as observers: Canada, Germany,
Japan and Mexico.
I.3 Representatives of the Centre for the Study of the
Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the
International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the
World Conservation Union (IUCN) also attended the meeting in an
advisory capacity. The full list of participants appears in Annex
I.
II. OPENING SESSION
II.1 The Chairperson welcomed the participants and thanked
the Government of Thailand for hosting this meeting.
II.2 The Director of the World Heritage Centre welcomed the
participants on behalf of the Director-General of UNESCO and
introduced the provisional agenda and the proposed time-schedule.
III. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
III.1 The Bureau adopted the provisional agenda outlined in
document WHC-94/CONF.001B.1.rev (Annex II).
IV. NOMINATION OF PROPERTIES FOR INCLUSION ON THE WORLD
HERITAGE LIST AND LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER
IV.1 The Bureau examined those nominations which were
referred back to the States Parties by the Bureau session of July
1994, as well as some nominations of properties that were
referred back to the State Party or deferred in earlier years and
for which additional information had been received. The Bureau
formulated the following recommendations for consideration by the
Committee.
Name of Property Identifi- State Party having Criteria
cation No. submitted the
nomination in accord-
ance with the
Convention
IV.2. Properties for which nominations were referred back to
the State Party by the Bureau session of July 1994
Natural properties
A. Properties which the Bureau recommended for inscription on
the World Heritage List
Galapagos Marine 1bis Ecuador N(ii)(iii)(iv)
Reserve (extension
of the Galapagos
Islands)
The Bureau recommended that the Committee include the
Galapagos Marine Reserve proposed as an extension to the World
Heritage site of Galapagos Islands on the World Heritage List.
The Bureau requested the Committee to commend the Ecuadorean
authorities for extending the World Heritage property to include
marine habitats extending to 40 nautical miles from the islands.
The Bureau however, was concerned that the proposed Marine
Reserve, and the Galapagos Islands faced the following threats
to their integrity:
- overfishing and illegal fishing of a wide range of species;
- human pressures from the local population and tourism on
both terrestrial and marine resources;
- inadequate management capacity and infrastructure ;
- adverse impacts of introduced animals and plants.
These threats call for mitigative actions via-à-vis:
- augmenting management capacity;
- encouraging institutional cooperation;
- stepping up law enforcement, and
- conducting research on sustainability.
In view of the prevailing threats to the integrity of the
extension proposed in the Marine Reserve and the Islands, the
Bureau recommended that the Committee include the Galapagos
(Islands and the extension of the Marine Resource Reserve) in the
List of World Heritage in Danger and request the Ecuadorean
Government to convene, in co-operation with the World Heritage
Centre, a donors conference to prepare a plan for financing a
programme of actions to mitigate the threats to the integrity of
the site.
The Delegate of Colombia expressed that the State Party should
be consulted and a programme for corrective measures be taken
before including the property on the List of World Heritage in
Danger.
Canaima National 701 Venezuela N(i)(ii)
Park (iii)(iv)
The Bureau recalled that, at its last session held in June 1994,
it had requested, on the basis of a recommendation made by IUCN,
that the Venezuelan authorities revise the boundaries of the
nominated area to exclude the savannah area which IUCN considered
did not meet World Heritage criteria. The Bureau was informed
that, although there was no formal written response from a staff
member of the Venezuelan Park authorities with respect to its
recommendation, the State Party has indicated verbally that it
was not willing to consider revising the boundaries of this site.
The Bureau however, noted that the presence of a population
of about 10,000 residents in the substantial area of the
savannahs, who have not been consulted regarding the nomination
of the area, are a cause of concern. Nevertheless, the Bureau was
satisfied that the area met all four natural World Heritage
criteria and merits inscription on the World Heritage List.
Hence, the Bureau recommended that the Committee inscribe Canaima
National Park on the World Heritage List and request the Centre
and IUCN to co-operate with the State Party to initiate a process
to review the boundaries of the site, taking into consideration
the interests of the local people and the need to focus the
nomination on the tepui portion of the Park.
B. Deferred nominations
Glacier and 354rev Canada/USA
Waterton Lakes
The Bureau recalled that when the Glacier National Park (USA) was
nominated in 1985, the Bureau had noted that the area "possessed
a certain number of important natural features but that similar
features were already represented in other parks already
inscribed on the List" and suggested that the nomination could
be re-examined if it included the Waterton Lakes National Park
(Canada). In accordance with the suggestion of the Bureau, a
nomination of the Glacier and Waterton Lakes was submitted in
1993, and once again revised in accordance with the suggestions
of the 1994 Bureau and re-submitted in November 1994.
The Bureau noted that IUCN had not been able to undertake
a comprehensive evaluation of the nomination submitted by Canada
and the United States due to time constraints. However, the
Bureau learnt that a preliminary evaluation of the nomination
carried out by IUCN concluded that the site's universal
significance within the biogeographic province under
consideration was not of "outstanding value". IUCN however,
conceded that there was considerable difference of opinion among
experts with respect to the above judgement. The Bureau noted
that the integrity of the site had considerably improved relative
to the time when the site was nominated in 1993. The Bureau
recommended that IUCN undertake a thorough evaluation of the
nomination submitted by Canada and the United States and provide
to the Bureau at its nineteenth session in mid-1995 more
comprehensive evaluation on which the Committee could base its
decision regarding the inscription of this property on the World
Heritage List.
Cultural properties
A. Properties which the Bureau recommended for inscription on
the World Heritage List
The Temple of 704 China C(i)(iv)(vi)
Confucius, the
Cemetery of Confucius,
and the Kong Family
Mansion in Qufu
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that additional information on the
buffer zone had been provided by the Chinese authorities as
requested by the Bureau at its eighteenth session in July 1994.
Having studied the information, ICOMOS recommended inscription
of this property under criteria (i), (iv) and (vi).
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (i), (iv) and (vi).
The ancient 705 China C(i)(ii)(vi)
building complex
in the Wudang
Mountains
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that it had positively evaluated the
map and the conservation plan that had been provided by the
Chinese authorities as requested by the eighteenth session of the
Bureau. ICOMOS recommended inscription of this property under
criteria C(i)(ii)(vi).
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (i), (ii) and (vi).
The Pilgrimage 690 Czech Republic C(i)(iv)
Church of St.
John of Nepomuk
at Zelena Hora
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that the State Party, as requested by
the Bureau at its eighteenth session, had provided additional
information concerning the effect of the new legislation on the
protection of ecclesiastical monuments and on the on-going
restoration project. This information was positively evaluated
and ICOMOS recommended, therefore, the inscription of this
property under criteria (i) and (iv).
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (i) and (iv).
The Lines and 700 Peru C(i)(iii)(iv)
Geoglyphs of
Nasca and
Pampas de Jumana
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that, following the request of the
Bureau at its eighteenth session, a new map had been submitted
by the State Party defining the bounderies of the property along
natural and geographical features. ICOMOS recommended the
inscription of this property under criteria (i), (iii) and (iv).
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (i), (iii) and (iv). The Bureau also
recommended the Committee to urge the authorities to reinforce
the protection and management of the vaste area of this property.
The earliest 16th 702 Mexico C (ii)(iv)
Century Monasteries
on the slopes of
Popocatepetl
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that it had received the requested
information on the bounderies and the buffer zones for each of
the nominated monasteries. It informed the Bureau also that
churches in Mexico are state property and that they are under the
supervision of the National Institute for Antropology and History
(INAH). The churches are, furthermore, all still being used for
their original functions which ensures the proper use and
management of the structures. ICOMOS, therefore, considered that
management and conservation arrangements were adequate and
recommended the inscription of the monasteries under criteria
(ii) and (iv).
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (ii) and (iv).
IV.3. Properties for which nominations were referred back to
the State Party or deferred in earlier years and for
which additional information has been received
Natural properties
A. Properties which the Bureau recommended for inscription on
the World Heritage List
Central Eastern 368bis Australia N(i)(ii)(iv)
Australian
Rainforest
(extension of the
Australian East Coast
Temperate & Sub-
tropical Rainforest
Park)
The Bureau recommended that the Committee inscribe the extension
proposed to this site by the Australian authorities under
criteria (i), (ii) and (iv). The Bureau, noting that the the
extension increased the size of the World Heritage site by 35%,
commended the Australian Government for acting on the the
recommendation of the Committee made in 1986 and agreeing to
adopt the name "Central Eastern Rainforest Reserves (Australia)"
for the enlarged property. The Bureau also recommended that the
Committee request the Australian authorities to complete the
management plans of individual sites, particularly those within
Queensland.
Arabian Oryx Sanctuary 654 Oman N(iv)
The Bureau recalled that the nomination of Arabian Oryx Sanctuary
(then referred to as Jiddat-al-Harasis) was originally submitted
in August 1992 and deferred for clarification of the legal
structures, boundaries and management plan. It noted that the
area was renowned for the success of the re-introduction of the
White Oryx Project. It acknowledged that the Royal Decree No.
4/94 of January 1994 concerning the legal responsibilities for
the management of the area was a partial response to an earlier
request of the Bureau for further strengthening the conservation
of the site. This required the issuance of appropriate by-laws
and directives called for by the Decree.
The Bureau took note of Ambassador Musa Bin Jaafar Bin Hassan's
letter of 21 November 1994 which included a preliminary response
to the Bureau request for a Management Plan. The framework of
the Plan submitted was considered to be technically sound and
hence the Management Plan should provide clarification of the
boundaries, as well as a zoning plan and improved management
regime of the site. The Bureau was informed that due to the late
arrival of the letter and the framework plan, IUCN was unable to
apply its full evaluation process to the nomination. However,
in the evaluation of the 1992 nomination IUCN had noted that the
site had potential for World Heritage listing. The Bureau was
satisfied with the new information provided and the political
will of the Oman Government to implement a management regimeinto
the site in accordance with its earlier recommendations. Hence
the Bureau recommended that the Committee inscribe this site on
the World Heritage List with the following provisions:
1) the site be inscribed on the World Heritage List under
criterion (iv) which focuses on the conservation of the
Arabian Oryx and the Houbara Bustard as well as other
threatened wildlife species living in the Sanctuary;
2) that a generalised map representing the "essential values"
of the Sanctuary be prepared by the Delegate of Oman in
consultation with IUCN and a representative of the World
Heritage Centre, and be used as a basis for the
inscription;
3) that the Omani authorities continue to strengthen the
management of the site by passing the by-laws and
directives called for by the decree and appoint additional
field staff to implement the management regime;
4) that the consultant who will prepare the management plan
clearly defines the World Heritage values in accordance
with the Operational Guidelines and defines the boundaries
of the area including a zoning plan which excludes any land
uses which may be in conflict with World Heritage values.
Clear recommendations must be made on criterion (iii), if
applicable to this listing, by 1 April 1995;
5) that IUCN present to the nineteenth session of the Bureau
an evaluation of the revised boundaries and additional
World Heritage criteria (if applicable), based on the
consultant's report and such further information it
requires;
6) that the nineteenth session of the Bureau review the
revised boundaries and additional criteria in accordance
with its normal procedures.
The Bureau recommended that the Committee inscribe the
property under criteria (iv).
B. Deferred nominations
Ha Long Bay 672 Vietnam
The Bureau recalled that at its last session it referred the
consideration of this nomination pending the establishment of a
legal framework, a revision of the boundaries of the proposed
site and the preparation of a management plan. The Bureau was
informed that the Vietnamese authorities have upgraded
legislation for the protection of the site and made revisions to
the boundaries of the proposed site. However, the Bureau noted
that the revised boundaries did not provide the necessary clarity
and a management plan had not yet been prepared.
The Bureau was informed that a Vietnamese Delegation was
expected to provide additional information to the Committee at
this session. Hence, the Bureau recommended that the outgoing
and incoming Chairpersons together with IUCN review the
information to be provided by the State Party and advise the
Committee.
Cultural properties
A. Properties which the Bureau recommended for inscription on
the World Heritage List
Uluru-Kata Tjuta 447rev Australia N (ii)(iii)
National Park C (v)(vi)
(renomination of
Uluru National
Park under cultural
criteria)
The Bureau recalled that this property was originally nominated
as a mixed site and was inscribed in 1987 under natural criteria
N(ii)(iii) and that it had been re-nominated as a cultural
landscape for inscription under the revised cultural criteria.
ICOMOS recommended inscription under cultural criteria (v) and
(vi) as it considered the property to be one of the most ancient
managed landscapes in the world and an outstanding illustration
of successful human adaptation over many millennia to the
exigencies of a hostile environment; and forming an integral part
of the traditional belief system of one of the oldest human
societies in the world.
After considerable discussion on the interpretation and
application of the criteria for cultural landscapes without any
monumental component, the Bureau recommended that the Committee
inscribe this property, in addition to the inscription as a
natural World Heritage site, under cultural criteria (v) and
(vi).
Following the discussion, the Bureau requested the Secretariat
to publish, e.g. in the World Heritage Newsletter, the cases
where cultural landscape criteria have been applied, so that
their interpretation and application be diffused among the States
Parties.
Old City of 95bis Croatia
Dubrovnik
(extension)
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that it had positively evaluated the
proposed extension of this World Heritage site to include the
island of Lokrum and areas and fortresses at the east and the
west of the walled city. ICOMOS also recommended positively on
the proposed buffer zone for the area on the slopes of the hills
above the town.
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee extend
the actual World Heritage site as proposed by the State Party.
Petäjävesi Old Church 584 Finland C (iv)
The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its fifteenth session
in December 1991 deferred this nomination and requested a more
exhaustive study on the universal value of this monument. ICOMOS
informed the Bureau that this study had been undertaken and that
it concluded that the church is "the best preserved of Finland's
churches built in the crucifix tradition and is a worthy
representative for the type ... It deserves a place on the World
Heritage List where, together with Urnes stave-church [Norway],
it will serve to represent the height of wooden church
architecture in Scandinavia."
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criterion (iv).
Vilnius Historic 541 Lithuania C (ii)(iv)
Centre
The Bureau recalled that the Historic Centre of Vilnius was
nominated by the USSR and examined by the Bureau at its
fourteenth session. The Bureau referred this nomination back
requesting additional information on the town planning schemes
which existed in the immediate vicinity of the historic centre.
After Lithuania became an independent state it signed the World
Heritage Convention in 1992. The Lithuanian authorities then
renewed the process of nomination and provided the additional
information requested.
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that it considered the protective
legislation for the nominated site and a wide area surrounding
it adequate but that the only reservation it had was that the
private owners do not have the obligation to maintain and restore
their properties.
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (ii) and (iv).
Skogskyrkogärden 588Rev. Sweden C (i)(ii)
The Bureau at its seventeenth session deferred this nomination
until a comparative study on cemeteries and a study on XXth
century architecture be undertaken by ICOMOS. Furthermore, the
Bureau considered at that time that this property should also be
evaluated as a cultural landscape. ICOMOS informed the Bureau
that, as a result of a colloquium on cemeteries and consultations
with expert groups, it had concluded that the cemetery of
Skogskyrkogärden is the most influential and best preserved of
the 'forest cemeteries' and that it is an outstanding example of
designed cultural landscape. ICOMOS, therefore, recommended
inscription of this property under criteria (i) and (ii).
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (i) and (ii).
City of Safranbolu 614 Turkey C (ii)(iv)(v)
The Committee at its sixteenth session deferred this nomination
until information on the boundaries of the site was provided.
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that this information had been
provided and that it considered the proposed boundaries to be
adequate. It also made reference to the adequate protection and
management of the nominated site and recommended inscription
under criteria (ii), (iv) and (v).
The Bureau recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe
the property under criteria (ii), (iv) and (v).
V. EXAMINATION OF REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE
V.1 The Bureau examined document WHC-94/CONF.001B/3,
003Add. and 003Add.1 and took the following decisions:
A. NATURAL HERITAGE
A.1 Requests on which the Bureau took a decision
A.1.1 Technical cooperation
The Bureau considered the rapid growth in the demand for
technical cooperation funds and recommended that in the future,
at least one third of the annual budget for technical cooperation
should be targetted towards natural World Heritage sites.
The Bureau considered four requests for technical
cooperation for strengthening management of natural World
Heritage sites and took the following decisions:
Requests approved by the Bureau
1. Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria): Purchase and
installation of equipment for the measurement and
monitoring of water-levels and water quality in the
Srebarna Wetlands US$ 19,000
Requests not approved by the Bureau
1. Kilimanjaro National Park (Tanzania): The Bureau requested
the Tanzanian authorities to reformulate their request for
US$ 30,000 for developing a system of trails in the Park,
and take into consideration more urgent conservation
priorities for the management of the Park which have been
set by the new Management Plan for the site.
A.1.2 Training
The Bureau noted the increasing demand for support for
organizing training courses for natural and cultural heritage
specialists. The Bureau recommended that in the future the annual
training budget should be divided equally for training natural
and cultural heritage specialists.
The Bureau considered eight requests for supporting the
training of natural heritage specialists and worked on the
assumption that the training budget for 1995 will be the same as
that of 1994 and gave priority to supporting training activities
in Africa and in less developed countries.
Requests approved by the Bureau
1. 17th International Training Course 30,000
for Protected Area Managers of Latin
America, CATIE, Costa Rica
2. Regional Training Course for 30,000
Protected Area Managers of Arab States,
Egypt
3. Support to participants from Francophone 19,000
Africa in the Training Course on Protected
Areas, organized by ENGREF, France, in
Côte d'Ivoire
4. Regional Training Course for Protected 20,000
Area Managers of West Africa, organized by
School of Wildlife Specialists, Garoua, Cameroon
(an additional US$ 5,000 for supporting the
publication of the proceedings of the training
seminar should be sought from other sources)
5. Fellowships to African World Heritage
site and Protected Area Managers at Regional
Training Institutions:
School of Wildlfe Specialists, Garoua, 22,000
Cameroon
Mweka College of African Wildlife 20,000
Management, Arusha, Tanzania
The Bureau also approved a sum of US$ 30,000 for preparing
a strategy for the training of managers of natural World Heritage
sites. In this connection a workshop is to be organized in
cooperation with the United States National Park Service in
September 1995. The Bureau further urged the Secretariat to
undertake a comprehensive assessment of the training supported
by the World Heritage Fund in the past and to use the outcome of
such an assessment in the elaboration of a strategy for the
future.
Requests not approved by the Bureau
1. Due to budgetary constraints, the Bureau did not approve the
sum of US$ 20,000 requested by the organizers of a training
seminar on protected area management in Europe. The Bureau urged
that the organizers raise the funds needed through alternative
sources in Europe.
A.2 Requests for which the Bureau formulated a recommendation
to the Committee
1. Komodo National Park (Indonesia): The Bureau recommended
that the Committee approve a sum of US$ 40,000 of the US$ 63,400
requested by the Indonesian authorities for the purchase of a
patrol boat and the procurement and installation of a GIS-GPS
system. The Bureau recommended that the Indonesian authorities
limit the costs of the GIS-GPS system to a maximum of US$ 19,000
by calling for competitive bids for the supply and installation
of this system for the Komodo National Park
2. Ujung Kulon National Park (Indonesia): The Bureau
recommended that the Committee approve a sum of US$ 40,000 as a
contribution to buffer zone development activities to provide
water facilities for local people. An agreement for cessation of
resource extraction inside the Park is under discussion. The
objective of this project is to demonstrate operational links
between the conservation of Ujung Kulon National Park and
benefits to local people.
B. CULTURAL HERITAGE
B.1. Requests on which the Bureau took a decision
B.1.1 Technical cooperation
In examining the ten technical co-operation requests for
cultural properties, two submitted by ICCROM and eight by States
Parties, the Bureau decided, in accordance with previous
decisions taken by the Committee to give priority to activities
for properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger and to
those having a catalytic affect rather than for the funding of
specific restoration works.
Requests approved by the Bureau
1. The Historic Town of Ouro Preto (Brazil) - US$20,000
The Bureau approved US$20,000 out of the total amount of
US$50,000, subject to obtaining assurance that the balance of
US$30,000 for the construction of five houses for the relocation
of the affected inhabitants be funded by other sources.
2. ICCROM Technical Assistance - US$25,000
The Bureau approved this financial support to the ICCROM
Technical Assistance Programme to supply institutions of State
Parties, free of charge, with basic documentation, scientific and
didactic equipment and conservation products.
3. Printing of Management Guidelines for World Cultural
Heritage Sites, by B.M. Feilden and J. Jokilehto - US$6,900
The Bureau approved this request to support the printing cost of
the French-language edition of this publication if other sources,
notably of the Francophone community cannot be identified.
Requests not approved by the Bureau
1. Ngorongoro Conservation Area (United Republic of Tanzania)
(International Conference on Ngorongoro, in Bellagio, Italy)
The Bureau, while recognizing the value of the proposed
international conference in Italy for the Tanzanian conservators,
did not recommend approval of this request in view of other
requests of higher priority and due to the availability of other
funding sources for this conference at the Rockefeller Foundation
in Italy.
B.1.2 Training
The Bureau at its eighteenth session in December 1994,
examined eleven requests for training activities related to
cultural properties of which five were submitted by ICCROM and
six by States Parties to the total amount exceeding US$ one
million. In view of budgetary constraints under the indicative
allocation for training, the Bureau decided to give priority to
requests submitted by developing countries for activities
benefiting site managers of World Heritage cultural properties.
The emphasis would be on courses held in situ which take into
account local training needs rather than "regular contribution
to annual courses" organised at the headquarters of training
institutes. This criteria was therefore used to evaluate all
training requests.
Requests approved by the Bureau
1. Sub-Regional Conservation Workshop on Western European
Medieval Wall Paintings, 1 July - 10 September 1995,
Sighisoara, Romania - US$28,000.
2. Scientific Principles of Conservation Regional Course for
Latin America, June-July 1995, Belo Horizonte, Brazil -
US$30,000.
3. Training of Technical Personnel, Cap Vert - US$25,000.
4. Training for the Region of Latin America in Conservation of
the Adobe World Heritage, October 1995, Chan Chan, Peru -
US$20,000.
Requests not approved by the Bureau
1. International Architectural Conservation Course ARC 95,
ICCROM, 18 January - 26 May 1995, Rome, Italy.
In view of the availability of other funding sources for this
regular course, the Bureau did not approve this request for
US$25,000.
2. Regional Training Courses in Architectural and Urban
Heritage Conservation, 5 September 1994 to 30 June 1995,
Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
This request for US$19,030 was not approved at this time due to
budgetary constraints and other requests of higher priorities.
B.2 Requests for which the Bureau formulated a recommendation
to the Committee
B.2.1 Technical cooperation
1. Old City of Dubrovnik (Croatia) - US$50,000
The Bureau recommended the approval of the full requested
amount of US$ 50,000 for, inter alia, the purchase of equipment
for the documentation centre; expertise for the development of
a tourism development plan; promotional and educational material
and activities on World Heritage in Dubrovnik.
2. Wieliczka Salt Mine (Poland) - US$100,000
The Bureau recommended, after considerable debate, the
approval by the Committee of this request for US$100,000 to
purchase the dehumidifying equipment required for the
preservation of the salt sculptures of this World Heritage Site
in Danger.
3. Kathmandu Valley (Nepal) - US$52,000
The Bureau recommended approval by the Committee of the
requested US$ 52,000 for the deployment of a UNESCO international
technical advisor for 6 months in view of the serious and urgent
need for strengthen measures to redress the present state of
conservation of the Kathmandu Valley.
4. The Complex of the Hue Monuments (Vietnam)
(Upgrading of the Hue Conservation Laboratory) - US$108,000
The Bureau recommended approval of the amount of US$108,000
to meet the cost of laboratory equipment purchase (US$ 72,700)
and related short-term training to enable the Hue authorities to
have the basic facilities to overcome the present obstacles to
conservation. The World Heritage Centre should, however, be
consulted on the list of equipment, and approve the detailed
specification and cost estimate; as well as the selection of the
international experts.
5. Historic Areas of Istanbul (Turkey)
(Restoration of the mosaics of Hagia-Sophia) - US$80,000
The Bureau recommended approval by the Committee of an
amount of $80,000 to complete the final phase of this restoration
project.
6. Palmyra (Syrian Arab Republic)
The Bureau did not recommend the approval by the Committee
of this request for US$90,000. It recommended that the Committee
requests the Syrian authorities to prepare a global and coherent
conservation programme for this site in accordance with the
recommendations of the UNESCO expert mission which took place in
December 1993.
B.2.2 Training
1. ICCROM/CRATerre (International Centre for Earthen
Constructions): Training for a professional team; and
craftsmen-technician team for the restoration and
maintenance of the Palace of Abomey, Benin - US$ 33,000
The Bureau recommended the approval of US$33,000 out of the
original request for US$44,000.
2. Regional Training Course of Maghreb Architects for the
Conservation and Protection of Cultural Monuments and Sites
(1994 and 1995, Tunisia)
The Bureau recommended the approval by the Committee of the
full amount of US$50,000 for this request.
3. Regional Meeting of Directors of Cultural Offices in Latin
America and the Caribbean (April 1995, Cartagena, Colombia)
The Bureau recommended approval by the Committee of the
requested amount of US$45,000. Budgetary provisions other
than training such as preparatory assistance and promotion
can be considered.
4. International Course on the Technology of Stone
Conservation, ICCROM, 30 March - 14 June 1995, Venice,
Italy.
Despite recognition of the importance of this course and
the support given to it in previous years, the Bureau did
not recommend approvl of this US$51,000 request from ICCROM
due to other funding priorities and in view of the fact
that other funding sources were available for the
organization of this regular course.
5. Training Programme in the Conservation of Architecture,
Painting, Wood, Stone and Antique Objects for the
Preservation of the Hué World Heritage Site (1995,
dates not specified), Vietnam
This request for US$40,790 was not recommended for approval
in view of the approval under Technical Cooperation of US$
108,000 for the purchase of conservation laboratory
equipment and related training in Hué which was deemed to
be of higher priority.
VI. MONITORING: REPORTS ON THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF
SPECIFIC PROPERTIES
VI.1. In preparation for the Committee's agenda item 9
section C which deals with the reports on the state of
conservation of specific properties, the Bureau examined working
document WHC-94/CONF.001B/4 as well as the seperate documents
prepared by ICOMOS and IUCN.
VI.2. In view of the great number of state of conservation
reports, the Bureau recommended the Committee to examine
particularly, at its plenary session, the state of conservation
reports on the following properties:
A. NATURAL PROPERTIES
A.1. Natural properties on the List of World Heritage in
Danger
Aïr-Ténéré Reserve (Niger)
A.2. Natural properties on the World Heritage List
Great Barrier Reef (Australia)
Galapagos National Park (Ecuador)
Keoladeo National Park (India)
Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania)
Serengeti National Park (Tanzania)
Redwood National Park (United States of America)
Kahuzi-Biega National Park and Virunga National Park
(Zaire)
B. CULTURAL PROPERTIES
B.1. Cultural properties on the List of World Heritage in
Danger
Angkor (Cambodia)
Natural and Culturo-historical Region of Kotor
(Yugoslavia)
B.2. Cultural properties on the World Heritage List
Memphis and its Necropolis - the Pyramid Fields from
Giza to Dahshur (Egypt)
Petra (Jordan)
Megalithic Temples (Malta)
Hal Saflieni Hypogeum (Malta)
Kathmandu Valley (Nepal)
Kizhi Pogost (Russian Federation)
The Complex of Hue Monuments (Vietnam)
Pueblo de Taos (United States of America),
as well as the following five properties that have
been monitored in the context of the Latin American
pilot monitoring programme:
Serra da Capivara (Brazil)
Quirigua (Guatemala)
Ilha de Mozambique (Mozambique)
Lima (Peru)
Rio Abiseo (Peru).
VI.3. Regarding the remaining state of conservation reports,
the Bureau recommended the Committee to adopt the following text
for inclusion in the Committee's report:
Reports on the State of Conservation of Specific Properties
I. INTRODUCTION
The Committee recalled that the World Heritage Committee at its
seventeenth session and the Bureau at its eighteenth session
examined reports on the state of conservation of seven natural
and six cultural properties inscribed on the List of World
Heritage in Danger and on seventeen natural and fifty-nine
cultural properties on the World Heritage List.
The Committee commended the States Parties which had responded
to its recommendations or observations and urged the States
Parties which had not done this, to do so. In this context, the
Committee emphasized that, according to the Operational
Guidelines, one of the essential functions of the Committee is
to monitor the state of conservation of properties inscribed on
the World Heritage List and that a continuous communication
between the Committee and the States Parties regarding the state
of conservation of the World Heritage sites is indispensable in
this respect.
The Committee examined the state of conservation reports prepared
by the secretariat and the advisory bodies and concluded the
following:
II. Natural Heritage
II.1. Natural Properties on the List of World Heritage in
Danger
Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria)
The Committee was informed that the Secretariat is continuously
in contact with the Bulgarian authorities, which presented a
report on their restoration efforts at the last session of the
Bureau and have recently updated this report.
The Committee confirmed the decision of the Bureau at its
eighteenth session that a detailed report on conservation
measures should be presented to the nineteenth session of the
Bureau in 1995. The Committee decided to retain this site on the
List of World Heritage in Danger.
Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia)
The site was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
in 1992. Missions to the site were carried out in 1992 and 1993.
Given the fact that there has been a recent outbreak in fighting
in the Bihac region, the situation remains critical. The
Committee decided, therefore, that another fact-finding mission
to this area, particularly to the Korkaova Uvala Virgin forest
should take place. The Committee decided to retain the site on
the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Sangay National Park (Ecuador)
The site was inscribed in 1983 and added to the List of World
Heritage in Danger in 1992 due to threats from poachers, boundary
encroachment and unplanned road construction. The situation at
the site was discussed between a representative of the president
of Ecuador and World Heritage Centre staff and the Committee's
continuous concerns were brought to the attention of the
Government of Ecuador.
The Committee decided to retain this site on the List of World
Heritage in Danger and that another fact-finding mission should
be carried out.
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire)
The site was included on the List of World Heritage in Danger in
1992 because of a proposed iron-ore mining project and threats
due to the arrival of a large number of refugees. An expert
mission was undertaken in 1993 and proposals to revise the
boundaries of the site were endorsed by the seventeenth session
of the Committee in 1993. An international assistance project
under the World Heritage Fund was carried out in 1994. The
Committee was informed that the French Ministry of the
Environment in cooperation with IUCN France is carrying out a
study and review of the site with regard to potential future
investment. A report on this project is expected in due course.
The Committee decided to retain this site on the List of World
Heritage in Danger and requested that the Bureau at its
nineteenth session be informed of the results of the French
mission.
Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India)
At its eighteenth session, the World Heritage Bureau took note
of the response by the Indian Government concerning Manas
Wildlife Sanctuary which was inscribed on the List of World
Heritage In Danger in 1992.
The Committee was informed that the Secretariat received a report
on the conditions of the site from WWF-India. The report
emphasises the critical situation in the area. Furthermore, the
Government of India has indicated its interest in a joint mission
to the site by World Heritage Centre staff and local NGO's.
The Committee commended the Indian authorities on this initiative
and recommended that this mission be undertaken when conditions
in the area are sufficiently stable. The Committee decided to
retain Manas Wildlife Sanctuary on the List of World Heritage in
Danger.
Air-Ténéré Reserve (Niger)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Everglades National Park (United States of America)
The site was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
in 1993 due to an increasing number of threats since the date of
its inscription on the List in 1979. The Government is providing
significant financial support for the management of the site and
for its long-term restoration in the order of hundreds of
millions of dollars. The American authorities had prepared a
report for the eighteenth session of the Committee.
The Committee decided to retain the site on the List of World
Heritage in Danger.
II.2. Natural Properties on the World Heritage List
Great Barrier Reef (Australia)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Shark Bay (Australia)
The Committee recalled that at the time of inscription of this
site it requested IUCN to report back on the progress with
respect to (1) implementation of the Commonwealth/State
management agreement and (2) efforts to achieve more effective
conservation of the site.
As the Government of Australia had assured that the October 1990
agreement was to provide the management framework for this site,
the Committee was concerned that most of the provisions of the
agreement have not been operationalised. Therefore, the Centre
wrote to the Australian authorities requesting positive and
concrete action, and was informed by the national authorities
that a copy of the new agreement would be available by early
December. A report from the Australian authorities is
anticipated shortly.
Willandra Lakes Region (Australia)
The Committee was informed of IUCN's field evaluation report on
the state of conservation of this property. It requested the
Australian authorities to review the boundaries of the site to
exclude areas which no longer held World Heritage values and to
continue their recent progress in improving the management of the
site.
Mount Athos (Greece)
A report prepared by WWF and Ecumenical Patriachate of
Constantinople (EPC) has pointed out that the ecology of this
site is being impacted by overgrazing, chemical pollution and
forestry activities. In early December the World Heritage Centre
received a letter from the Greek authorities outlining the
measures which are being implemented to address these concerns.
The Committee requested that a field review together with the
appropriate Greek authorities be carried out to evaluate these
conflicting reports.
Banc d'Arguin National Park (Mauritania)
The Committee recalled that IUCN reported to the Bureau at its
eighteenth session on a planned capture operation of six monk
seals from the sea population of the park. Subsequently, the
Centre was informed by the French Ministry for the Environment
that the experiment was carefully planned and coordinated with
IUCN's Species Survival Commission and that the capture operation
and breeding experiment is underv the direction of the "Comité
scientifique international pour le suivi du programme francais
de sauvegarde du phoque moine".
The Committee took note of the above information.
Te Wahipounama (New Zealand)
In July 1994 the Bureau was advised of threats to the integrity
of this site arising from cattle grazing in some parts of the
Park and the impact of potential logging operations in Maori-
owned coastal forests immediately adjacent to the Park. As
requested by the Bureau, the New Zealand authorities have
submitted a report outlining measures being implemented for
mitigating these threats. IUCN has expressed satisfaction with
these measures and no further action is required at the present
time.
Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Serengeti National Park (Tanzania)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Kahuzi-Biega National Park and Virunga National Park (Zaire)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Redwood National Park (United States of America)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls (Zambia and Zimbabwe)
The World Heritage Centre was informed by letter of 5 August
1994 from the National Heritage Conservation Commission of Zambia
that the proposal to build the Batoka Dam was dropped. The Batoka
Gorge Hydro Electric Scheme would have had a major environmental
impact on the World Heritage site and would have flooded the
Batoka Gorge of the Zambezi River, a two million year old unique
geological and geomorphological formation.
The Committee commended the Government of Zambia on the decisions
taken to ensure the integrity of this World Heritage site.
Mana Pools, Sapi and Chewore Reserves (Zimbabwe)
The Committee regretted that with the relocation of the ten
remaining rhinos from this Park to an intensive protection zone,
this World Heritage site has lost one of its "flagship" species.
The Committee urged the Centre that in order to protect
populations of similar species in other World Heritage sites, it
should expand its cooperation with IUCN's Species Survival
Commission and the Secretariat of the Convention on International
Trade on Endangered Species (CITES).
III. Natural and Cultural Heritage (mixed sites)
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)
The Committee was informed on proposed helicopter flights from
Cusco to the village of Aguas Calientes, which is only two
kilometers from the ruins of Machu Picchu, authorization of which
would be subject to the approval of an environmental impact study
by the National Institute for Natural Resources (INRENA). IUCN
informed that it was finalizing the examination of the impact
study and that it will transmit its recommendations to the
Secretariat as sson as these are available.
The Committee requested that the Bureau at its forthcoming
nineteenth session be informed of the outcome of IUCN's
observations.
IV. Cultural Heritage
IV.1. Cultural Properties on the List of World Heritage in
Danger
Palace of Abomey (Benin)
The Committee commended the Government of Benin and ICCROM for
the activities undertaken since 1992 in training in preventive
conservation and for the project for the conservation and
enhancement of the Royal Palaces of Abomey which is foreseen for
1994-1996 in collaboration with ICCROM and the Government of
Italy. The Committee decided to retaine this site on the List of
World Heritage in Danger and requested the Secretariat to ensure
that a monitoring mission be undertaken to Abomey to evaluate the
state of conservation of the eleven palaces that have not yet
been subject to restoration and to report on it to the Bureau at
its nineteenth session.
Angkor (Cambodia)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Dubrovnik (Croatia)
The Committee was informed that the restoration of what is called
the fifth facade of the city -the roofs- was almost completed and
that there remained but a few insulae awaiting repairs, and that
important progress had been made in the restoration of several
of the most important monuments of the city.
The Committee commended the Government of Croatia and UNESCO on
the progress made in the conservation and restoration of
Dubrovnik. It noted, however, that after the priority needs had
been taken care of, other works such as the restoration of nine
destroyed palaces and details of Franciscan and Dominican
cloisters needed to be undertaken. The Committee decided,
therefore, to retain this site on the List of World Heritage in
Danger.
Timbuktu (Mali)
The Committee was informed that the Government of Mali had fully
endorsed the recommendations of a UNESCO mission that was
undertaken in early 1994 and which recommended a method of
intervention involving the local population which, since the
construction of the mosques, had been responsible for their
upkeep, thus perpetuating a living religious cultural tradition.
The Committee also endorsed this proposal and decided that it
would support its implementation, if and when requested by the
State Party. The Committee decided to retaine the site on the
List of World Heritage in Danger.
Bahla Fort (Oman)
The Committee recalled that it was informed during its
seventeenth session, that intensive restoration works were being
undertaken at this site and that it appeared probable that the
nature of the material used for the restoration work, the
rapidity with which the work was being carried out and the
methods used could raise a certain number of questions with
regard to conserving the authenticity of the monument. The
Committee was informed that, the Director of the World Heritage
Centre, at the invitation of the Government of Oman, undertook
a mission to Oman in March 1994 at which he was able to examine
the progress of restoration work underway. Following this mission
it was agreed with the national authorities that an expert
mission would take place from 10 to 19 December 1994.
The Committee decided to retain this site on the List of World
Heritage in Danger and requested that the results of this mission
be presented to the nineteenth session of the Bureau of the World
Heritage Committee in 1995.
Chan Chan Archaeological Zone (Peru)
The Committee welcomed the initiative of the Government of Peru
to organise in October 1995, in collaboration with ICCROM and
CRATerre, a regional course on the conservation of adobe parallel
to which the participants and international experts would also
evaluate the past conservation practices and experiences in Chan
Chan and define new conservation policies for this site. The
Committee requested the authorities to submit the results of the
course and the assessment of the conservation policies and
practices to the Secretariat so that recommendations for future
actions can be presented at the next session of the Committee.
It decided that this site be retained on the List of World
Heritage in Danger.
Wieliczka Salt Mine (Poland)
The Committee took note of the long-term conservation strategy
that had been developed for this site, which included a project
for ventilation and dehumidification. The Committee encouraged
the Polish authorities to implement this long-term conservation
strategy and requesed to be kept informed on its implementation.
It decided that this site be retained on the List of World
Heritage in Danger.
Natural and Culturo-historical Region of Kotor (Yugoslavia)
(to be examined by the Committee)
IV.2. Cultural Properties on the World Heritage List
Europe Region
Medieval City of Rhodes (Greece)
The Committee requested the Greek authorities for precise
information on the legal protection of the Medieval City as well
as to define a legal framework for the main principles guiding
the restoration of the buildings of the Medieval City of Rhodes.
Kremlin and Red Square (Russian Federation)
The Committee was informed that the Ambassador and Permanent
Delegate of the Russian Federation to UNESCO informed the
Director-General of UNESCO of a project concerning the possible
erection of a monument in honour of Marshal G. Zoukhov on the Red
Square. The Director-General, in a letter to the mayor of Moscow
dated 2 December 1994, underlined that the responsibility for
protecting a cultural property lies with the State Party
concerned, which should conserve it and avoid taking any measures
that would damage it. The Director-General suggested in his
letter that another appropriate location be sought for the
monument and requested that UNESCO be consulted prior to
undertaking any proposed work on the Red Square and the Kremlin.
The Committee fully endorsed this position and requested to be
kept informed on any development in this World Heritage site.
Kizhi Pogost (Russian Federation)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Burgos Cathedral (Spain)
The Committee recalled that the Bureau at its eighteenth session
congratulated the various Spanish organizations involved in the
actions taken for the conservation of Burgos Cathedral and that
it, at the same time, expressed a desire to see those components
of the total project which were still under negotiation put into
effect with the minimum delay.
The Committee noted that in August 1994, a statue fell off the
façade of the cathedral and requested ICOMOS to continue to
monitor the state of conservation of the cathedral and to report
its findings to the nineteenth session of the Bureau of the World
Heritage Committee.
Historic Areas of Istanbul (Turkey)
The Committee was informed that problems with the project's
financing had caused some delays in the restoration of the
mosaics and that UNESCO's experts present on the site had
expressed their regret to the authorities responsible for the
work that, in spite of their recommendations, the metallic
covering of the Haghia Sophia was executed with a material which
was too thin and therefore fragile.
Furthermore, it was informed that, according to the UNESCO
experts on site, reconstruction of long portions of the Roman and
Byzantine walls was being undertaken using new stones without
taking account of the advice of archaeologists and art
historians.
The Committee recommended to the Turkish authorities to take the
necessary steps to speed up the transfer of funds approved under
the World Heritage Fund for the restoration of the mosaics in the
Haghia Sophia to those responsible for its conservation.
The Committee also requested that the Turkish authorities
immediately stop the reconstruction of the Roman and Byzantine
walls, and that they undertake their restoration, in accordance
with principles accepted by the international community, and in
collaboration with the Turkish antiquities services.
Xanthos-Letoon (Turkey)
In the framework of the UNEP Mediterranean Action Plan, the
Coordinator of the Programme "100 Historical Sites of the
Mediterranean" carried out a mission to Turkey at the request of
the World Heritage Centre.
Having taken note of the extensive and detailed report, which the
Committee requested to be made available to the Turkish
authorities, the Committee recommended the Turkish authorities:
- to transmit to the World Heritage Centre the
Protection Plan for the Development of the
Patra/Xanthos/Letoon site, which should have been
ready in 1992;
- to implement the measures for the diversion of traffic
on the roads crossing the sites of Xanthos and Letoon;
- to review the construction of the superstructure of
the television relay installed at the summit of the
Xanthos Acropolis.
Arab States and Mediterranean Region
Memphis and its Necropolis - the Pyramid Fields from Giza to
Dahshur (Egypt)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Petra (Jordan)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Megalithic Temples (Malta)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Hal Saflieni Hypogeum (Malta)
(to be examined by the Committee)
City of Valetta (Malta)
The Committee was informed that in the framework of UNDP's Action
Plan for the Mediterranean, the Programme Coordinator for "100
Historical Sites of the Mediterranean" carried out a mission to
Malta at the request of the World Heritage Centre. The Committee
took note of the report and endorsed the mission's
recommendations that, faced with the accelerated degradation
affecting the historical buildings of Valetta, the authorities
of Malta should take appropriate urgent measures so that:
- the team of the Valetta Rehabilitation Project
acquires legal recognition and may call upon a Works
Division for the maintenance and restoration of the
historical buildings of Valetta;
- the Bill on the protection of Valetta can be finalized
as soon as possible in an appropriate form, in keeping
with the obligations for inscription on the World
Heritage List;
- a regulation on the signs, billboards and commercial
storefronts can be better formulated and applied by
the competent authorities, in order to preserve the
characteristics of the historical buildings of
Valetta.
Asia and the Pacific region
Kathmandu Valley (Nepal)
(to be examined by the Committee)
The Complex of Hue Monuments (Vietnam)
(to be examined by the Committee)
North and South America region
Puebla (Mexico)
The Committee recalled that a rehabilitation plan for a part of
the World Heritage site of Puebla, the Rio de San Francisco area,
was briefly discussed at its seventeenth session and that more
detailed information was provided at the eighteenth session of
the Bureau on the basis of a report from the Mexican National
Institute of Anthropology and History (INAH) and the report of
a UNESCO expert in urban rehabilitation and conservation who
visited Puebla in June 1994.
The Committee was informed that following the eighteenth session
of the Bureau and on the request of the Government of Mexico, the
same expert had undertaken a series of missions to Puebla to
advise the authorities in the preparation of the urban
development plan for the Rio de San Francisco area. The Committee
commended the authorities of Mexico, the State of Puebla and the
Municipality of Puebla on their positive response to the expert's
advice, and invited them to report on a regular basis to the
Secretariat on the further development of this project.
Pueblo de Taos (United States of America)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Latin American monitoring programme
Serra da Capivara (Brazil)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Quirigua (Guatemala)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Ilha de Mozambique (Mozambique)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Lima (Peru)
(to be examined by the Committee)
Rio Abiseo (Peru)
(to be examined by the Committee).
Following the examination of the state of conservation reports,
the Committee adopted the following proposals for the monitoring
and reporting on the state of conservation of individual World
Heritage properties in 1995 and invited the Secretariat to ensure
their implementation:
- The highest priority will be given to the monitoring of and
reporting on sites on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
- The Secretariat will again report to the Bureau at its
nineteenth session in 1995 on the state of conservation of
all sites on the List of World Heritage in Danger with an
assessment of the appropriateness of their continued
inclusion in this List.
- The Secretariat, in collaboration with the advisory bodies,
will continue to undertake reactive monitoring whenever
deemed necessary.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
VII.1 Following the decision of the Bureau to defer the
Glacier and Waterton Lakes National Park World Heritage
nomination, the Delegate of the United States, the Observer of
Canada and the Representative of IUCN, carried out consultations
to explore future courses of action, including a review of the
complementarity of the present and proposed World Heritage
sites.
VII.2 The Bureau endorsed the concept of considering the
Glacier and Waterton nomination as part of an extended World
Heritage site together with Yellowstone and the Canadian Rockies,
and encouraged the States Parties to bring a revised nomination
for consideration by the nineteenth session of the Bureau and the
World Heritage Committee.
VII.3 A working group to explore this concept was proposed
to be organized by the States Parties and appropriate site
managers in cooperation with IUCN, with the objectives of
bringing a consolidated nomination to the Bureau at its next
meeting.
VII.4 The concept of this association of management units
proposed by States Parties parallels management principles
relating to the cluster sites such as the Central-Eastern
Rainforests of Australia.
VII.5 IUCN said that it saw the proposal as a creative new
approach which shows a possible way forward.
VIII. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION
VIII.1 The outgoing chairperson of the World Heritage
Committee, Ms Olga Pizano, thanked the members of the Bureau, the
advisory bodies and the Secretariat for their support in
undertaking her work. The Delegate of Thailand, on behalf of all
the members of the Bureau, thanked the chairperson for her
committment to the implementation of the World Heritage
Convention and for the pleasant and efficient manner in which she
conducted the sessions of the World Heritage Committee and its
Bureau.
VIII.2 The Chairperson then declared the session closed.
*[EOF]