Distribution: Limited SC/89/CONF.003/12 19 September 1989 UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE Bureau of the World Heritage Committee Thirteenth session Unesco Headquarters, Paris, 27-30 June 1989 REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR I. INTRODUCTION 1. The thirteenth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee was held at Unesco Headquarters in Paris from 27 to 30 June 1989. It was attended by the members of the Bureau: Mr. A. C. Da Silva Telles (Brazil), Chairman; Mrs. A. Miltiadou (Greece), Rapporteur, and representatives of Australia, Canada, France, India and the Arab Republic of Yemen, Vice-Chairpersons. 2. Representatives of the following States Parties to the Convention attended the meeting of the Bureau as observers: Bulgaria, Colombia, Hungary, Turkey and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 3. Representatives of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Properties (ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN) also attended the meeting in an advisory capacity. II. OPENING SESSION 4. The Representative of the Director-General, Mr. S. Dumitrescu, Assistant Director-General, Science Sector, welcomed the members of the Bureau, representatives of observing States Parties, as well as of the advisory non-governmental organizations, ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM. Mr. Dumitrescu underlined the importance of the work of the Convention, which had been fully acknowledged recently at the occasion of the Unesco Executive Board at its 131st session. He drew the attention of the Bureau to the fact that the Director- General wanted very much to strengthen the Secretariat in terms of quantity and quality. In response to the request made by Mr. J. Collinson, Chairman of the World Heritage Committee in June 1988, and reiterated by his successor, Mr. A. C. Da Silva Tella in December 1988, he had therefore decided to include proposals for the creation of six additional posts to service the World Heritage Secretariat in the Unesco Draft Programme and Budget for 1990/91. This proposal will be presented for adoption by the Member States at the forthcoming twenty-fifth Unesco General Conference in October-November 1989. After mentioning that 109 States Parties had ratified the Convention, Mr. Dumitrescu pointed out that several Unesco Member States, such as Botswana, Indonesia and Venezuela, were likely to become States Parties to the Convention in the near future. He then provided 8 brief outline of the tasks facing the Bureau during the next three days and assured the Bureau that the Secretariat would do its utmost to help the Bureau in its work. Mr. Dumitrescu concluded his remarks by wishing the Bureau and other participants a successful meeting. 5.The Bureau adopted the provisional agenda with one amendment. *[2] III. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN SINCE THE TWELFTH SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE 6. The Secretary for the session, Ms. I. Robertson Vernhes, provided a brief report on the activities undertaken by the Secretariat since the last session of the Committee held in Brasilia in December 1988. 7. The Bureau took note of the fact that, as requested by the Committee at its last session, the Secretariat had presented as part of working document SC-89/CONF.003/3 drafts of revised nomination forms and forms for requesting international assistance from the World Heritage Fund. These revisions had been undertaken to ensure that these forms conform to the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, a revised version of which was adopted at the last session of the Committee. 8. The Bureau noted with satisfaction that implementation of all international assistance projects approved by the Committee at its last session was now in progress. Furthermore, the Bureau noted that the Secretariat had collaborated with the International Geological Correlation Programme (IGCP) of Unesco and the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS, an affiliate of ICSU) to identify a consultant who is working with a network of international experts to draw up a draft list of fossil and geological sites which would meet criterion (i) (the earth's evolutionary history) and criterion (ii) (on-going geological processes). The draft list is expected to be ready by end 1989 and will be submitted for technical review at the annual meeting of the IGCP scheduled for 29 January-1 February 1990. The Bureau noted that the draft list and the IGCP technical review will be ready for presentation to the Bureau at its fourteenth session and, if endorsed by the Committee, could serve as a reference for IUCN to undertake evaluations of geological sites in consultation with IGCP and IUGS. 9. Finally, the Bureau noted with satisfaction that the Convention was being increasingly known among all Unesco Member States due to several promotional activities undertaken by the Secretariat and which were presented as part of working document SC-89/CONF.003/9. IV. MONITORING THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTIES AND RELATED TECHNICAL PROBLEMS 10. The Secretariat recalled that the question of monitoring the state of conservation of cultural properties will be examined in 1990, at the fourteenth session of the Bureau, in conformity with the time-table adopted by the Committee at its twelfth session. 11. The representative of IUCN presented reports on 16 sites, most of which were documented in SC-89/CONF.003/2. A. PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER 1) Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania) The Bureau was glad to learn that, thanks in part to support provided under the World Heritage Fund, the situation of this site had greatly improved. The Bureau re-considered this matter under the agenda item concerning nominations/exclusion from the List of World Heritage in Danger (see paragraph XI.28.C.). 2) Garamba National Park (Zaire) The joint project to rehabilitate this Park run by the Frankfurt Zoological Society/WWF/World Heritage Fund met with considerable success since no more rhinoceros have been poached in the last 5 years, the rhinoceros population has increased by 50% and a better management regime has been established. The Park recently celebrated the 50th anniversary since its foundation. The Bureau noted this situation with satisfaction and recommended that the property be re-examined in 1990: if the situation *[3] continued to show improvement, steps should be taken to initiate the removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. B. OTHER NATURAL PROPERTIES 3) Tai National Park (Côte d'Ivoire) The Bureau recalled that IUCN had reported on the deteriorating situation of this site on several occasions and that the Committee had requested the Ivoirian authorities to propose its inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It noted that the Secretariat had contacted the Ivoirian authorities, but that only recently a response had been obtained in the form of a request for preparatory assistance in order to prepare a technical cooperation request for an integrated project addressing the need for increased protection of the natural values of this Park and also the socio-economic problems. The contribution of the World Heritage Fund would be used in a catalytic manner adding on to other funding sources such as UNDP. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to follow this matter and consult with IUCN in the preparation of the integrated project for technical cooperation. 4) Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal) The Bureau was informed of the project to construct a major highway across the Park, which would be financed by a number of Development Banks. Several impact studies - some contradictory in their conclusions - had been made: the Bureau expressed its preference for the alternative route outside of the Park to the North, which in addition to preserving the natural values of Niokolo-Koba, would serve to link up isolated villages. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to prepare a letter to the highest authority in Senegal recalling this State Party's obligation to protect the natural values for which Niokolo-Koba was inscribed on the World Heritage List and expressing the Bureau's strong preference for the alternative route outside the Park. 5) Mana Pools, Sapi and Chewore Reserves (Zimbabwe) The Bureau wished firstly to commend the Zimbabwean authorities for their efforts to protect the remaining rhinoceros and elephant populations. The Bureau expressed great concern however over the proposed oil exploration programme, particularly in the light of a very negative report submitted to the Secretariat by the Zimbabwe National Commission for Unesco. The Bureau therefore requested the Secretariat to convey its concern to the highest government authorities of Zimbabwe, as well as to the Director of Mobil Oil Company. 6) Sangay Park (Ecuador) The Bureau learned of several threats to this site, including a proposal to excise a large section of land for settlement. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to contact the Ecuadorian authorities to express its concern over the proposed excision and to encourage them to draw up a request for technical cooperation to support the elaboration of a revised management plan addressing many of the conflicting issues in the Park. The Bureau hoped that the request for technical cooperation could be submitted in time for examination by the Committee in December 1989. 7) Iguazu National Park (Argentina) / Iguaçu National Park (Brazil) The Bureau noted with satisfaction that the two States Parties had recently undertaken measures to coordinate the management and protection of these contiguous parks containing the famous waterfalls. In response to the suggestion of the IUCN representative to encourage the States Parties' acceptance to list these waterfalls under one name on the World Heritage List, the representative of Brazil stated that his government had not changed its position on this matter and that the two sites should continue to be indicated separately on the World Heritage List. *[4] 8) Mount Nimba (Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea) The Bureau noted that the preparatory assistance mission to this site in November 1988 had resulted in the elaboration of a two-year Unesco/UNDP project on evaluating the impact of iron-ore extraction on the natural values of the site and elaborating an integrated management plan which would improve protective measures and encourage socio-economic development of the transition zone. The Bureau nevertheless wished to express its concern about further damage to this site and suggested that this concern be communicated to the World Bank. 9) Yellowstone National Park (USA) Following a request of the Committee on 21 April 1989, the American authorities submitted a report on the fire management policy review and the recovery plan following the 1988 wildfires. The Bureau wished to thank the American authorities for this report and for their offer to make it available for other States Parties. 10) Manas Game Sanctuary (India) The Bureau noted that this site had recently been invaded by several hundreds of local people which had caused great damage to the park and the loss of several lives. The Indian authorities had sent in the police to halt further destruction, but the problem of illegal encroachment was still not resolved. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to contact the Indian authorities to express its concern over this situation and encourage taking appropriate measures to restore the site. 11) Wet Tropics of Queensland (Australia) The Bureau was informed by the representative of the Government of Australia of proceedings instituted against it before the Federal Court by the Government of Queensland with respect to the protection of the site of the Wet Tropics of Queensland inscribed on the World Heritage List in December 1988. The judge of the Federal Court is called upon to examine the question whether the ban decided by the Federal Government on commercial forestry operations in the site can reasonably be regarded as appropriate and adapted to the objectives of protecting, conserving, enhancing and rehabilitating the Wet Tropics of Queensland (World Heritage site). The Federal Government of Australia wishes that Mr. James Thorsell of IUCN, who led the evaluation of the site upon which the Committee based its decision to inscribe this site on the World Heritage List, give scientific and technical advice on the question brought before the Court. The Bureau considered that IUCN has a consultative role with respect to natural World Heritage sites. It would be concerned if scientific advice from this body could be interpreted as implicating the Committee in a national legal proceeding. In the event that IUCN decides to give such advice, the Bureau wished to affirm that this advice should not be interpreted as a mandate from the Committee to justify the inscription of the site on the World Heritage List. Furthermore, the Bureau expressed its concern about maintaining the integrity of the site. 12) The IUCN representative also gave reports on the conservation status of Rio Platano (Honduras), Manu National Park (Peru), Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia), Sagarmatha (Nepal), Wood Buffalo National Park (Canada). *[5] V. REVISION OF NOMINATION FORMS AND FORMS FOR REQUESTING INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND 12. The Secretary introduced document SC-89/CONF.003/3 under this agenda item and drew the attention of the Bureau to the fact that the revised forms were drafts and, owing to time constraints, the French version had been prepared within the Secretariat and not with the help of translation services of Unesco. Furthermore, the Bureau was also informed that, in accordance with the revised "Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention" (December 1988), separate forms for requesting international assistance for technical cooperation, training, preparatory assistance and emergency assistance had been prepared. 13. The Bureau decided that its members should send written comments on the drafts of all revised forms to the Secretariat before 15 September 1989. The suggestions and comments of the members of the Bureau would be incorporated by the Secretariat in drafts which are to be submitted to the World Heritage Committee at its thirteenth session in December 1989. The Committee, on the basis of the contents of those revised drafts and deliberations during its session, would decide whether the forms could be immediately adopted or revised further to improve clarity and precision. VI. REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE 14. The Bureau approved the following requests for international assistance for conducting regional training workshops in the field of natural heritage conservation and protected area management. A. Qatar (for the Arab Region), 7-20 October 1989. US$30,000 B. College of African Wildlife Management, Mweka US$30,000 United Republic of Tanzania (for anglophone African countries), in February 1990. C. The Ministry of Nature Protection and the US$30,000 Department of National Parks, Senegal (for francophone African countries), in Dakar and Saint Louis, 30 October to 17 November 1989. 15. The Bureau reviewed another request from Tanzania, for the purchase of equipment for protecting the archaeological and palaeontological site of Olduvai Gorge in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area of the United Republic of Tanzania. The Bureau, however, deferred its recommendations on this request, since the site had been inscribed on the World Heritage List under natural criteria. The Bureau, though, suggested that ICOMOS and the Secretariat provide further information on the relevance of cultural values for the inscription of this site on the World Heritage List at the forthcoming meeting of the Bureau and, subsequently, at the session of the Committee. The Bureau also considered the desirability of revising the criteria under which certain properties had previously been included, in order to determine whether other cultural or natural criteria did not also apply. 16. The Bureau heard details of an application for technical assistance amounting to about US$320,000 submitted by the Syrian Arab Republic for a conservation programme for the Old City of Aleppo. The Bureau agreed to grant the Syrian authorities preparatory assistance to enable them to draw up a large-scale project for submission to funding sources other than the World Heritage Fund, the resources of which were too limited to take on such a project. 17. The Bureau was informed that an ICOMOS mission was scheduled to visit the Wieliczka Salt Mines (Poland) in early July 1989. On the basis of the findings of this mission, a request for technical cooperation would be prepared and transmitted for the consideration of the Bureau and of the Committee at their December session. *[6] VII. SITUATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND 18. The Bureau took note of document SC-89/CONF.003/5 presenting the state of the Fund, notably the state of payment of mandatory and voluntary contributions to the Fund. The Secretary informed the Bureau that since the accounts had been drawn up as at 31 May 1989, mandatory contributions had been received from Bangladesh, Italy and Morocco and France had made its voluntary contribution for 1989. The Bureau expressed concern that a good many mandatory contributions had not yet been received for 1989 and hoped that these would be made in time for the 7th General Assembly of States Parties to be held during the twenty-fifth Unesco General Conference in October/November 1989. Indeed, it was recalled that in accordance with Article 16 (5) of the Convention, any State Party which is in arrears with the payment of its compulsory or voluntary contribution for the current year and the calendar year immediately preceding it shall not be eligible as a Member of the Committee. 19. The Bureau took note of the state of implementation of the various international assistance projects financed under the World Heritage Fund and also of the state of the budget approved for 1989. For this, it highlighted the fact that funds were being used up relatively more quickly than in previous years. It requested that Annex VII of the working document be completed to show clearly the amount of US$20,000 put aside for global studies, as well as the contingency funds and the reserve. The completed Annex VII was distributed to the members of the Bureau. 20. It had been noted that funds for temporary assistance for the implementation of the Convention had not been allocated in a balanced way between the natural heritage and the cultural heritage. The Bureau therefore authorized the Secretariat to use, for the implementation of the cultural part of the Convention, US$25,000 (from the 3 per cent contingency reserve) to fund temporary assistance pending the creation of the additional posts mentioned earlier, which would be funded under the regular programme. VIII. GLOBAL STUDY 21. The representative of the Director-General spoke of the difficulties encountered in preparing the global study of fundamental principles and criteria for the inscription of property on the World Heritage List, that the Committee had wished to see begun in 1989 and for which it had allocated a sum of US$20,000. 22. She expressed the wish that the Bureau would clarify the guidelines so far drawn up. A better definition of the parameters of the study was required so that it would have both the retrospective and forward-looking character desired by the Committee. The members of the Bureau considered that a preliminary phase covering examination of the indicative lists and the grouping into categories of the 315 inscribed sites would make it possible for themes on which the survey might be based to emerge. The Bureau also considered that ICOMOS should be in a position to submit to the next session of the Committee a general outline of work for that preliminary phase, together with a funding plan. It also considered it desirable for ICOMOS to start one or more of the thematic surveys mentioned in Brasilia on rural landscapes, traditional villages and contemporary architecture. The work could be financed from the US$20,000 allocated for that purpose by the Committee. IX. NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL PROPERTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST AND TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER 23. The Bureau examined 20 nominations of cultural properties to the World Heritage List. It recommended that the Committee inscribe 5 properties on the List (section A) and defer the examination of 6 properties (section B). In addition, it recommended that the Committee should not inscribe 9 properties (section C). The Bureau also considered 2 nominations to the List of World Heritage in Danger (section D). *[7] A. Properties recommended for inscription on the World Heritage List Name of Property Identification Contracting Criteria No. State having submitted the nomination of the property in accordance with the Convention Monastery of 518 Spain C(i)(iv) Poblet The Bureau recommended that this property be inscribed, on condition that the Spanish authorities extend the perimeter of protection to the outer walls of the monastery and that they provide assurances on the adequate protection of the whole area nominated. Furthermore, the Bureau was worried about the restoration policy applied until now, and recommended that future restoration work should respect the original materials and forms. Archaeological site 517 Greece C(i)(ii) of Olympia (iii)(iv)(vi) The Bureau recommended that this property be inscribed, and invited the Committee to request the Greek authorities to continue to protect carefully the site and its environment from the effects of increased tourism. Buddhist Monuments 524 India C(i)(ii) at Sanchi (iii)(iv)(vi) Cliff of Bandiagara 516 Mali C(v) The Bureau recommended inscription of this property under cultural criterion (v). Furthermore, it asked IUCN to check whether natural criterion (iii) would apply to this site, and to make its evaluation known to the Bureau at its special meeting in December and subsequently to the Committee. In addition, the Bureau recommended that the Committee request the Malian authorities to protect carefully this site and its environment which are particularly vulnerable. The Bureau also expressed its concern about the effects of increased tourism. Alcobaça Monastery 505 Portugal C(i)(iv) B. Nominations deferred by the Bureau Lorsch Monastery 515 Germany (Fed. Rep. of) The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred, to enable the authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany to extend the perimeter of the area nominated to the old outer walls of the monastery, and to provide complementary information on the protection measures of this complex, on the state of the excavations, on the development works and, in particular, on the installation of a site museum. Mystras 511 Greece The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred until the necessary information on the conservation policy applied to the ruins of Mystras and, in particular, on the restoration projects of the Byzantine Palace, is received. In the event this information is received by the fall, ICOMOS was requested to review it and present its *[8] findings for consideration by the Bureau in December. The Bureau could then formulate a recommendation to the Committee. Archaeological site 525 Greece of Akrotiri in Santorin The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred until the Greek authorities were able to nominate the whole island of Santorin (including the archaeological site of Thera and the Oia and Phira villages which are already on the Greek tentative list of cultural properties), and to provide all the necessary information concerning the global protection of the island. Furthermore, the Bureau recommended that IUCN be asked to undertake an additional evaluation of the natural aspects of this property. Cambridge Colleges 523 United Kingdom and the Backs The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred to enable the authorities of the United Kingdom to propose a less restrictive delimitation of this property, so as to allow it to keep the coherence of a prestigious university town. Maes Howe and Brogar, 514 United Kingdom Orkney Islands The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred to enable the authorities of the United Kingdom to propose a less restrictive delimitation of this property, and to provide assurances that the entire area nominated is adequately protected. Sumela Monastery 510 Turkey The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred in order to give ICOMOS the necessary time to further study this property in comparison with other sites of the same type. In the meantime, the Committee could invite the Turkish authorities to provide all useful information on the nature of the protection granted to the monastery and its environment and on the restoration works which will be carried out on the site. C. Properties not recommended for inscription on the World Heritage List 24. Although the Bureau recognized the importance of the properties listed hereunder for the cultural heritage of the States concerned, it considered that these sites did not meet the criteria for inscription on the World Heritage List, as defined for the purpose of implementing the Convention. Historic Centre of 504 Colombia Popayan Gerona 519 Spain Monastery of 520 " Pere de Rodes Canonical Church of 521 " Sant Vicenç de Cardona (Barcelona) Ubeda and Baeza 522 " Town of Taal 501 Philippines Town of Vigan 502 " *[9] Historic Centre of 503 " Intramuros de Manila Navan Fort 490 Rev. United Kingdom D. Nominations to the List of World Heritage in Danger 25. The Bureau was informed that an expert would proceed to Wieliczka Salt Mines in July 1989 in order to obtain the necessary information on the state of conservation of this property and on the most urgent needs for its protection. In the light of the results of this mission, which would be presented during the thirteenth session of the Committee, the Bureau, and in turn the Committee, could take a stand in December 1989 on the inscription of this property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. 26. The Bureau considered that, if the Government of Mali so wished, a preparatory assistance mission could be organized with a view to helping the authorities concerned to work out an appropriate nomination file on Timbuktu (mosques, cemeteries and mausoleums) to the List of World Heritage in Danger. This nomination file could be presented to one of the next sessions of the Bureau. X. NOMINATIONS OF NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST AND TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER 27. The Bureau examined five nominations, one of which (Tasmanian Wilderness) consisted of an extension to an already existing site and which was being processed as a new nomination in accordance with paragraph 54 of the Operational Guidelines, another of which (Tongariro National Park) had been previously deferred by the Bureau at its eleventh session and which was being re-examined at the request of the New Zealand authorities as they had submitted a report in response to the Bureau's recommendations at that time. 28. The Bureau also examined a request to remove a natural site from the List of World Heritage in Danger, which is presented in Section C. below. A. Nominations recommended for inscription Name of Property Identification Contracting Criteria No. State having submitted the nomination of the property in accordance with the Convention Tasmanian Wilderness 507 Australia N(i)(ii)(iii)(iv) (Extension to the Western Tasmanian National Parks World Heritage site) The Bureau noted with satisfaction the proposal to expand the existing World Heritage site by adding an additional area of 261,960 ha, i.e. a 34% increase. The Bureau concurred with the IUCN recommendation to further expand the additional nominated area to include the Denison/Spires/Maxwell River area comprising the Northern and Western portion of the "hole in the doughnut", plus a number of areas along the Eastern boundary of the current extension and welcomed the declaration of the representative of Australia that this additional expansion would be submitted in September. Accordingly, the Bureau requested the Australian authorities to submit the final boundaries of the proposed extension to the Secretariat by 15 September 1989 to allow IUCN to complete its evaluation. The Bureau further requested ICOMOS to evaluate the cultural values of the full extended area. The completed IUCN evaluation and the ICOMOS evaluation on the cultural values should be *[10] examined by the Bureau at the time of the Committee session in December to give the Committee a clear recommendation. Banc d'Arguin 506 Mauritania N(ii)(iv) National Park The Bureau recommended that the Committee inscribe this site on the World Heritage List, excluding the Cap Blanc Satellite Reserve which could only be considered once the boundary question is resolved and until the Côte des Phoques parts can be included. The Bureau also recommended that the Mauritanian authorities should adopt the recommendations of a FAO review of the protective legislation of the Park, as well as expand its research efforts into cultural and socio-economic aspects of local people (Imraguen) living in the Park. Mosi-oa-Tunya/ 509 Zambia/Zimbabwe N(ii)(iii) Victoria Falls The Bureau recommended the inscription of this site and requested the States Parties concerned to reduce the limits of the nominated property to include the Victoria Falls National Park, the southern half of Mosi-oa-Tuaya National Park, and a small portion of the riverine strip of Zambesi National Park in order to better concentrate on the core features of the Falls area and the downstream gorges. B. Nominations to be deferred Tongariro National Park 421 New Zealand The Bureau recommended that the inscription of this property on the World Heritage List be further deferred until the revised management plan is available for review, particularly with regard to the following items: a) the extent of ski development on Mt. Ruapehu, the current plans for expansion and the impact of these developments on cultural values and "image" of the park. This is compounded by new prospects for slope grooming and snow making which would have substantial impacts on scenic values and hydrology. It has been suggested that the ski fields of Tongariro would be very susceptible to effects of global warming which would require an upward movement of skiing activity; b) the extent to which the cultural values of the Park are given prominence in the new management plan and the level of involvement by the local Maori people. Wattenmeer 508 Fed. Rep. of Germany (Mudflats of lower Saxony) The Bureau recommended that the nomination of this site be deferred until a fully documented nomination of the whole Wadden Sea complex is jointly submitted by Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands. In this regard, the Bureau noted that the Netherlands is not yet a State Party to the Convention and requested the Secretariat to resume its contacts with the Dutch authorities to encourage the adherence of the Netherlands to the Convention. The Bureau welcomed the proposal that ICOMOS should help the countries concerned in drawing up the joint nomination to take account of the archaeological and cultural values of the Wadden Sea complex. C. Proposal to remove a natural property from the List of World Heritage in Danger Ngorongoro Conservation Area Tanzania The Bureau was glad to learn of improvements in the management and protection of this site, due in part to the support from the World Heritage Fund, since it was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1983. The Bureau noted that by letter dated 2 March *[11] 1989, the Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources and Tourism had agreed to remove this property from the List of World Heritage in Danger and recommended that the Committee should comply with this request. XI. PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES 29. The Bureau took note of the report on promotional activities (SC-89/CONF.003/9) prepared by the Secretariat and was particularly glad to learn of the number and variety of initiatives being taken, both within the States Parties themselves and with the support of the Secretariat. The representative of Australia commented on the success of the Heritage Week in Australia on 16-23 April 1989 and wished to thank Mr. B. von Droste, Secretary for the natural part of the Convention, for having made such an active contribution. The representative of India drew attention to the fact that India was celebrating World Heritage Day (18 April) since 1988 and also has started a World Heritage Week. The Bureau expressed its satisfaction that many other new activities were planned in States Parties. XII. MEANS OF ENSURING AN EQUITABLE REPRESENTATION OF THE DIFFERENT REGIONS AND CULTURES 30. The Bureau took note of documents SC-89/CONF.003/8 and Addendum, prepared by the Secretariat on the subject. The members of the Bureau were in favour of making money available from the World Heritage Fund to finance, in whole or in part, the participation of specialists in the preservation of the cultural or natural heritage who were nationals of the least-developed countries that were members of the Committee. Such grants would give those countries an opportunity to participate regularly in the Committee's work and could be assimilated to the funding of study tours enabling specialists to attend technical meetings. The Bureau considered that the procedures for such grants should be established by the Committee at its next session. 31. The possibility of increasing the number of Member States on the Committee to 36 (in order to re-establish a balance in the representation of the different regions and cultural areas within the Committee) was considered at length by the Bureau. One member of the Bureau spoke against the idea, especially as it could not be envisaged until the process of revising the Convention had been concluded, making it impossible to solve the problem at the next General Assembly. He suggested that the next elections should be organized, as for many other governmental committees, on the basis of quotas laid down according to the regions as defined at Unesco with a view to the execution of regional activities. Three other members of the Bureau endorsed that view. There being no consensus on that solution, the Bureau was in favour of the Secretariat's suggestion that the Committee should amend its Rules of Procedure and insert in Rule 8 a paragraph introducing a new category of observers (the conditions of whose participation it would lay down), namely the outgoing States, for a period of four years. Should the Committee so decide, such a solution would permit the active participation, as from 1991, of 35 States Parties consisting of the 21 Committee members and the 14 outgoing members, it being understood that in 1989 - subject to a decision by the Committee at its 13th session - participation would be of to 28 States Parties. 32. The Bureau expressed the wish that the forthcoming General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage would adopt, on the basis of the text proposed by the Secretariat, a resolution drawing the attention of States Parties to the importance of ensuring an equitable rotation of Member States on the Committee (some States having been members of it for 15 years and more) and requesting the Committee to consider amending its Rules of Procedure to permit participation in it by the new category of observers. *[12] XIII. REPORT OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE TO THE GENERAL CONFERENCE 33. The Bureau examined document SC-89/CONF.003/10 presenting the draft report of the Committee to the 25th session of the Unesco General Conference in October/November 1989. The Bureau requested that this document be completed to reflect its discussions on equitable representation, its decision concerning requests for international assistance and to present up to date figures for the contributions to the World Heritage Fund. XIV. DATES AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR THE THIRTEENTH SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE 34. The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its last session had decided that its thirteenth session should be held at Unesco HQ on 4-8 December 1989. The Bureau noted that unfortunately there were no conference facilities available at Unesco for that period and agreed that the thirteenth session would take place the following week on 11-15 December 1989. 35. In order to avoid such situations in the future, the Bureau suggested that the sessions of the Bureau and the Committee take place at the same dates each year so that the Secretariat could reserve the conference rooms well in advance. The Bureau recommended that the Committee hold its sessions during the first week of December each year and that the Bureau take place in June at a suitable date after the session of the Executive Board. 36. The Bureau examined document SC-89/CONF.003/11 proposing a draft agenda for the thirteenth session of the Committee: it proposed amendments to include an item on matters arising from the General Assembly of States Parties, a review of the criteria for cultural and natural heritage before the agenda item on nominations, in accordance with the recommendations of the Working Group, and also a report on the global study. XV. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION 37. The Chairman thanked the members of the Bureau and all those who had contributed to the success of the session. He then closed the session. SC/89/CONF.003/12 ANNEX I UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE Bureau of the World Heritage Committee Thirteenth Session (Unesco Headquarters, 27-30 June 1988) PROVISIONAL LIST OF PARTICIPANTS / LISTE PROVISOIRE DES PARTICIPANTS I. STATES MEMBERS OF THE BUREAU / ETATS MEMBRES DU BUREAU AUSTRALIA / AUSTRALIE H. E. Mr Edward Gough WHITLAM Member, Unesco Executive Board Mr John L. LANDER Alternate Permanent Delegate to Unesco Mr. D. GRAHAM Counsel for the Australian Government Mr Warren NICHOLLS Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories BRAZIL / BRESIL M. Augusto Carlos DA SILVA TELLES Chairman / Président Secrétaire du patrimoine historique et artistique national M. Luiz Felipe DE MACEDO SOARES Ministre Délegué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco M. Isaard Garcia DE FREITAS Assesseur technique Délégation permanente auprés de l'Unesco *[ANNEX I/2] CANADA Mr James D. COLLINSON Asst. Deputy Minister Environment Canada Mrs Christina CAMERON Director-General Environment Canada FRANCE M. François ENAUD Inspecteur général honoraire des monuments historiques Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication Mme. Muriel DE RAISSAC Chargée de mission Direction du Patrimoine Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication Mme. Anita DAVIDENKOFF Chef du Bureau de l'Unesco Ministère des Affaires étrangères M. Marcel JOUVE Chargé des relations internationales Direction de la Protection de la Nature Secrétariat d'Etat chargé de l'environnement M. Jean-Pierre BOYER Conseiller technique Commission nationale française pour l'Unesco Mlle. Françoise DESCARPENTRIES Premier Secrétaire Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco GREECE / GRECE Mme. Androniki MILTIADOU Rapporteur Conseiller aux affaires de la culture Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco M. Isidore KAKOURIS Sous-Directeur, Direction des Monuments byzantins et post-byzantins Ministère Hellénique de la Culture INDIA / INDE Mr Ramesh Chandra TRIPATHI Joint Secretary Indian Department of Culture *[ANNEX I/3] YEMEN ARAB REPUBLIC / REPUBLIQUE ARABE DU YEMEN M. Mohamed ALKHAMRY Ministre plénipotentiaire Ambassade de la République arabe du Yémen II. OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS STATE PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION / ETATS PARTIES A LA CONVENTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL BULGARIA / BULGARIE M. Tzanko BATCHAROV Comité de la Culture de la Bulgarie COLOMBIA / COLOMBIE Mme. Cecilia ZAMBRANO Premier secrétaire, Chargee d'affaires Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco HUNGARY / HONGRIE M. Béla KOVACSI Conseiller, Ministère de la Construction Mr Zoltan BALOGH Directeur général Ministère de la Santé TURKEY / TURQUIE M. Engin TURKER, Conseiller Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco USSR / URSS Mme. Tarjana VASILIEVA Senior Scientific Worker USSR Academy of Sciences USSR Committee for World Heritage Mr. Yuri MARTIN Estonian SSR Academy of Sciences Chairman, Estonian MAB Committee *[ANNEX I/4] III. ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY / ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPANT AVEC UN STATUT CONSULTATIF INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MONUMENTS AND SITES (ICOMOS) / CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES M. Roberto DI STEFANO Président Mr Helmut STELZER Secretary General M. Léon PRESSOUYRE Vice-Président Université de Paris I M. Hervé DEGAND Documentaliste INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES (IUCN) / UNION INTERNATIONAL POUR LA CONSERVATION DE LA NATURE ET DE SES RESSOURCES (UICN) Mr James THORSELL Executive Officer Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas Mr P.H.C. LUCAS Adviser Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESERVATION AND THE RESTORATION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY (ICCROM) / CENTRE INTERNATIONAL D'ETUDES POUR LA CONSERVATION ET LA RESTAURATION DES BIENS CULTURELS (ICCROM) Mr Jukka JOKILEHTO Assistant to Director *[ANNEX I/5] IV. SECRETARIAT Mr S. DUMITRESCU Assistant Director-General Science Sector Mme. Anne RAIDL Directeur Division du patrimoine culturel Mlle. Chantal RALAIMIHOATRA Chef p.i., Section des Normes internationales Division du Patrimoine culturel Mrs Jane ROBERTSON Division of Ecological Sciences Mr Natarajan ISHWARAN Division of Ecological Science~ Mlle. Chantal LYARD Section des Normes internationales Division du Patrimoine culturel Distribution: Limited ANNEX II UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE World Heritage Committee Thirteenth Session Unesco Headquarters, Paris, 11-15 December 1989 Salle XI PROVISIONAL AGENDA 1. Opening of the session by the Representative of the Director- General 2. Adoption of the Agenda 3. Election of the Chairman, Vice-Chairmen and Rapporteur 4. Equitable representation of different regions and cultures of the world: review of conclusions of the 7th General Assembly 5. Introduction on activities undertaken by the Secretariat since the twelfth session of the Committee 6. Report of the Rapporteur for the thirteenth session of the Bureau 7. Revision of nomination forms and forms for requesting international assistance 8. Monitoring of the state of conservation of World Heritage properties and related technical problems 9. Promotional activities 10. Requests for international assistance 11. Situation of the World Heritage Fund and budget for 1990 12. Global study 13. Review of criteria for inscription of properties on the World Heritage List 14. Nominations of cultural properties to the World Heritage List and to the List of World Heritage in Danger 15. Nominations of natural properties to the World Heritage List and to the List of World Heritage in Danger 16. Other business 17. Adoption of the report of the session 18. Closure of the session *[EOF]