World Heritage Centre https://whc.unesco.org?cid=305&l=en&searchDecisions=&search_decision=&search_focalpoint=&search_session_decision=59&search_status=&search_theme=&action=list&mode=rss World Heritage Centre - Committee Decisions 90 en Copyright 2020 UNESCO, World Heritage Centre Mon, 06 Jul 2020 01:46:59 EST UNESCO, World Heritage Centre - Decisions https://whc.unesco.org/document/logowhc.jpg https://whc.unesco.org 19 BUR VI.20 Simen National Park (Ethiopia) The Bureau recalled that the site was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1978 and took note of the results of a report on the workshop on the "Simen Mountains National Park Management" held in Gondar from 15 to 17 February 1995, as well as a report on the Simen Mountains Baseline Study by the University of Berne(Switzerland).

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5472 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Danger Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria) The Bureau recalled that the site was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1983 and placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1992. A report was presented by the State Party on their restoration efforts at the last session of the Bureau. Two small-scale international assistance projects from the World Heritage Fund are presently under way at the site, as well asinternational assistance from other sources. On 29 June 1995 the World Heritage Centre received a report prepared by the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Bulgaria recalling the history of the site and the deterioration of the state of conservation, which led to the listing of the site both on the List of World Heritage in Danger and the Montreux List of the Ramsar Convention in 1993. The main results of the measures taken to restore the ecological integrity of the site were research studies and the construction of a channel and a monitoring programme to oversee the status of the Reserve since 1994. The hydraulic connection between the lake and the Danube River was reestablished and the water level is now raised by lm. Furthermore, it is indicated that the Dalmatian Pelican is continuing to nest in the site.

The Representative of IUCN underlined that they are awaiting a detailed monitoring report from the Ramsar Convention Secretariat and recalled that the previous Bureau felt that the site may no longer retain the values for which it was inscribed.

The Bureau took note of both the report received from the State Party and the comments made by IUCN and recommended that no decision can be taken until the monitoring report by the Ramsar Convention Secretariat is received. This report should be presented to the session of the outgoing Bureau in December 1995.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5461 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia) The Bureau recalled that 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. The situation remains critical due to armed conflict and the political situation in the region which remains unchanged. The Committee at its eighteenth session decided to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger and another fact-finding mission to this area, particularly to the Korkaova Uvala Virgin Forest is to be scheduled for 1995-96. Given the continued armed conflict in the region, the Bureau recommended to the Committee to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5462 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Sangay National Park (Ecuador) The Bureau recalled that the site was inscribed in 1983 and placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1992 due to threats from poachers, boundary encroachment and unplanned road construction. A technical assistance project from the World Heritage Fund is underway. The equipment component of this project was carried out in 1994. Furthermore, the World Heritage Centre received in March 1995 a preliminary report by INEFAN (Instituto Ecuatoriano Forestal y de Are-as Naturales y Viola Silvestre) on the environmental impact of the construction of the Guamote-Macas road in the Park and a final report of the Commission (Ministry of Public Work/INEFAN) was received in May 1995. The Commission had studied the following issues: (1) the environmental impact of the first 7kms of the road, which havebeen constructed; (2) the measures to be taken to mitigate the environmental impact of the last 23 kms which still have to be constructed and (3) guidelines for the management of the Park to mitigate the negative impact of the new road.

From the report it is clear that the road has caused irreversible damage to the natural environment, as the construction has caused a number of landslides. The Commission recommended that the following measures should be taken: the “road should be made narrower (6 meters) ; manual labour should be used and not heavy machinery, to take care of the disposal of excavated material; the establishment of supervision by environmental experts; the setting-up of additional control posts at the entrance of the Park to halt spontaneous settlements; intensification of patrols in the Park to allow only government controlled eco-tourism; the creation of a small visitor centre for tourists; an inventory of the legal land owners in the Park should be made, and the new part of the road should be considered as an ‘environmental pilot stretch”.

The Representative of IUCN underlined that the impact on the site was worse than expected and that the local IUCN office will provide an update on conditions in the site in September 1995.

The Bureau asked the Centre to write to the Government of Ecuador to commend the authorities for the impact report and to transmit the concerns of the Bureau as well as to ask for clarification on the present situation of the threats to the site.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5463 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d’Ivoire) The Bureau recalled that 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 from neighboring countries. 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 recently carried out in 1994, and a report was presented to the eighteenth session of the World Heritage Committee. The French Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry for Cooperation, in cooperation with IUCN-France, has carried out a study and review of the site for the Government of Guinea with regard to priority needs and potential future investment.

Two experts from the French IUCN Committee presented a report on a mission to the site which took place end-1994. The mission stated the international donor community has not given support and there are also problems with regard to the absence of commitment by the Government of Guinea, including the fact that the site is legally not sufficiently protected or classified as a protected area on the national level, with responsibilities shared by four ministries. The expert also spoke of negativeimpacts of the potential mining project adjacent to the site. The mission, furthermore, reported on scientific issues, including the lack of topographic thematic mapping and monitoring of water quality. The mission recommended enhanced conservation management including resource inventories with international cooperation and bilateral development agencies. Road projects should be reviewed and rural development projects outside the site extended. The enhancement of educational and development projects with the local population are considered as a cornerstone for the future protection of the site.

The Bureau recalled that the boundaries were revised and adopted by the seventeenth session of the World Heritage Committee and requested the Centre, jointly with IUCN, ‘to follow-up on the results of the mission, including a letter to the Guinean authorities to ask for clarifications on the legal protection and classification of the site. It recommended to the World Heritage Committee to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5464 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India) The Bureau recalled that at its eighteenth session, the World Heritage Committee took note of the information provided by the Indian Government through the Permanent Delegate that "if the representatives of the World Heritage Centre and of the World Heritage Committee desire to visit New Delhi, Assam and Manas for discussion, or see the site" then they "would be welcomed by the concerned authorities of the Government of India". In the same letter the Indian authorities also indicated that the Indian Government will involve local level NGOs in monitoring the state of conservation of the site. Cooperation between the management authorities of the Manas Wildlife Sanctuary of India and Manas National Park in Bhutan should be encouraged. To enhance cooperation between India and Bhutan in the conservation of the Manas ecosystem, the Government of Bhutan should be invited to ratify the Convention as soon as possible.

The Bureau requested the World Heritage Centre, in cooperation with the Government of India, to elaborate the terms of reference for a mission to New Delhi, Assam and Manas in India.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5465 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Everglades National Park (United States of America) The Bureau recalled that 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. Federal State and local governments as well as private foundations have joined forces in providing significant financial support for the management of the site and for its long-term restoration. The Committee took note of a detailed report prepared by the American authorities which was presented at its eighteenth session.

The World Heritage Centre received a monitoring report from the National Park Service in May 1995 indicating that the Federal Government is engaged in restoration planning for the Everglades National Park under the aegis of a Federal Restoration Working Group. The Group provided a comprehensive statement listing priorities, recent accomplishments and critical next steps in the Federal programme for the Everglades restoration. The Governor and Cabinet of the State of Florida approved the acquisition of portions of the Frog Pond, a historically transitional wetland on the eastern boundary of the Park, crucial to the restoration of ground water levels and surface flow. Recent negotiations have led to agreement with property owners.

The Bureau concluded that the site remains seriously threatened and recommended that the site be retained on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5467 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Virunga National Park (Zaire) Virunga National Park, inscribed under criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv) in 1979, was included in the List of World Heritage in Danger at the last session of the World Heritage Committee in December 1994, due to the tragic events in Rwanda and the subsequent massive arrival of refugees from that country. Virunga National Park, situated at the border between Rwanda and Uganda, has been destabilized by the uncontrolled arrival of refugees, causing deforestation and poaching at the sites. The Bureau recalled that the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee approved a total of US$ 50,000 emergency assistance for both Kahuzi-Biega National Park and Virunga National Park. The project is carried out in cooperation with IUCN, WWF and the International Gorilla Conservation Programme. A report on the project was received at the time of the Bureau session indicating the World Heritage Fund project was effective and crucial to help in maintaining the Park’s management activities and to support the staff. However, the ecological situation at the Park is not improving, the bamboo forests have been cut and the number of elephants and hippos are much reduced within the site. The buffalo population is also threatened. The report indicates that the Park is a primary source of fuelwood and construction wood for the refugees and that 30 to 40,000 people are entering the Park daily.

The report recommends:(1) a long-term-political solution, including the evacuation of refugee camps within the site and (2) that IZCN should pay the salaries of their staff at the Park.

The Bureau discussed the situation at length and recommended: (1) to prepare a press release jointly with IUCN to raise awareness of the need for repatriation and re-location of the refugee camps; (2) to write a letter to the Government of Zaire for greater operational support including the payment of salaries of the staff of the site; (3) that the Centre arranges a meeting between the Director-General of UNESCO with the Ambassador of Zaire to discuss these issues, and (4) that, at the request of the Delegate of Senegal, all possibilities should be explored within the UN system, in particular with UNHCR and UNDP, to find a solution. The Bureau furthermore, requested the Centre to write a letter commending UNDP/GEF, the European Union and the GTZ for their support for the protection of the site and encourages continuous cooperation between the newly-appointed environmental coordinator and the World Heritage Centre.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5468 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Tasmanian Wilderness (Australia) The Bureau recalled that this mixed site was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1982 and that the Bureau at its eighteenth session in July 1994, discussed reports received on logging operations in areas adjacent to the World Heritage area. IUCN gave an update on the situation and recalled two concerns which were raised: that there is forested land outside the site which may have World Heritage values, and furthermore that adverse impact on the existing World Heritage site could result from logging and reading activities adjacent to the site. IUCN noted that both the 1990 and 1994 General Assemblies of IUCN had urgedAustralia to evaluate the World Heritage values of these areas and that recent concerns about the impacts of forestry operations had been expressed by the Australian and New Zealand Committees for IUCN and the Wilderness Society (Tasmania).

The Director-General of IUCN wrote to the Australian Government in March 1995 seeking advice on this issue. A detailed reply was received from Senator Faulkner, Australian Minister for the Environment, dated 28 June 1995, stating the commitment of the Australian and Tasmanian Governments to protecting World Heritage values and to undertake a comprehensive assessment of Tasmanian forests.

The Bureau noted concerns which have been expressed about logging and reading activities in forest areas which may impinge on World Heritage values in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage area, and resolved to thank the State Party for the encouraging response of the Australian Minister for the Environment. In particular the Bureau noted: (1) the commitment of both the Australian and Tasmanian Governments to negotiate a Regional Forest Agreement which would involve a comprehensive assessment of a wide range of values, including World Heritage values, for forested areas in Tasmania; (2) that, in the meantime, the two governments have agreed to avoid activities that may significantly affect those areas of the old-growth forest or wilderness that are likely to have high conservation value; (3) that pending completion of a Regional Forest Assessment, the two governments have agreed to jointly undertake an assessment of those forest areas where commercial logging will be deferred, to allow among other things, an assessment of World Heritage values. The Bureau asked to be kept informed of developments which should maintain the integrity of the existing site and may lead to the identification by the State Party of further World Heritage values, including possible additions to the boundaries of the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage site.

ICOMOS stressed that as this was a mixed site all additional information concerning this site should be referred to ICOMOS as well as to IUCN.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5469 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Manovo-Gounda St.Floris World Heritage Site (Central African Republic) The Bureau recalled that the site was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1988 and was the subject of a monitoring report at the sixteenth session of the Committee held in Santa Fe. At that time the management regime had collapsed and the site was under numerous threats. It was recommended that the World Heritage Centre should carry out a mission to the site. Unstable conditions continued to prevail throughout 1993 and into 1994.

In 1994 a new government took office and the French company, "Compagnie Generale d'Aéronautique-CGA” decided to move forward with a significant tourism venture for which they had obtained a 20-year concession in 1985. The ‘Company La Gounda-Manova S.A." has been working with the new government negotiating funding,staffing and management direction for the site. From the 9 to 14 of May 1995 a monitoring mission was carried out on behalf of the World Heritage Centre by staff member of the Division of Ecological Sciences of UNESCO. This mission produced a positive report on the current situation in the Park. The Bureau took note of the report, acknowledged that finally a report was made on this World Heritage site and asked the Centre and IUCN to jointly follow-up the project.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5470 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Galapagos National Park (Ecuador) The Bureau recalled, at the request of the Delegate of Germany, discussions at previous sessions concerning both the state of conservation of the site as well as further action concerning the Galapagos Marine Reserve. By letter of 27 January 95, the Centre requested the Ecuadorian authorities to provide information in time for the Bureau meeting, but no reply was received. The Representative of IUCN informed the Bureau that the situation at the site had not improved, but that time has not allowed the presentation of a report to this Bureau. A report will be prepared for the nineteenth session of the World Heritage Committee

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5471 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Platano Biosphere Reserve (Honduras) The Centre informed the Bureau that a report was received from Fundaciôn Rio Platano concerning the site, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1982. The report concerns the agricultural intrusion at the western border of the site. Additional information was obtained on 12 April 1995 on the land reform programme and its implementation in north-eastern Honduras. The settlement programme threatens several protected areas. The Centre contacted the authorities concerned to obtain further information. The Centre has received additional reports about inadequate commitment to the conservation by the national government. Planned and unplanned colonization is taking place, unauthorized forest operations, poaching of birds and game is extremely serious. Indigenous cultures are threatened by colonization of outside settlers. The World Heritage Centre advised the Permanent Delegate of Honduras the concerns in April 1995, however, no response has been received so far.requested the Centre to prepare a letter for the signature of the Chairman of the World Heritage Committee to the President of Honduras, transmitting the concerns of the Bureau.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5473 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Shirakami-Sanchi (Japan) The Centre informed the Bureau that it has received several letters concerning the logging of beech forests outside the World Heritage site and has transmitted them for review to IUCN. The Bureau recalled that the site was inscribed in 1993, and that the Committee at the time recommended to review the site after three years. The Bureau invited the Centre to organize a mission to review the progress made in the implementation of the management plan with regard to the requirements of the World Heritage Convention.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5474 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Lake Malawi National Park (Malawi) The Bureau was informed that the UNESCO Equipment Division, in cooperation with the Centre, sent a mission to this World Heritage site in April 1995 to review the current international assistance projects at the site and to carry out an evaluation and assessment of future needs. The mission carried out a detailed review of technical assistance projects under the World Heritage Fund (including the purchase of boats) and helped in designing appropriate projects. This includes a project for an ecological inventory of the coastal regions of the islands in Lake Malawi National Park, which would allow authorities to better monitor changes of the state of conservation of the site. During the mission an environmental education project was discussed at the site which would involve the local villages within the World Heritage area. Such a programme would be crucial, as the population within the Park is growing and is heavily dependent on fish and wood as principal resources. The Bureau took note of this report.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5475 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Whale Sanctuary of El Viscaino (Mexico) The Bureau took note of the oral report presented by IUCN on the site indicating that Mitsubishi Corporation in partnership with the Mexican Government has a project to convert a part of the lagoon to salt ponds for industrial salt production. A one-mile long pier is proposed, which would disturb the grey whales within the lagoon. The Bureau recommended that a letter be written to the authorities indicating the concerns raised at the nineteenth session of the Bureau and to request an official response on the situation at the site.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5476 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman) The Bureau recalled that-at the eighteenth session of World Heritage Committee IUCN was requested to present to the Bureau an evaluation of the revised boundaries of this site, based on the report of the consultant working on the plan for the area.However, the Omani authorities, who have hired a consultant, have requested a re-scheduling of the report for 30 July 1995. Upon receipt of the report, an evaluation will be prepared for presentation to the nineteenth session of the Committee.

IUCN raised concern that the report was still not available, although the World Heritage Committee had specifically requested this information and indicated that this concerns not only the boundary question, but also the management regime, the legal status of the different parts as well as a new map of the site. The Delegate from Oman indicated that the consultant could not start his work earlier due to factors beyond his control and indicated that the results will be presented in due course.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5477 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Huascaran National Park (Peru) The Representative of IUCN informed the Bureau that the first mission had been undertaken to this World Heritage site reviewing the condition of the site, parks staff and resources, tourism and other issues such as possible threats to the site by mining, dam and road projects. The Bureau requested the Centre: (1) to write a letter of support to the Park management; (2) to write a letter from the Chairman of the World Heritage Committee to the Peruvian Authorities to reiterate the nature of the World Heritage area and the importance of the protection of World Heritage values and its integrity.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5478 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Bwindi National Park (Uganda) The Bureau recalled that Bwindi National Park was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1994. Reports from different sources, including WWF, have indicated that four mountain gorillas were killed at the site in March 1995. IUCN informed the Bureau that an investigation in Uganda on the incident is currently underway.

The Bureau requested the Centre to inform the Ugandan authorities of its concerns about the depletion of the population of mountain gorillas and to obtain information about the steps undertaken in this respect to ensure no further reductions in the future.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5479 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Redwood National Park (United States of America) The World Heritage Centre received on 15 September 1994 information on a proposed road project within the site, which involves 2 miles of highway relocation which has been subject to an Environmental Impact Study. The United States National Park Service and IUCN were requested by the eighteenth session of the World Heritage Committee to follow up this matter. The Centre informed the Bureau that in May 1995 a preliminary monitoring report from the National Park Service was received> indicating that the California Department of Transportation (CDT) has proposed to realignment of 3,2 Km (2 miles) of Highway 101 near Cushing Creek in Del Norte County to correct safety andoperational problems. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by the National Park Service and the California Department of Parks and Recreation and 76 comments were received, mostly opposing the alternative, which would have required the removal of at least 200 old growth redwood trees for highway widening. In response to the public and agency opposition, a Value Engineering Team considered other solutions and developed strategies to alleviate safety and traffic problems, which were presented at a public meeting in March 1995.

The Observer of the United States indicated that the proposed plans for the realignment have been abandoned. A detailed report will be presented to the next session of the Bureau.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5480 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST
19 BUR VI.20 Yellowstone National Park ‘(United States of America) The Centre informed the Bureau that detailed documentation concerning Yellowstone National Park was received from a group of fourteen North American conservation organizations. The documents raise serious questions about potential damage to Yellowstone National Park in particular from a proposed mining operation. A draft environmental impact statement is underway. The Centre contacted the American authorities to advise them of the concerns of the World Heritage Centre. Letters by the National Park Service and by the Assistant Secretary of Fish and Wildlife addressed to the Centre are requesting a joint mission, by the Centre and IUCN, to make an interim assessment of the mining proposal and that the Committee give consideration to placing Yellowstone National Park on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Delegate of Germany raised concern about the serious threats to the world's first National Park to be established. The Bureau recalled Article 6.3 of the World Heritage Convention. The Canadian Observer underlined that the proposed mining operation was to be carried out by a privately-owned American company. IUCN recalled a range of other threats outlined in a recent IUCN publication, such as deforestation by a religious group, tourism impact and wildlife policies. The Observer from the United States invited the Centre and IUCN to visit the site and to review the situation before the end of August. The Bureau decided that: (1) a letter from the Chairman of the World Heritage Committee be written to the States Party, underlining the serious concerns of the Bureau; (2) that a joint mission should take place to the site, subject to extrabudgetary funding, and (3) that a report on the impact of the proposed mine as well as an outline of other threats facing Yellowstone, should be made available for the nineteenth session of the World Heritage Committee.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5481 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 03 Jul 1995 00:00:00 EST