State of Conservation (SOC)
Niokolo-Koba National Park (1992)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:107,845USD
|1991||Purchase of 2 all-terrain vehicles to improve patrolling within ...||45,000 USD|
|1990||Consultancy services for environmental and socio-economic impact ...||20,000 USD|
|1986||Additional cost of radios ordered in 1985 for Niokolo-Koba ...||6,196 USD|
|1985||Purchase of 4 portable radios for protection programme for ...||9,618 USD|
|1982||Vehicles, camping equipment and radio communication material for ...||27,031 USD|
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Road project; Poaching; Management issues
Current conservation issues
The World Heritage Centre informed the Committee that it has requested the competent authorities of Senegal to provide to the Committee, at its sixteenth session, a summary of the plan to mitigate impacts of the road construction project in the Niokolo-Koba National Park.
Analysis and Conclusion
Link to the decision
Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal)
The Bureau at its last session held in Paris in July 1992, requested IUCN to provide an up-to-date report on the measures taken by the Senegalese authorities to mitigate the impacts of a road being constructed through this Park. The Committee noted that IUCN's Office for Western Africa, in co-operation with the Senegal National Park Service and the University of Dakar has undertaken a field mission to examine the mitigative measures taken and that the findings of the mission will be reported to the Bureau when it convenes for its seventeenth session.
No draft Decision
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2001 2000 1993 1992 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 2007
Threats to the Site:
b) Livestock grazing.
The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).