State of Conservation (SOC)
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (1998)
Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:315,222USD
|1997||Purchase of hydrological and meteorological equipment for Mount ...||19,840 USD|
|1995||Establishment of an administrative centre for Mount Nimba||18,000 USD|
|1993||Equipment and experts service for Mount Nimba||45,000 USD|
|1993||Consultancies and other services necessary for setting up a ...||30,000 USD|
|1992||Organization of an interdisciplinary mission to ascertain ...||35,000 USD|
|1992||Organization of a technical meeting for authorities of Côte ...||19,500 USD|
|1989||Purchase of an all terrain vehicle for Mount Nimba||20,000 USD|
|1988||Consultancy mission and meeting for preparing technical ...||15,000 USD|
|1986||Equipment for Mount Nimba Reserve||6,500 USD|
|1983||Financial contribution to a seminar/workshop on the elaboration ...||22,000 USD|
|1983||Consultant services to prepare requests for technical cooperation ...||6,082 USD|
|1982||Financial contribution to a tripartite meeting (Guinea, Ivory ...||8,000 USD|
|1981||Equipment for Mount Nimba||70,300 USD|
November 1988: June-July 1992: UNESCO field visit; May 1993: joint UNESCO/UNDP/IUCN mission; 1994: 2nd expert mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Lack of Management Plan;
- Lack of funding;
- New railway;
- Proposed reduction of the protected area;
- Refugees from Liberia
Current conservation issues
The Committee, at its last session (Naples, 1997), had requested the State Party (Guinea) and the Centre to contact the relevant mining companies, which foresee exploiting an iron-ore mine in the vicinity of the Reserve in order to learn more details of their interest to set up an international foundation for the conservation of Mt. Nimba. The Bureau, at its twenty-second ordinary session (June 1998), learnt that the Secretariat was participating in a meeting jointly organized by the “Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique” (CNRS) and a number of French Foundations on the subject of the “Role of Foundations and Trusts in the Management of Cultural and Natural Heritage”. The Bureau had also noted that the Centre is implementing a project using the US$ 20,000 approved by the Chairperson in 1997 to equip the Reserve's hydrological laboratory and recommended that the Committee retain Mt. Nimba in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
The meeting organized by the CNRS and French Foundations reviewed the role of foundations and trusts in the management of cultural and natural heritage from a very broad perspective. It did not however, improve the chances for the establishment of a specific Foundation for the Conservation of Mt. Nimba. The interest of the mining companies to establish a trust fund or a foundation for the conservation of Mt. Nimba appears to be contingent upon their obtaining the approval from the Government of Guinea to begin exploitation of the mine. The Centre has learnt in discussions with the members of the Permanent Delegation of Guinea to UNESCO that the process for obtaining such an approval of the Government of Guinea may take a considerable period of time. Thus it appears unlikely that a foundation or a trust fund for the conservation of Mt. Nimba will be established in the near future.
Analysis and Conclusion
Link to the decision
VII.7 Mount Nimba Nature Reserve (Guinea/ Côte d'Ivoire)
The Committee, at its last session (Naples, 1997), had requested the State Party (Guinea) and the Centre to contact the relevant mining companies, which foresee the exploitation of an iron-ore mine in the vicinity of the Reserve, in order to learn more details of their interest to set up an international foundation for the conservation of Mt. Nimba. The Committee was informed of a letter dated 20 September 1998, from the Permanent Executive Secretary of the MAB National Committee for Guinea informing the Centre that the Nimba Mining Company (NIMCO) has been dissolved by the Government and no other enterprise has been created to replace it.
The Committee noted that the establishment of a foundation or a trust fund for the conservation of Mt. Nimba appears increasingly unlikely in the immediate future. The Committee agreed with IUCN's observation that on-site information on the state of conservation of Mt. Nimba had not been updated for about three years. It accepted IUCN's offer to request its Regional Office for West Africa in Burkina Faso to undertake a mission, at the invitation of States Parties concerned, in order to prepare a state of conservation report for submission to the twenty-third session of the Committee. The Committee decided to retain Mt. Nimba in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
The Committee may wish to adopt the following:
“The Committee decides to retain Mt. Nimba in the List of World Heritage in Danger and requests the Centre, IUCN and the two States Parties co-operate to prepare an up-to-date state of conservation report for Mt. Nimba for submission to its twenty-third session in 1999. The Committee suggests that a strategic plan for the long term conservation of Mt. Nimba is also elaborated on the basis of the state of conservation report.”
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1987 1986 1984
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 1992
Threats to the Site:
The Reserve was inscribed on the List of the World Heritage in Danger as a result of two factors:
- a proposed iron-ore mining concession to an international consortium;
- the arrival of a large number of refugees to areas in and around the Guinean part of the site.
The granting of the concession was announced in 1992 and included portions of the WH site.
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”).