State of Conservation (SOC)
Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park (1997)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:0USD
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Current conservation issues
At its twenty-first ordinary session in June 1997, the Bureau, based on written and oral presentations made by IUCN, noted several positive developments with regard to the state of conservation of the following World Heritage sites: Tasmanian Wilderness, Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park and the Great Barrier Reef.
The Australian authorities have been requested to provide, before 15 October 1997, a copy of the Regional Forest Agreement and a report on the relevance of that Agreement for the maintenance of the integrity of the Tasmanian Wilderness.
Since the conclusion of the twenty-first session of the Bureau in June 1997 however, the following communications, addressed to the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, were received by the Centre:
- from the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) highlighting the actual and potential threats to the integrity of the Kakadu National Park, arising from the proposal to mine the Jabiluka uranium deposit located within the outer boundaries of the Park; and
- from the Friends of Hinchinbrook Society in Queensland, Australia, highlighting threats to the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area due to developments in the Hinchinbrook area and requesting the Committee to consider including the Great Barrier Reef in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
These communications were transmitted to the Chairperson, the Permanent Delegate of Australia to UNESCO and IUCN for their review and comments.
Analysis and Conclusion
The Bureau may wish to examine information that may be available at the time of its session and take appropriate action thereupon.
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
Detailed List of SOC reports
No specific threat identified
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”).