State of Conservation (SOC)
Huanglong Scenic and Historic Interest Area (1998)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:0USD
September 1998: World Heritage Centre/IUCN mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Current conservation issues
The Bureau was informed of the findings of a Centre/IUCN mission to this site in September 1998 that was favourably impressed with tourism management there. The site is located within the same Minshan Mountain range as the Jiuzhaigou World Heritage area described above. Tourist accommodation facilities in Huanglonggou are limited and future development of facilities is being confined to the town of Chuan Zhu Si, in Songpan County, 40 km of the Huanglong World Heritage area. The 7km boardwalk within the site is well managed and a visitor centre is currently under construction at Huanglonggou.
The mission team urged the Chinese authorities to implement the recommendation of the Committee, made at the time of inscription of this site and Jiuzhaigou in 1992, to link the two sites into a single Minshan Mountain World Heritage Area. The Bureau learned that the Chinese authorities had pointed out the need for undertaking scientific studies to link the two sites into a single World Heritage area nomination and the difficulties in coordination between two different County administrations. After the mission team had provided information on cluster nominations submitted by other States Parties, the Chinese authorities expressed an interest in taking the necessary steps to implement the Committee’s 1992 recommendation. The mission also urged the Chinese authorities to explore possibilities for linking the Jiuzhaigou-Huanglong cluster with a selected number of reserves set aside for the protection of the giant panda in Sichuan.
The Bureau commended the State Party for effectively managing tourism in Huanglong. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the State Party to undertake necessary studies for preparing a Minshan Mountain Range World Heritage area nomination linking Jiuzhaigou and Huanglong World Heritage sites and other giant panda reserves as appropriate. The Bureau recommended that the report of the Centre/IUCN mission to China be transmitted to the relevant Chinese authorities.
Link to the decision
VII.27 The Committee noted the decisions of the twenty-second extraordinary session of the Bureau as reflected in the Report of the Bureau session (Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/5) and included in Annex IV on the following properties:
Heard and McDonald Islands (Australia)
Shark Bay, Western Australia (Australia)
Wet Tropics of Queensland (Australia)
Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Bialowieza Forest (Belarus/Poland)
Iguacu National Park (Brazil)
Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon)
Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks (Canada)
Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area (China)
Huanglong Scenic and Historic Interest Area (China)
Wulingyuan Scenic and Historic Interest Area (China)
Los Katios National Park (Colombia)
Morne Trois Pitons National Park (Dominica)
Nanda Devi National Park (India)
Whale Sanctuary of El Viscaino (Mexico)
Royal Chitwan National Park (Nepal)
Sagarmatha National Park (Nepal)
Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman)
Huascaran National Park (Peru)
Huascaran National Park (Peru)
Kamchatka Volcanoes (Russian Federation)
Virgin Komi Forests (Russian Federation)
Skocjan Caves (Slovenia)
Thung Yai-Huay Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries (Thailand)
St. Kilda (United Kingdom)
Ha Long Bay (Vietnam)
Durmitor National Park (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)
The Committee noted the UN official name for the State Party: Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls (Zambia/Zimbabwe)
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
Detailed List of SOC reports
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”).