State of Conservation (SOC)
Everglades National Park (2000)
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:0USD
May 1999: World Heritage Centre visit to the site
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Agricultural, industrial and urban developments altering the natural systems;
- Pollution of the water (nutrients and mercury);
- Hurricane in August 1992
Current conservation issues
The twenty-fourth ordinary session of the Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to meet with the State Party and discuss the preparation of a schedule of actions for complete rehabilitation of the site and its eventual removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger. A video-conference between the Centre, IUCN and the State Party has been scheduled for 10 and 11 October 2000 for this purpose. The outcome of the video-conference will be reported at the time of the twenty-fourth session of the Committee.
Analysis and Conclusion
Link to the decision
VIII.15 World Heritage sites of the United States of America: Everglades National Park & Yellowstone National Park
The Committee recalled that the twenty-fourth ordinary session of the Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to meet with the State Party and discuss the preparation of a schedule of actions for complete rehabilitation of the site and its eventual removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Centre, IUCN and relevant authorities from the State Party, including the Directors of the two sites, participated in a conference call on 27 October 2000. The Observer of the United States of America informed the Committee that measures to address the threats to both Parks continue to be undertaken. In the view of the State Party, neither Yellowstone nor Everglades National Park has shown enough progress to warrant removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger. Following the conference call, consultations between the Centre, IUCN and the State Party, comprehensive discussions of the issue by the appropriate US Department of the Interior and National Park Service staff have taken place.
U.S. officials determined that complex scientific analyses of measures necessary to abate the threats to these two Parks are required. They have also concluded that it will be possible to prepare for review by the Committee a schedule of actions necessary for the eventual removal of these two sites from the List of World Heritage in Danger. This schedule will include measures as part of a national assessment of risks to Parks based on domestic law. Once this national assessment has been completed, the U.S. will derive from those analyses the information necessary to respond more fully to the Bureau's request.
Meanwhile, the Department of the Interior and the National Park Service will continue to submit interim reports on the condition of the two Parks and will work on completing the schedule for their removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger.
The Observer of the United States of America also indicated that the Operational Guidelines do not provide clear procedures for removing sites from the List of World Heritage in Danger. Consequently, the potential exists for different interpretations of how removal from the List should be accomplished. It was noted that the issue had not been resolved in the Operational Guidelines revisions proposed by the Canterbury Working Group. Accordingly, it was believed that a technical workshop on the process for delisting, involving other States Parties, as well as the United States, is well merited. Such a workshop could propose an appropriate amendment to the Operational Guidelines.
IUCN welcomed the observations of the Observer of the United States and agreed that the elaboration of measures and indicators that could provide a systematic approach to placing and removal of sites from the List of World Heritage in Danger require considerable research work and scientific analyses. IUCN expressed its readiness to cooperate with the State Party and the Centre to test out work needed to improve these aspects of state conservation monitoring.
The Committee recommended that the Centre and IUCN co-operate with the State Party to carry out the necessary scientific and technical work, using suitable means such as conference calls and workshops, in order to put in place a schedule of actions that will enable the Committee to track improvements in the state of conservation of these two sites in an objective manner and determine, in consultation with the State Party, the appropriate time for their removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger.
The Committee may wish to review new information that may be available at the time of its session and take necessary decisions and recommend appropriate actions for the consideration of the State Party, advisory bodies and the Centre.
United States of America
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1989
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 2010
Threats to the Site:
The property was re-inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, on the request of the State Party, due to concerns that the property's aquatic ecosystem continues to deteriorate, in particular as a result of:
- Alterations of the hydrological regime (quantity, timing, and distribution of Shark Slough inflows);
- Adjacent urban and agricultural growth (flood protection and water supply requirements that affect the property's resources by lowering water levels);
- Increased nutrient pollution from upstream agricultural activities;
- Protection and management of FloridaBay resulting in significant reduction of both marine and estuarine biodiverstiy.
Year: 1993 -2007
Threats to the Site:
The site was inscribed on the List of the World Heritage in Danger in 1993 after the park's Superintendent informed the Committee of extensive damage to Everglades' ecology due to a number of causes including:
- nearby urban growth,
- pollution from fertilisers,
- mercury poisoning of fish and wildlife,
- a fall in water levels caused by flood protection measures.
In addition, on 24 August 1992, Hurricane Andrew altered much of Florida Bay and its ecological systems and destroyed the park's visitor centre.
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”).