State of Conservation (SOC)
Niokolo-Koba National Park (2001)
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|
July 2001: joint World Heirtage Centre/IUCN monitoring mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Road project;
- Management issues;
- Gold prospecting
Current conservation issues
A Centre/IUCN monitoring mission to the site was undertaken from 5 to 15 July 2001. The full mission report is provided as an information document WHC-2001/CONF.207/INF.7. As suggested in the report, the Centre and IUCN propose that an aerial survey should be conducted as a matter of urgency. This survey should determine the number and distribution of giant eland in Niokolo-Koba NP’s eastern part and the adjacent Faleme Hunting Zone. Because of the present low density of giant eland, a total coverage of the primary giant eland area in Niokolo-Koba NP is recommended. A sample count following standardised methodology could be undertaken in the remaining areas of Niokolo-Koba NP and the Faleme Hunting Zone.
All National Park staff working in Niokolo-Koba or visiting the Park should be encouraged to record detailed giant eland information on standardised data sheets whenever possible. These records could possibly be kept at the Park offices in Tambacouda and later entered into a computer database. Observations should include standardised information such as date, habitat type, locality, group sizes and number of calves. Other regular visitors to Niokolo-Koba NP, such as tour operators, could also be encouraged to collect specific information on giant eland. It is desirable to protect a small number of giant eland outside Niokolo-Koba NP. The present six giant eland in Bandia Reserve could serve this purpose. No further captures and relocations of giant eland from Niokolo-Koba NP to areas outside the Park should be considered for the time being. A short field research project on giant eland should be considered for submission requesting support from the World Heritage Fund. This project should collect detailed population data, movements and habitat use. A one-year field project should be able to achieve the initial goals. Radio collaring of a few selected individuals would be essential to ensure that study animals could be reliably located.
Effective law enforcement (anti-poaching operations) will remain of critical importance, not only as far as the survival of giant eland is concerned but also other species in the Park. It is proposed that the services of a specialist consultant be sought to consider various alternative law-enforcement strategies. This must be done in close co-operation with National Parks’ authorities as well as community representatives in the Niokolo-Koba region. The project “The protection, reproduction and veterinary control of large antelopes, such as the Derby eland” proposed by the Tropical and Sub-tropical Agronomy at the ITSZ CZU in Prague, should be reviewed by all key stakeholder groups. The project could play a major role in ensuring the survival of the giant eland.
Link to the decision
VIII.96 The Committee endorsed the recommendations of the IUCN/Centre mission, and requested the State Party to review the document and report back with an action plan for implementation of the recommendations by 1 February 2002 for consideration by the twenty-sixth session of the Committee (June 2002).
The Bureau may wish to adopt the following for transmission to the Committee:
“The Committee endorses the recommendations of the Centre/IUCN mission, and requests the State Party to review the document and report back with an action plan for implementation of the recommendations by 1 February 2002 for consideration by the twenty-sixth session of the Committee (June 2002).”
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2013 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”).