State of Conservation (SOC)
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve
Factors affecting the property in 2002*
- Financial resources
- Ground transport infrastructure
- Identity, social cohesion, changes in local population and community
- Illegal activities
- Management systems/ management plan
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
International Assistance granted to the property until 2002
Requests Approved: 0
Total Amount Ap proved: 405,222USD
|2002||Mount Nimba Biodiversity Conservation project||30,000 USD|
|2001||Training workshop for awarenes raising on the Mount Nimba WH site ...||10,000 USD|
|2001||Réunion tripartite Guinée-Côte d'Ivoire-Libéria sur les Monts ...||20,000 USD|
|2000||Evaluation mission to mount Nimba World Heritage site inscribed ...||30,000 USD|
|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|
Missions to the property until 2002**
November 1988: June-July 1992: UNESCO field visit; May 1993: joint UNESCO/UNDP/IUCN mission; 1994: 2nd expert mission; August-September 2000: expert mission with UNDP
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2002
Fauna & Flora International (FFI) has informed IUCN and the Centre that the Second Tri-National Workshop on the Transboundary Management of the Environment of the Nimba Mountains, was held in N’Zerekore, Guinea, from 12 to 15 February, 2002. This meeting represented the second stage of a process initiated in collaboration with the three countries (Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea and Liberia, all of which are now States Parties to the Convention, with Liberia acceding to the Convention on 28 March 2002) by three international environmental NGOs; namely Fauna & Flora International, Conservation International and BirdLife International - with financial support from the World Heritage Fund, the Headquarters of Rio Tinto Mining Plc. and the Netherlands’ Committee for IUCN. The long-term goals of this process are to achieve cooperation for the conservation of the Nimba Mountains, prepare a common management strategy, and create a tri-national biosphere reserve of the Mountains. Consensus was reached at the workshop on clear work priorities for the period March 2002 – February 2003 as follows:
· Agreement for a tri-national framework agreement, to be legally binding, to permit transboundary field work. This agreement has been drafted and sent to each of the three countries for comment. The objective of the agreement is to permit field technicians to collaborate and pursue work across international boundaries in support of management of the wider ecosystem according to mutually agreed work programmes. To conclude this tri-national agreement, a third tri-national meeting with restricted participation is hoped to take place in Monrovia, Liberia, during the second half of 2002;
· Resolution of the ambiguity in the boundaries of the Dere-Tiapleu Forests between Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea. The disagreement over this forest area between Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea has threatened to accelerate local forest loss and undermine good relations between local authorities who need to collaborate not only for the protection of that Forest, but also for the overall conservation of the World Heritage site.
Other priorities include the preparation of phased proposals/action plans for tri-national monitoring of fauna, flora, hydrology, meteorology and land-use cover, and tri-national collaboration for certain management activities (fire management, control of poaching, etc.). The implementation of these will depend in part upon signing the tripartite framework agreement. Workshop participants produced the Declaration of N’Zerekore on the Tri-National Management of the Nimba Mountains which proposes the establishment of a tri-national steering mechanism for transboundary management activities and the submission to each respective government of a legal framework agreement for such international collaboration. The CEGEN in Guinea, the Directorate for the Protection of Nature (DPN) of Côte d‘Ivoire and the National Environmental Commission of Liberia (NECOLIB) will be responsible for leading this process in their respective countries The workshop participants also proposed that FFI be responsible for ensuring the continued coordination of these activities, along with the lead agency in each country, and with BirdLife International and Conservation International being responsible for selected technical and logistical questions.
UNDP-Conakry has informed the Centre that the preparation of a GEF Project document for the conservation of the Mt. Nimba ecosystem has progressed satisfactorily and UNESCO is collaborating with UNDP, CEGEN-Conakry and the NGO partners to initiate dialogue with suitable donors like the European Union, to satisfy co-financing requirements of the prospective GEF grant.
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2002
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire)The World Heritage Committee,
1. Expresses its pleasure to welcome Liberia as a State Party to the Convention;
2. Congratulates the exemplary collaboration between the three States Parties, UN and conservation NGOs for establishing a sound framework for transborder collaboration for the conservation of the Mt Nimba ecosystem;
3. Invites the three Parties to review the draft tri-national framework agreement and finalise it as soon as possible, and that Guinea and Côte d'Ivoire resolve their differences in the boundary of the Dere-Tiapleu Forest in an amicable and effective manner;4. Decides to retain the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Technical Co-Operation in Guinea
The Bureau of the World Heritage Committee meeting during this session, approves the following international assistance requests.
Biodiversity Conservation project for the Mount Nimba World Heritage Site in Danger
US$30,000 for funding in 2003.
The Committee may wish to adopt the following:
"The Committee expresses its pleasure in welcoming Liberia as a State Party to the Convention and commends all three States Parties and their NGO partners for establishing a sound framework for transborder collaboration for the conservation of the Mt. Nimba ecosystem. The Committee invites the three Parties to review the draft tri-national framework agreement and cooperate with the NGOs and other partners to finalise the agreement as soon as possible. The Committee also invites Guinea and Côte d’Ivoire to resolve their differences in the boundary of the Dere-Tiapleu Forest in an amicable and effective manner so that the full co-operation of the local authorities and all other stakeholders for the conservation of the Mt. Nimba World Heritage site and the Mt. Nimba ecosystem is realized. The Committee decides to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger."
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”).