State of Conservation (SOC)
Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary (2003)
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:249,607USD
|2001||Support to African countries to attend Regional Workshop on ...||20,000 USD|
|2000||Lutte contre le Salvinia molesta dans le delta du fleuve du ...||130,475 USD|
|1998||2nd International Conference on Wetlands and Development, ...||20,000 USD|
|1992||Purchase of redwood and other materials for repairing sluice ...||10,000 USD|
|1988||Financial contribution to repair sluices in Djoudj National Park||20,000 USD|
|1982||Equipment for biological research and surveillance at Djoudj ...||29,132 USD|
|1980||Joint mission to draw up a plan of protection for Djoudj National ...||20,000 USD|
September 2000: joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN / Ramsar mission; March-April 2001: expert mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Construction of a dam (issue resolved)
- Proliferation of the aquatic fern Salvinia molesta
- Lack of human resources
Current conservation issues
The construction of the Diama Dam on the Senegal River led to proliferation of invasive species in the Senegal River’s delta, in particular Salvinia molesta, which was accidentally introduced in 1999, and Typha australis. At the request of the State Party, the Committee at its 24thsession inscribed the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger, approved emergency assistance of US$ 130,000 to tackle the problem of invasive species in the delta and called on other donors to support this action. In November 2002, IUCN Senegal reported on the development of the project established in 2000 between the Park’s scientific committee and the Royal Tropical Institute of the Netherlands. The project included the implementation of mechanical and biological control of Salvinia molesta. Mechanical protective measures (floating barriers, tight-mesh nets) were put in place by the end of 2000. Biological control consisted of the introduction of an insect Cyrtobagus salviniae, the natural enemy to the Salvinia molesta. In a report on the execution of phases 1 and 2 of the emergency assistance programme, dated February 2003, the State Party confirms that the problem of the invasion of Salvinia molesta can be considered as resolved but that there is a need for further monitoring by a special unit so that in the future, rapid intervention measures could be implemented whenever necessary. The State Party also notes that the uncontrolled development of vegetation, the filling up of open waters and the increasing salinity of soils are changing the ecosystem and might threaten in the future the conservation of the site.
IUCN confirms that after the release of Cyrtobagus salviniae in areas bordering the Park and in the whole delta, Salvinia molesta has been reduced to an acceptably low level. Accordingly, it no longer represents a threat to the Park and the delta in general. However, IUCN points out that Typha australis and Eichhornia crassipes are major problems in the site, and require urgent attention and action. IUCN therefore notes that additional information is required about the surface affected by these species and clarification of the actual problems (specifically related to Typha australis) and remarks that in order to control Typha australis, biological control measures might not be adequate, as the potential of these measures needs further exploration and research.
Since the Salvinia problem is under control, the Centre in consultation with the State Party accepted to use the remaining budget under the emergency assistance grant to assist the Site management and the National Direction of National Parks to acquire vehicles and administrative material, which will improve the capacity of the State Party to react more swiftly to emergency situation. Part of the grant is also used to apply some management measures in favour of waterfowl.
The new information provided above has been proposed on a consensual basis between IUCN and the Centre.
Analysis and Conclusion
Link to the decision
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Congratulates the State Party and associated partners for their efforts to control Salvinia molesta in a cost effective manner;
2. Notes that savings made in the project funds are being used for strengthening State Party capacity to protect the property and implement measures benefiting the conservation of waterfowl;
3. Requests the State Party to continue co-operating with IUCN, the World Heritage Centre, the Ramsar Convention Secretariat and other relevant partners in carrying out an urgent assessment of the scale and threat of Typha australis and Eichhornia crassipes to the property and in finding successful control measures to reduce the spread of these species to an acceptable level. The IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group, which already assisted in the case of Salvinia molesta, would be willing to provide technical support for this work at the request of the State Party;
4. Recommends that the State Party, the World Heritage Centre, IUCN, and the Ramsar Convention Secretariat provide advice by 1 February 2004 for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 28th session in 2004 on possible benchmarks and timeframes that could facilitate the Committee deliberations on the possible removal of the Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary from the List of World Heritage in Danger;
5. Decides to retain the Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Link to the decision
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Following examination of state of conservation reports of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-03/27.COM/7A),;
2. Decides to maintain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:
- Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam, Afghanistan (27 COM 7A.21)
- Butrint, Albania (27 COM 7A.26 )
- Tipasa, Algeria (27 COM 7A.17)
- Royal Palaces of Abomey, Benin (27 COM 7A.15)
- Angkor, Cambodia (27 COM 7A.22)
- Manovo-Gounda St. Floris National Park, Central African Republic (27 COM 7A.12 )
- Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve, Côte d'Ivoire/Guinea (27 COM 7A.4)
- Virunga National Park, Democratic Republic of the Congo (27 COM 7A.2)
- Garamba National Park, Democratic Republic of the Congo (27 COM 7A.2)
- Kahuzi-Biega National Park, Democratic Republic of the Congo (27 COM 7A.2)
- Okapi Wildlife Reserve, Democratic Republic of the Congo (27 COM 7A.2)
- Salonga National Park, Democratic Republic of the Congo (27 COM 7A.2)
- Sangay National Park, Ecuador (27 COM 7A.13)
- Abu Mena, Egypt (27 COM 7A.18)
- Simien National Park, Ethiopia (27 COM 7A.3)
- Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve, Honduras (27 COM 7A.14)
- Manas Wildlife Sanctuary, India (27 COM 7A.9)
- Group of Monuments at Hampi, India (27 COM 7A.23)
- Old City of Jerusalem & its Walls (27COM7A.29)
- Timbuktu, Mali (27 COM 7A.16)
- Air & Ténéré Natural Reserves, Niger (27 COM 7A.5)
- Bahla Fort, Oman (27 COM 7A.19)
- Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore, Pakistan (27 COM 7A.242)
- Chan Chan Archaeological Zone, Peru (27 COM 7A.28)
- Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras, Philippines (27 COM 7A.25)
- Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary, Senegal (27 COM 7A.6)
- Ichkeul National Park, Tunisia (27 COM 7A.8)
- Rwenzori Mountains National Park, Uganda (27 COM 7A.7)
- Everglades National Park, United States of America (27 COM 7A.11)
- Historic Town of Zabid, Yemen (27 COM 7A.20)
Draft 27 COM 7 (a) 6
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Commends the State Party and associated partners for their efforts to control Salvinia molesta in a cost effective manner and notes that savings made in the project funds are being used for strengthening State Party capacity to protect the site and implement measures benefiting the conservation of waterfowl;
2. Requests the State Party to continue cooperating with IUCN, the Centre, the Ramsar Convention Secretariat and other relevant partners in carrying out an urgent assessment of the scale and threat of Typha australis and Eichhornia crassipes to the site and in finding successful control measures to reduce the spread of these species to an acceptable level. The IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group, which already assisted in the case of Salvinia molesta, would be willing to provide technical support for this work at the request of the State Party;
3. Recommends that the Centre, IUCN, the Ramsar Convention Secretariat and the State Party advise the twenty-eighth session of the Committee on possible benchmarks and timeframes that could facilitate the Committee deliberations on the possible removal of the Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary from the List of World Heritage in Danger;
4. Decides to retain the Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2011 2009 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2001 2000 1992 1991 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 2000 -2006
Threats to the Site:
The sanctuary is threatened by an aquatic fern, Salvinia molesta, which proliferates across the river and invades neighboring Mauritania Diawling park. An attempt biological control - by introducing beetles eating plants supplied by South Africa - has not yielded the expected results.
The national authorities are in favor of registration to facilitate their task and to appeal to donors.Year: 1984 -1988
Threats to the Site:
The Committee was informed by IUCN that the immediate threat posed by the earthen dam upstream from this property had been removed since the recent rains had been sufficiently abundant to wash this temporary dam away. However, the longer term threat posed by the dam to be constructed down-stream still remained and still,seriously jeopardised the future of this site.
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”).