Year of inscription on the World Heritage List 1996
Year(s) of inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger N/A
Previous Committee Decisions see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/765/documents/
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved: USD 0
For details, see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/765/assistance/
UNESCO Extra-budgetary Funds
Previous monitoring missions
1997: IUCN fact-finding mission; May 2004, August 2007: Joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN Reactive Monitoring missions.
Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports
Illustrative material see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/765/
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2015
The State Party did not submit a report on the state of conservation of the property, as requested by the Committee at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013).
The State Party did not provide detailed information on the plans for hydropower development on the Zhupanova River, nor the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), which were also requested by the Committee in its Decision 37 COM 7B.21.
Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre and IUCN
It is regrettable that the State Party did not submit a report on the state of conservation of the property.
The current situation with the hydropower projects on the Zhupanova River remains unclear. It is recommended that the Committee reiterate its request to the State Party to provide detailed information on any plans to construct hydropower stations on the Zhupanova River and EIAs for these projects, including an assessment of potential impacts on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), in accordance with IUCN’s World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment.
Uncertainty regarding the overall area of the four regional nature parks that form part of the property remains unresolved. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recall that Decision 36 COM 7B.21 refers to a discrepancy between two documents with information from the State Party, namely the Retrospective Inventory (2011) and the report submitted by the State Party in preparation of the 36th session of the Committee (Saint-Petersburg, 2012), which explicitly states that the borders of the Nature Parks were revised in 2010. They note that the State Party did not submit a map showing the current boundaries of the property, as has been requested by the Committee. It is recommended that the Committee urge the State Party to clearly confirm the overall area of the four regional nature parks that form part of the property, and submit to the World Heritage Centre a detailed map showing the boundaries of all components of the property as inscribed, to ensure that all contradictions regarding the boundaries of the property are permanently resolved.
Given that no detailed information has been provided on the implementation of the recommendations of the 2007 Reactive Monitoring mission, it is recommended that the Committee reiterate its request to the State Party to fully implement these recommendations, particularly regarding the development and implementation of one integrated management plan and coordination structure, a comprehensive tourism management plan, and the strengthening of the institutional capacity of the administrations of the property, both in terms of human and financial resources.
Concerns regarding the decline in populations of wild reindeer and snow sheep raised by the Committee in its Decision 37 COM 7B.21 remain. As no detailed information has been provided on the current status and trends of key wildlife populations within the property, it is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to develop a comprehensive monitoring system for the entire property in order to obtain data on the populations of key species, which are crucial to the OUV of the property.
Decision Adopted: 39 COM 7B.20
The World Heritage Committee,