Lorentz National Park

• Mining
• Human resources (Security limitations)
• Ground transport infrastructure (Development threats)
• Fishing/collecting aquatic resources (Exploitation of marine resources)
• Management systems/management plans (Absence of a co-ordinating agency, Absence of a finalized strategic management plan, Park boundaries not physically demarcated)
• Financial resources (Inadequate financing)
• Other climate change impacts (Nothofagus dieback)
• Illegal activities

N/A

On 31 January 2022, the State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/955/documents/ and indicates the following:

• Mitigation measures implemented for the Habema-Kenyam road inside the property include undertaking Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART) patrols and biodiversity monitoring, installing retaining walls and drainage channels and planting trees along the roadside. Monitoring of the habitat of priority species in November 2020 detected ten MacGregor’s honeyeater (Macgregoria pulchra) and one Dingiso tree kangaroo (Dendrolagus mbaiso);
• The Trans-Papuan Highway is one of Indonesia’s strategic infrastructure projects, which is part of the 2020-2024 Medium-Term National Development Plan. The highway passes through the property in two locations: the Enarotali-Ilaga-Mulia segment runs approximately 40 km through the north side of the property, and on the east side of the property, the Habema-Kenyam segment transects the property for 209 km. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and its Environmental Management Plan (EMP) dated December 2016 for the road, of which the Enarotali-Ilaga-Mulia segment is a part, are annexed in Indonesian. The EIA concluded that the construction of the Highway is “environmentally feasible”;
• Creation of the Lorentz National Park Collaborative Management Forum (FKPTNL), made up of national, provincial and regional governments, universities, NGOs and the private sector, has led to a revision of the national park management zonation and the creation of a Long-Term Development Plan of the property. These efforts are stated to be more representative, equitable, participatory, collaborative and transparent in protecting the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property;
• Community empowerment programmes have been developed to provide assistance to local communities and their micro-businesses, such as agricultural and livestock farming;
• The Special Use Zone of the property is clarified as areas that are designated as community settlements that predated the creation of the park. The proposed airport will be very small, and usage will be restricted to emergency responses, flight training and charter passenger services;
• Nothofagus dieback surveys in 2012 and 2019 show that dieback was likely not caused by either fungus or opening of the access road, and therefore requires further studies, but tree mortality was recorded during fire events. The surveys also indicate that natural regeneration is occurring well in disturbed habitats;
• Fire Safety Management is being implemented in the property under the Long-Term Development Plan.

In a letter dated 9 December 2021, the State Party invited an IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission to the property, in line with past Committee decisions. The mission has been postponed by the State Party for security reasons, and it has not yet taken place at the time of writing the present report.

Some positive efforts are underway at the property, including activities to strengthen the involvement of and assistance to the communities that live inside the property. The park management zonation is stated to have been developed through a collaborative and participatory approach. The clarifications provided with regard to the Special Use Zone, especially in relation to the community settlements and the airport within the property, is noted. However, it is recalled that the Trans-Papuan Highway has been included in the Special Use Zone as a ‘life support’ facility, according to the 2020 State Party report. The State Party should be reminded that no development project planned within and around a World Heritage property should be justified and carried out without a prior assessment of potential impacts on the property’s OUV, in accordance with Paragraphs 118bis and 172 of the Operational Guidelines. In line with Decision 44 COM 7B.94, the forthcoming mission remains an important opportunity to discuss and assess the effectiveness of the new zoning for the long-term protection of the property’s OUV.

The road developments inside the property remain of great concern. The mitigation measures in relation to the Habema-Kenyam Road through SMART patrols and biodiversity monitoring are noted, as the Committee has been expressing concerns regarding the potential increase in illegal logging and poaching associated with road development. Recalling that the road construction was completed a few years ago, the State Party should develop and submit a clear action plan in one of the working languages of the Convention, including a timeline for the rehabilitation of all areas damaged by the road construction as well as a plan to monitor its impacts.

It is worrying that an additional 40 km of road will cross the property as part of the Trans-Papuan Highway, thus leading to further disturbance and habitat fragmentation within the property. It is unclear what the current status of this Enarotali-Ilaga-Mulia segment is, but media articles suggest that works have already been completed and connected. It is regrettable that the EIA has only been shared now, despite the World Heritage Centre’s request for clarification on the Trans-Papuan Highway, in its letter on 18 December 2018, and as repeatedly requested in the 2019 and 2021 state of conservation reports. Furthermore, while the EIA reportedly concluded that the construction of the highway is “environmentally feasible”, the EIA was only provided in Indonesian, so it was not possible to review it, but the table of contents suggests that no specific assessment of impacts on the OUV of the property was undertaken. If this is the case, there is a pressing need to assess the cumulative impacts of these roads on the OUV of the property and, in particular, to implement a stringent set of measures to mitigate impacts linked to the construction of the roads and their use, including to prevent illegal logging and poaching, and monitor their effects.

The monitoring figures for two important species in the property from 2020 are noted. Considering the importance of the property for its endangered, endemic and range-restricted species of various taxa, there is a need for a robust monitoring mechanism. The State Party should be requested to clarify the objective and details of the biodiversity monitoring plan that is being implemented across the property as part of the park management activities.

The preliminary results of the Nothofagus tree dieback were reported again as being inconclusive. While noting the positive signs that Nothofagus is regenerating well naturally, even in disturbed habitats, the State Party should be encouraged to continue their survey to further their understanding of the causes of the dieback, define suitable management interventions and consider seeking international collaboration, as was recommended by the 2014 IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission.

It is regrettable that the overdue IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission to the property, pending since 2017, continues to be postponed. Recalling that the Committee had previously raised illegal fishing and poaching as threats that have not been followed up in recent years, it is recommended that the mission take the opportunity to also review these matters, in addition to the mission’s scope as set out in Decision 44 COM 7B.94.