State of Conservation
22
Reports
5
Properties
1
States Parties
Threats* :
| Site | State Party | Year | Threats* | Danger List |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| city of cuzcoCity of Cuzco | peru Peru |
2011 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| city of cuzcoCity of Cuzco | peru Peru |
2010 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| city of cuzcoCity of Cuzco | peru Peru |
2005 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: a) Lack of maintenance of historic buildings; b) Use of reinforced concrete in the centre of town |
No |
| city of cuzcoCity of Cuzco | peru Peru |
2004 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: Deliberate neglect of historic properties |
No |
| historic sanctuary of machu picchuHistoric Sanctuary of Machu Picchu | peru Peru |
2010 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| historic sanctuary of machu picchuHistoric Sanctuary of Machu Picchu | peru Peru |
2009 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| historic sanctuary of machu picchuHistoric Sanctuary of Machu Picchu | peru Peru |
2008 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| historic sanctuary of machu picchuHistoric Sanctuary of Machu Picchu | peru Peru |
2007 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| historic sanctuary of machu picchuHistoric Sanctuary of Machu Picchu | peru Peru |
2006 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| historic sanctuary of machu picchuHistoric Sanctuary of Machu Picchu | peru Peru |
2005 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| historic sanctuary of machu picchuHistoric Sanctuary of Machu Picchu | peru Peru |
2004 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| historical centre of the city of arequipaHistorical Centre of the City of Arequipa | peru Peru |
2009 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: Material decay and abandonment of buildings, as well as the effect of heavy traffic on historic buildings |
No |
| historical centre of the city of arequipaHistorical Centre of the City of Arequipa | peru Peru |
2008 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: Material decay and abandonment of buildings |
No |
| huascarán national parkHuascarán National Park | peru Peru |
2001 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| huascarán national parkHuascarán National Park | peru Peru |
2000 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| huascarán national parkHuascarán National Park | peru Peru |
1999 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| huascarán national parkHuascarán National Park | peru Peru |
1998 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
| lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru Peru |
2011 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
| lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru Peru |
2009 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
| lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru Peru |
2007 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
| lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru Peru |
2006 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
| lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru Peru |
2005 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, | No |
* :
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”).
** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.

Peru
