State of Conservation
31
Reports
9
Properties
8
States Parties
Threats* :
| States Parties: |
Nepal
|
| Year: | 1992 |
| Document Source: | WHC-92/CONF.002/12 |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| Other Threats: | Need for restoration/consolidation works |
| States Parties: |
Nepal
|
| Year: | 1991 |
| Document Source: | SC-91/CONF.002/3 |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| Other Threats: | Need for restoration/consolidation works |
| States Parties: |
Nepal
|
| Year: | 1990 |
| Document Source: | CC-90/CONF.004/3 |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| Other Threats: | Need for restoration/consolidation works |
| States Parties: |
Morocco
|
| Year: | 2004 |
| Document Source: | WHC-04/28.COM/15B |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| Other Threats: | State of abandonment and degradation |
| States Parties: |
Kenya
|
| Year: | 2003 |
| Document Source: | WHC.03/27.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| Other Threats: | Uncontrolled forest land excisions, in the Mount Hombe and Ragat blocks |
| States Parties: |
Kenya
|
| Year: | 2002 |
| Document Source: | WHC-02/CONF.202/17 |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| Other Threats: | Uncontrolled forest land excisions, in the Mount Hombe and Ragat blocks |
| States Parties: |
Kenya
|
| Year: | 2001 |
| Document Source: | WHC-01/CONF.208/10,WHC-2001/CONF.205/5 |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| States Parties: |
Kenya
|
| Year: | 2000 |
| Document Source: | WHC-2000/CONF.202/5,WHC-2000/CONF.204/10 |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| States Parties: |
Italy
|
| Year: | 2013 |
| Document Source: | WHC-13/37.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| States Parties: |
Italy
|
| Year: | 2012 |
| Document Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
| States Parties: |
Philippines
|
| Year: | 2003 |
| Danger List: | Yes |
| Document Source: | WHC.03/27.COM/7A |
| Threats*: | Avalanche/ landslide |
Properties
Categories
Regions
Threats
Avalanche/ landslide (31)
* :
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.

Nepal
Morocco
Kenya
Italy
Philippines

