State of Conservation (SOC)
Simien National Park (2004)
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
Requests Approved: 0
(from1978-1996)
Total Amount Ap proved: 233,171USD
| 1996 | Technical workshop on the conservation of Simien National Park | 30,000 USD |
| 1991 | Reconstruction of infrastructure and purchase of equipment for ... | 50,000 USD |
| 1987 | Contribution to the publication costs of the management plan for ... | 3,500 USD |
| 1982 | Expert service and financial contribution for a seminar/workshop ... | 21,000 USD |
| 1982 | In situ training of wardens of Simien National Park | 9,691 USD |
| 1981 | Equipment for Simien National Park | 113,450 USD |
| 1979 | Joint mission to prepare a technical cooperation request for ... | 5,530 USD |
| 1978 | Simien: request for equipment and specialists services | 0 USD |
Missions**
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Agricultural Pressure; Logging; Poaching/Hunting; Lack of capacity in conservation techniques; Lack of management mechanism (including legislation); Lack of monitoring system; Lack of human or financial resources; Lack of institution coordination
Corrective Measures
(a) the realignment of the boundary of the Park to exclude the villages along the boundary of the Park;
(b) the extension of the Park to include at least Mesarerya and Lemalino Wildlife Reserves;
(c) significant and sustainable reduction in the human population density within the Park, especially within the core area; and
(d) effective conservation within the extended National Park of a larger population of Walia Ibex and Simien Fox.
Current conservation issues
At the time of the preparation of the document, the State Party had not submitted the report requested by the Committee at its 27th session to provide additional information on progress made on the state of conservation of the property, particularly in relation to the benchmarks for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger and other recommendations outlined in the IUCN/UNESCO mission report of April 2001.
However IUCN has received a report dated 12 March 2004 from the “Simien Mountains National Park Integrated Development Project” a project funded by the Austrian Government. This project operates in and around the Park focusing on five major issues: strengthening Park management; community based tourism development; agricultural intensification; natural resource rehabilitation and conservation and enhancing the capacity of communities and institutions. The report provides figures on the increase in the population of wildlife, specifically the Walia Ibex and Simien Fox. Numbers of Walia Ibex are said to have increased from 514 in 2001 to 558 in 2002 and to 579 in 2003, indicating a significant and continuous increase compared to the 1995 figure of 270. Simien Fox numbers show an increase from 41 in 2001 to 45 in 2002 and 2003, a significant increase from the 1997 estimate of 20 to 30 individuals. These numbers concur with the numbers reported in last years report by the State Party. IUCN is currently seeking input from the Canid Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission to verify the increase in numbers reported.
The report notes that the construction and installation of different tourist facilities has increased the number of tourists, which in turn increases the income of the community in and around the Park. It is stated that the introduction of new technologies of crop production, vegetable and tree seedling production have decreased the agricultural expansion and deforestation within the World Heritage property and that awareness campaigns to inform local communities about the use of the Park, tourism and natural resources have created a sense of ownership and support for the Park.
The report provides no information with regard to other benchmarks set by the Committee at its 25th session, which are included in the draft decision.
Conclusion
Decision
28COM15A.4
Link to the decision
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Commends the Austrian Government for its support to the property through the Simien Mountains National Park Integrated Development Project;
2. Reiterates its request to the State Party to provide by 1 February 2005, a report on the state of conservation of the property for examination by the Committee at its 29th session in 2005, specifically on progress made in relation to the benchmarks set by the 25th session of the Committee for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger on the following issues:
a) realignment of the Park’s boundary to exclude the villages along the boundary,
b) extension of the Park to include at least Mesarerya and Lemalino Wildlife Reserves,
c) significant and sustainable reduction in the human population density within the Park, especially within the core area,
d) Effective conservation within the extended National Park of a larger population of Walia ibex and Simien Fox;
3. Decides to retain Simien National Park on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
28COM15C.2
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-04/28.COM/15A Rev),
2. Decides to maintain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:
- Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam, Afghanistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.21)
- Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley, Afghanistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.22)
- Butrint, Albania (Decision 28 COM 15A.28)
- Tipasa, Algeria (Decision 28 COM 15A.16)
- Walled City of Baku with the Shirvanshah's Palace and Maiden Tower, Azerbaijan (Decision 28 COM 15A.29)
- Royal Palaces of Abomey, Benin (Decision 28 COM 15A.14)
- Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park, Central African Republic (Decision 28 COM 15A.1)
- Comoé National Park, Côte d'Ivoire (Decision 28 COM 15A.2 )
- Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve, Côte d'Ivoire/Guinea (Decision 28 COM 15A.5)
- Okapi Wildlife Reserve, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
- Kahuzi-Biega National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
- Virunga National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
- Garamba National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
- Salonga National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
- Sangay National Park, Ecuador (Decision 28 COM 15A.12)
- Abu Mena, Egypt (Decision 28 COM 15A.17)
- Simien National Park, Ethiopia
- (Decision 28 COM 15A.4)
- Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve, Honduras (Decision 28 COM 15A.13)
- Group of Monuments at Hampi, India (Decision 28 COM 15A.24)
- Manas Wildlife Sanctuary, India (Decision 28 COM 15A.10)
- Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat), Iraq (Decision 28 COM 15A.18)
- Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls, Jerusalem (Decision 28 COM 15A.31)
- Timbuktu, Mali (Decision 28 COM 15A. 15)
- Kathmandu Valley, Nepal (Decision 28 COM 15A.25)
- Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves, Niger (Decision 28 COM 15A.6)
- Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore, Pakistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.26)
- Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone, Peru (Decision 28 COM 15A.30)
- Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras, Philippines (Decision 28 COM 15A.27)
- Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary, Senegal (Decision 28 COM 15A.7 )
- Ichkeul National Park, Tunisia (Decision 28 COM 15A.9)
- Everglades National Park, United States of America (Decision 28 COM 15A.11)
- Historic Town of Zabid, Yemen (Decision 28 COM 15A.20)
Draft Decision: 28 COM 15A.4
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Commends the Austrian Government for its support to the property through the Simien Mountains National Park Integrated Development Project;
2. Reiterates its request to the State Party to provide by 1 February 2005, a report on the state of conservation of the property for examination by the Committee at its 29th session in 2005, specifically on progress made in relation to the benchmarks set by the 25th session of the Committee for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger on the following issues:
a) Realignment of the Park’s boundary to exclude the villages along the boundary;
b) Extension of the Park to include at least Mesarerya and Lemalino Wildlife Reserves;
c) Significant and sustainable reduction in the human population density within the Park, especially within the core area; and
d) Effective conservation within the extended National Park of a larger population of Walia Ibex and Simien Fox.
3. Decides to retain Simien National Park on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Simien National Park
EthiopiaExports
Word File Threats*
- Identity, social cohesion, changes in local population and community
- Management systems/ management plan
- Other Threats:
Decreasing population of Walia Ibex and Simien Fox
Documents
WHC-04/28.COM/15A.RevOther Documents:
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...SOC ID: 1365
Inscription on the Danger List
Year: 1996Threats to the Site:
The World Heritage Committee decided to inscribe the Simien National Park on the List of World Heritage in Danger due to evidence of recent deterioration of the population of the Walia ibex, which have moved out of the park due to human presence and to cultivation of considerable areas of the Park. Other large mammals characteristic of the site, such as the bushbuck and the bushpig have become extremely rare.
Road construction and human population increase within the site represent further threats to the values of the Park, which was one of the first sites to be inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1978.
The decision to inscribe this site on the List of World Heritage in Danger had however, not met the approval of the regional authorities in Bahir Dar, where the site is located. Efforts are thus being made by the Department of Wildlife and National Parks of Ethiopia and the UNESCO Office in Addis Ababa to provide more information to the regional authorities on the meaning and implications of the Committee's decision and encourage them to view it in a positive light.
* :
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.
