State of Conservation (SOC)
Mont-Saint-Michel and its Bay (1990)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Requests Approved: 0
Total Amount Ap proved: 0USD
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Current conservation issues
The Bureau's concerns were brought to the attention of the French authorities by letter dated 25 July 1990. Also, the Secretary for the natural part of the Convention, at the invitation of the French authorities, participated in the first meeting of the Conseil de la Baie (Bay Council), which brought together all the partners concerned by the protection and development of the site. The meeting took note of the Bureau's recommendations concerning the siltation of the Bay and the re-definion of the limits of the inscribed area, in order to avoid projects such as the construction of pig farms and large-scale amusement parks.
The French authorities have not yet officially replied to the Secretariat's letter but have indicated that an oral report on all of these problems will be presented to the Committee at Banff.
Link to the decision
26. As the Bureau requested during its last session, the French representative reported on the siltation problems at Mont St. Michel and its Bay. The Committee noted with satisfaction the planned siltation control works, including the demolition of the dike providing access to Mont St. Michel and its present parking facilities and the replacement of this dike with a bridge that will reestablish water circulation. The Committee wished to encourage the French authorities to implement these projects as soon as possible.
No draft Decision
Mont-Saint-Michel and its Bay
- Erosion and siltation/ deposition
- Management systems/ management plan
- Other Threats:
Other Documents:View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC ID: 1621
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”).