State of Conservation (SOC)
Niokolo-Koba National Park (1989)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Requests Approved: 0
(from1982-1986)
Total Amount Ap proved: 42,845USD
| 1986 | Additional cost of radios ordered in 1985 for Niokolo-Koba ... | 6,196 USD |
| 1985 | Purchase of 4 portable radios for protection programme for ... | 9,618 USD |
| 1982 | Vehicles, camping equipment and radio communication material for ... | 27,031 USD |
Missions**
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Road project; Poaching; Management issues
Corrective Measures
Current conservation issues
IUCN reported to the Thirteenth Session of the Bureau a proposal of the Government of Senegal to construct a new road to connect two villages on either side of the park using a route which would bisect the park. IUCN had conducted an environmental impact study of the proposal for the EEC and suggested an alternative route which would avoid damage to the World Heritage site.
The Bureau requested the Secretariat to prepare a letter to the highest authority in Senegal recalling this States Party's obligation to protect the natural values for which Niokolo-Koba was inscribed on the World Heritage List and expressing the Bureau's strong preference for the alternative route outside the Park.
IUCN has also made representations on its own behalf to the President of the Republic of Senegal. However, at the time of the writing there has been no indication of any change in the roading proposals.
Conclusion
Decision
13COMVIII.16
Link to the decision
Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal)
The Committee recalled that there was a project to construct a major highway across the Park which would greatly jeopardize its natural values, and that the Bureau had expressed its preference for an alternative route outside the Park. On 1 August 1989, in accordance with the Bureau's recommendation, the Director-General of Unesco had written to the President of Senegal, His Excellency A. Diouf, informing him of the Bureau's preference for the alternative route. The Secretariat indicated to the Committee that, at a meeting held in Dakar on 14 November 1989, the Senegalese authorities had nevertheless stated their intention to proceed with the construction of the highway across the park.
The World Bank had advised the Secretariat of its involvement in this project with associated bodies, through the preparation of a proposed programme for a Transport Sector Credit of which this project was part. The Bank had concluded, on the basis of the documents provided by Senegal, that the alternative route outside the park had not been sufficiently assessed. The Committee agreed with the Bank's proposal to carry out a more detailed study of the alternative route, which is presently being examined under a Bank appraisal mission in the field.
The Committee requested the Secretariat to contact the Senegalese authorities to recall their responsibility in maintaining the integrity of this World Heritage site, stressing that the Committee offered its full co-operation in seeking a satisfactory solution to this issue which would safeguard the natural World Heritage values. The Committee also requested the Secretariat to contact the World Bank to inform it of the Committee's views.
No draft Decision
Niokolo-Koba National Park
SenegalExports
Word File Threats*
- Ground transport infrastructure
- Illegal activities
- Management systems/ management plan
- Other Threats:
Documents
SC.89/CONF.003/02SC.89/CONF.004/05
Other Documents:
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...SOC ID: 1593
Inscription on the Danger List
Year: 2007Threats to the Site:
a) Poaching;
b) Livestock grazing.
* :
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.
