State of Conservation (SOC)
Ngorongoro Conservation Area (1993)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:208,632USD
|1990||Purchase of a Land Rover and radio equipment for the ...||49,782 USD|
|1988||Purchase of 2 vehicles (one tipper truck and one 4x4 pick-up) for ...||50,000 USD|
|1988||Contribution to the purchase of associated spare parts for ...||10,000 USD|
|1987||Purchase of a Land Rover for anti-poaching activities in ...||17,500 USD|
|1987||Participation of a specialist from Ngorongoro Conservation Area ...||4,000 USD|
|1987||Additional costs of equipment for Ngorongoro Conservation Area||2,000 USD|
|1986||Equipment to strengthen the protection of Ngorongoro Conservation ...||20,000 USD|
|1980||Additional financial assistance for the preparation of a ...||7,000 USD|
|1979||Financial grant for establishment of a management plan for ...||24,950 USD|
|1979||12-month fellowship in law/administration for Ngorongoro ...||18,000 USD|
|1979||Drawing up by an architect-museologist of a project for the ...||5,400 USD|
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Shortcomings in the management and lack of resources (issues resolved)
Current conservation issues
The Bureau recalled that this site was removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1988, and was deeply concerned to learn that the Prime Minister of Tanzania had announced that the residents of the area will be allowed to grow crops inside this World Heritage site, in contradiction to the Ngorongoro Conservation Area Law. The Bureau recommended that the Committee, at its seventeenth session in December 1993, include once again, the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in the List of World Heritage in Danger and requested the Centre to communicate its concerns to the Minister of Tourism, Natural Resources and Environment of Tanzania. The Bureau's concerns have been communicated to the authorities in Tanzania.
A copy of a letter to IUCN dated the 22 September 1993 indicates that agricultural pressure on the area is continuing and IUCN will provide a report on the state of conservation.
Analysis and Conclusion
Link to the decision
Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania)
The Committee recalled that the site was removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1990 and noted the recommendations and discussion of the seventeenth session of the Bureau concerning uncontrolled cultivation in the conservation area. Technically, this cultivation is not permissible under the legislation for the area and much damage to natural values had been caused.
The Director of the World Heritage Centre and the Director of the UNESCO Division of Physical Heritage provided information regarding the situation of the site's cultural heritage (Olduvai Gorge), and particularly regarding the serious threats to the footprints of early man. The Committee was informed that a project by the Getty Conservation Institute was underway to protect this priceless cultural heritage.
The Committee discussed the possibility of including the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It was noted that the Government of Germany provided US$ 275,000 for the preparation of a new Management Plan for the site.
Finally, the Committee requested the Centre to report back at the next session of its Bureau in 1994 regarding the protection of the cultural values of the site. The Centre should also transmit to the Government of Tanzania the Committee's serious concerns regarding the ongoing cultivation which threatens the natural values of this property.
No draft Decision
Tanzania, United Republic of
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2014 2012 2011 2010 2009 2007 2006 2005 2004 2002 2001 2000 1999 1994 1993 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 1984 -1989
Threats to the Site:
Shortcomings in the management and protection of the property
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”).