World Heritage Centre https://whc.unesco.org?cid=305&l=en&action=list&searchDecisions=&search_session_decision=65&mode=rss World Heritage Centre - Committee Decisions 90 en Copyright 2019 UNESCO, World Heritage Centre Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:21:03 EST UNESCO, World Heritage Centre - Decisions https://whc.unesco.org/document/logowhc.jpg https://whc.unesco.org 21 BUR IV.A.2 State of conservation The Bureau examined reports on the state of conservation of eleven of the thirteen natural properties included in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau noted that in the case of Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria) and Everglades National Park (United States of America) no new information had been received, since the conclusions of the twentieth session of the Committee.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5552 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.3 Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia) The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its twentieth session, had determined that the World Heritage values of Plitvice Lakes National Park had not been adversely impacted by the armed conflict of the early 1990s, and concluded that the natural systems of the site were recovering from pre-war over-development and over-use. The Committee decided to retain Plitvice Lakes National Park on the List of World Heritage in Danger, because it recognized potential post-war threats due to rising visitor impacts, and the damaged condition of the Park's infrastructure.

The Bureau was informed that the Croatian authorities had revised the boundaries of the Park to increase its total area to include the entire underground basin which supplies water to lakes and streams of Plitvice and had trained Park employees. A road outside the northeast boundary of the Park to re-direct traffic currently passing through the Park is under construction and, a state of conservation report on the Park, including the experience gained from the management of visitors during the summer of 1997, is expected to be submitted to the Centre by 15 September 1997. 

The Bureau commended the Croatian authorities for increasing the total area of the Park to include the entire underground basin supplying Plitvice's lakes and streams and constructing a road outside of the Park's northeast boundary in order to redirect truck-traffic currently flowing through the Park. The Bureau requested the Centre to contact the Croatian authorities to obtain a map of the new boundaries of the Park and to find out whether they intend to enlarge the World Heritage area to conform with the Park's new boundaries. The Bureau recommended that the Committee, after reviewing the state of conservation report due by 15 September 1997, decide whether or not to remove Plitvice Lakes National Park from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5553 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.4 Virunga National Park (Democratic Republic of the Congo), Garamba National Park (Democratic Republic of the Congo) Since the twentieth session of the Committee, the eastern part Democratic Republic of the Congo has become further destabilized and military action has spread to other parts of the country. Reports received indicate that in both these sites, infrastructure had been destroyed and wildlife populations decimated. The Bureau noted that IUCN and the Centre will continue to maintain contacts with UNHCR and conservation NGOs and provide up-to-date reports on both Virunga and Garamba, at the time of the twenty-first session of the Committee. 

The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to contact relevant authorities of the new Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in order to arrange for a high-level mission to meet with senior officials to remind them of their responsibilities under the World Heritage Convention and to discuss restoration and rehabilitation of the country's five World Heritage sites. This mission should initiate project proposals in consultation with the authorities of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Implementation of some of the projects may be financed by emergency assistance from the World Heritage Fund. A long-term policy and strategic vision for World Heritage conservation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is the main need at the moment. The Centre should co-ordinate its activities with those of other UN agencies and conservation NGOs active in the country. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to provide detailed reports on both sites, at the twenty-first extraordinary session of the Bureau to be held on 28 and 29 November 1997, in Naples, Italy.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5554 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.5 Sangay National Park (Ecuador)  The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its twentieth session, commended the Park administration's (Instituto Ecuadoriano Forestal y de Areas Naturales y Vida Silvestre, (INEFAN)) actions and reports, but reiterated its serious concerns about road construction activities, poaching and colonization, and recalled its request for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The Bureau noted that INEFAN has submitted a report to the Centre that identifies the Guamote Macas road construction to be the main problem and that colonisation in the Guamboya valley and along the River Palora, and small-scale mining activities have been stopped. The new management plan is close to finalization and government institutions and NGOs have expressed interest in participating in its implementation.

IUCN informed the Bureau that the implementation of a number of conservation projects at Sangay, including several funded by WWF and the European Union have begun.

The Bureau commended INEFAN for its report and action, but reiterated it's calls for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Guamote Macas road construction project. The Bureau recommended that the Committee retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5555 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.6 Simen National Park (Ethiopia) The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its last session noted the report of the technical mission to the site, (2-9 November 1996), which identified the deterioration of the Walia ibex population, loss of biodiversity, encroachment at the borders of the site and impacts of the construction of a road through the Park, and, as stipulated in Paragraph 79 of the Operational Guidelines, included Simen National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau was informed that the Head of the Bureau of Agriculture of the Bahir Dar Region, where Simen National Park is located, informed the Centre of his Regional Government's disagreement with the Committee's decision to include Simen in the List of World Heritage in Danger. He drew the Centre's attention to the fact that although Simen was neglected in the past, currently Simen receives high attention and effective protection. The number of Walia Ibex has increased as a result of proper protection of the Park and the Central and the Regional Governments are implementing a rehabilitation programme to restore the Park's infrastructure to its previous state. Furthermore, he indicated that the Regional Authorities do not accept the statement in the report of the technical mission to Simen, undertaken in November, 1996: i.e. "A majority of participants endorsed the recommendation that Simen Mountain National Park should be listed as World Heritage site in Danger". Following the Committee's decision to include Simen National Park on the List of World Heritage in Danger, the Regional Authorities in Bahir Dar have decided not to convene the technical workshop, originally scheduled for 10-18 April, 1997, and for which the Committee approved a sum of US$ 30,000 at its last session. They have called upon the Central Government of Ethiopia to co-operate with concerned national and regional institutions to organize a discussion forum with UNESCO in order to reverse the decision taken by the Committee.

The Bureau noted that a mission to Simen National Park had been undertaken by the United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) from 10 to 25 April 1997 and that a buffer zone development project for the site is under consideration.

The Bureau acknowledged the possibility that the views of the Regional Government in Bahir Dar may not have been accurately reflected when the Committee decided to include Simen in the List of World Heritage in Danger. Nevertheless, the Bureau called upon the Ethiopian authorities in Addis Ababa and Bahir Dar to view the Committee's decision in a positive light and to proceed with convening the stakeholders meeting. The Bureau in particular requested the Director of the Centre to meet with the Permanent Delegate of Ethiopia to UNESCO to resolve the problem and to explain the Committee's decision. Furthermore, the Bureau recommended that the Centre and IUCN take actions to assist the Ethiopian authorities to convene the stakeholder's meeting and to submit a report to the twenty-first session of the Committee in December 1997 so as to enable the Committee to review Simen National Park's status as a World Heritage site in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5556 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.7 Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire) The Bureau recalled that at its twentieth session, the Committee noted the fact that UNESCO's Legal Affairs Office was considering the proposals made by a working group for setting up an "International Foundation for Mt. Nimba". The Bureau was informed that the Legal Affairs Office of UNESCO has advised the Centre that UNESCO cannot create an International Foundation but that such a Foundation may be established under the national legislation of a suitable State Party. The Swiss Foundation established for the conservation of Banc d'Arguin National Park, a World Heritage site in Mauritania, was considered a good example. Contributions earmarked for Mt. Nimba may also be set aside under a special account of the World Heritage Fund (as per paragraph 118 of the Operational Guidelines), or set up as a separate 'Funds-in-Trust', similar to the World Heritage Fund, within UNESCO.

The Bureau, while recognizing these options for setting up a Foundation or a Special Fund for Mt. Nimba, noted that the mining companies are not yet ready to contribute funds to launch the initiative. Furthermore, the Bureau took note of the fact that the Minister of Environment of Guinea acknowledged the threats to Mount Nimba, reiterated the commitment of his Government to the protection of the site and requested that the site be retained on the List of World Heritage in Danger. 

The Bureau requested the Centre to transmit information concerning the options for setting up a Foundation or a Special Fund for Mt. Nimba to the authorities of Guinea and recommended that the Committee retain Mt. Nimba on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5557 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.8 Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve (Honduras) The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its twentieth session included Rio Platano in the List of World Heritage in Danger and urged the Honduran authorities to implement the eleven-point corrective action plan, endorsed by the Honduran Minister for the Environment, and keep it informed, on a regular basis, of measures taken to safeguard this property.

The Bureau noted that a revised budget breakdown requested from the Honduran authorities for a US$ 30,000 project, approved by the Bureau at its twentieth session for preparing a management plan for Rio Platano, has not yet been received. The Bureau was informed that major changes in the staff of the Ministry of Environment of Honduras had occurred and that a number of projects have been initiated in cooperation with Nature Conservancy, WWF and KFW (Germany). The Bureau noted that IUCN will provide a report on Rio Platano at the forthcoming session of the Committee.

The Bureau requested that the Centre contact the Honduran authorities to obtain the necessary information for the implementation of the management planning project and recommended that the Committee retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5558 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.9 Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India) The Bureau noted that the Ministry for Environment and Forests (MOEF) of India, hosted a World Natural Heritage Site Managers' Meeting for South Asia, from 16 to 19 January 1997. The Director of Manas Wildlife Sanctuary presented a report on the state of conservation of Manas at that meeting. A staff member of the World Heritage Centre accompanied the Deputy Inspector General for Wildlife in India on a mission to Manas Wildlife Sanctuary from 20 to 23 January 1997. The mission concluded that:

(i) Militancy of the Bodo people in the early 1990s had damaged the infrastructure for the protection of Manas and demoralized staff, resulting in poachers taking a heavy toll of wildlife populations within Manas Wildlife Santuary. (ii) Since 1993, militant activity has diminished and Manas authorities have been able to improve relationships with surrounding villagers and seek their support for conservation. Peace and order in and around Manas have been re-established and an estimated 8,000 tourists visited Manas in 1996. (iii) Damaged ranger and guard units are in urgent need of repair and/or reconstruction. The poaching threat continues to prevail as the mobility and the communications capability of Manas staff remain limited.

The Bureau was informed of a report on Manas Wildlife Sanctuary from the MOEF transmitted via the Permanent Delegation of India, which notes that "Manas deserves to continue to be in the World Heritage in Danger List", as it helps to draw international attention to the site. The MOEF has also submitted an emergency assistance request for a contribution from the Fund for US$ 235,000 to implement a three-year rehabilitation plan estimated to cost a total sum of US$ 2,135,000.

The Bureau commended the Indian authorities for the report provided and their support for organizing the mission to the site. The Bureau noted that the emergency assistance request in support of the rehabilitation of the site will be discussed under Agenda Item 6 "Requests for international assistance" and recommended that the Committee retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5559 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.10 Air-and-Ténéré Reserve (Niger) The Bureau recalled that a peace agreement, signed on 20 April 1995, had started a dialogue between the conflicting parties and set in motion the process for a return to a normal management regime and that the Committee at its twentieth session had noted that a detailed site evaluation and the development of an action programme for site recovery may become feasible in the near future. The IUCN/WWF project, with funding from DANIDA, for re-establishing a normal management regime for the site is soon to be resumed.

By letter of 20 March 1997, the Permanent Delegation of Niger has provided the terms of reference for a monitoring mission to the site, expected to be carried out in the autumn of 1997. The Bureau heard a presentation by Mr. André Bourgeot (CNRS/EHESS, France) who had carried out a mission to the site in April 1997 together with local IUCN staff. He indicated that: (a) there were no security problems in the area; (b) the vegetation is less impacted than the wildlife populations, whose decline was noticeable; and (c) an analysis of the Reserve's situation should be undertaken by a team including a competent specialist in ecology. The Bureau noted that the proposal to establish an Air-and-Ténéré Biosphere Reserve covering 24 million hectares was favourably recommended to the MAB Bureau for inscription on the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. The Delegate of Niger informed the Bureau that this Biosphere Reserve would reach as far as the Algerian border and constitute a huge wildlife reserve with the World Heritage site as core area and buffer zone. The Delegate of Niger thanked Mr. Bourgeot for his report and commended IUCN for their efforts to support the conservation of the site. Furthermore, he was of the view that the state of conservation of the site has improved considerably and the site might be removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau recommended that the Committee at its forthcoming session review the status of Air-and-Ténéré, future plans for its continuing recovery and decide whether or not it should be removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5560 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.11 Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia) The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its twentieth session noted that the construction of two dams had limited freshwater flow and devastated the wetland values of Ichkeul National Park, leading to dramatic increases in the salinity of the lake and marshes and sharp reductions in migratory bird populations. Hence, the Committee included Ichkeul in the List of World Heritage in Danger and requested the Tunisian authorities to provide a programme of corrective measures to reverse the degradation of the site, and alerted them to the possibility of the deletion of Ichkeul from the World Heritage List if rehabilitation of the site is not possible.

IUCN informed the Bureau that the report of an official mission to the site by the Ramsar Convention Secretariat had suggested that the Tunisian authorities give a clear indication of the measures they plan to take based on a number of studies already carried out and which have identified conservation actions. Furthermore, an agreement on the release of water from the dams should be reached and a central management authority addressing all management issues in the site, including the long-term management of the Tindja sluice needs to be established. The Ramsar mission recommended the repair of the sluices, the filling of the Joumine Canal to restore the Joumine Marsh, and continuous scientific monitoring of the Park's ecology.

In its discussions on the potential delisting of Ichkeul, the Bureau recalled the Committee's discussions with regard to another wetland, i.e. Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria) and that the Committee had given the Bulgarian authorities a three-year time frame to restore the site.

The Bureau requested the Centre to transmit the recommendations made by the mission of the Ramsar Secretariat to the Tunisian authorities and invite them to provide their views with regard to the implementation of the recommendations, by 15 October 1997. The Bureau also recommended that the Committee set up a three-year time table to review the outcome of efforts to restore Ichkeul National Park and in the meantime retain the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5561 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.12 Yellowstone National Park (United States of America) The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its twentieth session noted several remedial actions taken by the State Party to minimize potential and ascertained threats to this site, and commended the President of the country for his efforts to fully remove the potential mining threat to the integrity of the site with a mutually, to-be-agreed upon trade of land, valued at US$ 65 million. Since then, the Montana State Office of the Bureau of Land Management of the United States Department of the Interior, and the Northern Region Forest Service of the United States Department of Agriculture have published a summary, and the full Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Proposed Cooke City Area Mineral Withdrawal and have circulated it inviting any person or group to comment on the Draft EIS.

The Bureau recommended that the Committee in consultation with IUCN and the State Party and based on its review of the state of conservation report due from the State Party by 15 September 1997, determine whether actions taken to mitigate potential and ascertained threats to Yellowstone are adequate and whether or not Yellowstone should be removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5562 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.14 Angkor (Cambodia) The Bureau, while commending the efforts of the Royal Government of Cambodia and UNESCO, expressed deep concern over the looting and illegal excavation of cultural properties from Angkor, notably over the organized trade in antiquities, including the dismantling of monuments. The Bureau invited the Royal Government of Cambodia to submit a report to the twenty-first session of the Committee on administrative mechanisms and regulations put into place for the enforcement of the law on cultural heritage including measures adopted for the prevention of illicit traffic in cultural property. Finally, the Bureau took note with satisfaction of the decision taken by the Royal Government of Cambodia to forbid any hotel construction within the Zones 1 and 2 of the site of Angkor. Furthermore, the Bureau ardently wished that in conformity with the studies carried out for the enforcement of the zoning plans, hotels be built within the hotel zone.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5563 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.A.15 Fort Bahla (Oman) After having taken note of the report of the Secretariat concerning the situation at Fort Bahla, the Bureau thanked the Omani authorities for their communications of 12 and 24 March 1997 by which they confirmed their intent to carry out the recommendations of the UNESCO experts. However, it expressed its serious concern following the collapse of the Fort's north-west Tower and requested them to make every effort to consolidate the monument. It approved the dispatch of a new expert mission next October, on a cost-sharing basis, as previously.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5564 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.B.17 Australian World Heritage Sites Introducing its written report on the state of conservation of natural World Heritage properties, IUCN supplemented this with a verbal report on more recent developments in Australia. IUCN recalled previous discussions of the Bureau and the Committee on the future of forested public lands adjoining the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area and the response at that time by the State Party that World Heritage issues would be taken into account in the negotiation of a Regional Forest Agreement between the Governments of Australia and the State of Tasmania. The IUCN Representative said that a World Heritage Expert Panel had reported in June 1997 to the two Governments to facilitate consideration of World Heritage issues. This report and extensive data bases should ensure that information on World Heritage potential would be available when decisions are made in finalizing the Regional Forest Agreement due to be completed by 30 June 1997.

The Bureau decided to commend the State Party on the comprehensive approach adopted and to invite the State Party to report to the Centre on the outcome relevant to World Heritage by 15 October 1997.

IUCN also commented favourably on the manner in which World Heritage cultural and natural values are being taken into account in the preparation of a new management plan for the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, including a workshop held on 16 June 1997 with the Anangu people (traditional and legal owners of the Park) and Park staff on the implications of World Heritage status on visitor management. Issues raised in the IUCN report on other sites, i.e. Great Barrier Reef, Kakadu National Park and Shark Bay, noted a number of positive decisions taken, particularly those aimed at conserving dugong habitats in the Great Barrier Reef.

The Delegate of Australia commented in detail on all the issues raised in the IUCN report about Australia and suggested that IUCN seek official comment from the Australian government as the next step. She also expressed concern at the lack of time to consider and respond to the report and requested more advanced consultations with the State Party to permit dialogue on the issues raised. Concern at the late tabling of the report was also expressed by the Delegate of Germany. The Delegate of Australia assured the Bureau that the State Party would continue to maintain its commitment to respect the integrity of its World Heritage sites.

The Chairperson ruled that the issues raised in the IUCN report should not be further considered at this meeting, because in many cases the States Parties had not been given the opportunity to examine the issues raised, to verify their accuracy and to respond.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5565 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.B.18 Iguacu National Park (Brazil) The Bureau noted that an alarming situation has recently developed in this Park which required urgent attention. A local organization is campaigning for the reopening of an 18 km road which was closed in 1986 to strengthen protection of the site. In early May, 800 people invaded the Park and set up camp to begin unauthorized work to re-open the road. The responsible conservation authorities have been unable to resist political pressures associated with this development and have not acted to contain the damage.

The Bureau requested the Centre to urgently contact Brazilian authorities to encourage them to re-establish control over the section of the Park to close the road and to rehabilitate the damaged areas within the Park. The Bureau observed the fact that Iguacu (Brazil) and Iguazu (Argentina) National Parks continue to remain as two separate World Heritage sites, despite the prevailing opportunity to link them into a single transborder World Heritage area for purposes of the World Heritage List.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5566 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.B.19 Democratic Republic of the Congo a)   Okapi Faunal Reserve 

The Bureau was deeply concerned to learn that the armed conflict which spread, during early 1997, to the whole of the region has led to the looting of all facilities and killing of several elephants in this site, inscribed on the World Heritage List in Mexico (December, 1996). Most of the expatriate and research staff have fled the Park and those remaining in the site receive only minimum salaries. There are reports of gold mining within the Park and the new Government's policy with regard to respecting the boundaries of the World Heritage area remain unclear.

b)   Kahuzi Biega National Park 

The Bureau noted with grave concern that portions of this Park had been deforested and considerable hunting of wildlife had been reported. Park facilities have been looted and destroyed and most of the Park staff have left the area. The Park may also be serving as a hide-out for militant groups and conflicts between tribal populations in the area have also been reported. Although UNHCR and GTZ (Germany) are considering to provide support for the Park projects cannot be started until the security situation in the area returns to normal.

The Bureau expressed its serious concerns regarding the integrity of Okapi Faunal Reserve and the Kahuzi Biega National Park and recommended that the Committee, at its next session, include these two sites in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau recalled its recommendation of a high level mission to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, made with regard to the two sites in this State Party already recognized as World Heritage Sites in Danger (i.e. Garamba and Virunga National Parks) and suggested that such a mission include discussions on the state of conservation of Okapi Faunal Reserve and the Kahuzi Biega National Park as well with a view to initiating projects for their rehabilitation.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5567 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.B.20 Galapagos National Park (Ecuador) The Bureau thanked IUCN, and the Observer of Ecuador for their reports. It noted that there was a major effort in Ecuador to take steps to conserve the World Heritage values of the islands.

The Bureau recalled that, at its twentieth session in Merida, the World Heritage Committee decided "to include the Galapagos National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger, effective 15 November 1997, unless a substantive written reply by Ecuador is received by 1st of May 1997, and the Bureau, at its twenty first session determine that effective actions have been taken".

Having studied both the report of the State Party and the report of IUCN, the Bureau came to the conviction that such effective actions have been taken that the efforts of the Ecuadorean authorities should be honoured. The Bureau therefore decided that it would not be appropriate to include the Galapagos National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger at this time.

In order to enable the World Heritage Committee, at its twenty first session, to have a full picture of the up-to-date situation of the World Heritage Site, the Bureau asked the State Party to deliver a progress report by, 15 November 1997, on the nine issues outlined in the IUCN report of 3rd June 1997, as follows:

  • Decree
  • Law
  • Control of Residency
  • Quarantine
  • Environmental management of populated areas
  • Introduced species
  • Marine reserve
  • Tourism
  • Financing

The Bureau recommended the World Heritage Committee to ask the State Party for an annual progress report on the above mentioned issues from the end of 1998 until the end of 2002.

The Bureau further recommended that if the decrees of the Government of Ecuador are not reflected in law by the time of the twenty-first session of the World Heritage Committee, scheduled in December 1997, in Naples, Italy, the Committee could once again consider adding the Galapagos to the List of World Heritage in Danger.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5568 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.B.21 Kaziranga National Park (India) The Bureau noted that a member of the Centre joined the Deputy Inspector General for Wildlife for India, during 24-25 January 1997, on a mission to Kaziranga National Park, in the State of Assam, India. The Bureau learnt with satisfaction Kaziranga's success in conserving the great one-horned rhinoceros, whose population within the Park has grown from 366 in 1966 to about 1,200 at present. However, every year about 26 rhinos are poached and an additional 52 die due to natural causes, most of them drowning in the annual floods of the Brahmaputra River.

The Bureau encouraged the management of Kaziranga to proceed with their plans to add six adjacent patches totalling more than 400 sq.km. to the Park, increase the number of anti-poaching camps along the periphery of the Park, build upland refuges for animals to retreat during the annual flooding of the Brahmaputra River and launch conservation awareness and environmental education programmes for local villagers. Furthermore, the Bureau noted that the Indian authorities have submitted a request for financial assistance to support the implementation of parts of the above-mentioned activities and that the Bureau will consider the request under Agenda Item 6 (Requests for international assistance).

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5569 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.B.22 Keoladeo National Park (India) The Bureau recalled the fact that the Committee had previously expressed concerns regarding the decrease in the population of wintering Siberian cranes returning to this site and management problems, such as the over-growth of grasses, forming a thick mat in some areas were adversely affecting the breeding habitat of the Siberian cranes. Records maintained by Park management indicated that the wintering population of Siberian cranes, estimated at about 38 in 1985-86 when the site was inscribed on the World Heritage List, had dropped to 5 in 1992-93; no Siberian cranes were seen in Keoladeo during 1993-95. In 1996-97 three Siberian cranes have returned to Keoladeo National Park.

The Bureau noted that the State Party, recognizing that the decrease in the number of Siberian cranes arriving to winter at Keoladeo may be attributable to the intensity of hunting and other threats prevailing along the migratory route of the species, have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the eight countries (Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakstan, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) with whom it shares the range of the central and western Asian populations of the Siberian crane. UNEP, which hosts the Secretariat of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), International Crane Foundation (ICF) and the Wild Birds Society of Japan are also signatories to the MOU, under which an action plan foresees: (i) the release of captive-bred Siberian cranes to augment wild populations; and (ii) capturing of Siberian cranes and the deployment of satellite transmitters on the cranes for tracking their migratory route from their wintering areas in Keoladeo to spring breeding grounds in other countries. At the site level, the management has introduced a controlled burning and cutting regime for grasses in order to limit their growth from negatively impacting the breeding habitats of the cranes and closed the Park for grazing by cattle belonging to local villagers. The Bureau urged the Centre to cooperate with the CMS Secretariat and support the implementation of the action plan.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5570 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST
21 BUR IV.B.23 Sundarbans National Park (India) The Bureau was informed that the Sundarbans National Park and World Heritage Area, comprising 1,330 sq.km., forms the core area of the larger Sundarbans Project Tiger Reserve (2,585 sq.km) and the even larger "Sundarbans Biosphere Reserve" which extends over more than 9,000 sq.km of the inter-tidal area of the Sundarbans delta. Although India has not yet formally nominated the Sundarbans Biosphere Reserve for inclusion in UNESCO's international network of biosphere reserves, the case illustrated an interesting application of the World Heritage and the Biosphere Reserve concepts of UNESCO within the same ecosystem. Several eco-development activities undertaken in the larger Biosphere Reserve, e.g. fishing, collection of honey, timber harvest etc., have enabled the management to establish a working relationship with the local people and solicit their cooperation for the protection of the "Biosphere Reserve's" core area, i.e. Sundarbans National Park and World Heritage Area. This working relationship between the management and the local people has been particularly useful in minimizing the poaching threat to the world's largest population of the Bengal tiger inhabiting this World Heritage Site. The Bureau noted with interest the harmonious application of UNESCO's World Heritage and Biosphere Reserve concepts in Sundarbans and urged the Secretariat and IUCN to identify similar cases and bring them to the attention of States Parties to the Convention.

]]>
https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5571 wh-info@unesco.org Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:00:00 EST