The Bureau recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to again contact the State Party and the private Foundation responsible for site management and to field a mission to this site if invited and prepare a detailed report describing the state of conservation of the site and measures needed for its rehabilitation. The Bureau recommended that the Centre and IUCN submit such a report for review at its twenty-fourth session to be held in mid-2000.

The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its last session (Kyoto, 1998), had requested the Centre and IUCN to consult with ICCN (Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature) and international conservation NGOs to estimate the cost of paying "motivational allowances" to staff at Virunga as an interim measure and submit a proposal for emergency assistance for the consideration of the twenty-third session of the Bureau. IUCN had informed the Committee that most of the eastern DRC is controlled by rebel forces. The Committee had suggested that the Centre and IUCN transmit its concerns on the state of conservation of the four sites to international and national NGOs and urge them to disseminate information regarding the Committee’s concerns among the general public as well as specific target groups like the military.

The Bureau was informed that a representative of the International Rhino Foundation (IRF) had visited Garamba from 27 February to 5 March 1999 and found that resident guards appear to have forged a working relationship with rebel forces controlling the area. Significant poaching threats prevail in the region. Despite shortages in fuel supplies, vehicles, communications equipment and ammunition and the high-risk security situation, resident guards are patrolling the area to the extent possible.

The Bureau learned of the outcome of a seminar, held in Naivasha, Kenya, from 12 to 16 April 1999, which brought together ICCN, concerned international conservation NGOs (e.g. IRF, Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), International Gorilla Conservation Programme (IGCP), Diane Fossey Gorilla Fund for Europe, Gilman International Conservation and WWF), GTZ (German Technical Co-operation), UNESCO and representatives of staff from all four sites to discuss future steps that could be taken for the conservation of the four sites. The seminar reached the following principal conclusions:

(i) populations of all flagship species, including the gorilla, elephant, northern white rhinoceros and okapi are endangered;

(ii) Kahuzi Biega and Virunga have suffered significant deforestation;

(iii) field equipment has been looted and available equipment is either inadequate or in poor condition;

(iv) Okapi and Kahuzi Biega are facing threats due to illegal mineral exploitation;

(v) lack of respect for conservation laws is widespread and is threatening the integrity of all four sites as well as the life of staff who have chosen to continue carrying on their duties; and

(vi) a two-pronged approach focusing on diplomatic and political actions at one level and direct support to encourage performance of conservation actions by staff resident in the sites at the other, is critical to ensure the survival of the sites until peace and security conditions become normalized in eastern parts of the DRC. The report of the Naivasha Seminar includes estimates of financial support necessary for providing salaries and allowances and equipment to resident staff in all four sites.

The Seminar resulted in the establishment of a Task Force comprising the consortium of NGOs, ICCN and GTZ. The Task Force members are in the process of approaching various donors to raise the necessary funds for paying salaries and allowances to staff and provide basic equipment for staff to carry out their day-to-day functions.  A project concept is being developed by this Task Force.

The Director General of ICCN addressed the Bureau on behalf of the Task Force and called upon the assistance of the Bureau and Committee for the conservation of the four sites. He informed the Bureau that in affirming its commitment to the Convention, his Government has decided to pay its dues for the years 1996, 1997 and 1998 to the World Heritage Fund despite the difficult economic and political conditions prevailing in his country.

 The Bureau called upon the Centre and IUCN to:

• support the process started by the Task Force to build support for the conservation of the World Heritage sites of the DRC;
• co-operate with relevant international organizations, e.g. UN Resident Co-ordinator System, important donor countries etc., and call upon leading personalities including the Chairperson  of the Committee and the Director- General of UNESCO, to intervene in the diplomatic and political arena at the international, regional, national and local levels in order to draw attention to the need to respect the World Heritage status of the four sites and create an environment in which ICCN and its staff resident in the four sites could carry out necessary conservation actions;
• co-operate with the Task Force with a view to approaching private foundations, bi- and multilateral donors and organizations in order to develop a package of international assistance targeted directly to meet livelihood, equipment and other essential needs of the resident staff to enable staff to carry out their duties and responsibilities in an effective manner; and
• work together with the Task Force members attending the session of the Bureau, to prepare a package of emergency and technical assistance to provide support to the staff of the four sites from the World Heritage Fund which the Bureau could consider under the agenda item on international assistance (Item 7 of the provisional agenda item of the twenty-third session of the Bureau).

The Bureau agreed with the view expressed by IUCN that special efforts are needed to ensure the conservation of the four sites located in a zone of intense armed conflict. In addition, the Bureau endorsed IUCN's position that successful interventions to protect these four sites could provide important lessons that may be applicable elsewhere in the world for the protection World Heritage sites in times of armed conflict. The Bureau recommended that the Committee retain all of the four sites in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau also recalled that the two four-wheel drive vehicles purchased in 1998 for Kahuzi Biega and Garamba are still stored in Kenya since the two vehicles could not be delivered to the sites due to the on-going war in the eastern parts of the DRC. The Bureau was informed that a neighbouring State Party to the Convention (i.e. United Republic of Tanzania) has requested financial assistance for the purchase of two vehicles to strengthen protection of two of its World Heritage sites. The Bureau recommended that the Centre and IUCN discuss this matter with ICCN and Task Force representatives with a view to transferring the two vehicles currently stored in Kenya to the Tanzanian sites, and submit a proposal to effect this transfer for the consideration of the Bureau under the agenda item dealing with international assistance.

The Bureau was informed that in response to an invitation from the Government of Ecuador, via its letter of 4 March 1999 to the Centre, a mission led by IUCN experts and comprising paticipants from WWF, Fundacion Natura and the Ministry for the Environment of Ecuador had visited Sangay National Park from 10 to 14 June 1999.  The report of the mission was tabled as Information Document INF.17.  This report noted a number of positive developments at this site, but considered that it should stay on the List of World Heritage in Danger.  The Bureau noted that the mission report has been made available only at the time of its session and that the State Party needed time to review the report and respond to the findings and recommendations of the report.

The Bureau invited the State Party to submit its response to the findings and recommendations of the mission report to the Centre before 15 September 1999. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to review the response from the State Party and submit a set of recommendations on the state of conservation of Sangay, including whether or not Sangay should be retained in the List of World Heritage in Danger, for examination by the Committee at its twenty-third session in Marrakesh, Morocco, from 29 November to 4 Decemebr 1999.

The Bureau expressed its concern over the lack of adequate communication between the Centre and the regional authorities in Bahir Dar on the state of conservation of this site. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to consult with the UN Resident Co-ordinator for Ethiopia and the Central Government of Ethiopia to develop a strategy to improve communications with the regional authorities in Bahir Dar. IUCN informed the Bureau that it is assisting the national Government of Ethiopia on environmental conservation projects and will try to use its contacts to improve communications between the Centre and the regional authorities in Bahir Dar. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to submit a report on the outcome of their efforts in this regard and recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau requested the Centre to contact the relevant authorities in the two States Parties and encourage them to extend an invitation to IUCN's Regional Office for West Africa to field a site visit and provide a detailed report on the state of conservation of Mt. Nimba to the twenty-third session of the Committee. The Bureau recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau was informed that the flooding of the Patuca River, at the time when Hurricane Mitch impacted the site, has destroyed a great deal of vegetation and wildlife as well as settlements. However, more precise information on impacts on the natural heritage values of the site is needed to plan rehabilitation measures. IUCN’s Regional Office for Meso-America is promoting a project to assess the impact of Hurricane Mitch on protected areas in the region, including World Heritage sites, with a view to obtaining baseline data necessary to prepare and implement restoration plans.   The Bureau noted that the Centre is in contact with the staff of the GTZ-KFW conservation project for Rio Platano and with the Permanent Delegation of Honduras to UNESCO to obtain more information on the Patuca II project and the extent of damage caused to Rio Platano by Hurricane Mitch.

The Bureau reiterated the Committee’s request to the State Party to consider inviting a Centre/IUCN mission to the site in 1999. Furthermore, the Bureau recommended that the Centre and IUCN continue to co-operate with the State Party to obtain detailed information concerning the Patuca II project and baseline data on the damage caused by Hurricane Mitch in order to plan rehabilitation measures. The Bureau recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau was satisfied to receive confirmation from the Centre that all equipment purchased and delivered using the first instalment of US$ 75,000 is now operational and in use. With regard to the use of the second instalment of US$ 90,000, plans for the purchase of two additional wooden fiber boats and 400 units of patrolling gear for US$ 20,000 remain unchanged and are being implemented. The use of the balance of US$ 70,000 for the construction of ranger posts and staff housing, however is being reviewed due to the fact that not all parts of the Sanctuary are fully secure for staff to be resident. Furthermore, site management seems eager to support some activities that would benefit local villages and enhance trust-building between management and the local community. MOEF has submitted to the Centre a revised budget, comprising sixteen activities, for the use of the US$ 70,000. The Centre, after consulting with IUCN, had sought clarification from the Indian authorities on conservation benefits expected to derive from six of the sixteen activities that are intended to cater to the needs of local villagers. The Bureau was informed that MOEF has transmitted via its letter of 21 June 1999, a detailed report on the state of conservation of Manas that included clarifications requested by the Centre. The Bureau requested the Centre to transmit the report to IUCN for review.

The Bureau was informed that the WWF Office of Bhutan has offered the Centre its assistance in reviewing detailed documentation on the Convention, with a view to advising the Royal Government of Bhutan on the implications of Bhutan’s ratification of the World Heritage Convention and the nomination of the Royal Manas National Park as a World Heritage site. The Bureau noted that the Centre has transmitted all relevant information to the WWF Office in Bhutan. The Bureau encouraged the Centre and IUCN to continue their co-operation with WWF and other international conservation organizations resident in Bhutan to urge the Royal Government of Bhutan to ratify the Convention and nominate the Royal Manas National Park for consideration as World Heritage as soon as possible. 

The Bureau urged the Centre and IUCN to finalize the revision of the budget for the use of the US$ 70,000 and expedite the rate of implementation of the rehabilitation plan that appears to have slowed down during 1998. The Bureau recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Committee learned of the State Party’s efforts to elaborate an emergency rehabilitation programme for the site, focused to: (i) restore sites used as bases by the rebels in the past; (ii) strengthen surveillance and protection capacity; (iii) promote ostrich breeding in partial enclosures; (iv) carry out rapid evaluation of impacts on populations of key faunal species; (v) establish a committee for development and management of the site; and (vi) conduct training workshops on threats to natural heritage for selected target groups like border police, customs officers etc.

The Bureau examined the emergency rehabilitation plan presented in Document WHC-99/CONF.204/INF.12 and noted that the Chairperson had approved a grant for supporting a training seminar for border police and customs officers. The Bureau was informed that IUCN's Country Office for Niger has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife of Niger for launching a programme entitled « Air 2000 », in co-operation with other donors like SDC, DANIDA and GEF. The signing of this MOU has resulted in some modifications to the component of the emergency rehabilitation plan activities, indicated in the Document WHC-99/CONF.204/INF.12 and which were to be submitted for financial support from the World Heritage Fund. Following the request of the Observer of Niger, the Bureau asked the Centre and IUCN to explore ways and means to finance the implementation of the rehabilitation plan, including the submission of projects for financial assistance to the consideration of the Chairperson and the twenty-third session of the Committee (29 November to 4 December 1999). The Bureau agreed with the recommendation of IUCN that the decision on whether or not the Committee should consider removing the Air and Ténéré Reserves from the List of World Heritage in Danger should be deferred until 2000, when the monitoring results of the impact of the implementation of the rehabilitation plan would be available. Hence, the Bureau recommended that the Committee retain Air and Ténéré in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau examined Document WHC-99/CONF.204/INF.11 containing the report of the mission of experts from IUCN, the Ramsar Convention Secretariat and the Centre to Ichkeul, fielded in February 1999. The Bureau noted that the experts recognized the uncertainty linked to the feasibility of rehabilitating Ichkeul to conditions that existed at the time of its inscription (1980). However, the Bureau was satisfied to note that the State Party is committed and taking significant efforts to mitigate threats to the site and ensure effective and timely rehabilitation. The Bureau was in agreement with the mission that the monitoring of the effectiveness of the rehabilitation would have to be based on a reasonable time frame. Inter-linked indicators such as salinity, availability of preferred species of food plants of birds, and the number of wintering birds arriving in Ichkeul could fluctuate significantly, based on annual variations in rainfall and evapo-transpiration which affect water levels in the Lake. The Bureau concurred with the view of mission that the Committee should defer its judgement on the success or failure of the rehabilitation of Ichkeul until such time when possible improvements to the ecology of the Lake could be detectable.

The Tunisian Observer informed the Bureau that three of the six dams that would have diverted waters coming into the Lake (see page 12 of the Document WHC-99/CONF.204/INF.11) have been suspended and plans for the provision of fresh water to Lake would become operational by the year 2001. The Delegate agreed with the mission recommendation concerning the longer time frame needed for the ecological monitoring of restoration of wetland ecosystems such as the Ichkeul. He furthermore pointed out that considerable data existed to set up a monitoring programme as recommended by the expert mission, but implementation of a rigorous monitoring programme would require assistance for national capacity-building.

The Bureau invited the State Party to submit a threat mitigation status report to the twenty-third session of the Committee in accordance with the outline proposed by the expert mission report. The proposed outline invited the State Party to define current and expected values for a set of indicators, e.g. water salinity levels, counts of a selected number of endangered species of birds and the availability of preferred food plants of birds etc.  This could provide the basis for a monitoring programme during a 5 year-period from 2000 to 2004. IUCN stressed the need that the selection of parameters for the monitoring programme be related to the values for which the site was originally inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1980. The Bureau recommended that the State Party undertakes necessary studies and analysis needed for developing the region’s economy based on ecotourism and similar non-extractive resource uses so that local people who are dependent on grazing their livestock on the Ichkeul marshes could be provided with alternative livelihood options. The Bureau recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Bureau noted that some one hundred on-going projects are being implemented by more than a dozen countries and agencies, including large scale infrastructural projects such as road and bridge constructions, airport extension and public utilities upgrading of The World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Japan International Co-operation Agency (JICA) and other bilateral and multilateral financial and development co-operation agencies, as well as privately-funded projects, notably for the construction of tourism facilities.  To ensure that such works, necessary for the socio-economic welfare of the population, do not undermine the World Heritage values of the site, the Bureau requested the strengthening of international co-ordination efforts by APSARA and ICC to review all public and private works affecting the site in addition to the monumental conservation projects.  Recalling paragraph 56 of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, the Bureau invited the State Party to inform the Committee, through the Secretariat, of major restorations or new constructions which they intend to undertake or to authorize which may affect the World Heritage values of the site, before the drafting of basic documents of the specific projects and before granting authorization.

As a management tool to record and monitor the various development works, the Delegate of Hungary stressed the need to update the Geographical Information System (GIS) of Angkor developed in 1993, and to make this consolidated data available to all concerned parties.

Concerning the conservation projects, the Bureau, while expressing its appreciation for the high quality of the standards applied in the on-going projects, stressed the necessity to ensure the transfer of knowledge and skills to the national and local experts through training.  In this regard, ICCROM, recognized by the Committee as the principal partner for training in cultural heritage conservation, reiterated its readiness to evaluate the training aspects of the on-going projects and to improve, as appropriate, the effectiveness of such endeavours.

The Bureau, furthermore expressed its deep concern over the alarming reports on the continued looting and illicit traffic of cultural properties in Angkor and other cultural sites on the Tentative List of Cambodia. Referring to the report presented by the Secretariat on this matter and stating that although his country is not yet a signatory to the 1970 Convention, the Observer of Thailand expressed his satisfaction with the measures taken by the Thai authorities, following the seizure by the Thai police of more than one hundred objects from a temple in Cambodia. Recalling the request of the Committee at its twenty-first session for the recording and documentation of these sites, the Bureau called upon the Secretariat to strengthen support to the State Party in this regard. The Bureau also urged the State Party to take further action to enhance the protection of the site against looting and the national frontiers against illicit export of cultural properties and requested the signatories of the 1970 Convention to take all measures possible to prevent the importation and sales of Khmer cultural objects of uncertain provenance.

The Bureau requested the State Party to prepare an updated state of conservation report with the support of the UNESCO Office in Phnom Penh and the Division of Cultural Heritage of UNESCO of the actions being undertaken in addressing the concerns expressed above. The Bureau invited the Chairperson of the Committee to write to the Co-chairpersons of the ICC requesting them to also assist the State Party in the preparation of this report.  This report should include information concerning the on-going and planned major public and private works in the region of Angkor, as well as the status of measures being undertaken at the national and local levels to control looting and illicit traffic of cultural properties from Angkor and other sites on the Tentative List of Cambodia. The Bureau requested that this report be provided to the Secretariat by 15 September 1999 for examination by the Committee at its twenty-third session.

Joya de Ceren (El Salvador): The protective roofs proved to be inadequate to protect the excavated areas of this site. Prolonged soaking of the volcanic soil resulted in rapid plant and fungal growth on the excavated structures. The expert recommended preventive action and the full incorporation of risk preparedness in the management plan that is under preparation with support of the Getty Conservation Institute.

Antigua Guatemala (Guatemala): Widespread flooding occurred up to one meter high, particularly in the Alameda del Calvario. Decisive action was taken immediately by the authorities, the city was cleaned and most of the damage has already been repaired.

Archaeological Park and Ruins of Quirigua (Guatemala): This was the most heavily damaged site visited by the expert. Canals and water management systems of the surrounding banana plantations were destroyed, causing mud and water to flood the site and impregnating the structures and sculptures with agricultural chemicals. Cleaning of the stone requires a long and expensive process. Most of the infrastructure at the site, storage facilities, fences etc. were also destroyed. There is a need for a management plan with risk preparedness provisions.

Maya Site of Copan (Honduras): The Copan River overflowed and retook its original course, destroying archaeological remains (Las Sepulturas) as well as a retention wall. Excavation tunnels in the pyramids that were not stabilised were affected. In ICOMOS’s opinion these should be immediately backfilled once the research and documentation concluded. A thorough review of the excavation policy for Copan should be undertaken.

The Ruins of Leon Viejo (Nicaragua): This site was nominated for inscription on the World Heritage List some years ago and recognised as having World Heritage values. The site was very seriously affected by a hurricane in 1982. As a consequence of Hurricane Mitch, the stream that was canalised at that time, overflowed and returned to its original course. The site was covered with mud and walls were destabilised. Cleaning and repair were immediately undertaken. The construction of protective walls and dredging of the stream will be required.

IUCN underlined that the ACIUCN has started a process for monitoring Australian sites. The aim is to bring IUCN members together to discuss key issues at each site and recommend actions. This process, although not perfect, has to be encouraged. In the ACIUCN report that IUCN transmitted to the Centre and has been forwarded to the State Party for review and comment, are a number of key points:

(a)      the scale and complexity of this World Heritage site has to be recognized as a key issue relating to assessing management effectiveness;

(b)      the range of threats, including catchment management and impacts from on-shore activities on the adjoining reef complex needs a co-ordinated approach to management between a range of different stakeholders and agencies;

(c)      the need for an effective and representative system of protected areas within this very large World Heritage site; and

(d)      the importance of a strong, effective and dedicated authority for management.

ACIUCN indicated strong support for the GBRMPA but noted that the organization needs to have organisational stability and long-term adequate funding. IUCN noted a number of other threats, including fishing, oil spills and oil shale mining and noted that ACIUCN recommended that no oil shale mining and prospecting should be permitted within the GBR World Heritage area and adjacent zones. IUCN recognizes that the GBRMPA has a challenging, complex and very difficult task in managing the Reef. IUCN feels that the state of the GBR World Heritage area should be looked at in conjunction with the IUCN report and the implementation of the strategic plan for the GBR. IUCN feels that the state of the GBR World Heritage area should be looked at in conjunction with the IUCN report and the implementation of the strategic plan for the GBR.  IUCN supports stakeholder-Government consultation as part of the periodic reporting process.

The Bureau noted that the Australian authorities had submitted their comments on the ACIUCN Report entitled: “Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area: Condition, Management and Threats”. They have annexed a description of recent management initiatives addressing threats to the integrity of the GBR World Heritage Area to that letter. The letter and the annex were transmitted to IUCN for review. Furthermore, the Centre also received a copy of the letter from Mr. Victor Kuss, to the Executive Director of ACIUCN, expressing his disagreement concerning the recommendation of the ACIUCN report on oil shale mining in the World Heritage area and in the adjacent inter-tidal zone (Recommendation No: 22 of the ACIUCN report).

The Bureau welcomed the two-step process adopted by IUCN to review the state of conservation of the Great Barrier Reef for the purpose of its reporting to the Bureau, i.e. an initial in-depth review by ACIUCN in full consultation with all stakeholders to report to IUCN Headquarters, followed by an IUCN Headquarters review of the ACIUCN report and other relevant information to provide inputs to the Centre’s preparation of the working document on the state of conservation of World Heritage sites. 

The Bureau requested ACIUCN and the State Party to review the 29 recommendations listed in the ACIUCN report, to elaborate a more focused set of recommendations and a detailed plan for implementation and monitoring those recommendations. Such a plan should, to the extent possible, be built on consensus view of all stakeholders concerned with the long-term conservation of the GBR World Heritage area. This plan should be provided to the Centre and IUCN before 15 September 1999 so that a report can be submitted to the twenty-third session of the Committee to be held in Marrakesh, Morocco, from 29 November to 4 December 1999.

The Australian Observer agreed with the recommendation of the Bureau and made a set of observations on the ACIUCN report’s recommendations and proposed follow up actions.  The full text of the statement made by the Australian Observer is included in Annex III.

IUCN informed the Centre that it has received information indicating that potential threats due to existing and proposed mining activities, such as shell mining, expansion of salt extraction, gypsum leases and mineral sands mining are key concerns for the conservation of this area. Other concerns include: inappropriate tourism development, visitor access to environmentally sensitive locations and the need to finalise an overall management plan for the site. ACIUCN has established a process involving key stakeholders to finalise its report on the conservation status for the Shark Bay World Heritage site.

The Bureau requested IUCN to submit an up-to-date state of conservation report on this site to its twenty-third extraordinary session in November 1999.

IUCN informed the Centre that preliminary advice it has received indicates that the central issue is the effectiveness of implementation of the management plan, in relation to issues such as invasive species, water extraction, fire management, tourism development and the effective involvement of Aboriginal people. IUCN has informed the Centre that ACIUCN has established a collaborative process to finalise its report on the conservation status of the Wet Tropics. This report will be ready for submission to the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau in November 1999.

The Australian authorities had informed the Centre that the Heard Island and McDonald Island (HIMI) benthic project to establish a marine protected area includes a desktop study and a field survey. The desktop study commenced in January 1999 and was due to be completed in June 1999. It aims to document the distribution and abundance of different types of benthic habitats on the continental shelf around Heard Island, including an evaluation of the differences between benthic habitats in the territorial waters (0-12 nautical miles) and the remainder of the Australian (200 nautical miles) EEZ surrounding the Island. The field survey will examine the effect of trawling on these types of habitats and develop management options to protect environmental values of the benthic environments. The second stage, i.e. the field survey, is intended to be a pilot study to provide indicative results on habitats. Dependent upon the availability of the necessary ship transport, the Australian authorities estimate that the earliest opportunity for beginning the second stage will be in the summer of 2000/2001. The letter of 12 April 1999 from the Australian authorities has been transmitted to IUCN for comments.

IUCN commended the process to create a marine protected area around HIMI which it saw as essential to more effectively protect marine biodiversity.

The Bureau recommended that the State Party submits a report on the desktop study, due to be completed in June 1999, to the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau in November 1999.  The Australian Observer informed the Bureau that the report of the desktop study is being finalised and will be submitted to the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau.

In a separate initiative, WWF-International is launching a study financed by a SFR 50,000 grant for investigating transborder ecological and conservation aspects of the tiger population inhabiting the Sundarbans ecosystem. The two World Heritage sites together support the largest and the most viable wild tiger population in the world. The WWF-project intends to promote co-operation between the Bangladesh and Indian site staff and scientists for the conservation and management of tiger populations, as a first step that could lead towards discussions to consider the joint inscription of the two sites as a single entry in the World Heritage List. The Ministry of Environment and Forests of the Government of Bangladesh, via their fax of 22 June 1999 informed the Centre that they accept the suggestion made by the Centre (with the agreement of the relevant authorities of the Ministry of Environment and Forests of India) to host a meeting in Bangladesh to discuss co-operation between the two sites. The Government of Bangladesh has indicated that they would inform the Centre of the venue, timing and financial requirements of organising such a planning meeting in due course.

IUCN supported the efforts of the Government of Bangladesh to strengthen the management at this site. IUCN Bangladesh country office is assisting with this project. IUCN reiterated its recommendation for the desirability of combining the Sundarbans World Heritage sites of Bangladesh and India into one single site, which is effectively managed in a co-ordinated way. IUCN highlighted the “Parks for Peace” initiative, which works on transboundary protected areas and may be applicable in this case.

The Bureau commended the Government of Bangladesh and the Asian Development Bank for their efforts to strengthen the management of The Sundarbans (Bangladesh) and WWF-International in launching a study on transborder aspects of tiger ecology and conservation. The Bureau thanked the Government of Bangladesh for agreeing to host a planning meeting to build co-operation between the management of these two sites. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to extend their fullest co-operation to the Governments of Bangladesh and India, and to all other international, regional and national organisations who may wish to participate in building a programme of co-operation which could result in the eventual joint inscription of the two sites as a single entry on the World Heritage List.

The Bureau requested IUCN to provide an up-to-date state of conservation report on this site to its twenty-third extraordinary session in November 1999.

An IUCN/UNESCO mission visited the site in March 1999 and discussed the state of conservation with all the stakeholders including local residents and local Government officials. The mission identified the following four issues as most threatening to the integrity of this site:

(1) The Colon Road which was illegally reopened in May 1997. The Federal Public Prosecutor is presently prosecuting the local communities of the area for reopening the road and the Federal and State agencies for not enforcing the closure of the road. The majority of the local people favour the continued use of the road as it shortens the distance between communities in the northern and southern sides of the Park by about 130 km. The north-south road dissects the Park into two and has resulted in the opening of the forest canopy along most of its length. The road has led to the destruction of parts of the forest, interrupted wildlife movement between the eastern and western sections of the Park and has severely impacted the site’s World Heritage value. Research and academic personnel have expressed particular concerns regarding the preservation of the jaguar that may be threatened with extinction in the region, as its habitat has been dissected by this road. The road is leading to an increase in silting of the creeks and rivers and alteration of drainage patterns, further exacerbating the impact on World Heritage values. The road has also opened up the Park for illegal extraction of timber and poaching.

(2) Helicopter flights originating from Brazil and Argentina began in 1972. Following recommendations from the World Heritage Committee in 1994, flights on the Argentinean side have been stopped, but have continued on the Brazilian side. In 1996, growing concern on this matter led to a discussion between the Presidents of Brazil and Argentina. In 1997 Brazil, in agreement with Argentina, recommenced helicopter flights which are restricted to Brazilian territory, operate between 0900 and 1700 hours, and maintain a minimum altitude of 1600 feet (i.e. 500 metres). The heliport was to be relocated from a site adjacent to the Falls to outside of the National Park. But a suitable location for the heliport outside of the Park has yet to be found and up to 20-25 flights per day, each of 7 to 11 minutes, continue to originate from within the Park. A study of the Environment Institute of Paraná has found that most visitors believe that the flights are interfering with their enjoyment of the Falls. The study however did not investigate the impact of the flights on the fauna.

(3) The Salto Caixas Dam on the Iguacu River was built recently but is located upstream of the National Park and at present there is no evidence of any impact on the World Heritage values of the Park. The proposal for another dam, Capanema, has been abandoned, as it would have had a direct impact on the Park.  The new Management Plan for Iguacu National Park was to be completed by May 1999.

This management plan will aim to address all of the above-mentioned problems. It is clear that the management of the two World Heritage sites, i.e. Iguacu National Park (Brazil) and the Iguazu National Park (Argentina) would benefit from closer liaison and co-ordination between their respective management authorities. IUCN stressed that sufficient time should be given to the State Parties for implementing the recommendations of the mission.

The Centre informed the Bureau that the Ministers of both the Environment and Tourism, and the Governor of the State of Parana met on 13 April 1999 and agreed that the situation of the Colon Road is not acceptable. They defined a number of measures to solve this problem, including the recuperation of degraded areas, and consultation with local authorities to ensure a peaceful solution to close the road. The Observer of Brazil informed the Bureau that the new management plan has been finalized and recommends the closure of the illegal road and evaluates damage and establishes a series of recommendations for the restoration of this area. The plan also defines a new zoning of the Park.  A dialogue with the Argentinian National Park Service towards a common programme of research, monitoring and protection of the two World Heritage sites has been started.

The Bureau requested the State Party to immediately close the Colon Road and initiate a recovery plan to increase canopy closure and re-vegetation of ground cover and stabilise soils and control erosion. In the absence of satisfactory progress with regard to the permanent closure of the road and the implementation of the recovery plan by the time of its twenty-third extraordinary session, the Bureau may recommend that the Committee include Iguacu National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger. Furthermore, the Bureau requested the State Party to: (i) immediately halt helicopter flights pending a thorough evaluation of their impact on the fauna, particularly the avifauna; and (ii) provide a copy of the new management plan to IUCN for review to enable an assessment of the effectiveness of the plan to address prevailing threats to the integrity of the site.