Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

Administration
Budget
Capacity Building
Communication
Community
Conservation
Credibility of the World Heritage ...
Inscriptions on the World Heritage ...
International Assistance
List of World Heritage in Danger
Operational Guidelines
Outstanding Universal Value
Partnerships
Periodic Reporting
Reinforced Monitoring
Reports
Tentative Lists
Working methods and tools
World Heritage Convention








2025 25 GA
2025 47 COM
2024 46 COM
2023 24 GA
2023 45 COM
2023 18 EXT.COM
2022 17 EXT.COM
2021 16 EXT.COM
2021 23 GA
2021 44 COM
2021 15 EXT.COM
2020 14 EXT.COM
2019 13 EXT.COM
2019 22 GA
2019 43 COM
2018 42 COM
2017 12 EXT.COM
2017 21 GA
2017 41 COM
2016 40 COM
2015 11 EXT.COM
2015 20 GA
2015 39 COM
2014 1 EXT.GA
2014 38 COM
2013 19 GA
2013 37 COM
2012 36 COM
2011 10 EXT.COM
2011 18 GA
2011 35 COM
2010 34 COM
2010 9 EXT.COM
2009 17 GA
2009 33 COM
2008 32 COM
2007 16 GA
2007 8 EXT.COM
2007 31 COM
2006 30 COM
2005 15 GA
2005 29 COM
2005 29 BUR
2004 7 EXT.COM
2004 7 EXT.BUR
2004 28 COM
2004 28 BUR
2003 14 GA
2003 27 COM
2003 27 BUR
2003 6 EXT.COM
2002 26 COM
2002 26 BUR
2001 25 COM
2001 25 EXT.BUR
2001 5 EXT.COM
2001 13 GA
2001 25 BUR
2000 24 COM
2000 24 EXT.BUR
2000 24 BUR(SPE)
2000 24 BUR
1999 23 COM
1999 23 EXT.BUR
1999 4 EXT.COM
1999 12 GA
1999 3 EXT.COM
1999 23 BUR
1998 22 COM
1998 22 EXT.BUR
1998 22 BUR
1997 21 COM
1997 21 EXT.BUR
1997 2 EXT.COM
1997 11 GA
1997 21 BUR
1996 20 COM
1996 20 EXT.BUR
1996 20 BUR
1995 19 COM
1995 19 EXT.BUR
1995 10 GA
1995 19 BUR
1994 18 COM
1994 18 EXT.BUR
1994 18 BUR
1993 17 COM
1993 17 EXT.BUR
1993 9 GA
1993 17 BUR
1992 16 COM
1992 16 BUR
1991 15 COM
1991 8 GA
1991 15 BUR
1990 14 COM
1990 14 BUR
1989 13 COM
1989 7 GA
1989 13 BUR
1988 12 COM
1988 12 BUR
1987 11 COM
1987 6 GA
1987 11 BUR
1986 10 COM
1986 10 BUR
1985 9 COM
1985 5 GA
1985 9 BUR
1984 8 COM
1984 8 BUR
1983 7 COM
1983 4 GA
1983 7 BUR
1982 6 COM
1982 6 BUR
1981 5 COM
1981 1 EXT.COM
1981 5 BUR
1980 3 GA
1980 4 COM
1980 4 BUR
1979 3 COM
1979 3 BUR
1979 2 BUR
1978 2 GA
1978 2 COM
1978 1 BUR
1977 1 COM
1976 1 GA

Decision 23 BUR IV.B.49
Tongariro National Park (New Zealand)

At its twenty-second ordinary (June 1998) and extraordinary (November 1998) sessions, the Bureau was informed of the events resulting from the eruptions of Mount Ruapehu in 1995 and 1996. The volcano’s Crater Lake has been drained and a large build-up of ash has blocked the Lake’s outlet.  When Crater Lake refills, probably within the next few years, a rapid collapse of the ash dam could occur followed by a major lahar.  The management authorities are faced with the dilemma of either letting nature take its course, putting both human life and some natural values at risk, or taking action to open up the outlet. The option to excavate a trench through the ash at the crater outlet should not significantly affect the natural values for which the site is inscribed. However, interference with the summit area has implications for the recognition and respect for the spiritual, traditional and cultural values to the Maori people which justified the site’s inscription under cultural criterion (vi). The Ngati Rangi and the Ngati Tuwharetoa Maori Tribes are opposed to the idea of engineering works at the Crater Lake.  The Minister for Conservation has called for a comprehensive environmental and cultural assessment identifying the risks associated with and possible impacts of the mitigation options.

In a letter dated 31 March 1999 from the New Zealand Department of Conservation, the Centre was provided with an update on the decisions concerning management of the ash build-up at the Crater Lake outlet on Mount Ruapehu.  A Draft Assessment of the Environmental Effects report was released for public comment in late October 1998 and consultations have taken place with Maori people, other agencies and the public. Furthermore, the Department of Conservation is investigating possible components of a suitable alarm system to warn members of the public about large lahars from Crater Lake and informal discussions have begun to establish an emergency management group to address such hazards.  Continuous monitoring has shown that as of 22 March 1999, the Crater Lake was 22% full and 54 metres below the old overflow level.  According to current projections, the Crater Lake will not fill until the year 2003.

IUCN confirmed to the Bureau that the New Zealand Government is proceeding with great caution not to offend Maori sensibilities over the option of excavating a trench through the 1995 and 1996 ash build-up blocking the outlet to the Crater Lake of Mount Ruapehu.  IUCN also informed the Bureau that the report on public consultations on the Draft Assessment of the Environmental Effects report will be sent to the Minister of Conservation, who will make a decision as to what action to take, following receipt of an opinion on the legal implications of cutting a trench or letting nature take its course.  ICOMOS commented on the relevance of the case of managing the ash-build up at Tongariro National Park to other cases where in the future there would be an equal need to negotiate a management solution between two cultures.

The Bureau requested the Centre, IUCN and ICOMOS to maintain contact with the State Party to monitor the ash build-up at the Crater Lake and submit a report to its twenty-fourth session in the year 2000. 

Decision Code
23 BUR IV.B.49
Themes
Conservation
States Parties 1
Year
1999
State of conservation reports
1999 Tongariro National Park
Documents
Context of Decision
WHC-99/CONF.204/15
top