Kahuzi-Biega National Park

a) Armed conflict and political instability;

b) Poaching by military and armed groups;

c) Encroachment;

d) Illegal mining and deforestation.

• Impact of refugees;
• Presence of armed militia and illegal settlers in the property;
• Increased poaching;
• Deforestation.

Total amount provided to the property: through the United Nations Foundation and the Government of Belgium funded programme for the Conservation of the DRC World Heritage properties. First phase (2001–2005): approximately USD 300,000 was disbursed for staff allowances, equipment, community conservation, monitoring and training activities and efforts to address encroachment. Second phase (2005-2008): a substantial contribution is planned towards the emergency action plan (USD 300,000) with funding from the Government of Belgium.

On 30 January 2006, an updated report on the state of conservation of the five DRC World Heritage properties was submitted by the State Party, including information on the Kahuzi-Biega National Park. The report recalls the major threats to the property, in particular the presence of rebels from Rwanda in the property, encroachment by large scale farmers, mining inside the Park, deforestation, population pressure on the Park and conflicts with local people, particularly those resulting from the extension of the Park in 1975.The report describes a number of activities initiated by the State Party, in cooperation with its partners, to respond to these threats, as well as certain constraints, which were reviewed during the UNESCO monitoring mission.

From 3 to 23 March 2005, an UNESCO monitoring mission visited Virunga National Park and Kahuzi-Biega National Park. IUCN joined the mission in Kinshasa for debriefing meetings with the DRC protected area administration and the ministry. The mission notes that in spite of the continuing threats to the property, certain positive developments were observed since 2004. After the war of General Nkunda in August 2004, security improved considerably in the highland sector of the Park, in particular on the eastern side of the mountains. This resulted in a stabilisation of the gorilla population in this sector and improved cooperation between the Park and the local communities. An inventory of the gorilla population conducted in the highland sector in November 2004 found 168 gorillas, a considerable improvement compared to the estimate of 130 found in the survey of 2000.

In the lowland sector however, the security situation remains precarious, as the region is the scene of regular armed clashes between the DRC army (FARDC), assisted by troops from the United Nations Organization Mission in DRC (MONUC), and elements of the Rwandan rebel movement FDLR (Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda). FDLR use the Park as their operational base, in the corridor between the highland and lowland sector in the Nindja area, in the western side of the highland sector in Bunyakiri and in the lowland sector in Swiza, a former mining area located inside the Park. FDLR is reported to be actively engaged in mining activities in the Park and is also thought to be responsible for much of the poaching. In addition, several other armed groups operate in the region.

FARDC also has numerous military positions around the Park. The reunification and retraining camp, where former militia and army soldiers are retrained for integration in the new reunified army, is situated at Kibirizi, outside the Park. Army troops are reported to be poorly disciplined, badly paid, if at all, and lacking the necessary logistical tools MONUC has a base at the Kavumu airport and is ensuring the security on the Miti-Hombo road, which goes through the Park.

The presence of armed groups but also of the FARDC in the property has a negative impact on its conservation. The armed militia depend for their survival on the resources of the Park and its surroundings and are heavily involved in poaching and resort to looting the surrounding villages. As reported before, they are also involved in the mining activities inside the Park, which provides them with a key source of revenue. Although no figures are available, it is clear that their activities have an extremely negative impact on mammal populations. However, the mission also received information from ICCN Park staff and conservation NGOs that soldiers of FARDC are also involved in destructive activities, in particular poaching, artisinal mining and bamboo harvesting.

It needs to be noted that relations between the Park and the military command in the province are good and that regular joint patrols are conducted between Park guards and the army. For example, a joint action between FARDC and Park staff around the Itebero area was able to chase out poachers and armed groups and close down mining sites. MONUC has also given support to Park operations, in particular logistical support.

A major threat to the Park seems to be the actual military strategy used by FARDC with assistance of MONUC to deal with FDLR. In the two months prior to the mission, several military operations took place in which FDLR base camps were attacked, resulting in a retreat of the rebels into the forests of the Park. From a conservation perspective, the operations have negatively impacted the property as they have driven the rebels inside the Park, where they engage in mining and poaching activities. Following the attacks, FDLR has taken revenge on the local communities living around the property, killing numerous villagers, raping women and burning down houses.

As a result of this insecurity, Park staff only control a limited part of the property. Although the two Park stations Itebero and Nzovu in the lowland sector are again manned by guards since 2004, and three patrol posts were rehabilitated in 2005, it is estimated that only 15 percent of the Park is actually covered by ICCN patrols.

The mission noted that for the moment it is impossible to assess the real impact of the war on the conservation of the Park, in particular the lowland area. The last complete survey of that sector dates from 1994-1995, before the start of the war. In 2005 survey activities started in the Itebero area, but they had to be interrupted because of the security situation. In the area surveyed, presence of gorillas was confirmed, as well as other mammals like duikers, buffalos and leopards but no sign of the presence of elephants could be detected. The mission considers that it is necessary to conduct a survey of the entire lowland area, as soon as the security situation allows it, to be able to assess the real impact of the war and ongoing insecurity on the property.

The mission also enquired about the situation in the corridor connecting the lowland and highland sectors of the Park. The corridor is of utmost importance for the ecological integrity of the property, but is at the centre of conflicts both with the local communities of the Nindja area (part of which was included in the Park when it was extended in 1975) and between a number of important people in the region, who in the 1980s illegally occupied farmland abandoned at the end of the colonial time and which was subsequently included in the extension. These, and other, issues underline the importance of clear demarcation of the Park boundaries. ICCN hopes to reopen its discussion on the Park limit as soon as the security situation allows.

The mission also noted that the Park is receiving clear political support from the government and the provincial and local authorities. The mission met with the recently appointed Governor of the South Kivu province, who pledged his support for the protection of the World Heritage property. The Park authorities were also able to develop good relations with the local traditional chiefs, who are actively supporting conservation efforts. Remarkably, the Park authorities were also able to improve considerably the relations with the local communities during the war as the devastating effects of armed groups on both the Park and the local villages created a clear common agenda. However, with elections approaching, certain politicians are trying to use the Park in the framework of their political campaign. An example is the Minister of Lands, who recently proposed in an official letter to diminish the size of the Park to its original size of 60,000 ha which existed before 1975.

The UNESCO mission felt that given the instability in the region and the rapidly changing situation in the field, it was currently impossible to define a set of corrective measures and benchmarks that will clearly lead to a removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger. However, the mission developped a set of concrete recommendations to the State Party which can be used by the Committee to follow up on the efforts of the State Party to further improve the state of conservation of the property. These are detailed in the draft decision.

The mission noted that the Park has received, over the years, substantial technical and financial support, in particular from the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) and more recently from UNESCO and various NGOs, but that the funding available is insufficient to ensure effective management of the property. The German development Bank is also planning to include the property in the programme it is developing to assist the DRC protected area system. The mission also developed, together with ICCN and the conservation NGO working in the property, an emergency action plan that will be implemented in the framework of the second phase of the UNESCO DRC World Heritage programme with funding from the Government of Belgium. The action plan will support the above mentioned recommendations.