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

Lorentz National Park

Indonesia
Factors affecting the property in 2006*
  • Civil unrest
  • Financial resources
  • Fishing/collecting aquatic resources
  • Housing
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Mining
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

a) Mining;

b) Security limitations;

c) Development threats;

d) Exploitation of marine resources;

e) Absence of a co-ordinating agency;

f) Absence of a finalized strategic management plan;

g) Absence of physically designated Park boundaries;

h) Inadequate financing.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2006
Requests approved: 2 (from 1996-2001)
Total amount approved : 41,400 USD
Missions to the property until 2006**

IUCN mission 2004.

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2006

The State Party, in response to the request from the 29th session of the World Heritage Committee for a progress report on the implementation of recommendations from the 2004 IUCN mission to the property, submitted on 6 March 2006, a two-page report to the World Heritage Centre.

The State Party notes that the Strategic Plan for the management of the World Heritage property is in the final stage. However, there is no schedule identified for its implementation as called for in Decision 28 COM 15B.10. The State Party notes that the park management authority, Balai Taman Nasional Lorentz, has been agreed and is in the process of being established. Meanwhile, the park is under the management of the regional Conservation Agency. The 2006 national budget includes provisions for some management activities of the property. However, no information is included on actual amounts allocated.

The Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation, and WWF-Indonesia have carried out an assessment of the management of Lorentz National Park to measure the effectiveness of the Park’s management. The assessment reviewed the threats arising from “pre-existing development rights” on the conservation of Lorentz National Park. However, based on the limited information avaiable, it is not possible to determine the degree to which this has been adequately addressed.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN are concerned about the length of time involved in the finalization/implementation of the Strategic Plan for the property and that the resources (human and financial) available to manage it are extremely limited for such a large national park that covers such a wide range of habitats, from high mountains to coastal marine.

The report received from the State Party does not provide a substantive response to the World Heritage Committee’s request to commission an independent environmental audit of the proposed Habema Road (28 COM 15B.10 paragraph 3).

In addition to the issues reported by the State Party, IUCN has received a number of press reports and information concerning pollution and land rights issues associated with the Freeport mine on the park boundary. The press reports provide details of on-going public protests in Indonesia over the activities of the mining company and IUCN is concerned that these issues may threaten the World Heritage property if they remain unresolved.

Of particular concern is the pollution of the marine and estuary areas of the World Heritage property resulting from the water discharged from the mine tailings into the estuary of the Ajkwa River, near the boundary of the property. This discharge could be carried by longshore drifting into the marine section of the World Heritage property.

IUCN is also concerned about the reported oil and gas exploration within the World Heritage property, which appears to be supported by licenses and permits that have been issued over the park. In addition a number of reports have been received on a large landslide reported to have occurred in and near the property. This landslide seems to be the result of a new underground mining technique applied in the Freeport mine.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2006
30 COM 7B.14
State of Conservation (Lorentz National Park)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.12, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Notes that there are ongoing significant threats to the values and integrity of the World Heritage property that requires a concerted effort and adequate resources to address;

4. Notes with concern that the Strategic Plan has yet to be formally approved and implemented;

5. Urges the State Party to take urgent action for the establishment, staffing and funding of the park management authority, Balai Taman Nasional Lorentz;

6. Requests the State Party to formally approve and implement the Strategic Plan and to provide a detailed report as soon as possible, but not later than 31 October 2006, on the human and financial resources required to implement the Strategic Plan and the actual resources currently available from the State Party and other sources;

7. Encourages the international donor community to place a high priority on funding the implementation of the Strategic Plan, once it has been formally approved by the State Party;

8. Urges the State Party to provide a substantive response to the World Heritage Committee's request (28 COM 15B.10 paragraph 3) to commission an independent environmental audit of the proposed Habema Road;

9. Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with a detailed report by 1 February 2007 on the state of conservation of the property in relation to the different issues noted above, including the threats to the World Heritage property posed by the mining activities, in particular those associated to the discharge of water from the mine tailings into the estuary of the Ajkwa River, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 31st session in 2007.

Draft Decision: 30 COM 7B.14

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.12, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Notes that there are ongoing significant threats to the values and integrity of the World Heritage property that requires a concerted effort and adequate resources to address;

4. Notes with concern that the Strategic Plan has yet to be formally approved and implemented;

5. Urges the State Party to take urgent action for the establishment, staffing and funding of the park management authority, Balai Taman Nasional Lorentz;

6. Requests the State Party to formally approve and implement the Strategic Plan and to provide a detailed report as soon as possible, but not later than 31 October 2006, on the human and financial resources required to implement the Strategic Plan and the actual resources currently available from the State Party and other sources;

7. Encourages the international donor community to place a high priority on funding the implementation of the Strategic Plan, once it has been formally approved by the State Party;

8. Urges the State Party to provide a substantive response to the World Heritage Committee’s request (28 COM 15B.10 paragraph 3) to commission an independent environmental audit of the proposed Habema Road;

9. Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with a detailed report by 1 February 2007 on the state of conservation of the property in relation to the different issues noted above, including the threats to the World Heritage property posed by the mining activities, in particular those associated to the discharge of water from the mine tailings into the estuary of the Ajkwa River, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 31st session in 2007.

Report year: 2006
Indonesia
Date of Inscription: 1999
Category: Natural
Criteria: (viii)(ix)(x)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 30COM (2006)
Exports

* : 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”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top