Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve
Factors affecting the property in 1987*
- Financial resources
- Ground transport infrastructure
- Illegal activities
- Management systems/ management plan
- Mining
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Lack of Management Plan; Lack of funding; Poaching; New railway
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1987
Total amount approved : 112,882 USD
1986 | Equipment for Mount Nimba Reserve (Approved) | 6,500 USD |
1983 | Financial contribution to a seminar/workshop on the ... (Approved) | 22,000 USD |
1983 | Consultant services to prepare requests for technical ... (Approved) | 6,082 USD |
1982 | Financial contribution to a tripartite meeting (Guinea, ... (Approved) | 8,000 USD |
1981 | Equipment for Mount Nimba (Approved) | 70,300 USD |
Missions to the property until 1987**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1987
IUCN has sent a letter of concern to the World Bank over potential impacts of a new railway line to serve a $300 million iron ore mine investment, that would further damage this site.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 1987
The Committee should request a status report on the area from the relevant authorities.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1987
11 COM VIII.18
Requested Progress Reports
18. The Committee requested its Chairman to write to the authorities concerned for the following natural sites mentioned in the IUCN document in order that progress reports could be submitted to the Committee at its next session: Western Tasmania National Parks (Australia); Mt.Nimba (Cote d'Ivoire/Guinea); Machu Picchu Historic Sanctuary (Peru); Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal); Selous Game Reserve (Tanzania).
No draft Decision
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.