Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park
Factors affecting the property in 1990*
- Management systems/ management plan
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1990
Total amount approved : 246,450 USD
|1990||La Amistad: construction of 3 guard posts, purchase of ... (Approved)||50,000 USD|
|1990||Various conservation and training activities for La ... (Approved)||50,000 USD|
|1988||Equipment and financial contribution for strengthening ... (Approved)||30,000 USD|
|1985||Improvement of infrastructure, implementation of the ... (Approved)||40,000 USD|
|1985||Strengthening the protection and management of ... (Approved)||32,150 USD|
|1983||Training programme, improvement of infrastructures and ... (Approved)||30,000 USD|
|1982||In situ training of wardens of La Amistad Reserve (Approved)||14,300 USD|
Missions to the property until 1990**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1990
[Oral report by IUCN]
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1990
14 BUR IV.A.15
La Amistad/Talamanca (Costa Rica)
The Bureau noted the need to review the original boundaries of this site. Several Indian Reserves, included in the original nomination had since then been degraded by coal mining and road construction projects and were not being managed for conservation objectives. The lack of definition of conservation areas had resulted in a native resident, who attempted to prevent illegal hunting, being recently shot and killed. The Bureau recommended that the Chairman contact the Costa Rican authorities to express condolences to the affected family on behalf of the Committee. The Bureau also requested the Costa Rican authorities to contact IUCN to define the boundaries of the World Heritage portion of the site excluding areas which were not of outstanding universal value. Furthermore, the Bureau suggested that if the La Amistad National Park of Panama, nominated by Panama in 1989, is inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1990, then the Costa Rican authorities co-operate with their counterparts in Panama in proposing the listing of this transborder park as a single site.
14 COM IX
SOC: La Amistad/Talamanca Range (Costa Rica)
La Amistad/Talamanca Range (Costa Rica)
The Committee noted the need to review the original boundaries. of this site in order to exclude those areas not of outstanding universal value and extend the site to include the expanded Talamanca and Chirripo National Parks. The Committee asked the Secretariat to suggest to the Costa Rican authorities that they set the new boundaries of this property in response to IUCN's suggestion.
14 COM XII.A
Requests for International Assistance: Technical Co-operation
46. The Committee examined the document prepared by the Secretariat in this regard and congratulated the Secretariat on its clear presentation of the requests submitted. Considering the Bureau's recommendations, the Committee decided to approve the following requests:
A - TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION
1. Ngorongoro Conservation Area (United Republic of Tanzania) US$49,782
Purchase of a Land Rover and radio equipment for the archaeological and paleontological site of Olduvai.
2. Studenica Monastery (Yugoslavia) US$51,000
Purchase of computer and photographic equipment and equipment for the restoration of murals. With respect to this site, the Committee has noted with satisfaction the assurances provided by the Yugoslavian authorities that there will be no dam construction near the monastery which could jeopardize the outstanding value of this site.
3. Archaeological site of Delphi (Greece) US$50,000
Purchase of a sandblaster and seven dehumidifiers for the restoration of objects from the site which have been placed in the Delphi museum. The Committee examined the possibility of acceding to requests concerning the conservation of objects from archaeological sites, and it asked the Secretariat to draw up a draft decision on this issue for inclusion in the Operational Guidelines, to ensure that the fund allocation limits for objects from archaeological sites protected by the World Heritage Convention are clearly defined. This draft decision is to be presented to the Bureau and Committee at their next sessions.
4. Timbuktu (Mali) US$45,138
Consolidation of the Djingareiber mosque and improvement of terrace rainwater drainage systems. Removal of sand from the walls and interior court of the Sankore mosque, and installation of bollards to divert traffic away from the mosque.
5. International symposium on the "Preservation of Urban Historic Areas in Changing Times" (Canada) US$26,000
Publication of the proceedings of the symposium.
1. La Amistad National Park (Panama) US$50,000
As part of the described management plan, financing of the construction of three guard posts; purchase of field equipment and materials for environmental education activities; organization of training seminars for park guards.
2. Salonga National Park (Zaire) US$60,000
Reinforcement of park protection through infrastructure construction (ranger posts, jetty) and purchase of an all-terrain vehicle and smallscale equipment.
3. Talamanca Range-La Amistad National Park (Costa Rica) US$50,000
The Committee approved this request under two conditions: that the Costa Rican authorities report on the completion of the previous projects and that the boundaries of this property be revised in accordance with IUCN recommendations. The Committee instructed the Bureau to determine at its next session whether these conditions had been met before deciding whether to award an appropriate amount to Costa Rica.
47. With respect to Banc d'Arguin National Park (Mauritania), the Committee noted that a request for technical cooperation had been submitted to the Secretariat but that this request needed to be reformulated. The Committee encouraged the Mauritanian authorities to prepare and submit a new request for consideration at its next session.
No draft Decision
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”).