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

Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex

Thailand
Factors affecting the property in 2013*
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
  • Land conversion
  • Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Water infrastructure
  • Other Threats:

    Forest fragmentation / Need for ecological corridors

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Road expansion, in particular regarding Highway 304;
  • Forest fragmentation, connectivity and the need for ecological corridors;
  • Encroachment;
  • Management Planning;
  • Tourism and visitor levels;
  • Dams and cattle grazing.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2013
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2013**

February/March 2012: joint UNESCO/IUCN reactive monitoring mission. 

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2013

On 1 February 2013, the State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, which provides information on impacts from expansion works on Highway 304, land encroachment and cattle grazing within components of the property, and construction of the Huay Samong Dam. A report on Environmental Mitigation Measures and Environmental Monitoring Plans related to the construction of Huay Samong Dam is annexed to the report. In addition, the State Party submitted the Environmental Impact Assessment of the Wildlife Corridor and Road Widening Project on Highway 304 to the World Heritage Centre in November 2012.  It deals with one of the sections where the road crosses the property boundaries. This report includes details and an assessment of proposed options for wildlife corridors for the expansion project from km 26 – 29 on Highway 304.

a)   Expansion of Highway 304

Highway 304 runs through the joint boundary of Khao Yai and Thap Lan National Parks in two sections, from km 26 to 29 and from km 42 to 57. The State Party reports that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Wildlife Corridor and Road Widening Project on Highway 304 (the section from km 26 – 29) is currently with the National Environmental Board, which has requested additional information from the Department of Highways (DoH). A complete English translation of the full EIA on this section of the road expansion is yet to be received by the Committee. The English translation of the EIA attached to the current State Party report outlines options for wildlife corridor construction and identifies the most suitable option. However, it does not present an assessment of the different options, and provides only summarized information on the environmental impacts of the preferred option and the proposed mitigation measures during the construction phase. It does not present clear conclusions on impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, nor does it provide details on available resources for the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. Furthermore, it does not provide any information on mitigation measures to be implemented after the construction phase. IUCN considers that the information provided by the State Party is not sufficiently detailed to demonstrate that the expansion of Highway 304 will not have significant negative impacts on the property’s integrity and OUV.

The State Party provides details on actions implemented in regards to speed limits and their enforcement on the relevant sections of the highway that transect the property, including checkpoints and patrolling teams to monitor the speed of vehicles, traffic barriers and stops at crucial parts of the road, warning and interpretive signs at dangerous sections and limits on road access at night. The State Party reports that road # 3436 that bisects the property has been closed, with ranger stations and monitoring put in place. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note that other roads bisecting the property remain open. Enforcement of appropriate speed limits along these routes remains important, noting that these roads are, or have the potential to be used as short cuts through the property.

b)  Encroachment

The State Party previously reported implementation of stricter measures to halt land encroachment within the property. The current report also provides details of additional efforts, including monitoring of encroachment levels (mapping expected to be completed in 2014) and strengthened enforcement measures. Proof of land ownership is still being resolved between the Department of National Parks (DNP) and the local communities with continued consultation between both the authorities and surrounding communities. The State Party indicates that encroachment has not increased since inscription of the property, in contrast to numerous reports received by IUCN indicating increasing encroachment, particularly along the northern border of Thap Lan National Park. IUCN is also concerned by recent newspaper reports indicating a weakening of efforts to address this issue, and notes that the property remains under heavy pressure from encroachment and neighbouring land use practices.

c)  Illegal logging

IUCN has received reports of increased illegal logging of Siamese rosewood by armed gangs of up to 30 individuals within the boundaries of the property, especially in Dong Yai and Ta Phraya National Parks, including the tragic death of a patrol ranger in March 2013. Reported aloewood collection in Khao Yai National Park, and to a lesser degree in the other components of the property, is also a concern. The illegal logging and international illegal trade of Siamese rosewood and other valuable timber species are directly threatening the property’s OUV and a cause for serious concern. There is an urgent need for concerted management action to address these issues and ensure that the OUV is maintained. This should also include international support, particularly from other Siamese rosewood range States, and States concerned with the illegal trade of Siamese rosewood and other valuable timber species (Cambodia, China, Lao People Democratic Republic, Thailand, and Viet Nam). The World Heritage Centre requested the State Party to provide further information on this issue on 8 April 2013. No comments have been received so far.

d)  Huay Samong Dam

The State Party confirms that construction work on the Huay Samong Dam continues and indicates that all relevant agencies are working towards mitigation of the impacts on the property’s OUV during construction. However, details on actions to limit the impact during construction are limited. The State Party states that the area of the property flooded on completion of the dam will serve as a protection zone against encroachment.

However, no details were provided on timelines for implementation of these work plans and which specific actions, if any, have already been implemented. Reports have also been received indicating that there has been no progress on assigning oversight of the dam reservoir area including providing a mandate for DNP to oversee management of the water area to prevent eventual poachers using fishing boats to enter deep into the parks. This issue has been identified as a problem at other sites where DNP does not have the authority to interdict criminals on the water as the management belongs to other authorities that do not have law enforcement authority in regards to the property. Finally, IUCN notes that consideration should be given to associated risks, such as the introduction of exotic commercial fish species into the reservoir, and would strongly advise that preventive measures are taken to avoid the introduction, intentional or accidental, of exotic fish species. The World Heritage Centre requested the State Party to provide further information on this issue on 12 April 2013. No comments have been received so far.

e)  Cattle grazing

The State Party reports that levels of illegal grazing of livestock in the property have improved with the numbers of livestock decreasing significantly in recent years in response to management efforts, and notes continued efforts to remove small subsistence cattle grazing completely from the property. However, the State Party does not make a unequivocal statement in regards to the issue of release of cattle for long term grazing by commercial agricultural companies, raised in the 2012 mission report and by the Committee. The potential impact on the property from this type of cattle grazing is significantly greater than that posed by small-scale settlements which keep cattle enclosed at night. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN consider that the issue of large numbers of cattle, free ranging throughout the area, continues to complicate the removal of smaller subsistence cattle grazing and will require a high level of political will and increased enforcement.

f)  Management Planning, including tourism planning

The State Party outlines a number of efforts to address Management Planning of the property including a revision of the original 2006 Management Plan. The first draft of the revised plan is yet to be presented for consideration by relevant national committees or the Cabinet. The State Party also provides details of a zoning system proposed for the property to assist with effectiveness of administration and operation control, and notes its willingness and interest to work with the World Heritage Centre in that regard. However, no maps or indication of when the zoning plan will be implemented or how it will be enforced are provided.

The State Party provides considerable detail and background on the issues to be considered in undertaking tourism planning, including ease of access from key transport routes and the popularity of the site due to its inscription as a World Heritage property. However, it does not provide information on the timeline for such planning or its integration into the overall Management Plan for the property.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note these efforts, but are concerned that insufficient management staff to oversee protection of some parks (e.g. Dong Yai and Pang Sida), as well as a lack of sufficient resources for effective anti-poaching patrols in all five component parks, are impacting on management effectiveness of the property.  In that regard, IUCN is seriously concerned about reports indicating that the populations of several key species are now very low, notably Siamese Crocodile (Crocodylus siamensis) which is reportedly on the verge of extinction, Banteng (Bos javanicus) and Tiger (Panthera tigris), whose populations in the property are estimated to be below 30 and 20, respectively.  The World Heritage Centre requested the State Party to provide further information on this issue on 12 April 2013. No comments have been received so far.

Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2013

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note the completed expansion works on sections of Highway 304 outside the property are likely to have led to an increase in traffic on all sections of the road, and until the construction of ecological corridors is completed, the impact from the existing road on the property is likely to continue. They recommend that the Committee urge the State Party to expedite the construction of ecologically effective wildlife corridors, based on detailed plans and on completed, approved EIA reports for both sections of the Highway transecting the property (26 – 29 km and 42 – 57 km).

Assessment of the scale and extent of encroachment into the current boundaries of the property is essential to improved enforcement and management. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN therefore recommend that the Committee request the State Party to prioritise completion of a detailed mapping exercise and up to date assessment of encroachment.Priority should also be given to reducing illegal grazing activities, particularly those conducted by commercial agricultural companies, and the increasingly aggressive illegal logging of valuable timber species within the boundaries of the property.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN remain concerned by the impacts during and after construction of the Huay Samong Dam, including proposed plans for introduction of exotic species and the need for enforcement of regulations restricting access to the property once the reservoir is filled. They recommend that the Committee request the State Party to urgently complete the EIA and detailed plans for mitigation actions, including their implementation during and after the construction of the dam.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recommend that the Committee welcome the planned revision of the Management Plan for the property and the proposed zoning plan, and recommend that the Committee request the State Party to submit the (revised) documents, including a tourism Management Plan, to the World Heritage Centre for consideration. It is essential that the updated Management Plan sets clear priorities and includes objectively verifiable indicators and implementation timeframes.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN consider that the property’s OUV remains under serious threat, particularly related to the expansion of Highway 304, encroachment, illegal logging of high value timber species, particularly Siamese rosewood, and sub-optimal management. They are of the view that there has been limited demonstrable progress with the implementation of the recommendations of the Committee (Decision 36 COM 7B.17)and the 2012 reactive monitoring mission, and that the current level of threat could warrant inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger if significant progress over the next 12 months cannot be demonstrated. They therefore recommend that the Committee request the State Party to invite an IUCN reactive monitoring mission to the property before its 38th session in 2014, in order to assess progress in the implementation of the recommendations, and to make a recommendation on whether the property meets the conditions for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2014. 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2013
37 COM 7B.15
Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex (Thailand) (N 590rev)

The World Heritage Committee,

1.  Having examined Document WHC-13/37.COM/7B,

2.  Recalling Decision 36 COM 7B.45 adopted at its 36th session (Saint-Petersburg, 2012),

3.  Extends its deepest condolences to the family of the guard killed during operations conducted to protect the property;

4.  Notes with concern that implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, to address impacts from expansion works on Highway 304, particularly along the sections of the highway within the property, have not been undertaken and no timeline for completion has been provided, and urges the State Party to expedite the construction of ecologically effective wildlife corridors, based on detailed plans and on completed, approved Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), including detailed assessments of different options and carefully planned measures for mitigating impacts in the long term for both sections of the Highway transecting the property;

5.  Reiterates its request to the State Party to implement and enforce speed limits and impact mitigation actions on other roads that bisect the property, and to monitor and restrict the use of other roads as shortcuts and transport routes through the property;

6.  Requests the State Party to complete an up-to-date assessment of the level of encroachment and any increase therein since the inscription of the property, including a detailed mapping exercise, as a matter of priority, and recommends that the State Party considers submitting a request for a major boundary modification to exclude encroached areas that do not contribute to Outstanding Universal Value, and to include adjoining areas of high conservation value, following the relevant procedures as outlined in the Operational Guidelines , and with prior advice of IUCN;

7.  Also requests the State Party to take the necessary measures to halt all illegal logging in the property, and ensure that all people participating in illegal resource extraction activities are removed from the property, and with the support of other States Parties concerned, particularly Cambodia, China, Lao People Democratic Republic and Viet Nam, halt illegal trade in Siamese rosewood (Dalbergia cochinchinensis);

8.  Also notes that construction continues at the Huay Samong Dam site, and also reiterates its request to the State Party to undertake all necessary mitigation, enforcement and anti-encroachment actions to ensure this project does not impact the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

9.  Further reiterates its request to the State Party to implement all the recommendations of the 2012 joint UNESCO/IUCN reactive monitoring mission, including a clear statement on the extent and status of cattle grazing in the property, by June 2014 ;

10.  Further request the State Party to invite an IUCN reactive monitoring mission to the property before the 38th session of the Committee in 2014, in order to assess progress in the implementation of the above recommendations and those made by the 2012 reactive monitoring mission, and to consider whether the property should be considered for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger;

11. Requests furthermore the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2014 , an updated and detailed report on the state of conservation of the property, including a report on the progress achieved in the implementation of the 2012 mission recommendations and those actions outlined above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session in 2014.

37 COM 8E
Adoption of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value
The World Heritage Committee,

1.  Having examined Documents WHC-13/37.COM/8E and WHC-13/37.COM/8E.Add,

2.  Congratulates States Parties for the excellent work accomplished in the elaboration of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in their territories;

3.  Adopts the retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value, as presented in the Annex of Document WHC-13/37.COM/8E, for the following World Heritage properties:

  • Andorra: Madriu-Perafita-Claror Valley;
  • Argentina: Cueva de las Manos, Río Pinturas; Jesuit Block and Estancias of Córdoba; Quebrada de Humahuaca; Iguazu National Park;
  • Australia: Shark Bay, Western Australia; Greater Blue Mountains Area; Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens; Willandra Lakes Region; Kakadu National Park;
  • Austria / Hungary: Fertö / Neusiedlersee Cultural Landscape;
  • Bangladesh: The Sundarbans; Ruins of the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur;
  • Belgium : La Grand-Place, Brussels;
  • Belgium / France: Belfries of Belgium and France;
  • Bolivia: Fuerte de Samaipata; Tiwanaku: Spiritual and Political Centre of the Tiwanaku Culture; Historic City of Sucre; Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos;
  • Brazil: Serra da Capivara National Park;
  • Chile: Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works; Rapa Nui National Park; Churches of Chiloé; Sewell Mining Town; Historic quarter of the Seaport City of Valparaiso;
  • China: Huanglong Scenic and Historic Interest Area; Mount Huangshan; Mountain Resort and its Outlying Temples, Chengde; Ancient City of Ping Yao; Classical Gardens of Suzhou; Summer Palace, an Imperial Garden in Beijing; Ancient Villages in Southern Anhui – Xidi and Hongcun; Longmen Grottoes; Yungang Grottoes; Yin Xu; Imperial Tombs of the Ming and Qing Dynasties; Historic center of Macao; Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor;
  • Colombia: Port, Fortresses and Group of Monuments, Cartagena; Historic Centre of Santa Cruz de Mompox; San Agustín Archaeological Park; National Archeological Park of Tierradentro;
  • Costa Rica: Area de Conservación Guanacaste;
  • Cuba: Trinidad and the Valley de los Ingenios; Desembarco del Granma National Park; Alejandro de Humboldt National Park; Old Havana;
  • Cyprus: Choirokoitia; Painted Churches in the Troodos Region;
  • Denmark: Kronborg Castle;
  • Ecuador: City of Quito; Historic Centre of Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca; Galápagos Islands;
  • El Salvador: Joya de Cerén Archaeological Site;
  • Ethiopia: Aksum; Fasil Ghebbi;
  • Finland / Sweden: High Coast / Kvarken Archipelago;
  • Guatemala: Archeological Park and Ruins of Quirigua; Antigua Guatemala;
  • Germany: Classical Weimar; Messel Pit Fossil Site; Roman Monuments, Cathedral of St Peter and Church of Our Lady in Trier; Aachen Cathedral; Cologne Cathedral; Hanseatic City of Lübeck; Historic Centres of Stralsund and Wismar; Museumsinsel (Museum Island), Berlin; Old town of Regensburg with Stadtamhof; Speyer Cathedral; Town Hall and Roland on the Marketplace of Bremen; Town of Bamberg;
  • Greece: Mount Athos;
  • Honduras: Maya Site of Copan;
  • Hungary: Old Village of Hollókő and its Surroundings; Millenary Benedictine Abbey of Pannonhalma and its Natural Environment; Early Christian Necropolis of Pécs (Sopianae); Tokaj Wine Region Historic Cultural Landscape; Hortobágy National Park - the Puszta; Budapest, including the Banks of the Danube, the Buda Castle Quarter and Andrássy Avenue;
  • Hungary / Slovakia: Caves of Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst;
  • India: Sun Temple, Konârak; Group of Monuments at Hampi; Mahabodhi Temple Complex at Bodh Gaya; Elephanta Caves; Great Living Chola Temples; Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus (formerly Victoria Terminus); Mountain Railways of India;
  • Indonesia: Ujung Kulon National Park; Komodo National Park; Lorentz National Park; Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra; Sangiran Early Man Site;
  • Iran (Islamic Republic of): Pasargadae; Takht-e Soleyman;
  • Ireland: Archaeological Ensemble of the Bend of the Boyne;
  • Italy: Venice and its Lagoon;
  • Japan: Yakushima; Shirakami-Sanchi; Buddhist Monuments in the Horyu-ji Area; Shiretoko; Historic Monuments of Ancient Kyoto (Kyoto, Uji and Otsu Cities); Shrines and Temples of Nikko; Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii Mountain Range; Itsukushima Shinto Shrine; Himeji-jo;
  • Latvia: Historic Centre of Riga;
  • Lao People’s Democratic Republic: Town of Luang Prabang;
  • Lithuania: Vilnius Historic Centre;
  • Luxembourg: City of Luxembourg: its Old Quarters and Fortifications;
  • Malaysia: Kinabalu Park;
  • Mauritius: Aapravasi Ghat;
  • Mexico: Pre-Hispanic City of Teotihuacan; Historic Centre of Morelia; Earliest 16th-Century Monasteries on the Slopes of Popocatepetl; Historic Monuments Zone of Querétaro; Historic Fortified Town of Campeche; Franciscan Missions in the Sierra Gorda of Querétaro; Agave Landscape and the Ancient Industrial Facilities of Tequila; Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino; Ancient Maya City of Calakmul, Campeche; Archaeological Monuments Zone of Xochicalco; Historic Monuments Zone of Tlacotalpan; Pre-Hispanic City of Chichen-Itza; Historic Centre of Zacatecas; Historic Centre of Oaxaca and Archaeological Site of Monte Albán; Sian Ka’an; Luis Barragán House and Studio; Rock Paintings of the Sierra de San Francisco; Archaeological Zone of Paquimé, Casas Grandes; Historic Centre of Puebla; Historic Town of Guanajuato and Adjacent Mines; Pre-hispanic town of Uxmal; Hospicio Cabañas, Guadalajara; Islands and Protected Areas of the Gulf of California; Historic Centre of Mexico City and Xochimilco; Pre-Hispanic City and National Park of Palenque; El Tajin, Pre-Hispanic City;
  • Netherlands: Ir.D.F. Woudagemaal (D.F. Wouda Steam Pumping Station); Schokland and Surroundings; Droogmakerij de Beemster (Beemster Polder); Rietveld Schröderhuis (Rietveld Schröder House);
  • Nicaragua: Ruins of León Viejo;
  • Nigeria: Sukur Cultural Landscape;
  • Norway: Rock Art of Alta; Urnes Stave Church; Bryggen;
  • Oman: Archaeological Sites of Bat, Al-Khutm and Al-Ayn;
  • Pakistan: Taxila; Historical Monuments at Makli, Thatta; Rohtas Fort; Buddhist Ruins of Takht-i-Bahi and Neighbouring City Remains at Sahr-i-Bahlol;
  • Panama: Darien National Park; Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo and Historic District of Panamá;
  • Paraguay: Jesuit Missions of La Santísima Trinidad de Paraná and Jesús de Tavarangue;
  • Peru: City of Cuzco; Chavin (Archaeological Site); Historic Centre of Lima; Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu;
  • Philippines: Historic town of Vigan;
  • South Africa: uKhahlamba / Drakensberg Park;
  • Switzerland: Abbey of St Gall; Benedictine Convent of St John at Müstair; Old City of Berne; Three Castles, Defensive Wall and Ramparts of the Market-Town of Bellinzona;
  • Thailand: Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex; Thungyai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries; Historic Town of Sukhothai and Associated Historic Towns; Ban Chiang Archaeological Site;
  • Turkey: Göreme National Park and the Rock Sites of Cappadocia; Nemrut Dağ; Great Mosque and Hospital of Divriği; Hierapolis-Pamukkale;
  • United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: Blaenavon Industrial Landscape; Blenheim Palace; Canterbury Cathedral, St Augustine's Abbey, and St Martin's Church; Castles and Town Walls of King Edward in Gwynedd; City of Bath; Durham Castle and Cathedral; Giant's Causeway and Causeway Coast; Heart of Neolithic Orkney; Ironbridge Gorge; Maritime Greenwich; New Lanark; Old and New Towns of Edinburgh; Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites; Studley Royal Park including the Ruins of Fountains Abbey; Tower of London; St Kilda; Westminster Palace, Westminster Abbey and Saint Margaret's Church;
  • Uruguay: Historic Quarter of the City of Colonia del Sacramento;
  • Uzbekistan: Itchan Kala;
  • Venezuela : Coro and its Port; Ciudad Universitaria de Caracas;

4.  Decides that retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in Danger will be reviewed by the Advisory Bodies in priority;

5.  Further decides that, considering the high number of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value to be examined, the order in which they will be reviewed by the Advisory Bodies will follow the Second Cycle of Periodic Reporting, namely:

  • World Heritage properties in the Arab States;
  • World Heritage properties in Africa;
  • World Heritage properties in Asia and the Pacific;
  • World Heritage properties in Latin America and the Caribbean;
  • World Heritage properties in Europe and North America;

6.  Requests the World Heritage Centre to harmonise all sub-headings in the adopted Statements of Outstanding Universal Value where appropriate and when resources and staff time allow to carry out this work;

7.  Also requests the State Parties, Advisory Bodies and World Heritage Centre to ensure the use of gender-neutral language in the Statements proposed for adoption to the World Heritage Committee;

8.  Further requests the World Heritage Centre to keep the adopted Statements in line with subsequent decisions by the World Heritage Committee concerning name changes of World Heritage properties, and to reflect them throughout the text of the Statements, in consultation with States Parties and Advisory Bodies;

9.  Finally requests the States Parties to provide support to the World Heritage Centre for translation of the adopted Statements of Outstanding Universal Value into English or French respectively, and finally requests the Centre to upload these onto its web-pages.

Draft Decision:  37 COM 7B.15

The World Heritage Committee,

1.  Having examined Document WHC-13/37.COM/7B,

2.  Recalling Decision 36 COM 7B.45 adopted at its 36th session (Saint-Petersburg, 2012),

3.  Extends its deepest condolences to the family of the guard killed during operations conducted to protect the property;

4.  Notes with concern that implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, to address impacts from expansion works on Highway 304, particularly along the sections of the highway within the property, have not been undertaken and no timeline for completion has been provided, and urges the State Party to expedite the construction of ecologically effective wildlife corridors, based on detailed plans and on completed, approved Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), including detailed assessments of different options and carefully planned measures for mitigating impacts in the long term for both sections of the Highway transecting the property;

5.  Reiterates its request to the State Party to implement and enforce speed limits and impact mitigation actions on other roads that bisect the property, and to monitor and restrict the use of other roads as shortcuts and transport routes through the property;

6.  Requests the State Party to complete an up-to-date assessment of the level of encroachment and any increase therein since the inscription of the property, including a detailed mapping exercise, as a matter of priority, and recommends that the State Party considers submitting a request for a major boundary modification to exclude encroached areas that do not contribute to Outstanding Universal Value, and to include adjoining areas of high conservation value, following the relevant procedures as outlined in the Operational Guidelines, and with prior advice of IUCN;

7.  Also requests the State Party to take the necessary measures to halt all illegal logging in the property, and ensure that all people participating in illegal resource extraction activities are removed from the property, and with the support of other States Parties concerned, particularly Cambodia, China, Lao People Democratic Republic and Viet Nam, halt illegal trade in Siamese rosewood;

8.  Also notes with increasing concern that construction continues at the Huay Samong Dam site, and also reiterates its request to the State Party to undertake all necessary mitigation, enforcement and anti-encroachment actions to ensure this proposed project does not impact the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

9.  Further reiterates its request to the State Party to implement all the recommendations of the 2012 joint UNESCO/IUCN reactive monitoring mission, including a clear statement on the extent and status of cattle grazing in the property, by June 2014;

10.  Further request the State Party to invite an IUCN reactive monitoring mission to the property before the 38th session of the Committee in 2014, in order to assess progress in the implementation of the above recommendations and those made by the 2012 reactive monitoring mission, and to consider whether the property should be considered for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger;

11.  Requests furthermore the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2014, an updated and detailed report on the state of conservation of the property, including a report on the progress achieved in the implementation of the 2012 mission recommendations and those actions outlined above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session in 2014.

 

Report year: 2013
Thailand
Date of Inscription: 2005
Category: Natural
Criteria: (x)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 37COM (2013)
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