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

Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park

Central African Republic
Factors affecting the property in 1998*
  • Illegal activities
  • Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Heavy poaching;
  • Lack of management plan;
  • Possible transfer of the management of the site to a private foundation
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1998
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Information presented to the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in 1998

At its last session, the Committee was seriously concerned about the uncontrolled poaching by armed groups which had resulted in the death of four members of the Park staff in 1997 and the decimation of more than 80% of the Park's wildlife populations. Deteriorating security conditions had brought tourism to a halt and the efforts of a 10-year EU project appeared not to have generated any tangible benefits for the conservation of the site. The Committee welcomed the efforts of the Government of CAR to assign site-management responsibilities to a private Foundation and requested the Centre and IUCN to contact the State Party and the Foundation to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and rehabilitation plan for the site.

At the time of the preparation of this document, no such report had been received.

Action Required

The Bureau, based on additional information that may be available at the time of the twenty second session of the Bureau, may recommend appropriate actions to the consideration of the State Party and/or the Committee as well as the Centre and IUCN.

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1998

The Committee, at its last session (Naples, 1997), was seriously concerned about the uncontrolled poaching by armed groups which had led to the death of four members of the Park staff, decimated more than 80% of the Park's wildlife populations and brought tourism to a halt. The Committee had welcomed the efforts of the Government of CAR to assign site management responsibilities to a private Foundation and had requested the Centre and IUCN to contact the State Party and the Foundation to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the site. The Bureau, at its twenty-second ordinary session (June, 1998) noted that the State Party had not responded to the Centre’s letter outlining the Committee’s recommendations mentioned above, and reiterated the Committee’s request and recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. So far the Centre has not received a response from the State Party to its letter transmitting the recommendations of the twenty-second ordinary session of the Bureau.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1998
22 BUR V.A.3
Manovo-Gounda-St.Floris National Park (Central African Republic (CAR))

The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its last session, was seriously concerned about the uncontrolled poaching by armed groups which had resulted in the death of four members of the Park staff in 1997 and the decimation of more than 80% of the Park's wildlife populations. Deteriorating security conditions had brought tourism to a halt. The Committee had welcomed the efforts of the Government of CAR to assign site management responsibilities to a private Foundation and had requested the Centre and IUCN to contact the State Party and the Foundation to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and rehabilitation plan for the site. The Bureau noted that the State Party has not responded to the Centre’s letter outlining the Committee’s recommendations made at its last session in December 1997. 

The Bureau reiterated the Committee’s request that the Centre and IUCN contact the State Party and the Foundation to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the site and recommended that the Committee retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

22 COM VII.3/11
SOC: Manovo-Gounda-St.Floris National Park (CAR)

VII.3 Manovo-Gounda-St.Floris National Park (Central African Republic (CAR))

The Committee, at its last session (Naples, 1997), was seriously concerned about the uncontrolled poaching by armed groups which had led to the death of four members of the Park staff, decimated more than 80% of the Park's wildlife populations and brought tourism to a halt. The Committee had welcomed the efforts of the Government of CAR to assign site management responsibilities to a private Foundation and had requested the Centre and IUCN to contact the State Party and the Foundation to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the site. The Committee noted that the State Party had not responded to the Centre's letter outlining the Committee's recommendations mentioned above.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger and requested the Director-General of UNESCO and the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee to write to the President of the CAR inviting his urgent intervention for the preparation of a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the conservation of this site.

The Committee may wish to adopt the following:

“The Committee decides to retain this site in the List of World Heritage Danger. It requests the Director General of UNESCO and the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee to write to the President of the CAR, inviting the President’s urgent intervention for preparing a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the conservation of this site.”

Report year: 1998
Central African Republic
Date of Inscription: 1988
Category: Natural
Criteria: (ix)(x)
Danger List (dates): 1997-present
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