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

Škocjan Caves

Slovenia
Factors affecting the property in 1998*
  • Human resources
  • Interpretative and visitation facilities
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Need for a clarification concerning the extended boundaries (issue resolved)
  • Need to finalize the new legislation for the site (issue resolved)
  • Need for a management plan 
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1998
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 1998**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1998

IUCN has informed the Centre that the Regional Vice-Chair of IUCN’s World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) attended a meeting in May 1998 for the preparation of a management plan for this site. The Regional Office of the Park, established in 1997, has completed the first phase of the management plan; however, the May 1998 meeting identified several problems, including the need to improve visitor facilities and training new rangers. WCPA and EUROPARC Federation offered to provide expert advice on park facilities and proposed to organize workshops in the Regional Park for training personnel on cave and karst protection. The Park has also invited IUCN to provide advice on the preparation of the management plan.

The Bureau invited the State Party to submit a request for organizing an in-situ training activity focusing on the conservation of European World Heritage sites with cave and karst features for possible financial assistance from the World Heritage Fund. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the State Party to provide any assistance needed in the preparation and finalisation of a management plan for the site.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1998
22 COM VII.27
Reports on the State of Conservation of Natural Properties Noted by the Committee

VII.27 The Committee noted the decisions of the twenty-second extraordinary session of the Bureau as reflected in the Report of the Bureau session (Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/5) and included in Annex IV on the following properties:

  • Heard and McDonald Islands (Australia)
  • Shark Bay, Western Australia (Australia)
  • Wet Tropics of Queensland (Australia)
  • Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Bialowieza Forest (Belarus/Poland)
  • Iguacu National Park (Brazil)
  • Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon)
  • Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks (Canada)
  • Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area (China)
  • Huanglong Scenic and Historic Interest Area (China)
  • Wulingyuan Scenic and Historic Interest Area (China)
  • Los Katios National Park (Colombia)
  • Morne Trois Pitons National Park (Dominica)
  • Nanda Devi National Park (India)
  • Whale Sanctuary of El Viscaino (Mexico)
  • Royal Chitwan National Park (Nepal)
  • Sagarmatha National Park (Nepal)
  • Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman)
  • Huascaran National Park (Peru)

The Committee noted that the Bureau's decision reflected the suggestion to establish an informal contact group on mining and World Heritage and that the IUCN "Draft Policy on Mining and Protected Areas" will be circulated.

  • Kamchatka Volcanoes (Russian Federation)
  • Virgin Komi Forests (Russian Federation)
  • Skocjan Caves (Slovenia)
  • Thung Yai-Huay Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries (Thailand)
  • St. Kilda (United Kingdom)
  • Ha Long Bay (Vietnam)
  • Durmitor National Park (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)

The Committee noted the UN official name for the State Party: Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

  • Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls (Zambia/Zimbabwe)

No draft Decision

Report year: 1998
Slovenia
Date of Inscription: 1986
Category: Natural
Criteria: (vii)(viii)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 22COM (1998)
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