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

Mount Athos

Greece
Factors affecting the property in 1994*
  • Forestry /wood production
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Water infrastructure
  • Other Threats:

    chemical pollution

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Forest fire in 1990
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1994
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 1994**
Information presented to the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in 1994
Report prepared by IUCN
  1. PROPERTY: MOUNT ATHOS {Greece)
  2. DATE INSCRIBED AND CRITERIA: 1989, Cultural iii, iv, v, vi, Natural iii
  3. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FROM WORLD HERITAGE FUND: None
  4. CONDITION OF PROPERTY:

At the July 1992 meeting of the Bureau, IUCN noted concern over an increase in forestry activities and road construction and suggested a mission to review conditions in this mixed site. The Greek authorities at the time did not feel this was needed and the issue was dropped.

A new report, however, issued in September 1993 by WWF and the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople (EPC) on the ecological status of the area, suggests that this concern be raised once again. In fact, many new roads have been built and many trees cut. There were also reports of overgrazing, chemical pollution from increasing use of fertilisers and pesticides, proposed hydrodam construction, inadequate sewage disposal, open refuse dumps and planting of inappropriate tree species. Some of the monasteries surveyed were sympathetic to conservation but many others were carrying out activities that are inconsistent with its World Heritage Status.

5.   EVALUATION:

There appears to be a need for impact studies, forest management plans and a system of reserve on Mount Athos. IUCN supports the recommendations made in the WWF/EPC report and would urge action before further damage is done.

6.   SUGGESTED ACTION BY THE WORLD HERITAGE BUREAU:

The Bureau should take note of the WWF/EPC report and request the authorities in Greece to contact the WWF office in Athens and report back to the next Committee on the status of the natural heritage of the site.

7.   REFERENCES:

Oikononou, Dimitrios et.al. 1993. Final Report of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, WWF International and WWF Greece Team on the Ecological Status of the Monasteries of Mount Athos. 25 p. plus appendix. 66 p.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1994
18 COM IX
SOC: Mount Athos (Greece)

Mount Athos (Greece)

A report prepared by WWF and Ecumenical Patriachate of Constantinople (EPC) has pointed out that the ecology of this site is being impacted by overgrazing, chemical pollution and forestry activities. In early December the World Heritage Centre received a letter from the Greek authorities outlining the measures which are being implemented to address these concerns. The Committee requested that a field review together with the appropriate Greek authorities be carried out to evaluate these conflicting reports.

18 BUR VI.B
Mount Athos (Greece)

The Bureau recalled that at its sixteenth session it noted concern over increasing forestry activities at the site, however, no mission was carried out. A recent report by WWF and the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople (EPC) on the ecological state of the site indicates serious threats, including overgrazing, chemical pollution as well as a proposed hydrodam construction. IUCN stressed the need for impact studies, a forest management plan and a system of reserves. The Bureau took note of the report and requested the Centre to write to the appropriate authorities transmitting its concerns with regard to the content of the afore-mentioned report. A report should be requested from Greece for presentation to the eighteenth session of the Committee.

Report year: 1994
Greece
Date of Inscription: 1988
Category: Mixed
Criteria: (i)(ii)(iv)(v)(vi)(vii)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 18COM (1994)
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