Osun-Osogbo Sacred Grove
Factors affecting the property in 2015*
- Fire (widlfires)
- Ground transport infrastructure
- Housing
- Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
- Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure
- Surface water pollution
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Urban development close to the property
- Road construction around the property
- Pollution of the Osun River
- Bush fires within the property
- Adverse impact of the commercialisation of the annual festival
- Fragility of spiritual, symbolic and ritual qualities of the Grove in the face of a growth in visitor numbers and the lack of a tourism management plan
- Road through property not re-aligned
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2015
Total amount approved : 10,000 USD
1999 | Preparation of 2 nomination files: Ekhor (Benin) & Osun ... (Approved) | 10,000 USD |
Missions to the property until 2015**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2015
On 28 January 2015, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1118/documents/ and addresses some of the issues raised by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session as well as the conservation of the sculptures, as follows:
- Pollution of the Osun River: The quality of the river water has improved as a result of increasing the cleaning of the river from one to four times a year.
- Conservation of the forest: As a result of plant regeneration and re-planting, the number of plant species in the forests has increased from 400 to 465. The faunal population are now contained within the forest by a wire mesh boundary fence.
- Conservation of the sculptures: During the year 2013-2014, 61 sculptures at the traditional (mythological) Ontoto market site in the Grove were restored by the Sacred Art Movement, as well the Flying Tortoise, a sculpture by Suzanne Wenger formerly at the traditional entrance to the Grove.
- Management: A revised Conservation/Management Plan was prepared in 2014 to run until 2019. In addition, a Cultural Tourism and Disaster Risk Preparedness Plans have been prepared. None of these plans have been submitted.
- Annual Festival: The new Plans aim to address the pressure on the Grove from the Annual Festival through zoning areas for spiritual and symbolic activities and diverting some social activities to the buffer zone or less sensitive areas. 5% of the income from the Grove will now go towards conservation work in the property.
- Urban Development and Roads: Although the new Management Plan includes approaches to ameliorating the impacts of development, no details have been provided, nor has a timescale been provided for the removal of the road through the property.
The requested ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission has not taken place, although the State Party has indicated that it will invite such a mission during the coming year.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2015
The progress with regenerating parts of the sacred forest area is welcome. At the time of inscription, there were plans to regenerate the 30% of the primary forest that had been damaged by plantations and other agricultural activities. It is not entirely clear whether all or only some of this area has now been regenerated and/or re-planted. The frequency of river cleaning has been increased; however, in respect of the sacred nature of the river, preventative policies need to be introduced to reverse water pollution and remove the need for regular cleaning.
A programme for the conservation of the sculptures has started with those in the market shrine having been completed. During the year, an International Assistance Request was received to support the conservation of the many other sculptures within the Grove. This request was referred back for more details on the conservation approach and on forward planning and documentation in the light of the extreme complexity of this work. It was also suggested that the forthcoming mission might consider these issues.
The production of a revised Management/Conservation Plan and of Visitor Management and Risk Preparedness Plans is also welcome. Given the strong development and visitor pressures on the Grove, these plans should be submitted to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies and also be considered by the forthcoming mission in order to understand specific measures on curtailing and controlling development in the setting of the property, the carrying capacity of the Grove and approaches to sculpture conservation.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2015
39 COM 7B.43
Osun-Osogbo Sacred Groove (Nigeria) (C 1118)
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/7B,
- Recalling Decision 38 COM 7B.53 adopted at its 38th session (Doha, 2014),
- Welcomes progress with regeneration of the sacred forest and the increased frequency of river cleaning; but urges the State Party to tackle the source of the river pollution;
- Also welcomes the revision of the Management Plan and the development of Cultural Tourism and Risk Preparedness Plans and requests the State Party to submit copies of these plans to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies;
- Notes that work on conserving sculptures has begun in the market shrine and that funds are being sought for further work in the Grove, and also requests the State Party to provide more details on the conservation approach, and on forward planning and documentation in the light of the extreme complexity of this work;
- Also notes that the State Party intends to invite the requested ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission to the property during the year, in order to consider urban development, tourism management and the conservation of natural resources; and suggests that the mission also consider conservation approaches to sculpture conservation;
- Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2016, an updated report, including a 1-page executive summary, on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 41st session in 2017.
Draft Decision: 39 COM 7B.43
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/7B,
- Recalling Decision 38 COM 7B.53 adopted at its 38th session (Doha, 2014),
- Welcomes progress with regeneration of the sacred forest and the increased frequency of river cleaning; but urges the State Party to tackle the source of the river pollution;
- Also welcomes the revision of the Management Plan and the development of Cultural Tourism and Risk Preparedness Plans and requests the State Party to submit copies of these plans to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies;
- Notes that work on conserving sculptures has begun in the market shrine and that funds are being sought for further work in the Grove, and also requests the State Party to provide more details on the conservation approach, and on forward planning and documentation in the light of the extreme complexity of this work;
- Also notes that the State Party intends to invite the requested ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission to the property during the year, in order to consider urban development, tourism management and the conservation of natural resources; and suggests that the mission also consider conservation approaches to sculpture conservation;
- Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2016, an updated report, including a 1-page executive summary, on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 41st session in 2017.
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.