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

Niokolo-Koba National Park

Senegal
Factors affecting the property in 2019*
  • Drought
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Illegal activities
  • Invasive/alien terrestrial species
  • Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals
  • Mining
  • Translocated species
  • Water infrastructure
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Poaching, capture and relocation of wildlife
  • Drying up of ponds and invasive species
  • Illegal logging
  • Livestock grazing
  • Road construction project
  • Potential dam construction
  • Potential mining exploration and exploitation
  • Loss of chimpanzee habitat
Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
  • Poaching
  • Livestock grazing
  • Dam construction project at Sambangalou
Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger

Adopted, see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/4087
Revised (finalization of indicators) in 2015, see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/6232  

Corrective Measures for the property
Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2019
Requests approved: 9 (from 1982-2017)
Total amount approved : 206,799 USD
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2019

On 31 January 2019, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report on the property, available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/153/documents/ :

  • The General Management Plan for the property (2019-2023) was approved last December following the implementation of International Assistance;
  • An inventory of large mammals was carried out in 2018 confirming the presence of flagship species and their homogeneous spatial distribution in the property. A diversity of large mammals remains present with positive tendencies for certain species (buffalo, hippotragus, waterbuck) in comparison with the 2006 inventory, but a reduction in the hartebeest population. A viable population of Derby eland remains present and the very low number of elephants is confirmed. There are reduced numbers of lions, leopards, lycaon and chimpanzee throughout the property, with the exception of the areas experiencing strong anthropic pressure;
  • Fragmentation of chimpanzee habitat remains a major concern and their habitat has degraded in the intervention zone of the Petewol Mining Company (PMC) at Mako;
  • Increased surveillance efforts, combined with awareness-raising and environmental education sessions, have resulted in a reduction in poaching. Surveillance has been strengthened with 22 patrol posts, 2 mobile intervention brigades and 3 zonal brigades;
  • Income-generating activities to benefit the local communities have been continued;
  • Mechanical actions aimed at the invasive species Mimosa pigra in the ponds at Simenti, Kountadala and Nianaka, as well as regular monitoring of the ponds, have improved their retention capacity. The establishment of water holes in the pastoral lands around the property have reduced pastoralism pressure;
  • Measures have been defined with the PMC for environmental monitoring with analyses of dangerous substances in the various water samples. Some results were not in conformity with international standards and the microbiological analyses data are not available;
  • The evaluation of impacts of the Sambangalou dam project is ongoing but detailed data is not available;
  • The Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development has delayed the closure of the quarry at Mansadala in 2021 due to public road works.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2019

The completion of the General Management Plan and the results of ecological monitoring show an improvement in management and a reduction of pressures linked to poaching and transhumance. The encouraging evolution of populations of certain flagship species is favourably welcomed.

 However, the situation of the elephant, the lycaon and the hartebeest remains a concern, and the ecological monitoring needs to be continued over a longer period to provide a database to analyze the dynamics of these populations. The absence of wildlife in areas of high anthropic pressure like the illicit gold-mining zones and the basalt quarry demonstrates the importance of halting these activities.

The low presence of chimpanzees in the property show the importance of populations outside the site, notably in the auriferous zones of Mako and Massawa.  The fragmentation of the habitat of chimpanzees in the PMC intervention zone remains a concern. The State Party should provide exact data on the monitoring of chimpanzees in the mining periphery, in order to enable an evaluation of the actual impacts of the project on the species.

The different development, education and awareness-raising actions are welcomed and should be continued to ensure their sustainability and to limit human pressure on the natural resources.

Actions aiming at the eradication of the Mimosa pigra species, as well as the regular monitoring of the ponds, are noted but a combat strategy combining various approaches must be given priority to eliminate the invasive species.

The results of some water samples are a cause of concern and the absence of microbiological data analyses is regrettable. It is recommended that the State Party establish a permanent monitoring system of the quantity and quality of the surface water, waste water and groundwater, upstream and downstream of the mining project at Mako.

It is also regrettable that the information provided on the inter-connectivity water project of the Gambia River and the ponds located in the property do not allow an evaluation of the potential impacts of the Sambangalou dam project on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV).  This project remains a potential threat to the property and must be the subject of a detailed Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) in conformity with the IUCN Advice Note.  It is recommended that the State Party keeps the World Heritage Centre informed on the progress of the project.

It is further regrettable that the closure of the Mansadala quarry has once again been delayed.  It is noted that the State Party initially affirmed that this quarry, located in the property, would be closed in 2015, and it is therefore recommended that the Committee request the State Party to proceed with its immediate closure given the negative impact on the OUV of the property.

The new General Management Plan mentions illegal mining activities in the property. In March 2019, the World Heritage Centre also received information from third parties concerning the granting of a mining license to the Barrick Gold Society, authorizing operations in the vicinity of the property as well as a mining extraction activity carried out by a company in the south-east part of the Park.  On 6 March 2019, the World Heritage Centre addressed a letter to the State Party requesting additional information on these projects but no response has been received at the time of this report. It is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to ensure that all mining exploitation in the property be immediately suspended and that no new mining permits located around the property be granted without an ESIA being carried out to evaluate the impacts on the OUV, including the cumulative effects of these projects.

It is also recommended that the Committee maintain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2019
43 COM 7A.15
Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal) (N 153)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/19/43.COM/7A.Add,
  2. Recalling Decision 42 COM 7A.55, adopted at its 42nd session (Manama, 2018),
  3. Congratulates the State Party for the efforts undertaken in the implementation of the corrective measures, in particular the updating of the General Management Plan of the property and its periphery, the combat against invasive species and the operationalisation of the ecological monitoring system, and requests the State Party to continue its efforts;
  4. Takes note that the results of the inventory and the ecological monitoring indicate an increase in the population of some flagship species, while showing the vulnerability of other species like the elephant, the lycaon, and the hartebeest and considers that this monitoring should continue for a longer period, and also requests the State Party to implement the recommendations of the inventory; notably the establishment of an emergency programme for the lycaon, a conservation programme for the Derby eland and a monitoring programme for the hartebeest ;
  5. Welcomes all the development, education, information and awareness-raising activities initiated by the State Party and its partners enabling an improved involvement of communities in the management of the property;
  6. Expresses its keen concern regarding the reports on mining extraction in the south-east part of the property, further requests that all mining exploitation in the property be immediately suspended, and reiterates its position concerning mining exploration or exploitation which is incompatible with World Heritage status, policy supported by the position statement of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) not to undertake such activities in World Heritage properties;
  7. Regrets that the State Party has not provided any information concerning the possible granting of a mining license to the Barrick Gold Society in the vicinity of the property, and requests furthermore the State Party to ensure that the impacts of this project on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property be evaluated in the framework of an in-depth Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), in conformity with the IUCN Advice Note on World Heritage and environmental assessment, and to submit, without delay, a copy to the World Heritage Centre for review by IUCN;
  8. Recalls its high concern with regard to the impacts of the Petewil Mining Company mining project on the quality and regime of the waterways as well as on the chimpanzee population and their habitat, and requests moreover the State Party to:
    1. Continue the regular monitoring of the quantity and quality of the surface water, waste water and groundwater above and below the Mako mining project,
    2. Provide detailed data on the monitoring of chimpanzees and their habitat, to enable an evaluation on the actual impacts of the project and the proposed mitigation measures to ensure the conservation of this species,
    3. Carry out microbiological analyses of the waterways likely to be affected by the project and submit the results to the World Heritage Centre for review by IUCN;
  9. Also regrets that the information provided on the inter-connectivity water project of the Gambia River and the ponds located in the property do not enable the evaluation of the potential impacts of the Sambangalou dam project on the OUV of the property and reiterates its request to the State Party that this project be subject to a detailed ESIA in conformity with the IUCN Advice Note and to keep the World Heritage Centre informed on the progress of the project;
  10. Further regrets the report on the closure of the quarry at Mansadala due to public works and requests in addition the State Party to proceed immediately with its closure given its negative impact on the OUV of the property;
  11. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2020, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 44th session in 2020;
  12. Decides to retain Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
43 COM 8C.2
Update of the List of World Heritage in Danger (Retained Properties)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC/19/43.COM/7A, WHC/19/43.COM/7A.Add, WHC/19/43.COM/7A.Add.2, WHC/19/43.COM/7A.Add.3 and WHC/19/43.COM/7A.Add.3.Corr),
  2. Decides to retain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:
  • Afghanistan, Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley (Decision 43 COM 7A.41)
  • Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision43 COM 7A.42)
  • Austria, Historic Centre of Vienna (Decision 43 COM 7A.45)
  • Bolivia (Plurinational State of), City of Potosí (Decision 43 COM 7A.48)
  • Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 43 COM 7A.5)
  • Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 43 COM 7A.6)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Garamba National Park (Decision 43 COM 7A.7)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 43 COM 7A.8)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 43 COM 7A.9)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Salonga National Park (Decision 43 COM 7A.10)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Virunga National Park (Decision 43 COM 7A.11)
  • Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 43 COM 7A.17)
  • Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 43 COM 7A.4)
  • Indonesia, Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (Decision 43 COM 7A.1)
  • Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 43 COM 7A.18)
  • Iraq, Hatra (Decision 43 COM 7A.19)
  • Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 43 COM 7A.20)
  • Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (site proposed by Jordan) (Decision 43 COM 7A.22)
  • Kenya, Lake Turkana National Parks (Decision 43 COM 7A.12)
  • Libya, Archaeological Site of Cyrene (Decision 43 COM 7A.23)
  • Libya, Archaeological Site of Leptis Magna (Decision 43 COM 7A.24)
  • Libya, Archaeological Site of Sabratha (Decision 43 COM 7A.25)
  • Libya, Old Town of Ghadamès (Decision 43 COM 7A.26)
  • Libya, Rock-Art Sites of Tadrart Acacus (Decision 43 COM 7A.27)
  • Madagascar, Rainforests of the Atsinanana (Decision 43 COM 7A.13)
  • Mali, Old Towns of Djenné (Decision 43 COM 7A.53)
  • Mali, Timbuktu (Decision 43 COM 7A.54)
  • Mali, Tomb of Askia (Decision 43 COM 7A.55)
  • Micronesia (Federated States of), Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia (Decision 43 COM 7A.43)
  • Niger, Aïr and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 43 COM 7A.14)
  • Palestine, Palestine: Land of Olives and Vines – Cultural Landscape of Southern Jerusalem, Battir (Decision 43 COM 7A.30)
  • Palestine, Hebron/Al-Khalil Old Town (Decision 43 COM 7A.29)
  • Panama, Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (Decision 43 COM 7A.50)
  • Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 43 COM 7A.51)
  • Senegal, Niokolo-Koba National Park (Decision 43 COM 7A.15)
  • Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 43 COM 7A.46)
  • Solomon Islands, East Rennell (Decision 43 COM 7A.2)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Aleppo (Decision 43 COM 7A.31)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Bosra (Decision 43 COM 7A.32)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Damascus (Decision 43 COM 7A.33)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient Villages of Northern Syria (Decision 43 COM 7A.34)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din (Decision 43 COM 7A.35)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Site of Palmyra (Decision 43 COM 7A.36)
  • Uganda, Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi (Decision 43 COM 7A.56)
  • United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (Decision 43 COM 7A.47)
  • United Republic of Tanzania, Selous Game Reserve (Decision 43 COM 7A.16)
  • United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 43 COM 7A.3)
  • Uzbekistan, Historic Centre of Shakhrisyabz (Decision 43 COM 7A.44)
  • Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Coro and its Port (Decision 43 COM 7A.52)
  • Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 43 COM 7A.38)
  • Yemen, Old City of Sana’a (Decision 43 COM 7A.39)
  • Yemen, Old Walled City of Shibam (Decision 43 COM 7A.40)
Draft Decision: 43 COM 7A.15

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/19/43.COM/7A.Add,
  2. Recalling Decision 42 COM 7A.55, adopted at its 42nd session (Manama, 2018),
  3. Congratulates the State Party for the efforts undertaken in the implementation of the corrective measures, in particular the updating of the General Management Plan of the property and its periphery, the combat against envasive species and the operationalisation of the ecological monitoring system, and requests the State Party to continue its efforts;
  4. Takes note that the results of the inventory and the ecological monitoring indicate an increase in the population of some flagship species, while showing the vunerability of other species like the elephant, the lycaon, and the hartebeest and considers that this monitoring should continue for a longer period, and also requests the State Party to implement the recommendations of the inventory; notably the establishment of an emergency programme for the lycaon, a conservation programme for the Derby eland and a monitoring programme for the hartebeest ;
  5. Welcomes all the development, education, information and awareness-raising activities initiated by the State Party and its partners enabling an improved involvement of communities in the management of the property;
  6. Expresses its keen concern regarding the reports on mining extraction in the south-east part of the property, further requests that all mining exploitation in the property be immediately suspended, and reiterates its position concerning mining exploration or exploitation which is incompatible with World Heritage status, policy supported by the position statement of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) not to undertake such activities in World Heritage properties;
  7. Regrets that the State Party has not provided any information concerning the possible granting of a mining license to the Barrick Gold Society in the vicinity of the property, and requests furthermore the State Party to ensure that the impacts of this project on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property be evaluated in the framework of an in-depth Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), in conformity with the IUCN Advice Note on World Heritage and environmental assessment, and to submit, without delay, a copy to the World Heritage Centre for review by IUCN;
  8. Recalls its high concern with regard to the impacts of the Petewil Mining Company mining project on the quality and regime of the waterways as well as on the chimpanzee population and their habitat, and requests moreover the State Party to:
    1. Continue the regular monitoring of the quantity and quality of the surface water, waste water and groundwater above and below the Mako mining project,
    2. Provide detailed data on the monitoring of chimpanzees and their habitat, to enable an evaluation on the actual impacts of the project and the proposed mitigation measures to ensure the conservation of this species,
    3. Carry out microbiological analyses of the waterways likely to be affected by the project and submit the results to the World Heritage Centre for review by IUCN;
  9. Also regrets that the information provided on the inter-connectivity water project of the Gambia River and the ponds located in the property do not enable the evaluation of the potential impacts of the Sambangalou dam project on the OUV of the property and reiterates its request to the State Party that this project be subject to a detailed ESIA in conformity with the IUCN Advice Note and to keep the World Heritage Centre informed on the progress of the project;
  10. Further regrets the report on the closure of the quarry at Mansadala due to public works and requests in addition the State Party to proceed immediately with its closure given its negative impact on the OUV of the property;
  11. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2020, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 44th session in 2020;
  12. Decides to retain Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Report year: 2019
Senegal
Date of Inscription: 1981
Category: Natural
Criteria: (x)
Danger List (dates): 2007-present
Documents examined by the Committee
SOC Report by the State Party
Report (2019) .pdf
arrow_circle_right 43COM (2019)
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