Western Caucasus

• Management systems/ management plan (Lack of Management Plan)
• Legal framework (Weakening of conservation controls and laws)
• Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation (Impacts of proposed tourism infrastructure development)
• Ground transport infrastructure (Road construction)
• Illegal activities (Deforestation)

On 31 January 2020, the State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/900/documents/, providing the following information:

• The rejection of plans to build large ski facilities in the property in the basins of the Mzymta, Urushten and Malaya Laba rivers is confirmed. However, the construction of a mountain resort on the Lagonaki Plateau is being considered provided that the construction and operation of this resort will not affect its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). Detailed plans and the results of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the project were planned to be submitted to the World Heritage Centre by 5 April 2020. The intention to invite an Advisory mission is also mentioned;
• By order No. 586-R of 30 March 2017, a lease of lands provides for the implementation of a large-scale investment project in the territory of Sochi National Park and the Sochi Federal Wildlife Refuge. The nature protection regime of both protected areas is reported to be maintained in the leased areas and no economic or construction activities have yet been implemented. Such activities would only be considered based on an EIA that would include an assessment of impacts on the OUV;
• For the purpose of fire protection, the State Party conducted in 2018 works on a forest road to Lunnaya Polyana that existed until 1999 along the western boundary of the property. Roadworks were discontinued in 2019;
• Inspections detected 81 violations of the protection regime in the Caucasus Strict Nature Reserve, mostly related to illegal visitation and in some cases illegal fishing and gathering of plants. The populations of protected plant and animal species are stable or increasing, with the exception of Colchic Boxwood being deleteriously affected by the invasive boxwood firefly. The negative impact from insect infestations on the OUV of the property is confirmed and expected to increase. The State Party is currently preparing proposals in view of assessing damage and developing restoration measures in collaboration with IUCN’s Invasive Species Specialist Group.

On 17 February 2020, a meeting was held between the World Heritage Centre, IUCN and a State Party delegation including representatives from the company interested in developing the proposed project in Lagonaki. No further details of the project were provided other than that it would be different from previous proposals. It is also noted that so far no EIA for the project has been submitted to the World Heritage Centre, in spite of the date mentioned in the State Party report.

On 13 July 2020, the World Heritage Centre transmitted third-party information to the State Party, according to which, new Resolution No. 97 of the Government of the Republic of Adygeya of 21 May 2020 enables the establishment of an economic zone inside the property where logging and the construction of linear facilities would be possible. The third-party argued that this resolution would legalise the construction of the above-mentioned road to the Lunnaya Polyana Biosphere Centre.

On 22 September 2020, the State Party submitted information to the World Heritage Centre confirming that the ‘Headwaters of Rivers Pshecha and Pshechashcha’ and ‘River Tsitsa headwaters’ Nature Monuments, which constitute part of the property, had been reorganised as Natural Parks. On 6 October 2020, the World Heritage Centre sent a letter to the State Party requesting further details of the legal implications of the changed status resulting from the announced reorganisation in order to be able to evaluate potential impacts on the OUV of the property. At the time of writing of this report, no further information has been received regarding this matter.

On 2 February 2021, the State Party submitted an updated report on the state of conservation of the property, including an explanatory note on the clarification of the boundaries of the property. The explanatory note delineates, among other minor deviations from the boundaries as inscribed, three enclaves to be excluded from the property in the Lagonaki Plateau area.

On 26 March 2021, the World Heritage Centre sent a letter to the State Party requesting further details regarding an order creating and approving the boundaries of the Lagonaki Biosphere Polygon within the property, based on concerns that the creation of this biosphere polygon might pave the way for the installation of ski facilities inside this property. On 13 April 2021, the State Party replied stating that the goal of the order is to update the legal status of the biosphere polygon to comply with current legislation, whilst also delineating precise boundaries of the biosphere polygon, and expanding these to include the Fisht-Oshten mountain massif. The letter also further confirmed that proposals remain under consideration for the development of a ski resort in the Lagonaki Plateau, stating that the location of the proposed resort is situated within the biosphere polygon, but outside the boundaries of the property, as per the boundaries delineated by the State Party in the explanatory note on the clarifications of the boundaries submitted to the World Heritage Centre on the 2 February 2021.

While the confirmation that plans to build large ski facilities in the Mzymta, Urushten and Malaya Laba river basins in the property have been rejected is welcomed, the proposed development of a “mountain resort” at Lagonaki is of serious concern. It is recalled that the World Heritage Committee has repeatedly stated its position that the construction of large-scale infrastructure within the property, including on the Lagonaki Plateau, would constitute a clear case for inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in line with Paragraph 180 of the Operational Guidelines. It is therefore recommended that the State Party urgently provides more details on the planned resort, ensure that no infrastructure is planned within the existing boundaries of the inscribed property and that an EIA assessing the potential impacts on the OUV of the property be submitted to the World Heritage Centre before any decisions are made, in line with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines.

The information contained within the explanatory note on the clarification of the boundaries provided by the State Party is noted with concern. Considering this proposes the exclusion of enclaves in the Lagonaki Plateau area, it is clear that such a reduction of the property’s boundaries cannot be considered through the boundaries clarification procedure but would have to be considered through a significant modification of the boundaries in line with paragraph 165 of the Operational Guidelines. It needs to be noted that the proposed boundaries  would create fragmentation of the property, and would be likely to have a direct negative impact on the property’s OUV, including its integrity. It also needs to be recalled that Annex 11 of the Operational Guidelines states that “boundary modifications should serve better identification of World Heritage properties and enhance protection of their Outstanding Universal Value”. It is further recommended that the Committee requests the State Party to clarify the current legal protection regime of these areas in order to ensure that all areas within the World Heritage property as inscribed benefit from appropriate level of protection.

The confirmation that land has been leased in Sochi National Park and the Sochi Federal Wildlife Refuge with the objective to implement a large-scale investment project is of concern, especially after the State Party in its report last year affirmed that no such plans existed. It should be recalled that in its Decision 42 COM 7B.80, the World Heritage Committee reiterated its concern that large-scale infrastructure projects in the Sochi National Park and Sochi Federal Wildlife Refuge could have negative impacts on the OUV of the property, including on efforts to reintroduce the Persian leopard and the consequent disruption to the habitat connectivity of this endangered species. It is recommended that the Committee reiterates its request to the State Party not to permit any construction of large-scale infrastructure in any of the protected areas immediately adjacent to the property without submitting the EIA to the World Heritage Centre, for review by IUCN.

The confirmation of further works on a road to the Lunnaya Polyana road is also of concern. While noting the clarification by the State Party that the works concern a re-opening of an existing forest road for park management purposes, it is considered that these works could result in erosion and also could facilitate access to the property, including to the Biosphere Centre. It is recalled that the 2012 Reactive Monitoring mission, when reviewing the question of this road stressed that it should be ensured that all infrastructure facilities, even if deemed necessary for management and research purposes, have no negative impacts on the OUV and that an EIA should be submitted to the World Heritage Centre before any final decision is taken on this development, in line with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines. 

The confirmation of the reorganisation of protected areas that comprise part of the property is noted. However, in relation to third party information received expressing concern that the reorganisation aims to establish economic areas inside the property, allowing for logging and for the construction of linear facilities, and in doing so, permitting the construction of the road to Lunnaya Polyana, it is recommended that the State Party should also be requested to clarify the legal implications of the changed status resulting from the announced reorganisation in order to be able to evaluate potential impacts on the protection of the property.

Finally, the reported negative impact from invasive alien species (IAS) on the OUV of the property is of serious concern and, whilst the envisaged collaboration with IUCN’s Invasive Species Specialist Group in combating the outbreak is welcome, this should continue to be encouraged.

Overall, it is of great concern that large-scale infrastructure projects continue to be proposed within and immediately adjacent to the property, despite the very clear position adopted by the World Heritage Committee. It is also unclear whether and how cumulative impacts of these proposed developments have been or would be assessed. It is therefore recommended that the Committee requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission to the property to a) assess the scale of impacts from IAS on the OUV of the property and whether they represent an ascertained danger, b) assess whether the creation of the biosphere polygon and the changes in status of the nature monuments included in the property have affected the legal protection of these areas and c) assess whether envisaged infrastructure and road development projects inside and near the property, including their cumulative impacts, represent a potential danger to the OUV of the property, in line with Paragraph 180 of the Operational Guidelines and to evaluate whether the property meets the conditions for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger.