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

Comoé National Park

Côte d'Ivoire
Factors affecting the property in 2010*
  • Civil unrest
  • Fire (widlfires)
  • Illegal activities
  • Land conversion
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Conflict and political instability
  • Lack of management control and access
  • Poaching
  • Encroachment: human occupation and agricultural pressure
  • Bush fires
Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
  • Potential impacts of civil unrest
  • Decrease of large mammal populations due to increased and uncontrolled poaching
  • Lack of effective management mechanisms
Corrective Measures for the property

The following corrective measures were identified during the 2006 World Heritage Centre / IUCN monitoring mission and adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006):

a) Establish, as a matter of urgency, an effective system of control and patrolling for the whole property, in close collaboration with the armed forces, and giving priority to the development and rehabilitation of necessary infrastructures;

b) Develop and initiate the implementation of a management plan for the property based on the management plan framework developed for the national system of protected areas. The management plan should give special attention to:

(i) Establishing a revised zoning system for the property to guide management activities that fully consider the status of the property as a World Heritage property and Biosphere Reserve;

(ii) Establishing participatory management arrangements with local communities to reduce pressures and impacts associated to the management of areas in particular on the periphery of the property;

c) Enlarge the activities of the management structure to encompass the entire property 

Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures

Five year timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures:

  • 2007: Preparatory work and developing contacts for technical and financial support, as well as implementation of emergency measures linked in particular to surveillance of the property;
  • 2008-2009: Preparation of a management plan and implementation of priority activities;
  • 2009-2011: Implementation and monitoring of activities under the management plan. 
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2010

Total amount provided to the property: USD 20,000 in 2006 through the UNESCO Man and Biosphere (MAB) programme for law enforcement and awareness activities.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2010
Requests approved: 3 (from 1988-1999)
Total amount approved : 97,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2010**

June 2006: joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN monitoring mission

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2010

The State Party did not submit a state of conservation report, which was requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009). Therefore, progress on the implementation of corrective measures is difficult to assess.

However, IUCN has received reports from its network of experts and members on a number of conservation issues pertaining to the corrective measures adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006). According to these reports, due to ongoing security concerns in Ivory Coast and the occupation of a large area of the property by the ‘Forces Nouvelles’ militia, the presence of the national park authorities in the property remains limited and there is little effective control and patrolling of the property (corrective measure a). This seems in contradiction to last year’s State Party report, which mentioned that the State Party had regained control over the entire extent of the property. IUCN has also received reports that the State Party has been unable to rapidly deploy the planned mixed ranger patrols, including members of the Ivorian army and of the ‘Forces Nouvelles’ militia.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note that the World Bank’s Protected Area Project for Ivory Coast (USD 2.54 million, 2009-2013) includes actions to improve the management of ComoéNational Park, such as development of a management plan, support to park communities through public awareness campaigns, environmental education, land management contracts, and the development of alternative livelihoods. A study on the state of conservation of ComoéNational Park has already been commissioned through this project, which should take place in 2010. IUCN also notes that a draft management plan for the property has been developed and is in the process of being finalized (corrective measure b).

They also note that the Wild Chimpanzee Foundation (WCF), in collaboration with the management authority OIPR (Office Ivoirien des Parcs et Réserves) and the Max Planck Institute Apes Database project, conducted a survey in June 2009 of chimpanzees and elephants, as well as other large mammals and reptiles, within the south-west area of the property and the “GEPRENAF” zone adjacent to the property (West African pilot community-based natural resources and management programme). While the dataset was not large enough to allow population estimates, the results clearly indicate that significant populations of large mammals are still present in the south-west of the property and the GEPRENAF zone, including chimpanzees and elephants. The survey found that the density of chimpanzee nests in this area was 10.6 per km2, indicating a relatively intact population. During the survey period, elephants were only directly observed in the GEPRENAF zone at a density of 1.9/ km. The results of the survey of chimpanzee and elephant populations are encouraging and indicate potential for their recovery across wider areas of the property. However, the survey also found a high incidence of poaching, deforestation and agricultural encroachment across the entire area, and IUCN has received additional information that a large influx of cattle into the property during the dry season is causing overgrazing and depleting waterholes important for the property’s wildlife, which increase the need to rapidly deploy the planned mixed ranger patrols, including members of the Ivorian army and of the ‘Forces Nouvelles’ militia.

IUCN also received reports that the German Cooperation (GTZ) has recently commissioned wildlife surveys within the property, as well as studies on the park’s infrastructure and socio-economic conditions. The objective of these surveys and studies is to develop a conservation strategy for the property. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN encourage the park authorities, conservation organisations to work closely together in order to coordinate their conservation efforts. The results of any detailed wildlife surveys undertaken through the above projects could be used to monitor the recovery of wildlife populations and develop the desired state of conservation for removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN welcome the funding secured through the World Bank’s Protected Area Project for Ivory Coast to improve the management of ComoéNational Park. They encourage the State Party to focus on implementing the corrective measures and rapidly deploy mixed ranger patrols, finalise the management plan, and develop an urgent rehabilitation plan for the property. They recall that the 2008 State Party report had indicated that three mining exploration licenses had been granted covering part of the property, and that the World Heritage Committee in its Decision 33 COM 7A.2 had urged the State Party to withdraw these licenses, in line with the World Heritage Committee’s clear position that mining is incompatible with World Heritage status, and the international policy statement of the International Council of Mining and Metals (ICMM) of not undertaking these activities in World Heritage properties.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN consider that the property should remain on the List of World Heritage in Danger until an effective management structure is in place and the recovery of the property’s key wildlife populations is demonstrated.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2010
34 COM 7A.2
Comoé National Park (Cote d’Ivoire) (N 227)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/7A.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 33 COM 7A.2, adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009),

3. Regrets that the State Party did not submit a state of conservation report, as requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009);

4. Considers that without a report by the State Party, on the implementation of the corrective measures and on the status of wildlife populations, it is impossible to evaluate the progress made towards a removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger;

5. Notes with concern reports received by IUCN that due to ongoing security concerns, the presence of the national park authorities in the property, and its effective control and patrolling remains limited, in spite of earlier reports of the State Party that it had regained control over the entire property;

6. Welcomes the reported support of various donors for activities to improve the management of Comoé National Park, and encourages the State Party and conservation organizations working within the property to closely coordinate their conservation efforts;

7. Urges the State Party to implement the corrective measures adopted by the Committee at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006) and in particular to rapidly deploy mixed ranger patrols, finalize the management plan, and develop an urgent rehabilitation plan for the property;

8. Reiterates its utmost concern about the granting of mining exploration licenses covering the property, urges the State Party to take the necessary steps to ensure the withdrawal of the these licenses, and calls upon the holders of any concessions to respect international standards, in line with the international policy statement of the International Council of Mining and Metals (ICMM) of not undertaking these activities in World Heritage properties;

9. Also reiterates its request to the State Party to develop, in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN, a proposal for the Desired State of Conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011;

10. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2011, a detailed report on the state of conservation of the property and on the implementation of the corrective measures, including a copy of the draft management plan, an overview of current and projected budgets for the management of the property, the status of anti-poaching activities, and any data on wildlife populations for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011;

11. Decides to retain Comoé National Park (Côte d'Ivoire) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

34 COM 8C.2
Establishment of the World Heritage List in Danger (Retained Properties)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Following the examination of the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-10/34.COM/7A, WHC-10/34.COM/7A.Add and WHC-10/34.COM/7A.Add.2),

2. Decides to retain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:

  • Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 34 COM 7A.22)
  • Afghanistan, Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley (Decision 34 COM 7A.23)
  • Belize, Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System (Decision 34 COM 7A.13)
  • Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.1)
  • Chile, Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works (Decision 34 COM 7A.29)
  • Colombia, Los Katios National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.14)
  • Côte d'Ivoire, Comoé National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.2)
  • Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 34 COM 7A.3)
  • Democratic Rep. of the Congo Virunga National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.4)
  • Democratic Rep. of the Congo Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.5)
  • Democratic Rep. of the Congo Garamba National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.6)
  • Democratic Rep. of the Congo Salonga National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.7)
  • Democratic Rep. of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 34 COM 7A.8)
  • Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 34 COM 7A.17)
  • Ethiopia, Simien National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.9)
  • Georgia, Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Decision 34 COM 7A.27)
  • India, Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (Decision 34 COM 7A.12)
  • Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 34 COM 7A.18)
  • Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 34 COM 7A.19)
  • Islamic Republic of Iran, Bam and its Cultural Landscape (Decision 34 COM 7A.24)
  • Jerusalem, Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (Decision 34 COM 7A.20)
  • Niger, Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 34 COM 7A.10)
  • Pakistan, Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore (Decision 34 COM 7A.25)
  • Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 34 COM 7A.30)
  • Philippines, Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (Decision 34 COM 7A.26)
  • Senegal, Niokolo Koba National Park (Decision 34 COM 7A.11)
  • Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 34 COM 7A.28)
  • United Republic of Tanzania, Ruins of Kilwa Kisiwani and Ruins of Songo Mnara (Decision 34 COM 7A.16)
  • Venezuela, Coro and its Port (Decision 34 COM 7A.31)
  • Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 34 COM 7A.21)
34 COM 8E
Adoption of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/8E,

2. Adopts the retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value, as presented in the Annex I of Documents WHC-10/34.COM/8E, WHC-10/34.COM/8E.Add and WHC-10/34.COM/8E.Add.2 for the following World Heritage properties: 

  • Algeria: Al Qal'a of Beni Hammad; M'Zab Valley; Djémila; Tipasa; Tassili n'Ajjer; Timgad; Kasbah of Algiers;
  • Austria: Historic Centre of the City of Salzburg; Palace and Gardens of Schönbrunn; Hallstatt-Dachstein / Salzkammergut Cultural Landscape;
  • Bulgaria: Boyana Church; Madara Rider; Thracian Tomb of Kazanlak; Rock-Hewn Churches of Ivanovo; Rila Monastery; Ancient City of Nessebar; Thracian Tomb of Sveshtari;
  • Côte d'Ivoire: Comoé National Park;
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo: Okapi Wildlife Reserve;
  • Denmark: Jelling Mounds, Runic Stones and Church; Roskilde Cathedral;
  • Ethiopia: SimienNational Park;
  • Israel: Masada; Old City of Acre; White City of Tel-Aviv - the Modern Movement; Incense Route - Desert Cities in the Negev; Biblical Tels - Megiddo, Hazor, Beer Sheba;
  • Jordan: Petra; Quseir Amra; Um er-Rasas (Kastrom Mefa'a);
  • Lebanon: Anjar; Byblos; Baalbek; Tyre; Ouadi Qadisha (the Holy Valley) and the Forest of the Cedars of God (Horsh Arz-el-Rab);
  • Malawi: Lake Malawi National Park;
  • Mauritania: Banc d'Arguin National Park; Ancient Ksour of Ouadane, Chinguetti, Tichitt and Oualata;
  • Morocco: Ksar of Ait-Ben-Haddou; Historic City of Meknes; Archaeological Site of Volubilis; Medina of Essaouira (formerly Mogador); Medina of Fez; Medina of Marrakesh; Medina of Tétouan (formerly known as Titawin); Portuguese City of Mazagan (El Jadida);
  • Niger: Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves; W National Park of Niger;
  • Oman: Bahla Fort;
  • Portugal: Laurisilva of Madeira;
  • Senegal: Island of Gorée; Niokolo-Koba National Park;
  • Seychelles: Aldabra Atoll; Vallée de Mai Nature Reserve;
  • South Africa: Fossil Hominid Sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans, Kromdraai, and Environs.
  • Spain: Cathedral, Alcázar and Archivo de Indias in Seville ;
  • Sudan: Gebel Barkal and the Sites of the Napatan Region;
  • Syrian Arab Republic: Ancient City of Bosra; Ancient City of Aleppo; Crac des Chevaliers and Qal'at Salah El-Din; City of Damascus; Site of Palmyra;
  • Tunisia: Archaeological Site of Carthage; Amphitheatre of El Jem; Ichkeul National Park; Medina of Sousse; Kairouan; Medina of Tunis; Punic Town of Kerkuane and its Necropolis; Dougga / Thugga;
  • Uganda: Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi;
  • United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: Saltaire; Dorset and East Devon Coast; Derwent Valley Mills; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Liverpool - Maritime Mercantile City; Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape.
  • United Republic of Tanzania: Selous Game Reserve; Kilimanjaro National Park;
  • Yemen: Historic Town of Zabid;

3. Decides that retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in Danger will be reviewed in priority;

4. Further decides that, considering the high number of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value to be examined, the order in which they will be reviewed will follow the Second Cycle of Periodic Reporting, namely:

  • World Heritage properties in the Arab States;
  • World Heritage properties in Africa;
  • World Heritage properties in Asia and the Pacific;
  • World Heritage properties in Latin America and the Caribbean;
  • World Heritage properties in Europe and North America.
Draft Decision: 34 COM 7A.2

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/7A.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 33 COM 7A.2, adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009),

3. Regrets that the State Party did not submit a state of conservation report, as requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009);

4. Considers that without a report by the State Party on the implementation of the corrective measures and on the status of wildlife populations, it is impossible to evaluate the progress made towards a removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger;

5. Notes with concern reports received by IUCN that due to ongoing security concerns, the presence of the national park authorities in the property and its effective control and patrolling remains limited, in spite of earlier reports of the State Party that it had regained control over the entire property;

6. Welcomes the reported support of various donors for activities to improve the management of Comoé National Park, and encourages the State Party and conservation organisations working within the property to closely coordinate their conservation efforts;

7. Urges the State Party to implement the corrective measures adopted by the Committee at its 20 session (Vilnius, 2006) and in particular to rapidly deploy mixed ranger patrols, finalise the management plan, and develop an urgent rehabilitation plan for the property;

8. Reiterates its utmost concern about the granting of mining exploration licenses covering the property, urges the State Party to take the necessary steps to ensure the withdrawal of the these licenses, and calls on the holders of any concessions to respect international standards, in line with the international policy statement of the International Council of Mining and Metals (ICMM) of not undertaking these activities in World Heritage properties;

9. Also reiterates its request to the State Party to develop, in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN, a proposal for the desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger;

10. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2011, a detailed report on the state of conservation of the property and on the implementation of the corrective measures, including a copy of the draft management plan, an overview of current and projected budgets for the management of the property, the status of anti-poaching activities, and any data on wildlife populations for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011;

11. Decides to retain Comoé National Park (Cote d’Ivoire) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Report year: 2010
Côte d'Ivoire
Date of Inscription: 1983
Category: Natural
Criteria: (ix)(x)
Danger List (dates): 2003-2017
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 34COM (2010)
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