Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park

a) Insecurity;

b) Poaching;

c) Mining;

d) Transhumance and illegal grazing;

e) Illegal fishing;

f) Lack of resources.

• Illegal grazing;
• Uncontrolled poaching by heavily armed groups and subsequent loss of up to 80% of the Park’s wildlife;
• Deteriorating security situation and a halt to tourism.

No corrective measures were adopted by the World Heritage Committee. However, the 2001 joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN monitoring mission did propose an emergency rehabilitation plan. Main components of this plan were:

a) Zoning of the park, materialization of its limits;

b) Development of a management plan;

c) Inventory of wildlife in the park together with a cartography of major habitats;

d) Management actions to conserve biodiversity and protect fragile ecosystems;

e) Development of a cooperation mechanism with all stakeholders, in particular local communities, government services, projects and hunting concessionaires;

f) Strengthening law enforcement in the property. 

Manovo-Gounda St. Floris National Park was inscribed in 1988 for its diversity of habitats, including a Sudano-Guinean woodland savanna and flood plains, as well as for its biodiversity, especially its wealth of large wildlife. At the time of inscription, the values and integrity of the property were already seriously threatened and the continuing pressure of threats led to its inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1997. In 2001, a joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN mission visited the property, and noted as main threats the lack of security, poaching, illegal mining, transhumance and illegal grazing, illegal fishing and the absence of resources to ensure the protection and the management of the property. Although corrective measures had not been formally adopted by the World Heritage Committee, the mission had proposed an emergency rehabilitation plan. At its 28th session (Suzhou, 2004), a further joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN monitoring mission was requested to review the implementation of this rehabilitation plan, and the state of conservation of the property. Unfortunately, due to the lack of security in the northern part of the Central African Republic this mission was postponed until 2009.

Moreover, the State Party has not submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, in accordance with the request of the World Heritage Committee in Decision 32 COM 7A.1.

The joint UNESCO/IUCN monitoring mission was organized from 1 to 11 April 2009. The mission confirmed that the long period of insecurity had had a negative impact on the values and integrity of the property. The mission was informed of the inventory data of 2005 carried out by ECOFAC (Ecosystèmes Forestières de l’Afrique Centrale) showing a significant reduction of the wildlife populations between 1985 and 2005. The decrease in populations varies between 68% (Giant Eland) and 100% (Cob Defassa) depending on the species, and the data shows a reduction in the spatial area for wildlife in the property. The elephant population has been reduced by 97%. These losses are the result of armed poaching (especially for ivory) and hunting to provide for the occupants of the Park and the bush meat market. The rhinoceros is reported as having disappeared from the Park since the 1990s. The hippopotamus is almost extinct and the ostrich, like the cheetah, are only very exceptionally mentioned. Although no recordings have been made since 2005, it is clear that the deteriorating security situation in the region, closely linked to the armed conflict in Sudan (Darfour region) and Chad, have encouraged an increase in poaching, and certainly caused greater wildlife losses since 2005.

The following threats were noted by the mission:

- The invasion of grazing areas by transhumants and their troops, that occupy the area replacing the wildlife, modifying the ecosystem of the flood plains and contributing to the poaching of smaller species ;

- Commercial ivory hunting (and other local products like honey and pepper) by mobile armed groups coming from Sudan and Chad;

- The invasion of the rivers and pools by fishermen (local or migrant) who make these sites less attractive, notably for the birds;

- The practice of bush fires of diverse origin (to increase grazing land, open up the area, poach, harvest honey…);

- Diamond prospection in the Park and the installation of small scattered mining camps;

- Closure of certain milieus (pools, salt marshes) due to the disappearance of large animals like the elephant.

The mission noted that the security situation had deteriorated since the 2001 mission, and particularly since the Darfour conflict (Sudan). Little progress in the implementation of the emergency plan proposed by the joint mission had been achieved:

a) Zoning of the Park and materialization of its limits:

There is no functional Park zoning enabling hierarchical action and priority decision-making.

b) Development of a management plan:

There is neither a management plan, nor a development, plan nor a regular workplan for the Park ; these are indispensible tools for the Park’s rehabilitation.

c) Inventory of wildlife in the Park together with a cartography of major habitats:

An inventory of wildlife was organized in 2005 in the framework of the ECOFAC Programme (Ecosystèmes Forestières de l’Afrique Centrale) funded by the European Union. The programme also ensures occasional aerial monitoring.

d) Management actions to conserve biodiversity and protect fragile ecosystems:

Currently, there are almost no management activities in the property, which have no administrative body for the Park area and no official responsibility for its conservation. There is neither supervisory staff nor staff directly responsible for the management of the property.

e) Development of a cooperation mechanism with all stakeholders, in particular local communities, government services, projects and hunting concessionaires: 

Apart from the ECOFAC Programme, to be recognized for its praiseworthy efforts, the Park has not benefitted from any efficacious conservation measures to date.

f) Strengthening law enforcement in the property:

In the framework of the ECOFAC Programme, two anti-poaching teams are detailed for the Park, operating mainly from the Sangba and Manovo bases. The Gordil base is only sporadically operational. There is no information available concerning the impact of the anti-poaching efforts. Nevertheless, the invasion of the most productive parts of the Park by the breeders, fishermen, and poachers and now and then the diamond miners emphasize the non-application of the law within the Park boundaries.

The mission concluded that, in the face of the serious threats noted, there is practically no management and protection measures in place. This is partially explained by the insecurity problems and the regional context referred to above. But mention must also be made of the very minimum investment provided by the State Party to remedy the situation. The only investment is the ECOFAC Programme, but this programme also includes the Village Hunting Zones and the Bamingui Park, covering more than 80,000km. Therefore, the programme is under-supported in view of the huge task, and without continuity or sustainability.

The list of pressures on the property is long and in part determined by the socio-political context of the whole region and the recurring transborder insecurity situation. Although the lack of recent information makes an accurate evaluation of the current Outstanding Universal Value difficult, based on information available the mission concluded that it was seriously degraded. Without the implementation of specific corrective measures in the framework of a new emergency plan to contain the threats observed, the degradation risks becoming irreversible, leading in the short-term to the loss of the Outstanding Universal Value.

In order to avoid the imminent loss of the Outstanding Universal Value, urgent action must be taken to limit the main threats. These actions concern:

- The removal of all the illegal occupants in the Park (shepherds and troops, fishermen and diamond miners);

- A halt to poaching organized from neighbouring countries;

- The establishment of professional management modalities for the Park and their financing.

In order to succeed in this respect, the State Party needs to make a commitment at the highest level, as well as a similar commitment from the neighbouring States Parties, notably Sudan and Chad.

In view of the extent of the problem and the means invested, important as regards absolute value but weak compared to the territory as a whole, the mission recommended to concentrate efforts within the framework of the new emergency plan concerning a reduced area of the property to conserve the essential values, and with the hope of ensuring the future rehabilitation of the property based on this closely protected core area. The mission recommended urgent corrective measures to be integrated into the emergency plan, which are included in the draft decision.

Given the situation in the property, the mission considered that the development of a draft Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger was premature.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN are extremely concerned by the significant loss of characteristics for which the property was inscribed on the World Heritage List, notably its exceptional biodiversity. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN consider that,  without urgent action on the part of the State Party, and assistance from the international community, justification for the Outstanding Universal Value will no longer be valid. In view of the seriousness of the situation, they recommend the application of the reinforced monitoring mechanism for the property. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN also recommend that the draft Statement of Outstanding Universal Value that was being prepared in March 2009, at the Dar es Salaam Workshop (Tanzania) be finalised, to enable an improved monitoring of the evolution of the property.