State of Conservation
140
Reports
33
Properties concerned
29
States Parties with SOC reports
Property Category:Naturalclose
Date end:2010close
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 2001 |
Document Source: | WHC-01/CONF.208/10,WHC-2001/CONF.205/5 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 2000 |
Document Source: | WHC-2000/CONF.202/5,WHC-2000/CONF.204/10 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1999 |
Document Source: | WHC-99/CONF.204/5,WHC-99/CONF.209/14 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1998 |
Document Source: | WHC-98/CONF.201/3B,WHC-98/CONF.203/8Rev. |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1997 |
Document Source: | WHC-97/CONF.204/2B,WHC-97/CONF.204/INF.9,WHC-97/CONF.208/4B,WHC-97/CONF.208/8B |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1996 |
Document Source: | WHC-96/CONF.201/7B,WHC-96/CONF.201/INF.13,WHC-96/CONF.202/2B |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1995 |
Document Source: | WHC-95/CONF.201/4,WHC-95/CONF.203/5,WHC-95/CONF.203/5 Add.1 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1994 |
Document Source: | WHC-94/CONF.003/6,WHC.94/CONF.003/07Rev |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1992 |
Document Source: | WHC-92/CONF.002/5 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Ecuador |
Year: | 1990 |
Document Source: | CC-90/CONF.004/13 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Russian Federation |
Year: | 2007 |
Document Source: | WHC-07/31.COM/7B |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 2007 |
Document Source: | WHC-07/31.COM/7B |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 2006 |
Document Source: | WHC-06/30.COM/7B |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 2004 |
Document Source: | WHC-04/28.COM/15B |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 2003 |
Document Source: | WHC.03/27.COM/7B |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
Other Threats: | Rapid economic development |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 2002 |
Document Source: | WHC-02/CONF.201/11Rev,WHC-02/CONF.202/17,WHC-02/CONF.202/2 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
Other Threats: | Rapid economic development |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 2001 |
Document Source: | WHC-01/CONF.208/10 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
Other Threats: | Rapid economic development |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 2000 |
Document Source: | WHC-2000/CONF.202/5,WHC-2000/CONF.204/10 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
Other Threats: | Risks linked to addressing environmental impacts of individual projects to the neglect of monitoring cumulative impacts of the overall development of Ha Long City and other areas surrounding the World Heritage area |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 1999 |
Document Source: | WHC-99/CONF.204/5,WHC-99/CONF.209/14 |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties: | Viet Nam |
Year: | 1998 |
Document Source: | WHC-98/CONF.201/3B,WHC-98/CONF.203/8Rev. |
Threats*: | Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation |
States Parties
Argentina Australia Belarus Brazil Bulgaria China Croatia Denmark Dominica Ecuador India Indonesia Italy Mauritania Mexico Montenegro Nepal Peru Poland Portugal Russian Federation South Africa Uganda United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Viet Nam Zambia Zimbabwe
* :
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.