State of Conservation
7
Reports
1
Properties concerned
1
States Parties with SOC reports
Property:
Lines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpaclose
Region:
Latin America and the Caribbeanclose
Site | State Party | Year | Threats* | Danger List |
---|---|---|---|---|
lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru |
2013 | No | |
lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru |
2011 | Air transport infrastructure,
Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Housing,
Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals,
Management systems/ management plan,
Mining,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru |
2009 | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Illegal activities,
Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals,
Mining,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru |
2007 | Crop production,
Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Illegal activities,
Mining,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru |
2006 | Crop production,
Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure,
Illegal activities,
Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals,
Mining,
Other Threats: Lack of systematic monitoring of the site |
No |
lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru |
2005 | Crop production, Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure, Illegal activities, Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals, Management systems/ management plan, Mining, | No |
lines and geoglyphs of nasca and palpaLines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Palpa | peru |
2000 | No |
* :
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.