Niokolo-Koba National Park

• Poaching, capture and relocation of wildlife
• Drying up of ponds, and invasive species
• Illegal logging
• Livestock grazing
• Road construction project
• Potential dam construction
• Potential mining exploration and exploitation

• Poaching
• Livestock grazing

a) Implement urgent steps to halt poaching, using the Department of National Park’s aircraft for surveillance, with ground support provided by a mobile ‘strike force’;

b) Provide urgent training to the newly-recruited staff in the park, focussing on park security procedures and general ‘orientation’ to integrated management approaches;

c) Survey and demarcate the park boundary;

d) Explore the possibility of creating boreholes outside the Park to minimize illegal movements of livestock and local population inside the Park in search of water;

e) Introduce a long-term moratorium on the hunting of giant eland, and also a hunting quota system in buffer areas surrounding the park based on reliable animal census statistics;

f) Modify the park ecological monitoring programme to focus on a limited number of indicators and benchmarks which can be measured in a most efficient manner;

g) Prioritise conservation of the property in national policy, planning and budgets and take proactive measures to solicit donor support for the management of the property;

h) Develop Species Survival Plans for Giant Eland, Elephant, Hartebeest, Chimpanzee and other threatened species;

i) Enhance trans-boundary cooperation and measures to protect buffer zones and ecological corridors outside the park;

j) Update the 2000 management plan and start its implementation.

On 12 April, 2010, the State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property to the World Heritage Centre. According to Decision 33 COM 7A.11 adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009). The State Party invited a joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN reactive monitoring mission to the property, from 4 to 11 May 2010. (The report is being prepared and is available at the following Internet address: http//whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/34COM).

Monitoring of corrective measures

a) Implement urgent steps to halt poaching

The State Party indicates that since 2008, surveillance activities have been strengthened by four aerial surveys of two or three days each, which, although very effective, have not been repeated for cost issues. In 2009, patrols resulted in 26 fines, the arrest of 39 poachers and the seizure of 15 hunting weapons, 27 bicycles, 3 trucks carrying timber, and a large consignment of ammunition. The mission noted that, in 2009, the establishment of a mobile anti-poaching brigade of 25 men (patrols in all the areas of the Niokolo-Koba National Park (NKNP) and at any time) was a positive step in the fight against poaching. Regular patrols were carried out for one to two days at least twice-weekly in a radius of 8 to 9 km around the posting station – for 17 operational stations. The mission also noted that the nearby communities play an important informative role in indicating the presence of poachers. The mission was also informed of a request for increasing the number of NKNP agents to 450. If they can be trained and equipped, this will likely be a decisive step in the fight against poaching.

However, the mission was informed that poaching remains one of the biggest threats to the property.

b) Provide urgent training to the newly-recruited staff

The mission was informed that newly-recruited staff receive induction training and training modules on various topics. The mission recommends that further efforts through training in conservation and integrated management for all staff be provided. The mission emphasizes that staff training must be accompanied by the provision of equipment necessary to perform the tasks.

c) Survey and demarcate the park boundary

The mission found that there are boundary markers demarcating the perimeter of the property every 5 km (every kilometre north-west of NKNP). The mission recommends that the markers be clearly visible and accompanied by a symbolic signage adapted to the socio-cultural context, that awareness-raising campaigns be organised, and that there be a more targeted interpretation in the villages.

d) Creation of boreholes outside the park, stray livestock and encroachment

The report indicates that, in 2009, meetings were held with farmers on the periphery of NKNP. Drilling around the park could cause livestock to congregate around the park and could result in strong pressure on the grazing areas and the park. The report mentions the importance of addressing the phenomenon of seasonal migration. The mission considers that, although the stray livestock are a real problem, it is still manageable and less harmful (as particularly affecting two areas on the outskirts of the property: Missirah-Gounas and Dar-Salam) than the drilling of boreholes in its periphery, taking into account the context of transhumance. Further reflection on this matter with the national and regional authorities is necessary. Agricultural encroachment still concerns 6000 ha (out of the 913,000 ha of the NKNP). Communication efforts with the nearby communities have been undertaken to raise awareness of this problem, and a programme is also planned to enable the villagers to cultivate other land.

e) Introduce a long-term moratorium on the hunting of giant eland

The State Party indicates that the giant eland is a fully-protected species under the Forestry Code, and does not appear in the quotas for each species of wildlife fixed each year by ministerial order. The mission considers that it is not useful to establish a specific moratorium on the hunting of giant eland since this species is already under maximum protection. The mission noted that the other species also benefit from a system of annual quotas. This corrective measure is thus, de facto, satisfactory.

f) Ecological monitoring of the park, indicators and benchmarks

The mission noted that the current reporting system for NKNP could be even more effective and useful for better monitoring if it were based on indicators that are simple, reliable and inexpensive to measure, and if it also focused on endangered species. No simple indicator has yet been identified. The mission recommends that the State Party establish a research programme with regional universities to identify such indicators. The mission noted that direct observation of the fauna did not confirm the latest inventory data from 2006, and that it showed wide margins of error of estimation. An accurate census of some key species of NKNP, following the same methodology as for the 2006 survey, for comparison, is required to track the evolution of species of large mammals. A request for International Assistance could be submitted for this purpose.

Monitoring of urgent measures

g) National priorities and measures to seek assistance from donors

The report indicates that the Triennial Priority Action Plan (PAP) established in 2007, with a global cost of 14 billion CFA francs (26 million US dollars), was submitted to some development partners in Senegal; however their contribution is slow to materialize. In addition, the report notes that the sizeable increase in the budget of the park, doubled in 2009 to 122 million (227,000 US dollars), was maintained in 2010. The mission considers that the budget increase is still very inadequate given the needs identified in the PAP, and that despite the increase in the number of staff, the distribution of field positions and the equipment of the agents does not seem suited to the challenges of surveillance. Moreover, the equipment available to the agents is insufficient for adequate management, and the poor road conditions prevent the reopening of abandoned positions.

h) Survival plan for endangered species

The State Party indicates that only chimpanzees, elephants and giant eland are the subject of special attention, but that contacts have been made with partners to monitor lions and wild dogs. The mission noted that the monitoring project for the giant eland by affixing transmitter collars has failed, and because of its high cost, it has been abandoned in the hope of finding another solution. A team of the National Parks Direction (NPD) deals with the monitoring of elephants, and a group of researchers is currently working with chimpanzees within the NKNP. The mission noted that plans for the survival of endangered species, as recommended by the 2007 mission, have not been developed. The mission found that the presence of elephants is regularly mentioned in the guest books at the entrance to the NKNP. In addition, guides and local communities encountered claimed that they frequently heard lions and that a large population of wild dogs exists in south-western NKNP. In its direct observations the mission also noted large ungulates in the presence of many young, which is an indication of population dynamics on the rise. These are encouraging signs.

i) Trans-boundary cooperation and measures to protect buffer zones

The mission was informed of the premature termination of the trans-boundary cooperation project with BadiarPark (Guinea) because of the Guinean political crisis. This has also created an axis of penetration for possible poachers towards the NKNP due to the complete absence of BadiarPark surveillance. In addition, five community-based natural reserves have been established in the outlying area of NKNP; they function as buffer zones co-managed with the local people and with their own eco-guards.

j) Management Plan developed in 2000 and its implementation

The State Party explains that as part of the evaluation / updating of the Rehabilitation and Management Plan of the NKNP and its periphery, a petition was submitted to IUCN Dakar. Without funding, this activity had to be rescheduled for 2010. The mission was informed that a draft update of the Management Plan is underway with the IUCN (the Regional Office has the agreement of the Minister for the Environment). The mission recommends that the Management Plan take into account the corrective measures and zoning of the property to allow for prioritization of control measures and participation of local communities.

Other items

k) Construction of peripheral elements (roads, dams)

The mission visited the construction site of the road linking Dakar to Sambailo (Guinea). It passes along the western edge of NKNP, along the route of a previously existing dirt track of the same width. Overall, the impact on the NKNP is negligible, and there is very good collaboration between the DNP and the company for the mitigation of potential adverse effects. The mission appreciates the existence on the site of an environmental unit to monitor impacts, and found that the work respects the integrity of the park.

The mission received a copy from the Gambia River Basin Development Organisation (OMVG) of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (EISA) of the Sambangalou Dam approved by the State Party, the Regional Office of the IUCN, WWF and Wetlands International. It was also informed that an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) is being considered, and that an independent panel (chaired by the Regional Office of IUCN) will be responsible for ensuring the successful implementation of the mitigation measures. The mission remains very concerned about the potential negative impacts on NKNP, such as the reductions of the forest-gallery areas and the Ronier Palm plantations, the river fording by wildlife, and the inadequate supply of water for the flood basins and ponds. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recommend that the State Party consider the possibility of abandoning the dam project that could have significant adverse effects on the values of the property and its conditions of integrity.

l) Drying up of ponds, and invasive species

In early 2010, aware of the problem and the urgency of the situation, the DNP established an Interdepartmental Working Group whose goal is to survey the situation of the park and propose solutions to the problem of lack of water points in the NKNP. The mission notes the creation of such a Working Group, and awaits its first conclusions. The causes of this drying up seem quite complex (climate change, human activities...) and sustainable solutions for the long term should be considered. The mission therefore believes that urgent action is needed to stop the spread of the phenomenon of invasion and to make viable the pools, which are areas of concentrated biodiversity and “drivers” of ecosystem functioning. 

m) Establishment of a public / private partnership

The State Party indicates that in 2009, several meetings chaired by the Minister for the Environment were held in order to advance this process, and the findings were submitted to the highest authorities of the country. The report notes that a commitment was made by USAID to support this project. The mission was informed that a new Steering Committee was established by the Minister for the Environment to pilot this process and is currently developing specifications for an international tender.

n) Draft Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (RSOUV)

As requested by the World Heritage Committee in its Decision 31 COM 7B.1, the State Party has submitted a draft RSOUV to the World Heritage Centre. This project is submitted for approval of the World Heritage Committee in document WHC-10/34.COM/8D. A revised draft conservation status for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger will be contained in the final report of the mission which is being finalized.

Considering the conditions on the property, and despite efforts by the State Party since the 2007 mission to ensure the safeguarding of the NKNP, including anti-poaching, the World Heritage Centre and IUCN consider that since 2007 there has been very little change on the site and that the state of conservation is still of enough concern to justify its maintenance on the List of World Heritage in Danger. Certain attributes of Outstanding Universal Value, such as the ponds and biodiversity, are deteriorated but can be restored. The park’s integrity remains severely threatened by reversible human activities (poaching, wandering livestock and encroachment, …).

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note that the level of protection enjoyed by the giant eland at national level satisfies de facto the corrective measure calling for the establishment of a moratorium. They find that the trend of deterioration of the state of conservation of the property can be reversed by massive and urgent action by the State Party with the indispensable support of the local communities and the international community. Unless corrective action is taken urgently, it is likely that the continued degradation of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property will have catastrophic and irreversible consequences on it and could lead to the deletion of the property from the World Heritage List. In this sense, a reactive monitoring mission will be necessary once the census of key species of the property is available, to take stock of the overall conservation status of the property and progress on the implementation of the reviewed corrective actions.