State of Conservation
28
Reports
28
Properties concerned
22
States Parties with SOC reports
Date Start:
2008close
Date end:2008close
Site | State Party | Year | Threats* | Danger List |
---|---|---|---|---|
belfries of belgium and franceBelfries of Belgium and France | belgium,france |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
bordeaux, port of the moonBordeaux, Port of the Moon | france |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
dong phayayen-khao yai forest complexDong Phayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex | thailand |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure,
Other Threats: Forest fragmentationNeed for ecological corridors. |
No |
dresden elbe valleyDresden Elbe Valley | germany |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | Yes |
golden mountains of altaiGolden Mountains of Altai | russian federation |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
group of monuments at hampiGroup of Monuments at Hampi | india |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
historic areas of istanbulHistoric Areas of Istanbul | turkiye |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure,
Other Threats: Continued degradation of the vernacular architecture within the protected zones (particularly Ottoman-period timber houses in the Zeyrek and Süleymaniye core areas); |
No |
historic centre of the city of salzburgHistoric Centre of the City of Salzburg | austria |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
historic centre of viennaHistoric Centre of Vienna | austria |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
historic monuments of ancient naraHistoric Monuments of Ancient Nara | japan |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
iguacu national parkIguaçu National Park | brazil |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
kaziranga national parkKaziranga National Park | india |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure,
Other Threats: Insufficient infrastructure |
No |
mount athosMount Athos | greece |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure,
Other Threats: Fire |
No |
niokolo-koba national parkNiokolo-Koba National Park | senegal |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | Yes |
okapi wildlife reserveOkapi Wildlife Reserve | democratic republic of the congo |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | Yes |
port, fortresses and group of monuments, cartagenaPort, Fortresses and Group of Monuments, Cartagena | colombia |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure,
Other Threats: Dilapidated state of conservation of the Church of Santo Domingo |
No |
red fort complexRed Fort Complex | india |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
samarkand – crossroad of culturesSamarkand – Crossroad of Cultures | uzbekistan |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
sangay national parkSangay National Park | ecuador |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
simien national parkSimien National Park | ethiopia |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure,
Other Threats: Declining populations of Walia ibex, Ethiopian wolf and other large mammal species |
Yes |
stonehenge, avebury and associated sitesStonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites | united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
tasmanian wildernessTasmanian Wilderness | australia |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
town of luang prabangTown of Luang Prabang | lao people's democratic republic |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
tropical rainforest heritage of sumatraTropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra | indonesia |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
upper middle rhine valleyUpper Middle Rhine Valley | germany |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
volcanoes of kamchatkaVolcanoes of Kamchatka | russian federation |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
western caucasusWestern Caucasus | russian federation |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | No |
yellowstone national parkYellowstone National Park | united states of america |
2008 | Ground transport infrastructure, | 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.