Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

Administration
Budget
Capacity Building
Communication
Community
Conservation
Credibility of the World Heritage ...
Inscriptions on the World Heritage ...
International Assistance
List of World Heritage in Danger
Operational Guidelines
Outstanding Universal Value
Partnerships
Periodic Reporting
Reinforced Monitoring
Reports
Tentative Lists
Working methods and tools
World Heritage Convention








2029 27 GA
2027 26 GA
2025 25 GA
2025 47 COM
2024 46 COM
2023 24 GA
2023 45 COM
2023 18 EXT.COM
2022 17 EXT.COM
2021 16 EXT.COM
2021 23 GA
2021 44 COM
2021 15 EXT.COM
2020 14 EXT.COM
2019 13 EXT.COM
2019 22 GA
2019 43 COM
2018 42 COM
2017 12 EXT.COM
2017 21 GA
2017 41 COM
2016 40 COM
2015 11 EXT.COM
2015 20 GA
2015 39 COM
2014 1 EXT.GA
2014 38 COM
2013 19 GA
2013 37 COM
2012 36 COM
2011 10 EXT.COM
2011 18 GA
2011 35 COM
2010 34 COM
2010 9 EXT.COM
2009 17 GA
2009 33 COM
2008 32 COM
2007 16 GA
2007 8 EXT.COM
2007 31 COM
2006 30 COM
2005 15 GA
2005 29 COM
2005 29 BUR
2004 7 EXT.COM
2004 7 EXT.BUR
2004 28 COM
2004 28 BUR
2003 14 GA
2003 27 COM
2003 27 BUR
2003 6 EXT.COM
2002 26 COM
2002 26 BUR
2001 25 COM
2001 25 EXT.BUR
2001 5 EXT.COM
2001 13 GA
2001 25 BUR
2000 24 COM
2000 24 EXT.BUR
2000 24 BUR(SPE)
2000 24 BUR
1999 23 COM
1999 23 EXT.BUR
1999 4 EXT.COM
1999 12 GA
1999 3 EXT.COM
1999 23 BUR
1998 22 COM
1998 22 EXT.BUR
1998 22 BUR
1997 21 COM
1997 21 EXT.BUR
1997 2 EXT.COM
1997 11 GA
1997 21 BUR
1996 20 COM
1996 20 EXT.BUR
1996 20 BUR
1995 19 COM
1995 19 EXT.BUR
1995 10 GA
1995 19 BUR
1994 18 COM
1994 18 EXT.BUR
1994 18 BUR
1993 17 COM
1993 17 EXT.BUR
1993 9 GA
1993 17 BUR
1992 16 COM
1992 16 BUR
1991 15 COM
1991 8 GA
1991 15 BUR
1990 14 COM
1990 14 BUR
1989 13 COM
1989 7 GA
1989 13 BUR
1988 12 COM
1988 12 BUR
1987 11 COM
1987 6 GA
1987 11 BUR
1986 10 COM
1986 10 BUR
1985 9 COM
1985 5 GA
1985 9 BUR
1984 8 COM
1984 8 BUR
1983 7 COM
1983 4 GA
1983 7 BUR
1982 6 COM
1982 6 BUR
1981 5 COM
1981 1 EXT.COM
1981 5 BUR
1980 3 GA
1980 4 COM
1980 4 BUR
1979 3 COM
1979 3 BUR
1979 2 BUR
1978 2 GA
1978 2 COM
1978 1 BUR
1977 1 COM
1976 1 GA
16 Decisions
0 Resolutions
Session: 13BUR 1989close
By Year
The Bureau was glad to learn that, thanks in part to support provided under the World Heritage Fund, the situation of this site had greatly improved. The Bureau re-considered this matter under the agenda item concerning nominations/exclusion from the List of World Heritage in Danger (see paragraph XI.28.C.).
2) Garamba National Park (Zaire) The joint project to rehabilitate this Park run by the Frankfurt Zoological Society/WWF/World Heritage Fund met with considerable success since no more rhinoceros have been poached in the last 5 years, the rhinoceros population has increased by 50% and a better management regime has been established. The Park recently celebrated the 50th anniversary since its foundation. The Bureau noted this situation with satisfaction and recommended that the property be re-examined in 1990: if the situation continued to show improvement, steps should be taken to ...
The Bureau recalled that IUCN had reported on the deteriorating situation of this site on several occasions and that the Committee had requested the Ivoirian authorities to propose its inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It noted that the Secretariat had contacted the Ivoirian authorities, but that only recently a response had been obtained in the form of a request for preparatory assistance in order to prepare a technical cooperation request for an integrated project addressing the need for increased protection of the natural values of this Park and also the ...
The Bureau was informed of the project to construct a major highway across the Park, which would be financed by a number of Development Banks. Several impact studies - some contradictory in their conclusions - had been made: the Bureau expressed its preference for the alternative route outside of the Park to the North, which in addition to preserving the natural values of Niokolo-Koba, would serve to link up isolated villages. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to prepare a letter to the highest authority in Senegal recalling this State Party's obligation to protect the natural values ...
The Bureau wished firstly to commend the Zimbabwean authorities for their efforts to protect the remaining rhinoceros and elephant populations. The Bureau expressed great concern however over the proposed oil exploration programme, particularly in the light of a very negative report submitted to the Secretariat by the Zimbabwe National Commission for Unesco. The Bureau therefore requested the Secretariat to convey its concern to the highest government authorities of Zimbabwe, as well as to the Director of Mobil Oil Company.
The Bureau learnt of several threats to this site, including a proposal to excise a large section of land for settlement. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to contact the Ecuadorian authorities to express its concern over the proposed excision and to encourage them to draw up a request for technical cooperation to support the elaboration of a revised management plan addressing many of the conflicting issues in the Park. The Bureau hoped that the request for technical cooperation could be submitted in time for examination by the Committee in December 1989.
The Bureau noted with satisfaction that the two States Parties had recently undertaken measures to coordinate the management and protection of these contiguous parks containing the famous waterfalls. In response to the suggestion of the IUCN representative to encourage the States Parties' acceptance to list these waterfalls under one name on the World Heritage List, the representative of Brazil stated that his government had not changed its position on this matter and that the two sites should continue to be indicated separately on the World Heritage List.
The Bureau noted that the preparatory assistance mission to this site in November 1988 had resulted in the elaboration of a two-year Unesco/UNDP project on evaluating the impact of iron-ore extraction on the natural values of the site and elaborating an integrated management plan which would improve protective measures and encourage socio-economic development of the transition zone. The Bureau nevertheless wished to express its concern about further damage to this site and suggested that this concern be communicated to the World Bank.
Following a request of the Committee on 21 April 1989, the American authorities submitted a report on the fire management policy review and the recovery plan following the 1988 wildfires. The Bureau wished to thank the American authorities for this report and for their offer to make it available for other States Parties.
The Bureau noted that this site had recently been invaded by several hundreds of local people which had caused great damage to the park and the loss of several lives. The Indian authorities had sent in the police to halt further destruction, but the problem of illegal encroachment was still not resolved. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to contact the Indian authorities to express its concern over this situation and encourage taking appropriate measures to restore the site.
The Bureau was informed by the representative of the Government of Australia of proceedings instituted against it before the Federal Court by the Government of Queensland with respect to the protection of the site of the Wet Tropics of Queensland inscribed on the World Heritage List in December 1988. The judge of the Federal Court is called upon to examine the question whether the ban decided by the Federal Government on commercial forestry operations in the site can reasonably be regarded as appropriate and adapted to the objectives of protecting, conserving, enhancing and rehabilitating ...
The IUCN representative also gave reports on the conservation status of Rio Platano (Honduras), Manu National Park (Peru), Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia), Sagarmatha (Nepal), Wood Buffalo National Park (Canada).
14. The Bureau approved the following requests for international assistance for conducting regional training workshops in the field of natural heritage conservation and protected area management: A. Qatar (for the Arab region), 7-20 October 1989 - US$30,000 B. College of African Wildlife Management, Mweka, United Republic of Tanzania (for anglophone African countries), in February 1990 - US$30,000 C. The Ministry of Nature Protection and the Department of National Parks, Senegal (for francophone African countries), in Dakar and Saint Louis, 30 October to 17 November 1989 - ...
15. The Bureau reviewed another request from Tanzania, for the purchase of equipment for protecting the archaeological and palaeontological site of Olduvai Gorge in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area of the United Republic of Tanzania. The Bureau, however, deferred its recommendations on this request, since the site had been inscribed on the World Heritage List under natural criteria. The Bureau, though, suggested that ICOMOS and the Secretariat provide further information on the relevance of cultural values for the inscription of this site on the World Heritage List at the forthcoming ...
16. The Bureau heard details of an application for technical assistance amounting to about US$320,000 submitted by the Syrian Arab Republic for a conservation programme for the Old City of Aleppo. The Bureau agreed to grant the Syrian authorities preparatory assistance to enable them to draw up a large-scale project for submission to funding sources other than the World Heritage Fund, the resources of which were too limited to take on such a project.
26. The Bureau considered that, if the Government of Mali so wished, a preparatory assistance mission could be organized with a view to helping the authorities concerned to work out an appropriate nomination file on Timbuktu (mosques, cemeteries and mausoleums) to the List of World Heritage in Danger. This nomination file could be presented to one of the next sessions of the Bureau.
Sites: Timbuktu
top