United nations educational, scientific and cultural organization convention concerning the protection of the world
PART II 14. The Great Barrier Reef
Yüklə 1,59 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- 15. Greater Blue Mountains Area (Australia) (N 917)
- 16. Sagarmatha National Park (Nepal) (N 120)
- 17. Te Wahipounamu – South West New Zealand (New Zealand) (N 551)
- 18. Tubbataha Reef Marine Park (Philippines) (N 653)
- 19. Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park (Viet Nam) (N 951 rev)
- EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA PART I 20. Belovezhskaya Pushcha / Bialowieza Forest (Belarus/Poland) (N 33-627)
- 21. Pirin National Park (Bulgaria) (N 225)
- 22. Lake Baikal (Russian Federation) (N 754)
- PART II 23. Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria) (N 219)
- 24. Nahanni National Park (Canada) (N 24)
- 25. Wood Buffalo National Park (Canada) (N 256)
- 26. Isole Eolie (Aeolian Islands) (Italy) (N 908)
- 27. Volcanoes of Kamchatka (Russian Federation) (N 765 bis)
- 28. Skocjan Caves (Slovenia) (N 390)
- 29. Doñana National Park (Spain) (685)
- 30. Henderson Island (United Kingdom) (N 487)
| PART II
14. The Great Barrier Reef (Australia) (N 154) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1981 Criteria: N (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: None
25 EXT BUR III.31-36
On 22 January 2004 the World Heritage Centre received a report from an NGO, Wildlife Whitsunday, concerning a proposed project at Airlie Beach adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. The proposed development project encompasses; a floating marina, residential development, commercial precinct, and connection to sewerage to allow discharge of vessels. The report highlights the potential environmental impacts associated with extensive disturbance of seagrass and mangroves as well as changes in hydrology. The report was transmitted to IUCN and the State Party. The Centre received the response from the State Party on 12 March 2004. The State Party indicates that the proposal is being considered by the Queensland State Government and the Commonwealth (Australian) Government. Conditions will be placed, if the project is approved by the Australian Government, to ensure that it has no significant impacts on the World Heritage integrity of the Great Barrier Reef. The State Party has also indicated that Wildlife Whitsunday has also been in contact with the Australian Department of the Environment and Heritage on this matter. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.14 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Acknowledges receipt of the State Party’s report with clarifications on the proposed development project at Airlie Beach adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage property; 2. Requests that the State Party keep the World Heritage Centre and IUCN informed on the status of the proposed development project at Airlie Beach and the proposed measures to avoid any potential impacts it may have on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage property. 15. Greater Blue Mountains Area (Australia) (N 917) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 2000 Criteria: N (ii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: None Previous Bureau/Committee Deliberations: 25 BUR V.113-115 Conservation issues: On 13 October 2003 the World Heritage Centre received a report from the Colong Foundation for Wilderness Ltd, Australia, claiming that a proposed mine will threaten the Greater Blue Mountains Area. The report draws attention to a proposal for a 27 million tonne sand and clay mine, located directly adjoining the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage property. According to the report, this will impact upon the biodiversity values, through pollution of the Wollangambe River, and damage essential elements of the integrity of the property. The report requests the Government to set up a public process to define an adequate buffer area for the property. The Centre transmitted the report to the State Party and IUCN. The State Party, responding to the report, noted that the assessment of this mining proposal is being conducted by the New South Wales Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources and the decision is awaited. It also indicated that the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act of 1999 imposes obligations on undesirable actions not only within a World Heritage area but also outside the area. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.15 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Acknowledges receipt of the State Party’s report with clarifications on the status of the proposed sand and clay mine adjacent to the Greater Blue Mountains Area; 2. Encourages the State Party to prevent any developments that could have adverse effects on the World Heritage property; 3. Requests that the State Party keep the World Heritage Centre and IUCN informed on the status of the proposed sand and clay mine adjacent to the Greater Blue Mountains Area and the proposed measures to avoid any potential impacts it may have on the World Heritage property. 16. Sagarmatha National Park (Nepal) (N 120) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1979 Criteria: N (iii) Previous International Assistance: US$ 71,995, Technical Co-operation for reforestation, environmental education and other conservation awareness building activities. Previous Bureau/Committee Deliberations: 23 EXT BUR III.iii 27 COM 7B.10
The Department of National Parks and Wildlife (DNPWC) of Nepal, in a report attached to its letter of 27 January 2004 to the Centre, noted that the Nepal Civil Aviation Authority has confirmed in writing that it will remove equipment and other construction materials from the Syangboche airstrip inside Sagarmatha National Park. The excavator and materials will be airlifted to Kathmandu. The Civil Aviation authority was in the process of hiring an helicopter in late January 2004 to airlift the materials from Syangboche. IUCN has noted the information and has expressed satisfaction with the action taken by the State Party to implement Committee decision 27 COM 7B.10. The report of the DNPWC does not however, address other issues raised by the Committee at its last session, e.g. enhanced co-operation with local stakeholders. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.16 The World Heritage Committee,
17. Te Wahipounamu – South West New Zealand (New Zealand) (N 551) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1990 Criteria: N (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: None
24 EXT BUR III.1.iii
On 12 February 2004 the World Heritage Centre received a report from the State Party concerning an oil-spill accident at Te Wahipounamu – South West New Zealand. The report indicated that approximately 13,000 liters of diesel fuel had spilled into the harbour at Freshwater Basin at the head of Milford Sound, which borders the Fiordland National Park that is part of the World Heritage property. Environment Southland, the responsible agency for the management of its oil spill response plan, indicates that the marine reserve at Milford Sound appears not to have been adversely affected by the spill. With respect to the adverse impact on wildlife, immediate and follow up action have not revealed any issues of immediate concern and it is thought that there will not be long term threats. Furthermore, a thorough clean up operation has been completed with the support of the community. The State Party informed the Centre that the Department of Conservation of the Government of New-Zealand and Environment Southland will carry out an investigation into the spill and management action will be taken to prevent the recurrence of such an accident. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.17 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Notes the information provided by the State Party concerning a recent oil spill accident at Te Wahipounamu-South West New Zealand; 2. Requests the State Party to take all necessary measures to prevent such accidents occurring in the future. 18. Tubbataha Reef Marine Park (Philippines) (N 653) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1993 Criteria: N (ii), (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: Total amount: US$60,000 (US$20,000, preparatory assistance; US$20,000, technical co-operation and US$30,000, training). Previous Bureau/Committee deliberations: 27 COM 7B.11 Conservation issues: The Centre and IUCN received a draft report from the Director of the Tubbataha Reef Marine Park on 30 January 2004. The report notes that, as requested by the Committee at its 27th session, a number of assessments on the effects of illegal fishing on the marine biodiversity of the site are under way with the support of the technical assistance received from the World Heritage Fund. The Director of the Tubbataha Reef Marine Park has confirmed to the World Heritage Centre that the final version of the report will be submitted to the World Heritage Centre by 15th June 2004 at the latest, as requested in the activity financing contract. IUCN believes that information from these studies could be useful for comparative studies on ecological conditions with those at the time of inscription of the site on the World Heritage List and for making judgements on how well conditions of site integrity are being maintained. Hence, IUCN recommended that the Committee request the State Party to submit information from the studies to the Centre as soon as possible. IUCN has noted that the State Party has provided some information on the issue of illegal fishing activities in the Sulu Sea and an analysis of the impact on the World Heritage property. IUCN believes however that more details and further clarification on this issue are needed and has suggested that the State Party consider convening national workshops, launch awareness campaigns and/or conduct studies on current legislation and its enforcement to better understand ways and means to mitigate impacts of illegal fishing. A selected number of side-events focussing on the conservation of marine ecosystems in East Asia, convened during the 7th Conference of Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity, in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 9 to 20 February 2004, reviewed the question of illegal fishing. Most of the participants in those events were of the view that efforts to address illegal fisheries may require sub-regional and regional level co-operation if they are to be successful. Draft decision: 28 COM 15B.18 The World Heritage Committee,
19. Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park (Viet Nam) (N 951 rev) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 2003 Criterion: N (i) Previous International Assistance: None
27 COM 8C.8
In December 2003, the leader of the IUCN/WCPA Task Force on Karst and Cave Protection participated in a training programme on the management of Karst protected areas, organized by the ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation (ARCBC), in Viet Nam. As part of the course he led the trainees to this site, newly inscribed on the World Heritage List by the Committee at its 27th session. He reported progress in soil re-consolidation and proper drainage arrangements on the new road through the Park. Despite extremely heavy rains, sediment load in the Son River appears to have reduced compared to what the same observer noted 12 months earlier. However, the group did not visit the southern sector of the road that runs outside of the Park’s boundary, which suffered greater disruption. Local officials informed the group that similar soil-reconsolidation efforts were underway in those locations as well. WWF researchers had reported more frequent sightings of the endemic langurs in the Chai Valley. More than 30 arrests of some senior provincial officials and major business operators who had illegally felled and stolen timber from the site had been made in Tay Nguyen. There appeared to be a new determination on the part of the Government to crack down on forest crimes. A number of new staff appointments were also being made. A representative of the World Heritage Centre participated in the ceremony to commemorate the World Heritage status of this site on 15 February 2004. Quang Binh Province displayed a high sense of pride over the site’s World Heritage status. All the senior officials who spoke at the ceremony, including the Deputy Prime Minister of Viet Nam and the Chairperson of the People’s Committee of the Quang Binh Province committed to fully implement the decisions of the 28th session of the Committee including the Committee’s wish that Viet Nam works to build transborder co-operation with the People’s Democratic Republic of Lao (Lao PDR). The Centre, the UNESCO Office in Viet Nam and the UNESCO National Commission of Viet Nam cooperated to send a Delegation of six national and four provincial Government representatives from Lao PDR to participate at the ceremony held in the Quang Binh Province of Vietnam. Hence the dialogue between Viet Nam and Lao PDR has now been re-launched with a view to moving towards the implementation of the Committee’s decision (27 COM 8C.8, paragraph 5). The Centre has initiated discussions with the Asia Environmental Directorate of the World Bank in Washington, D.C. and in the Lao PDR to explore possibilities to promote transborder cooperation between Lao PDR and Viet Nam. The World Bank is implementing a number of development projects in Lao PDR, along the Lao PDR-Viet Nam border, and therefore welcomes the opportunity provided by the Committee’s decision to build greater collaboration between the two neighbours for biodiversity conservation. The World Bank and the Centre had meetings in Vientiane, Lao PDR and with Viet Nam and Lao PDR Delegations in Paris, and all parties concerned have expressed their willingness to move forward to implement the Committee’s wishes. Nevertheless, given the capacity constraints, particularly in Lao PDR, the building of transborder co-operation will be a slow process. The possible nomination of a transborder World Heritage area by the two countries that includes the Phong Nha Ke Bang World Heritage property must therefore be seen as a medium-to-long term outcome, rather than an immediate result.
EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA PART I 20. Belovezhskaya Pushcha / Bialowieza Forest (Belarus/Poland) (N 33-627) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1979; extended in 1992 Criterion: N (iii) Previous International Assistance: None
25 COM VIII.97 27 COM 7B.14 Conservation issues: A joint IUCN/UNESCO mission visited Belovezhskaya Pushcha / Bialowieza Forest in Poland and the Republic of Belarus from 15 to 20 March 2004 in response to the decision of the 27th session of the World Heritage Committee (27 COM 7B.14). The mission reviewed the state of conservation of the property, evaluated possibilities for multi and bi-lateral co-operation in the management of the site, clarified issues of zoning of the World Heritage property as well as fencing along the international border, and met with all relevant stakeholders in both Belarus and Poland. The mission concluded that the integrity and the World Heritage values of the site in both countries are not threatened directly by logging or any other kind of actions inside the boundaries of the World Heritage property. The mission observed however a few potential common threats, which might have adverse impact on the whole territory, especially by causing a change in dominance of main tree species: a) global warming, b) long distance air pollution and c) Change of hydrological regime and groundwater levels. The mission also found that the integrity of the World Heritage property is rather vulnerable to external factors due to its relatively small size. The situation has however improved during the past eight years. The area of the Polish National Park was nearly doubled in October 1996, when the Council of Ministers approved an extension of 5,186 ha. By the year 2003, altogether 12,000 ha of the surrounding State Forests have been declared Nature Reserves. The administration of the National Park on the territory of the Republic of Belarus has also received additional territories under its jurisdiction, which will serve as additional buffer zones to the World Heritage property. The mission noted some other issues of concern, which if not managed or controlled, could potentially evolve to become threats to the integrity of the World Heritage property: a) insufficient integration of the World Heritage property on both sides of the border into the surrounding forest and ecological separation of the two sites due to the border fences, b) management activities in the forests surrounding the World Heritage property (mainly sanitary loggings) reducing the amount of dead and rotting wood, and c) growing impacts of tourism, concentrated in Bialowieza / Kamenuki villages adjacent to the World Heritage property. The mission found that the States Parties, their National Park staff and partners were well aware of these threats and had identified, where possible, measures to mitigate them. The mission pointed out, that some of the threats could be minimized by handling the whole forest as one management unit, where the protection of old-growth forest ecosystem and its biodiversity would be the main goals. The mission noted that the cooperation between the States Parties in the field of conservation and management of the World Heritage property was not yet adequate. However, the mission noted with satisfaction that the States Parties on their own initiative used the event of the mission to arrange a bi-lateral meeting and discuss ways to improve co-operation with regard to the management of the World Heritage property and the forest in general. The report noted that, in 1992, the core zone of the Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park on the territory of the Republic of Belarus was inscribed as an extension to the Polish site. The Polish part of the nominated area is well known for being the starting point for re-introduction projects of the European Bison. However, the conservation values of the forest complex are much wider. The World Heritage property area is a portion of a larger transboundary forest complex, of about 150,000 ha. The entire forest complex has remained the largest and best-preserved unit of mixed lowland forest in Europe divided into a Belorussian (90 000 ha) and a Polish (60 000 ha) part. The report noted that while in Belarus nearly all forests of the complex have become part of the transboundary World Heritage property (92,923 ha), less than 10 % of the forests in Poland have been included into the World Heritage property. The protection of biodiversity and natural processes in this larger forest area is of concern to local and national nature conservation NGOs particularly in relation to impacts from forestry. A number of NGOs and environmental specialists are arguing for an enlargement of the strictly protected areas as well as for an enlargement of the World Heritage property on the Polish side of the border. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.20 The World Heritage Committee,
21. Pirin National Park (Bulgaria) (N 225) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1983 Criteria: N (i) (ii) (iii) Previous International Assistance: None
26 COM 21 (b) 2 27 COM 7B.15 Conservation issues: The joint UNESCO-IUCN mission was carried out from 3 to 6 February 2004 in close cooperation with the State Party, the site manager and the Ministry for Environment and Waters. It noted that a number of ascertained and potential threats exist, including the existing ski development and other potential development proposals, which could threaten the values and the integrity of the World Heritage property. During the mission draft reports were provided to the mission team. The mission however noted that the response from the Government to the requests of the Committee was not adequate, and that no map of the World Heritage property was provided officially by the States Party despite repeated requests. The mission concluded with a number of specific recommendations on the following issues:
Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.21 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Recalling its decision to defer the inscription of Pirin National Park on the List of World Heritage in Danger until its 27th session (26 COM 21 (b) 2), with decision on this to be based on an assessment of the State Party's response to the UNESCO/IUCN mission report (27 COM 7B.15) and noting the results of the joint UNESCO/IUCN mission of February 2004, 2. Regrets that the State Party did not adopt the final management plan by the end of 2003 as requested (27 COM 7B.15) and urges the State Party to adopt this plan at least by the end of 2004; 3. Welcomes the cooperation of the State Party in addressing some of the issues, including the submission of an international assistance request for a potential extension of the World Heritage property; 4. Requests that the State Party implement the specific recommendations of the 2004 UNESCO / IUCN mission concerning the state of conservation of the site, its management, its zoning and the establishment of buffer zones and improved communication; 5. Requests the State Party to provide a detailed report on actions taken to respond to the recommendations of the 2004 mission report, as well as a clear map showing the boundaries of the site by 1 February 2005, for examination by the Committee at its 29th session in 2005. 22. Lake Baikal (Russian Federation) (N 754) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1996 Criteria: N (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: 1999: US$30,000, Training seminar Previous Bureau/Committee Deliberations: 26 COM 21(b)19 27 COM 7B.19
Following the invitation by the Russian authorities, as requested by the Committee (26 COM 21(b) 19 and 27 COM 7B.19), the high-level mission took place with meetings in the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation from 11-12 November 2003. The Director General of IUCN, the Director of the Centre, the Director of the UNESCO Moscow Office, The Chief of the Europe and North America Unit of the Centre, the Head of the IUCN Moscow Office, a protected area specialist of IUCN and a programme specialist from the UNESCO Moscow Office participated in the mission. The goal of the meeting was to discuss key issues related to the conservation of the Lake Baikal World Heritage property. During this meeting the representatives of the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation stressed the relevance of the cooperation with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and IUCN and the importance of developing it further. They presented comprehensive information on issues related to the current state of conservation of this World Heritage property and measures undertaken by Russian authorities, both at the national and local levels, to address these issues. They also confirmed their preparedness to present, according to the requests of the 26th and 27th sessions of the World Heritage Committee, a detailed report on the state of conservation of the Lake Baikal World Heritage property, and proposed to consider a joint pilot project with the participation of UNESCO and IUCN, aimed at addressing issues of concern relating to the conservation of Lake Baikal. Following this meeting the State Party submitted, on 10 March 2004, a detailed state of conservation Report outlining key actions implemented on the following issues:
Eight new enactments have been adopted, including key regulations on the ecological zoning for Lake Baikal; the limits of water level in Lake Baikal under economical activities; and the protection regime for endemic species of plants and animals in Lake Baikal. Four more legislative documents have been prepared on key issues such as the boundaries of the ecological zones, the list of harmful substances which use is forbidden or regulated in Lake Baikal, and the standards of maximum allowable harmful impacts on the Lake Baikal. However, it is not clear from the report whether or not the ecological zoning for Lake Baikal has been completed and formally approved, which is fundamental for the application of a number of these regulations.
Plans for the protection and rational use of natural resources have been elaborated for the Baikal basin, the Selenga river basin, and for water treatment and sanitation of the communities and recreational areas in the Central Ecological Zone of Lake Baikal. A feasibility study has been prepared on how to minimize impacts from ships in Lake Baikal.
Key functions assumed by this commission are now under the mandate of the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation, which is vested with the necessary authority to undertake this task.
A number of programmes have been implemented for the last three years to assess the ecological conditions of Lake Baikal, including monitoring water quality and forest changes using satellite images. Results from monitoring indicate that the quality of the water in Lake Baikal has not substantially changed in the last 5-8 years and that it still remains one of the cleanest water bodies on Earth.
The State Party report noted that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for this project, which had considered its potential impacts on Lake Baikal as well as issues of environmental safety in the course of construction and operation of the pipelines, was not approved by the Federal Commission that reviewed it. This Commission identified a number of risks associated with the development of this project in an area of high geological instability and where earthquakes are quite common. Also, the different routes proposed were passing through strictly protected areas, which are forbidden under the Federal Law for the Protection of the Environment.
A 10 year integrated programme for the re-profiling of the Baikalsk Pulp and Paper Mill has been designed and its first phase is under implementation. The first phase includes the development of a closed water recycling system which excludes industrial effluents from entering Lake Baikal. The total investment for the first phase is US$33,500,000, of which US$11,100,000 is provided by the joint-venture enterprise managing the mill. The State Party has also signed an agreement with the World Bank to obtain additional support for this long-term programme. Measures to reduce atmospheric pollution associated with the mill’s emissions have also been implemented.
This continues to be a problem due to the pollution associated with the population and related socio-economic activities within the Selenga River basin. It is important to note that this basin is shared with the State Party of Mongolia, where the Selenga River basin occupies more than 20% of Mongolia’s territory, and 40% of the total runoff of this river comes from this country. According to the results from hydro-chemical and hydro-biological monitoring implemented in 2001-2003 the level of pollution has not changed significantly and corresponds, according to the standards established for the Russian Federation, to Class III (moderate pollution). In some tributaries of the Selenga River there have been slight improvements in water quality. As the Selenga River is a key source of pollution for Lake Baikal and it is also of high importance for the maintenance of key fish species that breed upstream along its waters, this issue has been included as a priority activity under the Russian-Mongolian Intergovernmental Agreement signed in 1995.
According to the East Siberian Fishing Center the Baikal seal population in the period 1996-2000 ranged from 97,000 to 122,000, however there is indirect evidence of a slow population decrease. The State Party report stressed that there is not enough scientific evidence to relate this trend to human impacts and that this decrease could result from biological changes in the population. The State Party report does not provide information on the level of enforcement of hunting quotas and on the implementation of previous Committee’s recommendations to provide training to hunters to avoid unnecessary deaths of animals that are wounded during hunting.
It is reported that the main impacts on the protected areas existing within the World Heritage properties is associated with forest fires (see point below). The GEF project on the conservation of biological diversity in the Russian Federation provides support for the management of these areas, including patrolling and enforcement of protection.
It is reported that the number of fires in 2003 increased 1.8 times when compared with that of 2002 and the area affected by fires increased 15.8 times. The State Party provided additional funding of US$1,228,150 in the fourth quarter of 2003; however it was insufficient to control all fires that occurred in this period. According to the Russian Committee on Hydrometeorology the high number of fires is associated with the worst dry season reported in Russia for the last 108 years. The Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry for Emergencies and the Ministry of Defence have prepared with the Government of the Buryat Republic a Fire-Prevention and Mitigation Plan for 2004 which includes reinforcing the existing capacities for forest fires at the local level and doubled the number of fire prevention centres able to use satellite information for forest fire fighting and prevention. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.22 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Recalling the recommendation of the report of the monitoring mission in 2001 to include the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger, 2. Welcomes the collaboration between the Russian authorities, IUCN and the Centre in addressing cooperation and communication issues; 3. Notes the results of the high-level mission and the detailed report provided by the Russian authorities on 10 March 2004 and acknowledges the efforts of the State Party in enhancing the conservation of this site; 4. Requests, while noting the complex environmental and socio-economic issues associated to the conservation and development of Lake Baikal, that:
5. Notes with satisfaction that the outcome of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed transportation routes for oil and gas was negative and requests that any future proposal avoids the World Heritage property and to ensure that no route is selected through the watershed of Lake Baikal without first undertaking a comprehensive Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) to guarantee the highest standards of design and implementation; 6. Requests the State Party to provide an up-to-date report to the World Heritage Centre including on any decisions or proposed alternative to the oil and gas transportation route by 1 February 2005, for examination by the Committee at its 29th session in 2005. PART II 23. Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria) (N 219) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1983 Inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger: 1992 - 2003 Criteria: N (iv) Previous International Assistance: Total amount: US$56,000, Technical Cooperation and Training Previous Bureau/Committee Deliberations: 26 COM 21 (a) 1 27 COM 7A.10
The joint UNESCO-IUCN mission to Pirin National Park, which was carried out from 3 to 6 February 2004, took the opportunity to discuss state of conservation issues of Srebarna Nature Reserve with the Ministry for Environment and Waters in Sofia. The mission noted the progress made with regard to reporting on the Srebarna Nature Reserve and received a draft report during its meetings in Sofia. The mission recommended to process the international assistance requests under way and to enhance the collaboration with Romania as requested by the World Heritage Committee. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.23 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Noting the report by the State Party and the results from the February 2004 joint UNESCO/IUCN mission to Bulgaria, 2. Welcomes that the State Party requested technical assistance from the World Heritage Fund to urgently purchase a portable electric generator to enable rapid closure of the sluice gates in a potential emergency situation; 3. Regrets that the State Party did not submit a calendar of activities for preparing a proposal for a transborder World Heritage area in the Danube Delta in co-operation with other concerned States Parties as requested (27 COM 7A.10); 4. Requests the State Party to enhance the implementation of the management plan and to keep the Centre informed on progress achieved in transboundary collaboration relating to the Danube Delta ecosystem. 24. Nahanni National Park (Canada) (N 24) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1978 Criteria: N (ii) (iii) Previous International Assistance: None
26 COM 21 (b) 27 COM 7B.16 The Centre received a report from the State Party dated 23 December 2003. IUCN reviewed the State Party’s report on this site, which affirms that Parks Canada and the Deh Cho First Nations have completed their work on a new management plan for Nahanni National Park Reserve. This document is now being submitted for approval by the Minister of the Environment who is responsible for Parks Canada. With regard to the mine proposal by Canadian Zinc Corporation at Prairie Creek, the report notes that an Environmental Assessment was completed concerning a proposed pilot plant and new underground decline in June of 2003. In September 2003 a water licence was granted by the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board (MVLWB). Conditions of the water licence did not fully address key mitigation measures required in the environmental assessment, including certain protective measures related to a tailings pond and consideration of the feasibility of the site proposed for a polishing pond. The requirement to develop objectives for water quality monitoring with Parks Canada was also excluded. The Deh Cho First Nations asked for a judicial review of this matter and as a result, it is now before the courts. The report notes that until this matter is settled, the project will be on hold. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.24 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Acknowledging progress achieved in the conservation of the site, in particular the development of the new management plan for the property, submitted for approval, 2. Requests the State Party to keep the World Heritage Centre informed on the court’s decision on the judicial review on the water licence granted to Canadian Zinc Corporation at Prairie Creek. 25. Wood Buffalo National Park (Canada) (N 256) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1983 Criteria: N (ii) (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: None
26 COM 21(b) 4 27 COM 7B.17 The Centre received the State Party’s report, dated 20 January 2004. IUCN reviewed the State Party’s report, which noted that the winter road proposal for Wood Buffalo National Park is unchanged since Canada last reported on this issue. IUCN noted from the report that the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) and the Mikisew Cree First Nation filed separate applications in the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, for a judicial review of the matter. The report noted that both applications sought to prevent construction of the winter road. The report further indicated that the Federal Court of Canada dismissed CPAWS’ application for judicial review in October 2001 and CPAWS subsequently appealed to a higher court. This appeal was heard on April 30th 2003 and was subsequently dismissed. The report noted that, in December 2001, the Federal Court of Canada allowed the application for judicial review by the Mikisew Cree First Nation and set aside the Government of Canada’s decision on the basis that the winter road infringed upon the First Nation’s treaty rights to hunt and trap in the park. The report stated that the government of Canada appealed this decision and the appeal was heard by the Federal Court of Appeal on September 29th 2003. The Court of Appeal has not rendered its decision yet. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.25 The World Heritage Committee,
26. Isole Eolie (Aeolian Islands) (Italy) (N 908) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 2000 Criterion : N (i) Previous International Assistance: None
26 COM 21 (b) 13 27 COM 7B.18 Conservation issues: The State Party informed the Centre via letter dated 2 February 2004 that the region of Sicily is looking for an adequate solution with regard to requests to enlarge or to open new pumice quarries. These would require Environmental Impact Assessments according to the legal provisions in force. The Pumex Society presented a proposal for landscaping and rehabilitating the areas. IUCN noted that the authorities are seeking the most appropriate solutions to requests to enlarge and open new pumice quarries. Some initiatives have also been launched with the goal of creating new jobs to replace jobs lost in the extractive industry. In relation to this the State Party has sought IUCN’s advice on a proposal from the Pumex Society, holder of the mining concession, which seeks to enhance the urban areas and surrounding landscapes and reorganization of mining activities. The State Party has extended an invitation to IUCN to send a mission to the site if necessary. The objectives of the proposal of the Pumex Society are to: maintain the characteristics and values of the landscape; respect the geological and vulcanological characteristics; Conserve the historic and cultural values linked to the history of man’s activity in extracting pumice stone; promote the characteristics and the use of the historic and technological heritage of pumice stone on the Island of Lipari, through cultural tourism; and preserve the exploitation activity and commercialization of pumice stone at the international level due to its important economic implications. The proposal includes four areas of activities: environmental recuperation of areas currently being exploited; the current site of exploitation is on the north east side of the Lipari Island and is clearly visible from the sea, even from a distance. The proposal is to stop all activity in the current location – outside the crater – and to transfer it to the interior of the crater, less visible from outside. The current location would then be rehabilitated. Continued mining of pumice stone areas of Monte Pelato, following a very ancient practice specifically destined for this exploitation. Recuperation and rehabilitation of derelict or unused industrial buildings into hotels and tourist services is promoted, and the development of a Pumice Stone Museum that shows the modern system of production is planned. IUCN has also received information from some local NGOs. It has been informed that although regional authorities (Assessorato Regionale Territorio ed Ambiente) accepted in November 2002 that the quarries should be closed, the Mining Authority of Catania (another regional office) later accepted a request to keep the quarries working on a temporary basis. As a result, at least one NGO has brought the case to court and, at the time of the preparation of this document, IUCN has no further information on a decision on this issue. IUCN noted that the mining of pumice stone is currently authorized at Lipari by a regional law. The NGOs are in opposition to this law, considered in contradiction to the Territorial Plan. They believe that the mining activity leads to the destruction of the landscape and its outstanding universal values. Legambiente, a national NGO, has noted its opposition to the proposal by the Pumex Society as they believe it is in contradiction with the Landscape Plan; it has not been subject to adequate environmental impact assessments; and the rehabilitation work should involve the local community. Legambiente encourages the development of appropriate ecotourism in the World Heritage property, employing local communities in the conversion of the area into a site suitable for such activities and the subsequent development of ecotourism operations. IUCN welcomed the positive proposal from the Pumex Society towards the environmental recuperation of areas currently being exploited within the site including the rehabilitation of unused industrial buildings into hotels and tourist services. These and other activities included in this proposal would assist in replacing jobs lost in the extractive industry. IUCN also welcomed the initiative of the State Party in sharing this information with IUCN and the World Heritage Centre. However, IUCN noted that the proposal to close the existing quarries in a highly visible part of the site and open new quarries within the crater is not an acceptable solution. Thus, IUCN reiterated its previous recommendation that no mining operations should take place in any World Heritage property and urged the State Party to take measures to stop mining activities in the site which are in contradiction with the Landscape Plan for the property. IUCN believes that at this point a mission to the property is not required. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.26 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Noting the report provided by the State Party that so far no further pumice quarries have been opened and no extension to the four existing quarries within the World Heritage property has been granted, 2. Welcomes the positive proposal from the Pumex Society, and the initiative of the State Party of informing IUCN of this proposal, for the environmental recuperation of areas currently being exploited within the site and the rehabilitation of unused industrial buildings into hotels and tourist services, thus assisting in replacing jobs lost in the extractive industry; 3. Urges the State Party to seek long-term solutions towards a closure of the existing quarries, to stop all mining activities in the World Heritage property and to keep the World Heritage Centre and IUCN informed about further developments. 27. Volcanoes of Kamchatka (Russian Federation) (N 765 bis) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1996; extended in 2001 Criteria: N (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: None
26 COM 21(b)20 27 COM 7B.20 Conservation issues: Following the invitation for an IUCN/UNESCO mission to the site expressed by the Russian authorities during the 27th session of the Committee, the Centre and IUCN is collaborating with the State Party in preparing the mission scheduled for 25 to 30 May 2004. An update of the situation and recommendations from the mission will be provided, if possible, in at the time of the 28th session of the Committee (Suzhou, China). IUCN received a copy of the State Party report on the state of conservation of this site submitted on 10 March 2004. The report provides information on issues that have been of concern to the Committee in relation to the integrity of the property. Key points include:
Through the UNDP/GEF project on Biodiversity Conservation in the Russian Federation a number of measures have been taken to reduce illegal salmon fishing. At present this activity has been stopped within the five strictly protected areas forming the World Heritage property. Local communities are granted with special permission to catch salmon for their own consumption. Environmental education activities are also carried out in order to build awareness on the need to protect this species.
The report notes that this activity is occurring outside the World Heritage property but in areas adjacent to it. However, there is no indication in the report on whether this activity has impacts on the site, as have been noted before by a number of NGOs and experts. It is reported that a fall in prices of gold combined with the high cost of mining operations in this area, are halting further development of this activity in the region.
The construction of a 418 km gas pipeline, aiming to secure a stable energy supply to the Kamchatskaya region, has been the subject of a positive State Environmental Impact Assessment. The approved design of the pipeline is not passing through any of the areas that form the World Heritage property.
The report notes that this development is proposed in the Mutnovsoy Volcano, at 820m in altitude, which is not included within the World Heritage property. However it is not clear from the report whether the necessary supporting infrastructure required for undertaking this major development would have any impact on the World Heritage property.
The report noted a substantial decrease in the extension of forests affected by fires due to the increased efforts in forest prevention and fighting at the local level which involved a substantial increase in the funding allocated to these activities.
This was done in 1996, at the time of the original nomination, in order to exclude all gold fields from the World Heritage property. No further changes to the boundaries of the site have been proposed since then.
This project does not foresee the construction of a new road crossing the World Heritage property but to upgrade an existing winter road to be used also during the summer period. The road will be improved by the construction of bridges across watercourses that in summer tend to flood the road, making its use impossible. This feasibility study for this project has passed the Federal Environmental Supervision.
The implementation of the first phase of the UNDP/GEF project on Maintenance of Biological Diversity in Russian Federation started in April 2003 and is providing support to enhance conservation and management of 4 protected areas within the World Heritage property, namely Kronotskiy Natural Reserve, Yuzhno-Kamchatsky Wildlife Refugee (Zakasnik) and the Bystrinskiy and Nalychevo Natural Parks. This GEF project will be implemented until 2008 and also supports environmental monitoring and the development of an ecotourism programme that may generate revenues for the management of these protected areas. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.27 The World Heritage Committee, 1. Welcoming the State Party’s report on the state of conservation of this property and acknowledging the efforts from the State Party to address a number of integrity issues that have been of concern to the Committee, 2. Welcomes the support provided by the UNDP/GEF project on Maintenance of Biological Diversity in the Russian Federation to enhance the management of key protected areas within this property; 3. Welcomes the State Party’s co-operation with UNESCO and IUCN in the preparation of the mission to the site and notes that the key findings and recommendations from the mission, if implemented as scheduled, will be provided to the 28th session of the World Heritage Committee. 28. Skocjan Caves (Slovenia) (N 390) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1986 Criteria: N (ii) (iii) Previous International Assistance: None
24 COM VIII.23
The State Party provided via letter of 12 February 2004 to the Director-General of UNESCO information on the Spatial Planning Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia 10/02 and 8/03) starting the procedure for drafting a detailed spatial plan of national importance to secure drinking water supply for Slovene Istria and the hinterland Karst areas. The measures foreseen are located in the broader impact area of the Skocjan Caves. Several plans had been elaborated and evaluated in view of the sustainable use of the natural resources. To review any potential impact a study was prepared on the “Sustainable Water Supply of the Coastal and Karst Hinterland Area – Examination of Possible Water Resources with the Aim of Finding a Long-Term and Region-Specific Solution”. Construction of dams at the tributaries of the Reka River are proposed with a volume of about 9 million m3 and a height of up to 40m. The final decision will be adopted during the procedure for the Detailed Spatial plan of national importance, based on national legislation and necessary Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which includes impacts on the water status of Skocjan Caves. The State Party confirmed that the project is proposed for financing by the European Union cohesion funds and will adhere to national and European legislation. IUCN noted that while this information is most welcome, the State Party report does not expand on the technical solutions proposed to avoid impacts to the site nor is it supported by a copy of the EIA. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN have recently received a number of letters from NGOs, scientists, local community representatives and individuals who are strongly concerned about the proposed development of a series of wind generators on the Vremščica plateau, only 4 km from the World Heritage property. This plateau consists of the same type of rock associated with the development of the Skocjan Caves and is thus dynamically linked to the karstic system of the caves. The proposed development foresees the establishment of 90 wind generators. These are concrete structures 82m high with sails that reach 52m in diameter and weighing over 10 tons. The information received highlighted the impacts that such development may have on the flora and fauna of the plateau, as well as on the aesthetic values of the landscape. While this proposed development is outside the World Heritage property, IUCN is concerned about the potential impact that the construction work required for this development may have on the caves. This construction would imply clearing of the land surface, its compaction and the creation of deep and strong foundations for each of the pillars that sustain the wind generators. Due to the geological characteristic of the area such construction may inevitably require the use of explosives, which predictably can cause major impacts on the nearby caves and its speleothems. As noted in the IUCN Guidelines for Cave and Karst Protection, cave and karst systems are especially vulnerable and this sort of development may have irreversible impacts on the integrity of the site. In this case such impacts may affect the key values for which the site was inscribed in the World Heritage List. Indeed the use of explosives associated to land movements in the Vremščica plateau, only 4 km away from the World Heritage property, may result in the collapse of some of the caves. In addition, IUCN noted in its evaluation report of this site at the time of inscription, the importance of the cultural landscape associated with the site and stressed, “an important concern relating to the integrity of the site is the possibility of inappropriate development in the zone surrounding the site. Careful planning to ensure that the cultural landscape of the site remains authentic and natural must be strengthened”. However, as noted in many of the communications received, the proposed development of a series of wind generators would have an important aesthetic and visual impact on this cultural landscape. Furthermore, IUCN has been informed that the Expert Council of the Regional Skocjanske Park, the Parks Board and the Park's Authority have all agreed that the planned turbine wind farms in the border zone with the World Heritage property and/or within the Regional Park are not acceptable and that the plans should be withdrawn. These conclusions were widely disseminated and sent to the national authorities. However, it appears that the Ministry of Environment, Spatial Planning and Energy has not provided a clear statement on the proposed development and the final decision lies with the local authority to approve the location under their spatial and urban plans. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.28 The World Heritage Committee,
29. Doñana National Park (Spain) (685) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1994 Criteria: N (ii) (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: None
25 COM VIII.97 26 BUR XII. 34 Conservation issues: The site manager via a letter of 26 February 2004 informed the Centre that at the suggestion of the Ministry for the Environment, the Patronato of the Park at its session of 12 January 2004 approved the enlargement of the Park by 3500 ha. This has been approved by the Spanish Government and published in the official bulletin of 24 February 2004. The additional areas are in public ownership and guarantee the implementation of the project Doñana 2005, a long-term restoration project after the mining accident of April 1998. Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.29 The World Heritage Committee,
30. Henderson Island (United Kingdom) (N 487) Year of inscription on the World Heritage List: 1988 Criteria : N (iii) (iv) Previous International Assistance: None
Yüklə 1,59 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|