DOCSLIB.ORG

IUCN Evaluations of Nominations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

WHC-15/39.COM/INF.8B2 IUCN Evaluations of Nominations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List th IUCN Report for the World Heritage Committee, 39 Session Bonn, Germany, 28 June - 8 July 2015 Cover page photo: Son Doong cave lower doline © Howard Limbert IUCN Evaluations of Nominations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List Table of Contents Executive summary table Alphabetical index and IUCN field evaluators Introduction A. Natural Properties Page n° A1. New Nominations of Natural Properties Africa South Africa – Cape Floral Region Protected Areas [extension of the property “Cape Floral Region Protected Areas”] 3 Arab States Sudan – Sanganeb Marine National Park and Dungonab Bay - Mukkawar Island Marine National Park 15 Asia / Pacific Mongolia / Russian Federation – Landscapes of Dauria 29 Thailand – Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex 41 Viet Nam – Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park [renomination under (ix) and (x) and extension of “Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park”] 53 A2. Minor Boundary Modifications of Natural Properties Europe / North America Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park See document WHC-15/39.COM/INF.8B2.Add Latin America / Caribbean Panama – Darien National Park See document WHC-15/39.COM/INF.8B2.Add B. Mixed Properties Page n° B1. New Nominations of Mixed Properties Latin America / Caribbean Jamaica – Blue and John Crow Mountains 69 C. Cultural Properties Page n° C1. New nominations of Cultural Landscapes Asia / Pacific Mongolia – Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain and its surrounding sacred landscape 83 Singapore – Singapore Botanic Gardens 87 Europe / North America Spain – La Rioja and Rioja Alavesa Wine and Vineyard Cultural Landscape 91 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF IUCN EVALUATIONS TO THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE Meets protection and Meets one or more natural criteria Meets conditions of integrity management Name of the requirements State ) / Note ) ) ) property vii viii ix x Party ( ( ( ( (ID number) dation rotection in in rotection Criterion Criterion Criterion Criterion Criterion Integrity Boundaries Threats addressed Justification of serial approach Protection status Management zone Buffer P surrounding arrea Paragraphs of the Operational 78, 108- required ission Guidelines for the 118, 77 77 77 77 78, 87-95 99-102 78, 98 137 78, 132.4 103-107 Implementation of the World 132.4, Heritage Convention 135 m Further IUCN Recommen Cape Floral Region South Africa Protected Areas Extension − − yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no I (1007 Bis) Sanganeb Marine NP and Dungonab Bay - Sudan part no part part no no no no part no no yes D Mukkawar Island Marine NP (262 Rev) Mongolia / Landscapes of Dauria Russian − − no no no no no − no part no yes D (1448) Federaition Kaeng Krachan Thailand Forest Complex − − − part part yes yes − yes yes yes yes R (1461) Phong Nha – Ke Bang Renomination Viet Nam National Park − yes yes yes yes yes part − yes yes part no I Extension (951 Rev) Blue and John Crow Jamaica Mountains Mixed site − − no yes yes yes yes − yes yes part no I (1356 Rev) KEYS yes met I inscribe / approve part partially met N I non inscribe no not met R refer ̶ not applicable D defer ALPHABETICAL INDEX State Party ID No. Property Page Jamaica 1356 Rev Blue and John Crow Mountains 69 Mongolia / 1447 Landscapes of Dauria 29 Russian Federation South Africa 1007 Bis Cape Floral Region Protected Areas (extension) 3 Sanganeb Marine National Park and Dungonab Bay - Mukkawar Island Sudan 262 Rev 15 Marine National Park Thailand 1461 Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex 41 Viet Nam 951 Rev Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park (renomination and extension) 53 IUCN FIELD EVALUATORS Site Name Cape Floral Region Protected Areas (extension) Bastian Bertzky Sanganeb Marine National Park and Dungonab Bay - Naomi Doak & Hany El Shaer Mukkawar Island Marine National Park Landscapes of Dauria Maja Vasilijevic & Wendy Strahm Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex Bruce Jefferies Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park (renomination and Josephine Langley & Hag Young Heo extension) Blue and John Crow Mountains Melissa Marin & Tilman Jaeger It should be noted that the IUCN field evaluators are part of a broader evaluation approach detailed in the introduction of this report. THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION IUCN TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT OF WORLD HERITAGE NOMINATIONS April 2015 1. INTRODUCTION international earth science unions, nongovernmental organizations and scientific contacts in universities and This technical evaluation report of natural and mixed other international agencies. This highlights the properties nominated for inclusion on the World considerable “added value” from investing in the use of Heritage List has been conducted by the World the extensive networks of IUCN and partner Heritage Programme of IUCN (International Union for institutions. Conservation of Nature). The World Heritage Programme co-ordinates IUCN’s input to the World These networks allow for the increasing involvement of Heritage Convention in close cooperation with the regional natural heritage experts and broaden the IUCN Global Protected Areas Programme (GPAP) and capacity of IUCN with regard to its work under the other units of IUCN both at headquarters and in the World Heritage Convention. Reports from field regions. It also works closely with IUCN’s World missions and comments from a large number of Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA), the world’s external reviewers are comprehensively examined by leading expert network of protected area managers the IUCN World Heritage Panel. The IUCN World and specialists, and other Commissions, members and Heritage Programme then prepares the final technical partners of IUCN. evaluation reports which are presented in this document and represent the corporate position of IUCN’s evaluations are conducted according to the IUCN on World Heritage evaluations. IUCN has also Operational Guidelines that the World Heritage placed emphasis on providing input and support to Committee has agreed, and which are the essential ICOMOS in relation to those cultural landscapes which framework for the application of the evaluation have important natural values. process. In carrying out its function under the World Heritage Convention, IUCN has been guided by four IUCN has extended its cooperation with ICOMOS, principles: including coordination in relation to the evaluation of mixed sites and cultural landscapes. IUCN and (i) ensuring the highest standards of quality ICOMOS have also enhanced the coordination of their control, institutional memory and consistency panel processes as requested by the World Heritage in relation to technical evaluation, monitoring Committee. This cooperation will be reported in Item and other associated activities; 5B and other relevant items of the Committee’s agenda. (ii) increasing the use of specialist networks of IUCN, especially WCPA, but also other In 2014-15 IUCN has continued to work on the relevant IUCN Commissions and specialist Upstream Process, as will be debated in the relevant partner networks; items on the Committee’s agenda. (iii) working in support of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and States Parties to examine 2. EVALUATION PROCESS how IUCN can creatively and effectively support the World Heritage Convention and In carrying out the technical evaluation of nominations individual properties as “flagships” for IUCN is guided by the Operational Guidelines to the conservation; and World Heritage Convention. The evaluation process is carried out over the period of one year, from the (iv) increasing the level of effective partnership receipt of nominations at IUCN in March and the between IUCN and the World Heritage Centre, submission of the IUCN evaluation report to the World ICOMOS and ICCROM. Heritage Centre in May of the following year. The process involves the following steps: Members of the expert network of WCPA carry out the majority of technical evaluation missions, supported by 1. External Review. The nomination is sent to other specialists where appropriate. The WCPA independent experts knowledgeable about the network now totals more than 1700 protected area property or its natural values, including managers and specialists from 140 countries. In members of WCPA, other IUCN specialist addition, the World Heritage Programme calls on Commissions and scientific networks or NGOs relevant experts from IUCN’s other five Commissions working in the region. IUCN received almost (Species Survival, Environmental Law, Education and 100 external reviews in relation to the Communication, Ecosystem Management, and properties examined in 2014 / 2015. Environmental, Economic and Social Policy); from IUCN Evaluation Report – April 2015 i 2. Field Mission. Missions involving one or more • Directly after the field mission. Based on IUCN and external experts evaluate the discussions during the field mission, IUCN nominated property on the ground and discuss may send an official letter requesting the nomination with the relevant national and supplementary information before the IUCN local authorities, local communities, NGOs and World Heritage Panel meets in December, to other stakeholders. Missions usually take ensure that the Panel has all the information place between July and October. In the case necessary to make a recommendation on the of mixed properties and certain cultural nomination; and landscapes, missions are jointly implemented with ICOMOS. • After the first meeting of the IUCN World Heritage Panel (December). If the Panel finds 3. IUCN World Heritage
Recommended publications
  • CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction

    CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction

    CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Transport plays a crucial role in the efficient functioning of the domestic economy as well as development of international trade due to dependence on both coal-based energy production and imports. However, the issues in the transport sector of Mongolia are mainly derived from the salient features of a landlocked country with a low population and a long distance between population centers. A major characteristics of transportation in Mongolia is the collection and distribution by road of both passenger traffic and cargo transport from the north-south transport axis centering on Ulaanbaatar. The main north-south axis comprises both rail and road. Within road transport, the density of arterial road network remains very low and unpaved earth roads or multiple shifting tracks occupy a large portion of arterial roads. More than 30% of population and a half of national car ownership are concentrated in Ulaanbaatar City, while very low level of mobility is found in rural area because non-motorized traffic such as horse and cart prevails. Recently, such gap of mobility level is increasing. Under such circumstances, in response to the request of the Government of Mongolia (hereinafter referred to as "GOM"), the Government of Japan decided to conduct the Feasibility Study on Construction of Eastern Arterial Road in Mongolia (hereinafter referred to as "the Study"), in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations in force in Japan. Japan International Cooperation Agency (hereinafter referred to as "JICA"), the official agency responsible for the implementation of the technical cooperation programs of the Government of Japan, dispatched the preparatory study team headed by Mr.
  • Climate Change

    Climate Change

    This “Mongolia Second Assessment Report on Climate Change 2014” (MARCC 2014) has been developed and published by the Ministry of Environment and Green Development of Mongolia with financial support from the GIZ programme “Biodiversity and adaptation of key forest ecosystems to climate change”, which is being implemented in Mongolia on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development. Copyright © 2014, Ministry of Environment and Green Development of Mongolia Editors-in-chief: Damdin Dagvadorj Zamba Batjargal Luvsan Natsagdorj Disclaimers This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part in any form for educational or non-profit services without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The Ministry of Environment and Green Development of Mongolia would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the Ministry of Environment and Green Development of Mongolia. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures . 3 List of Tables . .. 12 Abbreviations . 14 Units . 17 Foreword . 19 Preface . 22 1. Introduction. Batjargal Z. 27 1.1 Background information about the country . 33 1.2 Introductory information on the second assessment report-MARCC 2014 . 31 2. Climate change: observed changes and future projection . 37 2.1 Global climate change and its regional and local implications. Batjargal Z. 39 2.1.1 Observed global climate change as estimated within IPCC AR5 . 40 2.1.2 Temporary slowing down of the warming . 43 2.1.3 Driving factors of the global climate change .
  • Know Your National Parks

    Know Your National Parks

    KNOW YOUR NATIONAL PARKS 1 KNOW YOUR NATIONAL PARKS KNOW YOUR NATIONAL PARKS Our Parks, Our Heritage Table of contents Minister’s Foreword 4 CEO’s Foreword 5 Northern Region 8 Marakele National Park 8 Golden Gate Highlands National Park 10 Mapungubwe National Park and World Heritage site 11 Arid Region 12 Augrabies Falls National Park 12 Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park 13 Mokala National Park 14 Namaqua National Park 15 /Ai/Ais-Richtersveld Transfrontier Park 16 Cape Region 18 Table Mountain National Park 18 Bontebok National Park 19 Agulhas National Park 20 West Coast National Park 21 Tankwa-Karoo National Park 22 Frontier Region 23 Addo Elephant National Park 23 Karoo National Park 24 DID YOU Camdeboo National Park 25 KNOW? Mountain Zebra National Park 26 Marakele National Park is Garden Route National Park 27 found in the heart of Waterberg Mountains.The name Marakele Kruger National Park 28 is a Tswana name, which Vision means a ‘place of sanctuary’. A sustainable National Park System connecting society Fun and games 29 About SA National Parks Week 31 Mission To develop, expand, manage and promote a system of sustainable national parks that represent biodiversity and heritage assets, through innovation and best practice for the just and equitable benefit of current and future generation. 2 3 KNOW YOUR NATIONAL PARKS KNOW YOUR NATIONAL PARKS Minister’s Foreword CEO’s Foreword We are blessed to live in a country like ours, which has areas by all should be encouraged through a variety of The staging of SA National Parks Week first took place been hailed as a miracle in respect of our transition to a programmes.
  • The Ecology of Large Herbivores Native to the Coastal Lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa

    The Ecology of Large Herbivores Native to the Coastal Lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa

    The ecology of large herbivores native to the coastal lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa by Frans Gustav Theodor Radloff Dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Science (Botany) at Stellenbosh University Promoter: Prof. L. Mucina Co-Promoter: Prof. W. J. Bond December 2008 DECLARATION By submitting this dissertation electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the owner of the copyright thereof (unless to the extent explicitly otherwise stated) and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Date: 24 November 2008 Copyright © 2008 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved ii ABSTRACT The south-western Cape is a unique region of southern Africa with regards to generally low soil nutrient status, winter rainfall and unusually species-rich temperate vegetation. This region supported a diverse large herbivore (> 20 kg) assemblage at the time of permanent European settlement (1652). The lowlands to the west and east of the Kogelberg supported populations of African elephant, black rhino, hippopotamus, eland, Cape mountain and plain zebra, ostrich, red hartebeest, and grey rhebuck. The eastern lowlands also supported three additional ruminant grazer species - the African buffalo, bontebok, and blue antelope. The fate of these herbivores changed rapidly after European settlement. Today the few remaining species are restricted to a few reserves scattered across the lowlands. This is, however, changing with a rapid growth in the wildlife industry that is accompanied by the reintroduction of wild animals into endangered and fragmented lowland areas.
  • Biodiversity in Sub-Saharan Africa and Its Islands Conservation, Management and Sustainable Use

    Biodiversity in Sub-Saharan Africa and Its Islands Conservation, Management and Sustainable Use

    Biodiversity in Sub-Saharan Africa and its Islands Conservation, Management and Sustainable Use Occasional Papers of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 6 IUCN - The World Conservation Union IUCN Species Survival Commission Role of the SSC The Species Survival Commission (SSC) is IUCN's primary source of the 4. To provide advice, information, and expertise to the Secretariat of the scientific and technical information required for the maintenance of biologi- Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna cal diversity through the conservation of endangered and vulnerable species and Flora (CITES) and other international agreements affecting conser- of fauna and flora, whilst recommending and promoting measures for their vation of species or biological diversity. conservation, and for the management of other species of conservation con- cern. Its objective is to mobilize action to prevent the extinction of species, 5. To carry out specific tasks on behalf of the Union, including: sub-species and discrete populations of fauna and flora, thereby not only maintaining biological diversity but improving the status of endangered and • coordination of a programme of activities for the conservation of bio- vulnerable species. logical diversity within the framework of the IUCN Conservation Programme. Objectives of the SSC • promotion of the maintenance of biological diversity by monitoring 1. To participate in the further development, promotion and implementation the status of species and populations of conservation concern. of the World Conservation Strategy; to advise on the development of IUCN's Conservation Programme; to support the implementation of the • development and review of conservation action plans and priorities Programme' and to assist in the development, screening, and monitoring for species and their populations.
  • A Synthesis of Renosterveld Ecology and Conservation

    A Synthesis of Renosterveld Ecology and Conservation

    Environmental Conservation Fragmented Landscape, Fragmented Knowledge: A Synthesis of Renosterveld Ecology and Conservation Emmeline N Topp1,2 and Jacqueline Loos1 cambridge.org/enc 1Institute of Ecology, Faculty of Sustainability Science, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Universitätsallee 1, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany and 2Agroecology, Department of Crop Science, Georg-August University, Grisebachstrasse 6, 37077 Göttingen, Germany Subject Review Summary Cite this article: Topp EN, Loos J (2019) Knowledge of ecological patterns and processes is key to effective conservation of biodiversity Fragmented Landscape, Fragmented Knowledge: A Synthesis of Renosterveld hotspots under threat. Renosterveld is one of the most critically endangered habitats in the Ecology and Conservation. Environmental biologically unique Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. For the first time, we map and Conservation 46: 171–179. doi: 10.1017/ synthesize the current state of knowledge on renosterveld ecology and conservation. We S0376892918000498 investigated 132 studies for the themes, locations and taxa of renosterveld research and the fragmentation, threats, recommendations and barriers to renosterveld conservation. More Received: 4 August 2017 Accepted: 18 December 2018 studies focused on plants than any other taxa (48% of articles) and are conducted mostly in larger, intact renosterveld fragments. The most commonly identified threat to renosterveld Keywords was agricultural intensification; conservation recommendations spanned improved farming Cape Floristic Region; farmland expansion; practices, formal protection and local patch management. Conservation implementation has fire regime; fragmentation; fynbos; South Africa; global biodiversity hotspot; been piecemeal and has depended largely on the goodwill of landowners, which can be Mediterranean ecosystem; value perception constrained by costs of conservation measures and a lack of suitable restoration means. Citizen science is a promising potential solution to some barriers.
  • Promoting Dryland Sustainable Landscapes and Biodiversity Conservation in the Eastern Steppe of Mongolia” Project

    Promoting Dryland Sustainable Landscapes and Biodiversity Conservation in the Eastern Steppe of Mongolia” Project

    Environmental and Social Management Framework for “Promoting Dryland Sustainable Landscapes and Biodiversity Conservation in The Eastern Steppe of Mongolia” Project ULAANBAATAR 2020 Required citation: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), World Wildlife Fund (WWF). 2020. Environmental and Social Management Framework for “Promoting Dryland Sustainable Landscapes and Biodiversity Conservation in The Eastern Steppe of Mongolia” Project. Ulaanbaatar. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO. © FAO, WWF, 2020 Some rights reserved. This worK is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAliKe 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode). Under the terms of this licence, this worK may be copied, redistributed and adapted for non-commercial purposes, provided that the work is appropriately cited. In any use of this worK, there should be no suggestion that FAO endorses any specific organization, products or services.
  • Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps

    Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps

    Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps DRAFT May 2009 South African National Biodiversity Institute Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Contents List of tables .............................................................................................................................. vii List of figures............................................................................................................................. vii 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8 2 Criteria for identifying threatened ecosystems............................................................... 10 3 Summary of listed ecosystems ........................................................................................ 12 4 Descriptions and individual maps of threatened ecosystems ...................................... 14 4.1 Explanation of descriptions ........................................................................................................ 14 4.2 Listed threatened ecosystems ................................................................................................... 16 4.2.1 Critically Endangered (CR) ................................................................................................................ 16 1. Atlantis Sand Fynbos (FFd 4) .......................................................................................................................... 16 2. Blesbokspruit Highveld Grassland
  • Centre De Documentation Scientifique De Nazinga

    Centre De Documentation Scientifique De Nazinga

    MINISTERE DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT ET DE L'EAU ________________ DIRECTION GENERALE DES EAUX ET FORÊTS ________________ DIRECTION DE LA FAUNE ET DES CHASSES ________________ RANCH DE GIBIER DE NAZINGA Projet de Valorisation Scientifique du Ranch de gibier de Nazinga c/o Bureau Wallonie-Bruxelles-APEFE 01 BP 6625 Ouagadougou 01 Tél. : + 226/413619 ou 314652 Télécopie : 308448 E-mail : [email protected] Centre de documentation scientifique de Nazinga : Références encodées sous EndNote® PORTIER Bruno version provisoire en date du 17/05/2000 Avec le soutien du Ministère de la Région Wallonne de Belgique, Direction Générale des Relations Extérieures Bibliographie – Centre de documentation Sc. Ranch de gibier de Nazinga Le présent document compile l’information bibliographique disponible au centre de documentation scientifique du Ranch de gibier de Nazinga encodée sous EndNote en date du 1er décembre 1999. Table des Matières I. Rapports Spéciaux Nazinga _______________________________________________ 1 II. Plans de recherche Nazinga ______________________________________________ 11 III. Rapports Divers ______________________________________________________ 13 IV. Articles Scientifiques __________________________________________________ 25 V. Livres & Sections de livres _______________________________________________ 75 VI. Revues et périodiques __________________________________________________ 78 VII. Thèses et mémoires____________________________________________________ 82 VIII. Conference Procceedings_______________________________________________
  • Flight Restrictions Over National Parks and World Heritage Sites

    Flight Restrictions Over National Parks and World Heritage Sites

    Physical Address: Postal Address: Telephone Number: E-mail Address: Ikhaya Lokundiza Private Bag X 73 +27 11 545 1000 [email protected] Treur Close Halfway House Waterfall Park 1685 Fax Number: Website Address: Bekker Street +27 11 545 1465 www.caa.co.za Midrand FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS OVER NATIONAL PARKS AND WORLD HERITAGE SITES The purpose of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003 is to “ provide for the protection and conservation of ecologically viable areas representative of South Africa's biological diversity and its natural landscapes and seascapes; for the establishment of a national register of all national, provincial and local protected areas; for the management of those areas in accordance with national norms and standards; for intergovernmental co-operation and public consultation in matters concerning protected areas; for the continued existence, governance and functions of South African National Parks; and for matters in connection therewith ”. Attention is drawn to section 47(1) of the Act which require a clearance of at least 2 500 FT above the highest point in a Special Nature Reserve, National Park or World Heritage Site. Pilots are cautioned that these altitudes might require aircraft to enter controlled airspace and therefore appropriate ATC clearances are to be obtained. Non-compliance to the Act is considered an offence (See Section 89 of the Act). Charts depicting the relevant National Parks and World Heritage Sites, and tables containing the Minimum Flight Altitudes, are provided to assist pilots with the identification, minimum heights to be flown or the avoidance of these areas in toto.
  • Safeguards Compliance Memorandum

    Safeguards Compliance Memorandum

    DocuSign Envelope ID: 691269DA-E069-4D8C-8845-315B912353F6 Safeguards Compliance Memorandum Project Information Project Name Promoting Dryland Sustainable Landscapes and Biodiversity Conservation in The Eastern Steppe of Mongolia GEF Focal Area Multifocal Safeguards Categorization B Project Description The project aims to halt the ongoing tragedy of commons regarding pasture land in eastern Mongolia and reverse the current unfavorable dynamic into positive and sustainable prosperity through the project activities. The project will support the development of improved land and pasture management plans to increase environmental protection and livelihood support. Component 1: Strengthening the enabling environment for the sustainable management of drylands in Mongolia. Under Component 1, the project will strengthen cross-sectoral, multi-stakeholder collaboration for integrated land management planning and monitoring. It will also support incorporation of land degradation and biodiversity considerations into the ongoing land management planning process; and will support the ongoing policy reform to promote sustainable land use. Component 2: Scaling up sustainable dryland management in the Eastern Steppe of Mongolia. Under Component 2, the project will strengthen sustainable dryland management in Eastern Mongolia through a three-pronged approach. First, the project will promote environmentally friendly, climate-smart crop and fodder production. Second, the project will work with local herder and forest communities in the target area to implement and scale up sustainable management and restoration of rangelands and forest patches. And third, the project will support partnerships between herder groups/cooperatives, local government and private sector to develop value chains and access to markets for sustainably produced agricultural products. Component 3: Strengthening biodiversity conservation and landscape connectivity.
  • Tariff and Membership Details

    Tariff and Membership Details

    WILD CARD PROGRAMME TARIFF AND MEMBERSHIP DETAILS July 2011 MEMBERSHIP CATEGORIES INDIVIDUAL COUPLE FAMILY (1 PAX) (2 PAX) (MAX 7 PAX) ALL PARKS CLUSTER Access to more than 80 Parks and Reserves around Southern Africa Includes access to all Parks and Reserves, which are included in the R 340 R 560 R 700 SANParks, Msinsi, EKZNWildlife, Cape Nature and Swazi Clusters SANPARKS CLUSTER R 325 R 535 R 640 Access to all 21 of SANParks National Parks in South Africa MSINSI CLUSTER Access to all 6 of Msinsi’s Resorts and Reserves near Durban and Pietermaritzburg R 290 R 475 R 565 EKZNWILDLIFE CLUSTER Access to 24 of KZN Wildlife’s Parks and Reserves in KwaZulu-Natal R 275 R 450 R 535 CAPENATURE CLUSTER Access to 24 of Cape Nature’s Parks and Reserves in the Western Cape R 305 R 505 R 600 MEMBERSHIP CLUSTER SWAZILAND’S BIG GAME PARKS CLUSTER Access to Big Game Parks of Swaziland’s 3 Parks in Swaziland R 270 R 435 R 525 INTERNATIONAL ALL PARKS CLUSTER Access to more than 80 Parks and Reserves around Southern Africa Includes access to all Parks and Reserves, which are included in the R 1,310 R 2,195 R 2,620 SANParks, Msinsi, EKZNWildlife, Cape Nature and Swazi Clusters MEMBERSHIP CATEGORY MEMBERSHIP RULES • Maximum of 1 Person • Any 1 person of any age INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIP • Membership is non-transferable, thus person cannot be changed during the course of a membership cycle of 1 year • Maximum of 2 Persons • Can be any two persons • Maximum of 2 Adults, or 1 Adult and 1 Child • COUPLE MEMBERSHIP A Child is anyone under the age of 18 years of age • Membership is non-transferable, thus main cardholder cannot be changed.