WHC-03/27COM/INF.8B Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage IUCN Evaluation of Nominations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List Report to the World Heritage Committee Twenty-seventh session 30 June – 5 July 2003 - Paris, France Prepared by IUCN – The World Conservation Union May 2003 Table of Contents Index of Evaluations Introduction i Technical Evaluation Reports A. Nominations of Natural Properties to the World Heritage List A1 New Nominations Three Parralel Rivers of Yunnan Protected Areas, (China ) 1 Ras Mohammed, (Egypt) 13 Saryarka - Steppe and Lakes of Northern Kazakhstan, (Kazakhstan) 19 The Natural System of Wrangel Island Sanctuary, (Russian Federation) 29 Monte San Giorgio, (Switzerland) 41 Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park, (Vietnam) 53 A2 Deferred Nominations for which additional information has been received Uvs Nuur Basin, (Russian Federation/Mongolia ) 71 A3 Extension of Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List Gough Island Wildlife Reserve Minor Extension (United Kingdom) 87 B. Nominations of Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List B1 New Nominations Purnululu National Park, (Australia ) 93 Rio de Janeiro: Sugar Loaf, Tijuca Forests, and the Botanical Gardens, (Brazil) 105 Parque Nacional del Este and its buffer zone, (Dominican Republic) 115 Landscape of the Pico Island Vineyard Culture, (Portugal) 125 B2 Extensions of Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List Jaú National Park (extension to form the Central Amazon Protected Areas), (Brazil) 133 B3 Extensions of Properties to include Natural Criteria Serra de Capivara National Park, (Brazil) 143 Saint Catherine Area, (Egypt) 151 C. Comments on Cultural Landscape Nominations Valley of the Pradnik River in the Ojcowski National Park, (Poland) 157 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, (United Kingdom) 161 Numerical Index of IUCN Evaluations of properties to be examined by the World Heritage Committee at its 27th session ID Number State Party World Heritage property proposed page 606 Bis Brazil Serra da Capivara National Park 143 740 Bis United Kingdom Gough Island Wildlife Reserve Minor extension 87 769 Rev Russian Uvs Nuur Basin 71 Federation / Mongolia 951 Rev Viet Nam Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park 53 954 Bis Egypt Saint Catherine Area 151 998 Bis Brazil Jaú National Park (extension to form the Central 133 Amazon Protected Areas) 1023 Russian Natural System of "Wrangel Island" Sanctuary 29 Federation 1080 Dominican Parque Nacional del Este and its buffer zone 115 Republic 1083 China Three Parallel Rivers of Yunnan Protected Areas 1 1084 United Kingdom Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 161 1085 Poland The Valley of the Pradnik River in the Ojcowski National 157 Park - a unique complex of cultural landscape 1086 Egypt Ras Mohammed 13 1090 Switzerland Monte San Giorgio 41 1094 Australia Purnululu National Park 93 1100 Brazil Rio de Janeiro: Sugar Loaf, Tijuca Forest and the 105 Botanical Gardens 1102 Kazakhstan Saryarka - Steppe and Lakes of Northern Kazakhstan 19 1117 Portugal Landscape of the Pico Island Vineyard Culture 125 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION IUCN TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORTS 1 May 2003 1. INTRODUCTION This technical evaluation report of natural sites nominated for inclusion on the World Heritage List has been conducted by the Programme on Protected Areas (PPA) of IUCN – The World Conservation Union. PPA co-ordinates IUCN's input to the World Heritage Convention. It also co-ordinates activities of IUCN’s World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) which is the world's leading expert network of protected area managers and specialists. In carrying out its function under the World Heritage Convention IUCN has been guided by four principles: (i) the need to ensure the highest standards of quality control and institutional memory in relation to technical evaluation, monitoring and other associated activities; (ii) the need to increase the use of specialist networks of IUCN, especially WCPA, but also other relevant IUCN Commissions and specialist networks; (iii) the need to work in support of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and States Parties to examine how IUCN can creatively and effectively support the World Heritage Convention and individual sites as “flagships” for biodiversity conservation; and (iv) the need to increase the level of effective partnership between IUCN and the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM. Members of the expert network of WCPA carry out the majority of technical evaluation missions. This allows for the involvement of regional natural heritage experts and broadens the capacity of IUCN with regard to its work under the World Heritage Convention. Reports from field missions and comments from a large number of international reviewers are comprehensively examined by the IUCN World Heritage Panel. PPA then prepares the final technical evaluation reports which are outlined in this document. IUCN has also placed emphasis on providing input and support to ICOMOS in relation to cultural landscapes and other cultural nominations which have important natural values. IUCN recognises that nature and culture are strongly linked and that many natural World Heritage sites have important cultural values. The WCPA membership network now totals over 1300 protected area managers and specialists from 120 countries. This network has provided much of the basis for conducting the IUCN technical evaluations. In addition, the Protected Areas Programme has been able to call on experts from IUCN's other five Commissions (Species Survival, Environmental Law, Education and Communication, i Ecosystem Management, and Environmental, Economic and Social Policy), from other specialist officers in the IUCN Secretariat, and from scientific contacts in universities and other international agencies. This highlights the considerable “added value” from investing in the use of the extensive networks of IUCN and partner institutions. 2. FORMAT Each technical evaluation report presents a concise summary of the nomination, a comparison with other similar sites, a review of management and integrity issues and concludes with the assessment of the applicability of the criteria, and a clear recommendation to the World Heritage Committee. Standardised data sheets, prepared for each nomination by UNEP - World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), are available in a separate document. 3. SITES REVIEWED 21 site files were reviewed by IUCN in the 2002/2003 period, involving 15 field inspections. These comprised: · 8 natural site nominations (including 1 extension and 1 referred site where additional information had been received), · 7 mixed site nominations (including 3 extensions), and · 6 cultural landscapes. Joint missions were carried out with ICOMOS for all new mixed site nominations. Joint missions were also carried out with ICOMOS to 2 cultural landscapes and the reports for these sites are included in this document. IUCN reviewed an additional 4 cultural landscape nominations and provided comments directly to ICOMOS to assist them in their evaluation process. The files reviewed by IUCN in 2002/2003 are as follows: ID Number State Party World Heritage property proposed A. Nominations of natural properties to the World Heritage List A1. New Nominations 1083 China Three Parallel Rivers of Yunnan Protected Areas 1086 Egypt Ras Mohammed 1102 Kazakhstan Saryarka - Steppe and Lakes of Northern Kazakhstan 1023 Russian Federation Natural System of "Wrangel Island" Sanctuary 1090 Switzerland Monte San Giorgio 951 Rev Viet Nam Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park A2. Referred nominations for which additional information has been received 769 Rev Russian Federation Uvs Nuur Basin / Mongolia ii A3. Extension of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List 740 Bis United Kingdom Gough Island Wildlife Reserve Minor extension B. Nominations of mixed properties to the World Heritage List B1. New nominations 1094 Australia Purnululu National Park 1100 Brazil Rio de Janeiro: Sugar Loaf, Tijuca Forest and the Botanical Gardens 1080 Dominican Parque Nacional del Este and its buffer zone Republic 1117 Portugal Landscape of the Pico Island Vineyard Culture B2. Extension of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List 998 Bis Brazil Jaú National Park (extension to form the Central Amazon Protected Areas) 606 Bis Brazil Serra da Capivara National Park 954 Bis Egypt Saint Catherine Area C. Nominations of Cultural Landscapes to the World Heritage List C1. Cultural Landscapes for which IUCN took part in a joint field inspection 1085 Poland The Valley of the Pradnik River in the Ojcowski National Park - a unique complex of cultural landscape 1084 United Kingdom Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew C2. Cultural Landscapes for which IUCN provided comments directly to ICOMOS 925 India Rock Shelters of Bhimbetka 1081 Mongolia Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape 1099 South Africa Mapungubwe Cultural Landscape 306 Rev Zimbabwe Matobo Hills 4. REVIEW PROCESS iii In carrying out the Technical Review, IUCN is guided by the Operational Guidelines, which requests IUCN "to be as strict as possible" in evaluating new nominations. The evaluation process (shown in Figure 1) involves five steps: 1. Data Assembly. A standardised data sheet is compiled on the site, using the protected area database at UNEP-WCMC; 2. External Review. The nomination is sent to experts knowledgeable about the site, primarily consisting of members of IUCN specialist commissions and networks and contacts from the region (approx. 85 outside reviewers provided input in relation