<
 
 
 
 
×
>
You are viewing an archived web page, collected at the request of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) using Archive-It. This page was captured on 21:49:36 Mar 26, 2023, and is part of the UNESCO collection. The information on this web page may be out of date. See All versions of this archived page.
Loading media information hide

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

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x

Bahla Fort

Oman
Factors affecting the property in 1988*
  • Other Threats:

    Degradation of the structures

International Assistance: requests for the property until 1988
Requests approved: 2 (from 1988-1988)
Total amount approved : 57,000 USD
Missions to the property until 1988**

October 1988: ICOMOS

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1988

Concerned by the degradation of the earth structures of the Bahla Fort that had just been inscribed on the World Henitage List, the Committee, at its last session, suggested that the Sultanate of Oman consider the possibility of nominating this property for inscription on the World Heritage List in Danger. Such a nomination was submitted by Oman on 8 February 1988.

 

In accordance with the recommendation of the Bureau at its twelfth session, an expert mission was sent to Bahia Fort with a view to evaluating the programme for corrective measures established by the Omani authorities. This mission was undertaken in October 1988; ICOMOS will communicate the results obtained to the Committee at its twelfth session.

 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1988
12 BUR IX.24
Requests for technical co-operation and training

24. Since ICOMOS was not yet in a position to provide accurate evaluation of the threats to the integrity of the following 2 properties, the Bureau recommended that the Committee's decision on the 2 requests be taken after further study has been carried out:

1. Urgent measures for strengthening the foundations of the wall and to study methods of reconstructing doors, windows and other wooden elements at Bahla Fort (Oman).

2. Equipment and technical assistance needed for restoration work at Wieliczka Salt Mine (Poland).

12 COM XIII.58-59
Requests for International Assistance

58. The Committee

noted that the Bureau had examined in detail the requests presented in document SC-88/CONF.001/6 and /6.Add ;

noted that a number of modifications for certain requests had been received by the Secretariat since the document had been prepared;

also noted that the requests from Algeria, Ecuador, Sri Lanka and Zaire had already been recommended for approval by the previous Bureau at its twelfth session in June 1988.

59. In accordance with the procedures for granting international assistance set out in the Operational Guidelines adopted by the Committee (WHC/2 Revised, December 1988), the Committee approved the following requests:

A. Technical cooperation


1) Tassili N'Ajjer (Algeria)

Equipment and a financial contribution to improve visitors' services and protection of the cultural and natural heritage: $53,000

 

2) Sao Miguel das Missoes (Brazil)

Financial contribution for the inventory of the documentation on the site: $10,000

 

3) Talamanca-La Amistad (Costa Rica)

Equipment and financial contribution for strengthening the conservation of the Pacific sector of the site: $30,000

 

4) Galapagos Island (Ecuador)

Purchase of 2 boats for strengthening the protection of the site: $54,000

 

5) Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae (Greece)

Purchase of a portable micro-earthquake monitoring system for the Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae (also for use at other Greek World Heritage properties): $30,000

 

6) Bahla Fort (Oman)

Financial contribution to works and training for safeguarding the property: $50,000

 

7) Anuradhapura, Polonnaruva and Sigiraya (Sri Lanka)

Equipment for conservation and restoration of monuments (see also training below): $25,500

 

8) Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania)

2 vehicles (one tipper truck and one 4x4 pick-up) for constructions aimed at strengthening anti-poaching measures: $50,000

 

9) Durmitor National Park (Yugoslavia)

Purchase of equipment to investigate the causes of the decline in the size of population of some birds species and tree death (N.B. the Yugoslav authorities are encouraged to undertake this work as appropriate in cooperation with WMO concerning research on air pollutants. Following the work in Durmitor, all efforts should be made by the Yugoslav authorities to make the specialized equipment purchased under the Fund available for other World Heritage properties in the region. Finally, the Yugoslav authorities are requested to provide a report to the Secretariat on the use of all the research equipment provided under the Fund for this project): $38,000

 

10) Garamba National Park (Zaire)

2 vehicles to continue the activities of the WWF/Frankfurt Zoological Society/World Heritage consortium to combat poaching: $50,000

 

11) Virunga National Park (Zaire)

Equipment to improve protective measures in the Park: $40,000

 
TOTAL: $430,500

B. Training activities


Sri Lanka

Training component of the technical cooperation request for the cultural triangle (n°7 above): $33,500

 

International Course on the Technology of Stone Conservation (ICCROM)

Financial contribution to cover costs of the participation of fellows from developing countries which are States Parties to the Convention: $37,500

TOTAL: $71,000

12 COM XIV.D
Inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger: Bahla Fort (Oman)

Bahla Fort  

433

Oman

In accordance with the wishes of the Omani authorities the Committee decided to inscribe Bahla Fort on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

No draft Decision

Report year: 1988
Oman
Date of Inscription: 1987
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iv)
Danger List (dates): 1988-2004
Exports

* : The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top