Ancient and Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and Other Regions of Europe

• Management systems/ management plan (lack of integrated Management Plan, lack of legal protection from logging, and inadequate management of logging in the Slovak part of the property)
• Inappropriate boundary configuration of some parts of the property 
• Management and institutional factors (lack of transnational research and monitoring plans, need for capacity building)
• Forestry / wood production

From 16 to 19 October 2018, a joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN Advisory mission visited the Slovak components of the property. On 30 November 2018, the States Parties submitted a joint report on the state of conservation of the property, available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1133/documents/, providing the following information:

• Regarding the Committee’s request to consider the future enlargement of components to at least the established minimum size of 50 ha, it is reported that only four components are less than 50 ha, all of which are located in the Sonian Forest cluster (Belgium). Some measures have been proposed in a new draft Management Plan, including construction of an ecological corridor (“green bridge”) between two components and the addition of a strict buffer zone adjacent to another component. Decisions on these proposals are expected in 2019, no enlargement of the components themselves has been planned to date;
• An overview is provided of the connectivity within all components and between component clusters. A roadmap is proposed for improving connectivity within clusters (by 2025), between neighbouring component parts/clusters (by 2030) and across Europe (by 2050);
• A two-year coordination project across the property has been funded by the State Party of Austria and could be extended until the first quarter of 2020. Other States Parties (Belgium, Germany, Spain) have expressed their willingness to take over coordination in the future. An overview of budget available at component level for different management aspects is also provided;
• An analysis of buffer zone design and management across the property is provided. It notes that 52% of buffer zones are managed under the regime “protected with regulated sustainable use”, a category, which is stated to have high variability in terms of intensity of the forest management applied. An approach to defining buffer zones proposes different “protection” and “development” zones, with defined management regimes, plus allowed and prohibited activities for each. It is proposed that the redesign of existing buffer zones according to this approach could start in 2020 and be finalized by 2025;
• Minor boundary corrections are proposed for two components in Paklenica National Park (Croatia) and their buffer zone;
• A proposal for boundary modification of the Slovak components of the property was prepared by the State Party and discussed with the Advisory mission, and is planned to be submitted by February 2020;
• In Slovenia, the two forest reserves containing the Slovenian components are proposed for designation as nature reserves to strengthen their protection regime.

On 22 October and 11 December 2018, the World Heritage Centre sent letters to the State Party of Albania regarding third party information about hydropower projects currently being implemented in Valbona National Park and illegal logging of old-growth forests in Shebenik-Jabllanice National Park, respectively, potentially affecting the Albanian components of the property. No response has been received to date. 

On 12 November 2018, the World Heritage Centre sent a letter to the State Party of Romania regarding third party information about logging operations in old-growth forests in the buffer zones of the Romanian components of the property. On 8 January 2019, the State Party replied, noting that logging was undertaken in the buffer zones of the respective components and had no impact on their Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). The forest interventions were undertaken in accordance with the national legislation and the relevant Management Plans. On 24 January 2019, the World Heritage Centre sent a follow-up letter asking for additional information regarding the exact location of the undertaken logging operations. On 12 March 2019, the State Party of Romania provided information on the location, the amount of harvested wood and the size of forest area affected by the operations in the buffer zones of the two components in question.

The information provided by the States Parties regarding the progress achieved in addressing the Committee’s requests expressed in its Decision 41 COM 8B.7 is noted. The discussions underway to ensure that funding is available for coordinated management of the property, as well as the approach developed to ensure better connectivity between the components are welcomed. The measures proposed by the State Party of Belgium to improve connectivity between existing components are noted, however, actual enlargement activities will be required in order to fully address the Committee’s request to consider the future enlargement of components to at least the established minimum size of 50 ha.

The development of joint guidelines for design and management of buffer zones across the property is welcomed. Progress has been achieved in reaching a common understanding of the appropriate management regimes. While this progress should be welcomed, it is of great concern that the States Parties have not yet agreed on some of the most critical issues , particularly regarding such activities as “clear cuts >0.3 ha, shelterwood cuts >0.3 ha” within buffer zones. It needs to be recalled that various IUCN evaluations of this property have stressed the importance of good buffer zone design as the only feasible way to protect the integrity of the small forest remnants included in this property. Through its Decision 41 COM 8B.7, the Committee requested all States Parties of this property to give special emphasis to appropriate buffer zone management, in order to support undisturbed natural processes.  It is therefore recommended that the Committee urge the States Parties to define a clear and strict approach to buffer zone design and management, which will allow for the protection of the OUV of the property and seek further guidance from the World Heritage Centre and IUCN. It is crucial that an appropriate management of the buffer zones is put in place in all components of the property to avoid jeopardizing its integrity and hence the OUV of the property.

In this respect, it is noted that issues related to logging in the buffer zones remain of concern in several parts of the property. The information provided by the State Party of Romania regarding logging operations in the buffer zones in Domogled-Valea Cernei and Cheile Nerei-Beusnita National Parks raises concern. According to the spatial data provided by the State Party, logging operations were limited to buffer zones only, but some locations appear to be very close, or even adjacent, to the boundaries of the components. In fact, the States Parties’ joint report notes the possibility of negative impacts from the opening of the canopy of stands adjacent to the property and recommends a minimum distance of 50m for openings larger than one tree height, and a crown cover not to fall below 80%. It is also of concern that no response has been received from the State Party of Albania regarding third party information about illegal logging in the buffer zone of one of the Albanian components, nor has any update from the State Party of Albania been included in the joint report. It is therefore recommended that the Committee extend its previous requests on the matter to all States Parties, so as to ensure that logging is, and remains, strictly prohibited within the property, and that no logging operations are allowed in the buffer zones of the property if they could have negative impact on natural processes and the property’s OUV. It is further recommended that the Committee request the States Parties of Albania and Romania to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission to their respective components of the property in order to assess whether past, ongoing or planned legal and/or illegal logging operations in the buffer zones had or might have negative impacts on the property’s OUV. It is further recommended that, prior to this mission, all States Parties of this transnational property provide an overview about the management regime of their respective buffer zones and the management operations which took place since inscription.  

The intention of the State Party of Slovakia to submit a proposal for a significant boundary modification of its components by February 2020 is noted. It is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to ensure that the recommendations of the Advisory mission are fully taken into account in the preparation of the final proposal and that it reiterate its position regarding the continued lack of adequate legal protection of the Slovak components of the property.

Finally, it is noted that corrections have been proposed for the boundaries of two components in Croatia and their buffer zone, only two years after the inscription of the components. It is recommended that the World Heritage Committee request the State Party of Croatia to provide more detailed information on the backgrounds and reasoning for this potential boundary modification of the two components for future follow-up through the appropriate procedures, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN.