Ichkeul National Park
Factors affecting the property in 2008*
- Management systems/ management plan
- Water (rain/water table)
- Water infrastructure
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2008
Total amount approved : 140,000 USD
| 2002 | Elaboration d'un plan d'urgence pour la sauvegarde du ... (Approved) | 50,000 USD |
| 1991 | Consultancy, equipment, design and construction costs ... (Approved) | 40,000 USD |
| 1989 | Financial contribution to the preparation of exhibits ... (Approved) | 20,000 USD |
| 1981 | Study on Ichkeul National Park (Approved) | 30,000 USD |
Missions to the property until 2008**
1999: World Heritage Centre / IUCN / Ramsar mission; 2000: IUCN / Ramsar mission; 2002: IUCN mission; June 2006: World Heritage Centre / IUCN mission
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2008
The State Party submitted its reports on the state of conservation of the property on 27 February 2008, the 2006-2007 scientific monitoring report, and the meeting notes for phase 1 of the study on the application of the management and forecasting models for the property, as well as a copy of the final version of the management plan, approved at the end of 2007 as the outcome of a GEF project, which has been implemented since 2003.
The main features of the management plan are: the progressive establishment of an autonomous management structure for the Park; zoning proposals within the Park; management of water resources through consultation with the authorities responsible for the dams and through use of a mathematical model; participatory management with local communities; and valorisation through sustainable ecotourism.
The State Party has implemented the following recommendations of the 2006 reactive monitoring mission and recommendations of the World Heritage Committee:
a) Management structure
The management plan identifies a three step procedure for establishment of a management structure endowed with powers of decision and financial autonomy. As the first step, a Committee was set up by ministerial decision on 24 September 2007, and will meet regularly in 2008. The institutional members have been identified and plan to meet during 2008 to prepare step two for the establishment of the management structure.
b) Water management
The management plan identifies water management as an essential element of the management of the lake-marshes ecosystem, through a process of consultation with the authorities responsible for operation of the dams. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note that the State Party continues to recognise Ichkeul as a net consumer of water, on par with agriculture, with the consequence that the property is included in the Ministry of Agriculture’s planning documents.
Studies to update the 1996 mathematical model for predicting and managing water resources, a crucial issue for the proper management of the property, began in 2007, and a first test application was carried out in January 2008. The 2006-2007 scientific monitoring study reported on the management of water resources of the property and concluded that despite low water supply the modelling used to aid water resource management had resulted in improvements of the aquatic ecosystem and its dependent flora and fauna.
c) Scientific research and monitoring
A detailed report on scientific research and monitoring at Ichkeul is annexed to the State Party’s report. This points out that the assemblage of ecosystems has recovered to a condition very close to that when it was first accepted on the World Heritage List. Thus, although inflow of water in the 2006/07 hydrological year was relatively limited, increased areas of submerged vegetation (notably Potamogeton) was recorded. Thanks to careful manipulation of the sluice, the marshes had extensive area of rushes Scirpus, numbers of water birds were comparable to the years before the dams were built, fish catches, notably of eels, resumed, and reed-beds around the edges of the lake began to reappear.
d) Social aspects
During 2007, several awareness raising activities were carried out including the production of documents on ecotourism, distributed to institutions, schools and visitors. Four schools surrounding the property created environmental clubs and two national workshops were organised. A first draft of a national strategy for public education and communication was also produced.
The establishment of an Agenda 21 programme for Ichkeul began in January 2008 in association with the town of Tinja, the administrative centre in which the Park is situated and where the first Agenda 21 Committee has been established.
However, some of the recommendations of the 2006 reactive monitoring misson relating to water management and scientific monitoring, although planned, are not fully implemented and include:
(i) Ensure the careful use of any water discharging from the Sidi Barrak Dam;
(ii) Assess the effects on Ichkeul of the planned construction of three additional dams;
(iii) Ensure that measures are put in place to restore the ecological functioning of the Joumine Wadi inside the Park; and
(iv) Collect and store scientific data and reports relating to Ichkeul in a central location to enable their analysis; in particular, for the census of winter waterfowl and for mountain birds;
The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recognise the significant achievements of the State Party in implementing the recommendations of the World Heritage Committee and in restoring the values of the property. The operation of the sluice has made it possible to overcome the potential problems of limited rainfall and water intake in the last year, and the State Party is to be congratulated on its continued policy of recognising the property as a net consumer of water.
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2008
32 COM 7B.7
Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia) (N1094)
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-08/32.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decisions 30 COM 7A.12 and 31 COM 7B.13, adopted at its 30th (Vilnius, 2006), and 31st (Christchurch, 2007) sessions respectively,
3. Commends the State Party for its successful management of limited water resources in 2006-7 and notes with satisfaction the continuation of the policy of considering Ichkeul as a net consumer of water;
4. Also notes that the State Party has begun the process of establishing a management structure, with powers of decision making and financial autonomy, as recommended by the 2006 mission, and has recently established an Agenda 21 Committee;
5. Welcomes the measures proposed in the management plan to achieve management of water resources through cooperation with the authorities responsible for the dams and through mathematical modelling;
6. Expresses its satisfaction at the continuing improvement of the state of conservation of the property, in particular the restoration of fresh water conditions, which have allowed the development of improved fish catches, greater expansion of water plants and the numbers of aquatic birds;
7. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2010, an updated report on the implementation of the remaining recommendations of the 2006 monitoring mission and the implementation of the management plan, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session in 2010.
32 COM 8D
Clarifications of property boundaries and sizes by States Parties in response to the restrospective inventory
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-08/32.COM/8D,
2. Recalling Decisions 30 COM 11A.2 and 31 COM 11A.2, adopted at its 30th (Vilnius, 2006) and 31st (Christchurch, 2007) sessions respectively,
3. Recalls that, as decided at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007) by Decision 31 COM 11A.2, the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies will not be able to examine proposals for minor or significant modifications to boundaries of World Heritage properties whenever the delimitation of such properties as inscribed is unclear;
4. Congratulates States Parties in the European Region and the States Parties of Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia on the excellent work accomplished in the clarification of the delimitation of their World Heritage properties and thanks them for their efforts to improve the credibility of the World Heritage List,
5. Takes note of the clarifications of property boundaries and sizes provided by the following States Parties in the European and Arab Regions in response to the Retrospective Inventory, as presented in the Annex of Document WHC-08/32.COM/8D:
- Armenia: Monasteries of Haghpat and Sanahin;
- Austria: Historic Centre of the City of Salzburg; Palace and Gardens of Schönbrunn; Hallstatt-Dachstein-Salzkammergut Cultural Landscape;
- Belgium: Flemish Béguinages;
- Bulgaria: Boyana Church; Thracian Tomb of Kazanlak; Rila Monastery; Ancient City of Nessebar;
- Croatia: Old City of Dubrovnik; Historical Complex of Split with the Palace of Diocletian; Episcopal Complex of the Euphrasian Basilica in the Historic Centre of Poreč;
- Czech Republic: Historic Centre of Telč; Pilgrimage Church of St. John of Nepomuk at Zelená Hora; Lednice-Valtice Cultural Landscape; Gardens and Castle at Kroměříž;
- Denmark: Jelling Mounds, Runic Stones and Church; Roskilde Cathedral;
- Egypt: Memphis and its Necropolis - the Pyramid Fields from Giza to Dahshur; Ancient Thebes with its Necropolis; Nubian Monuments from Abu Simbel to Philae; Historic Cairo; Abu Mena; Saint Catherine Area;
- Estonia: Historic Centre (Old Town) of Tallinn;
- Germany: Würzburg Residence with the Court Gardens and Residence Square; Castles of Augustusburg and Falkenlust at Brühl; Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin; Town of Bamberg;
- Greece: Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae; Mount Athos; Medieval City of Rhodes; Archaeological Site of Mystras; Delos;
- Hungary: Budapest, including the Banks of the Danube, the Buda Castle Quarter and Andrássy Avenue; Old Village of Hollókö and its Surroundings; Millenary Benedictine Abbey of Pannonhalma and its Natural Environment; Caves of Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst (presented jointly with Slovakia);
- Ireland: Archaeological Ensemble of the Bend of the Boyne; Skellig Michael;
- Italy: Historic Centre of San Gimignano; City of Vicenza and the Palladian Villas of the Veneto; Historic Centre of Siena; Ferrara, City of the Renaissance, and its Po Delta; The trulli of Alberobello; Early Christian Monuments of Ravenna; Historic Centre of the City of Pienza; Residences of the Royal House of Savoy; Botanical Garden (Orto Botanico), Padua; Portovenere, Cinque Terre, and the Islands (Palmaria, Tino and Tinetto); Costiera Amalfitana; Archaeological area of Agrigento; Su Nuraxi di Barumini; Archaeological Area and the Patriarchal Basilica of Aquileia;
- Latvia: Historic Centre of Riga;
- Luxembourg: City of Luxembourg: its Old Quarters and Fortifications;
- Morocco: Medina of Marrakesh; Ksar of Ait-Ben-Haddou; Archaeological Site of Volubilis;
- Poland: Cracow's Historic Centre; Historic Centre of Warsaw; Old City of Zamość; Medieval Town of Torún; Castle of the Teutonic Order in Malbork;
- Portugal: Monastery of Batalha; Cultural Landscape of Sintra; Prehistoric Rock-Art Sites in the Côa Valley;
- Romania: Danube Delta;
- Slovakia: Historic Town of Banská Štiavnica and the Technical Monuments in its Vicinity; Spišský Hrad and its Associated Cultural Monuments; Vlkolínec; Caves of Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst (presented jointly with Hungary);
- Spain: Garajonay National Park;
- Tunisia: Ichkeul National Park;
- Ukraine: Kiev: Saint-Sophia Cathedral and Related Monastic Buildings, Kiev-Pechersk Lavra;
- United Kingdom: Durham Castle and Cathedral; Ironbridge Gorge; Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites; Castles and Town Walls of King Edward in Gwynedd; Westminster Palace, Westminster Abbey and Saint Margaret's Church; Canterbury Cathedral, St Augustine's Abbey and St Martin's Church; Maritime Greenwich;
6. Requests the European and Arab States Parties which have not yet answered the questions raised in 2005, 2006 and 2007 within the framework of the Retrospective Inventory to provide all requested clarifications and documentation as soon as possible and by 1 December 2008 at the latest.
Draft Decision: 32 COM 7B.7
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-08/32.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decisions 30 COM 7A.12 and 31 COM 7B.13, adopted at its 30th (Vilnius, 2006), and 31st (Christchurch, 2007) sessions respectively,
3. Commends the State Party for its successful management of limited water resources in 2006-7 and notes with satisfaction the continuation of the policy of considering Ichkeul as a net consumer of water;
4. Also notes that the State Party has begun the process of establishing a management structure, with powers of decision making and financial autonomy, as recommended by the 2006 mission, and has recently established an Agenda 21 Committee;
5. Welcomes the measures proposed in the management plan to achieve management of water resources through cooperation with the authorities responsible for the dams and through mathematical modelling;
6. Expresses its satisfaction at the continuing improvement of the state of conservation of the property, in particular the restoration of fresh water conditions, which have allowed the development of improved fish catches, greater extension of water plants and the numbers of aquatic birds;
7. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2010, an updated report on the implementation of the remaining recommendations of the 2006 monitoring mission and the implementation of the management plan, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session in 2010.
TunisiaExports
* :
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.
