Garamba National Park

• Armed conflict and political instability
• Poaching by nationals and trans-border armed groups
• Unadapted management capabilities to address the poaching crisis

• Increased poaching
• Pressure linked to the civil war, thereby threatening the flagship species of the property

A draft was prepared during the 2010 reactive monitoring mission (https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/136/documents/ ) but indicators need to be quantified on the basis of the results of the aerial surveys. 

Adopted, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/4082

Total amount granted: USD 910,000 from the United Nations Foundation, the Governments of Italy, Belgium and Spain and the Rapid Response Facility.

On 17 February 2015, the State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/136/documents/ (pages 26 – 31).

Security challenges have also led to a renewed wave of elephant poaching, with at least 133 elephants poached between April and December 2014. In this period, park rangers were engaged in 25 violent encounters with poaching groups, armed with automatic rifles and grenades, and resulting in 14 poachers being killed. In 13 cases, the involved armed groups were documented to originate from South Sudan. In several cases, there is evidence that poachers used helicopters in their activities.

After a peak in April to June 2014, the number of elephants killed could be reduced progressively, following the acquisition of anti-poaching equipment (including a helicopter) and intensification of patrols covering 80% of the property (up from 60% in 2013) and 45% of the adjacent hunting areas (up from 20%). Unfortunately, recent reports received from the park management authority indicate that elephant poaching intensified again this year with a new group of poachers presumably originating from Sudan operating from the Azande hunting area. Another 31 elephant carcasses were found in February and March 2015.

Other measures taken by the State Party and African Parks to address this emergency are reported as follows:

• The Vice Prime Minister in charge of security visited the site with the Governor and the security committee and made strong recommendations to the Government to address the issue;

• Mixed operations between the Congolese Army (FARDC) and park rangers, with support of the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo MONUSCO and Unites States Africa Command force (AFRICOM). FARDC provided park rangers with arms and ammunition;
  • Two FARDC colonels implicated in poaching were transferred elsewhere;
  • Strengthened cooperation with local communities and traditional chiefs to provide intelligence on poaching activities;
  • Anti-poaching operations were restructured and a 24/7 operational control room was installed;
  • Cooperation efforts with the management of Lantoto National Park in South Sudan;

Increased pressure in the hunting areas as a result of increasing population densities and illegal logging and artisanal mining are also reported. A new management plan 2015 – 2017 is under preparation in response to the current emergency situation.

At the time of writing this report, the joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission to the property, requested by the Committee at its 38th session in 2014, could not yet take place due to the security situation.  An experienced guard was killed on 25 April 2015 following a confrontation with a group of armed poachers who attacked the patrol unit of the property.

While last year’s report noted a significant improvement of the security situation as a result of efforts to fight the rebels from the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), the impact of the war in the region created a new security problem and led to a renewed poaching crisis affecting the property since April 2014. In its report, the State Party notes that in March 2014, the elephant population was estimated at 1700 animals, so with at least another 164 elephants lost between April 2014 and March 2015, population numbers might plummet under the 1500 mark very soon. The elephant population of Garamba was estimated at more than 22000 in 1976 and at more than 11000 at the start of the conflict in 1995. More than 90% of the original elephant population has thus been lost. Already the Northern White Rhino, the last known wild population of which occurred in the property, has been considered extinct in the wild, with no sightings since 2006. Poaching is also targeting the small remaining population of the endemic Congolese giraffe, estimated at less than 40 individuals in 2013 and at least three more giraffe were reported to have been poached since the previous session. The continued erosion of wildlife populations is threatening the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, which was inscribed on the basis of its exceptional biodiversity. If the tide can not be turned soon, the populations of elephant and giraffe might be heading to extinction, resulting in an irreversible loss of OUV.

In the face of this dire situation, the relentless efforts of the Congolese Nature Conservation Institute (ICCN, the park management authority) and its partners, in particular the African Parks Foundation, to continue anti-poaching activities and halt the decline are commendable. It is welcomed that park rangers received more equipment, including weapons, ammunition and a helicopter. The increased cooperation with the FARDC, AFRICOM and MONUSCO are encouraging, as the poaching can not be dissociated from the wider security issues affecting the region.

The continued reports of the use of helicopters and the alleged involvement of national and foreign military in the poaching is extremely worrisome and it is recommended that the World Heritage Committee invite the Director General of UNESCO to call on the State Party as well as neighbouring States, in particular Uganda and South Sudan, which is planning to become a State Party to the World Heritage Convention, to ensure that military operations in the region do not impact on the OUV of the property. The organization of a high level meeting between the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda and South Sudan and other potential stakeholders on how to improve security in the region and address the poaching is suggested.

There is also concern about the increased pressure on the hunting areas adjacent to the property, in particular from artisanal mining, and it is recommended that the Committee reiterate its request to the State Party to develop a conservation strategy for the hunting areas so that they can act as buffer zones, given their importance for the conservation of the property’s OUV.

It is recommended that the Committee retain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger and continue to apply the reinforced monitoring mechanism.

General Decision on the properties of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

Current conservation issues

On 17 February 2015, the State Party submitted a report on the implementation of Decision 38 COM 7A.42, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/136/documents/ (pages 7– 9). The report notes the following progress in the implementation of the Kinshasa Declaration:

• In August 2014, the National Superior Defence Council, chaired by the President of the Republic, announced that instructions were given to reinforce security in the protected areas of the country and to strengthen the capacity of the park guards with assistance from the army;
• In November 2014, the Vice Prime Minister reiterated the commitment of the Government to implement the Declaration;
• A special anti-poaching brigade is being created in order to assist in protecting national parks. The Presidential Decree underway will formalize its creation;
• The cooperation with the army has been greatly improved;
• Efforts are underway to ensure that the mining cadastre includes updated information on the location of protected areas in order to ensure that there is no overlap between concessions and protected areas;
• The Interministerial Committee has not yet been officially established, but several interministerial meetings were held to discuss issues related to protected areas. At provincial level, these issues are dealt with by the Provincial Consultative Councils on Forests;
• The Strategic Plan of Action, which was adopted at the high level meeting of 2011, will be updated in 2015.

The report further notes that the new Hydrocarbons Code was adopted by both the Parliament and the Senate, but will still be discussed in the mixed Committee of the two Chambers, allowing for further discussion on Article 160, which foresees the possibility of degazetment of protected areas to allow for oil exploitation.

In relation to the oil exploration in Virunga, it is noted that the Government is planning to submit to the World Heritage Centre a proposal with “options for exception mechanisms for further negotiation”. This seems to be in line with the reply by the Prime Minister to the letter of 8 January by the Delegation Heads of the European Union, World Bank, UNESCO and United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), the Department for International Development (DFID) and the Ambassadors of Germany and Canada, where he pointed out that in the event the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) would want to go forward with oil exploitation, it would seek a minor boundary modification (see also report on Virunga National Park, item 4 of Document WHC-15/39.COM/7A).

Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre and IUCN

The statement by the Vice Prime Minister of DRC reiterating the commitment of the Government to implement the Kinshasa Declaration should be welcomed. In particular, it is encouraging that concrete measures have been taken to implement one of the most important elements of the Declaration, namely to create the conditions for implementation of the corrective measures by securing the sites.

The intention to create a special anti-poaching brigade is also noted. Widespread poaching is without doubt the single most important threat to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of all five properties. Results of the different inventories clearly show that since the start of the conflict, the biodiversity values of the properties have been seriously affected and their populations of emblematic species, such as Northern White Rhino, Okapi, Grauer’s Gorilla, Bonobo and Elephant, were severely reduced. Decisive action is needed to turn the tide. Recently, the increasing demand for ivory has in particular further increased pressure on the remaining Elephant populations. It is estimated that the DRC Elephant population, most of which is living in the World Heritage properties, has dwindled by over 90%, from more than 100 000 at the start of the 1980s to less than 10 000 today. Securing the sites and strengthening anti-poaching efforts are important, but additional efforts will be needed in cooperation with the Secretariat of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) to identify and take legal action against the criminal networks involved in the illegal traffic. Efforts to reduce demand in consumer countries are also needed.

The reported efforts to ensure that the mining cadastre uses accurate mapping information of the properties to avoid the attribution of mining concessions overlapping with the properties also responds to a long standing demand of the Committee. It is recommended that the Committee reiterate its requests to the State Party to annul all existing permits, which overlap with any of the properties.

It is also recommended that the Committee express its utmost concern about Article 160 of the new Code for Hydrocarbons, which foresees the possibility of degazetting protected areas, including World Heritage properties, as well as the statement made by the Prime Minister of DRC that the State Party might seek a boundary modification of Virunga National Park to allow for oil exploration activities to proceed. These are in clear contradiction to the Kinshasa Declaration, which committed to uphold the protection status of the properties. It is recommended that the Committee reiterate its position on this issue, as expressed in previous decisions.