Kakadu National Park
Factors affecting the property in 1991*
- Management systems/ management plan
- Mining
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Mining projects; Protected area considered inadequate at the time of inscription
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1991
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 1991**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1991
The Bureau was pleased to note that the Australian Commonwealth Government had decided not to allow mining at the Coronation Hill, located in an area that was to be nominated as part of the proposed Stage III of the extension of this World Heritage Site. Since Stage III of the proposed extension of the Kakadu National Park was estimated to be very much higher than 10% of the original extent of this property, the Bureau recommended that the proposed extension be considered as a new nomination. Accordingly, the Australian authorities have nominated the entire Kakadu National Park, including the re-nomination of Stages I and II which were already included on the World Heritage List, and a nomination of Stage III of the extension of this site.
The nomination has already been transmitted to IUCN and ICOMOS for evaluation during 1992.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1991
15 BUR VI.26
Kakadu National Park (Australia)
The Bureau was pleased to note that the Australian Cabinet has decided not to allow mining at Coronation Hill, located in an area that is being considered for nomination as an extension to this World Heritage site as part of Stage III of the expansion. The Australian observer informed the Bureau that the proposed Stage III of the extension of Kakadu National Park would add approximately another 6,000 sq.km to this site and wished to know whether or not the nomination of this extension needed to follow the procedure to submit a new nomination. The Bureau recalled that each of the stages I and II of the nomination of this site also covered equally large areas. The Bureau informed the Australian observer that since the proposed extension would increase the size of the World Heritage site by a third and that the original nomination of 1981 is now substantially modified, it would be considered as a new nomination.
No draft Decision
AustraliaExports
* :
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.
