KKFC World Heritage Application

A date to watch. On June 10th the IUCN will issue its advisory document to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee on whether they agree or disagree with the inscription of the Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex as a World Heritage Site, this year.

Will they or won't they? I think anyone who has visited knows it deserves it from a naturalists perspective, but there are other issues to be considered and requirements to be met.

Not hope in hell - pricing is just an internal administrative issue to Thailand and the DNP.

If IUCN agrees, what other steps follow before it will be a World Heritage Site?
Is it then simply waiting for the UNESCO committee to say yes or no?

If they recommend, then the recommendation goes to the Committee via the WHC secretariat - the committee will then vote, so theres a potential for politics to play a part in the final process. The same with any UN committee - its a final decision by member states (or group thereof) based on information submitted to them and then answers to questions they may raise.

I have no inkling as to what the recommendation is but at least one Kariang support group had tried to protest their lack of inclusion and demand a return of historical hunting rotational farming (slash and burn) rights (I kid you not but I admit to being biased against Kariang claims because I ,personally, do not believe their current way of life to be sustainable in a national park scenario).

Text corrected by Admin to match source

Thanks for the explanation.
The North of Thailand is a good example of why there should be no hunting rights for anybody in such a park, nowhere in the country.
Let's hope that somehow those people can be offered a good future outside the park to make them stop relying on the forest.

I had to correct the text in my previous post as it was wrong. It was a call for rights to conduct swidden farming (AKA slash and burn).

A good example that swidden farming techniques are destructive is Mae Wong National Park - its been 29 years since the villagers were relocated and the forest still has still not reclaimed the old swidden fields.

Actually to be fair - someone mentioned to me this weekend that if the swidden was allowed in a tightly controlled area, based on currently denuded areas, and not allowed to expand outside those areas then it would not be such a hardship to the animals in greater scheme of things. I have to say I found this quite reasonable.


Heres where you will find the recommendation when its published ........

www.iucn.org/world-heritage-committee/iu...ons/nominations-2016

Alas, this year it is potentially not to be, the recommendation has been to be referred once again....

"Refers the nomination of the Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex (Thailand) back to the State Party, taking note of the strong potential for this property to meet criterion (x), in order to allow it to more fully address the concerns that have been raised by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights concerning Karen communities within the Kaeng Krachan National Park, including the implementation of a participatory process to resolve rights and livelihoods concerns and to achieve a consensus of support for the nomination that is fully consistent with the principle of free, prior and informed consent;
4. Encourages the State Party to consider nominating the property also under criterion (ix);
5. Also encourages the State Party to continue the commendable initiatives on future biological connectivity opportunities, including those between the
nominated property and Thungyai - Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries in Thailand and, working in partnership with the State Party of Myanmar, between the nominated property and neighbouring transnational protected areas within the Taninthaya Forest Corridor in Myanmar;
6. Commends the State Party and partner NGOs for their increased efforts to address improved conservation management within the nominated property, including improved anti-poaching patrol systems, community engagement in Kui Buri National Park dealing with human/elephant conflict, and enhanced ecological research and monitoring, and encourages the State Party to continue with these efforts."

So the ball is now back with the DNP and the GoT to improve their plan and its execution for community involvement. The other possibility would be when the member states vote on whether to inscribe or not at their meeting next month (July 10 - 20th). That failing - the case would be reviewed again next year if the recommendation of referral is passed at the vote.

Full text is here......... whc.unesco.org/archive/2016/whc16-40com-inf8B2-Add-en.pdf

I wonder how exactly they would like the DNP/ Thai Government to take care of this problem.
Would supplying new homes outside the park to these communities be considered correct, or not? The question is if these communities would want to move or not...
Does anyone know how many people live in those communities?