WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions /

WHC Meeting in Brasilia (2010)

Page  Page 2 of 4:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  Next »  
Author Solivagant
Registered
#16 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 05:16 
Interesting that a "quiet veil" appears to have been drawn over the "failure" of Mt Vernon - has anyone seen ANY comments from the US about this subject???

Author winterkjm
Registered
#17 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 05:40 
Here is a great article that was in the Washington Post July 5th that shows how Mt. Vernon even made it this far. I have searched for any news about the failure of Mt. Vernon in its bid for inscription and came up with nothing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/03/AR2009070301570.html? sid=ST2009070301631

Author Solivagant
Registered
#18 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 08:33 
Hi winterkjm,
this article was actually dated a year earlier i.e Jul 5 2009 and correctly identified at least one of Mt Vernon's weaknesses back then . I cited it in this forum post (#22) on July 3rd 2009 (yes I know this was "before" it was supposedly written!!)
http://www.worldheritagesite.org/forums/index.php?action=vthread&forum=8&topic=291&pa ge=1#msg1550

I think we have also previously corresponded about the publicised discussions of the committee charged with deciding which US sites would be on their new T List - it was clear that Mt Vernon wasn't a unanimous decision even then.

As was said the other week the success of the Hawaii nomination might be enough to avoid US as a whole sinking into anti-UNESCO attitudes but surely someone somewhere is going to have to publicise and address the issue!!!

Author Durian
Registered
#19 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 10:04 | Edited by: Durian 
Hi winterkjm and all,

I've got the hard copy of ICOMOS summary report on Mount Vernon decision, and would like to share, so enjoy...:) (sorry with no link as it is a hard copy)

"Defers the examination of the nomination of Mount Vernon, United States of America,, to the World Heritage List in order to allow the State Party to reconsider the scope of the nomination;

Considers that any revised nomination with revised boundaries requires an expert mission to the site;

Recommends that the State Party:
a) Monitor the problems of erosion along the river;
b) Reduce to the minimum reconstruction for interpretive purposes, trusting other means of
interpreting the heritage values of the property;
c) Follow in all management and conservation activities the cautious approach established by the founders of the Mount Vernon Ladies Association;
d) Plant trees in order to screen the support facilities from the core of the nominated property. "

Author elsslots
Admin
#20 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 11:54 
Extension of Ngorongoro seems to be accepted too

Author winterkjm
Registered
#21 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 12:04 
Yeah I knew the article was from early July, but I didn't know anyone had posted it. Sorry about that, I just came upon it the first time yesterday. It gave alot of insight into the Mt. Vernon Unesco bid, and some reasons why it was chosen.

I hope the United States just abandons the idea of inscribing Mt. Vernon, this deferment seems to give some hope for the site. I just feel it doesn't meet the qualifications, and I'm American!

Author elsslots
Admin
#22 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 16:02 
More sites now coming in, via Twitter:
- Australian Convict Sites
- Turaif Quarter in Al-Diriyyah

Author winterkjm
Registered
#23 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 16:30 | Edited by: winterkjm 
A few more; new inscriptions are being announced via Twitter and the Brasilia website first.

Jantar Mantar Observatory (Jaipur/India)

Interesting both sites from Iran have succeeded!

Safi al-din Khănegăh and Shrine Ensemble in Ardabil (Iran)

Tabriz Historic Bazaar Complex (Iran)

Author Assif
Registered
#24 | Posted: 31 Jul 2010 17:38 
Marshall Islands made it too!
Atomic testing sites at the Bikini Atoll

Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#25 | Posted: 1 Aug 2010 07:57 | Edited by: meltwaterfalls 
Amsterdam, Jantar Mantar and Bikini Atoll stand out for me. I look forward to delving into the background on the Bikini Atoll one especially. Surprised that Iran was able to get 2 cultural sites inscribed in one session.
I guess it is time to do some research on some of the new additions I don't know much about at the moment.

I guess that the UK's Darwin proposal may finally have received a firm no. I didn't think it was really of outstanding universal value anyway.

It seems that Istanbul has survived for this year with out any reprimand, the halting of work on the Four Seasons Hotel seems to have done the trick for the time being http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-217711-101-unesco-keeps-istanbul-on-world-heri tage-list.html

Australia provided yet another frustration for me, I have seen the Hyde Park Barracks but didn't think it worthy of a visit (same as the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne). Oh well, I am sure I will be back Down Under soon, but I must admit neither really seem exceptional, maybe they will hold a surprise.

Time to start planning a return to a gloomy industrial corner of Wallonia!

Author elsslots
Admin
#26 | Posted: 1 Aug 2010 08:53 
Discussions will go on tonight, I believe.

I also noticed that on the Unesco website there's no mention of the Mining Sites in Wallonia having become a WHS. It was reported on twitter last night, but maybe an error?

Author Durian
Registered
#27 | Posted: 1 Aug 2010 09:58 | Edited by: Durian 
elsslots:
Discussions will go on tonight, I believe.


Should be as there is no new WHS that nominated on natural criteria yet (Central Highlands and Papahounakea are nominated as mix and cultural landscape).

Finally I've got the first draft decision which I mentioned earlier in my previous post

URL

there seem to be many referred and deferred sites that finally got approval from WHC against IUCN and ICOMOS recommendations.

Author winterkjm
Registered
#28 | Posted: 1 Aug 2010 10:03 
Some of the sights that failed this year.

The Triple-arch Gate at Dan (Israel)
- "Israel´s Delegation asks Comitee to withdraw the candidature of the Gate of the Three Arches Dan"

Darwin's Landscape Laboratory (United Kingdom)
- many here have commented they felt it did not meet the criteria

Mount Vernon (United States of America)- No news? Removed early on in the process

Augustowski Canal – a work of man and nature (Belarus / Poland)
- also withdrawn early on in the process

Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#29 | Posted: 1 Aug 2010 10:52 
Yep, it looks like we have another day to go, didn't realise that. Maybe my count can still eek up a little further.

Author Assif
Registered
#30 | Posted: 1 Aug 2010 12:18 
Now I see many extensions have been approved:
Ngorongoro (Tanzania), Roros (Norway), Rammelsberg (Germany), Graz (Austria), Suceava (Romania), Kiev (Ukraine), Coa Valley (Portugal now extended to include Spain as well).
This comes up to the fact that except the extension of Mountain Rails of India all cultural extensions were approved. Let's see if the natural candidates will similarly succeed.

Page  Page 2 of 4:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  Next » 
WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions / WHC Meeting in Brasilia (2010) Top

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message

 

 ?
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.
 
 
  www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®