LENA PILLARS NATURE PARK - EUROPE / NORTH AMERICA
←
→
Transcription du contenu de la page
Si votre navigateur ne rend pas la page correctement, lisez s'il vous plaît le contenu de la page ci-dessous
EUROPE / NORTH AMERICA LENA PILLARS NATURE PARK RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park
WORLD HERITAGE NOMINATION – IUCN TECHNICAL EVALUATION
LENA PILLARS NATURE PARK (Russian Federation) – ID No. 1299
IUCN RECOMMENDATION TO WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE: To defer the nomination of the property
Key paragraphs of Operational Guidelines:
Paragraph 77: A revised nomination has potential to meet one or more natural World Heritage criteria
Paragraph 78: Property as nominated does not meet integrity or protection and management requirements
nd
Background note: Lena Pillars Nature Park was previously nominated for consideration at the 32 Session of the World
Heritage Committee, based on a differently configured nomination including two serial components, one of which had a
designated buffer zone. IUCN evaluated the nomination and recommended to not inscribe the property on the World
nd
Heritage List. The State Party withdrew the nomination prior to discussion by the 32 Session of the Committee, and thus
it has not previously been considered by the Committee.
1. DOCUMENTATION processes. 20, 71-78; Trofimova, E.V., (2007)
Particularites du developpement recent du karst
a) Date nomination received by IUCN: 11 March 2011 calcaire de Siberie et d’Extreme-Orient (Russie).
Karst and Cryokarst Sosnowiec-Wroclaw 203-209;
b) Additional information officially requested from Wells, R (1996) Earth's geological history: a
and provided by the State Party: IUCN sent a letter to contextual framework for assessment of World
the State Party on 3 February 2012, which did not Heritage fossil site nominations. IUCN Gland
request supplementary information, but provided a Switzerland; Zhuravlev, A. and Wood, R.A., (2008)
statement on the evaluation process. The State Party Geology. 36, 923-926; Zhuravlev, A. and Wood, R.A.,
subsequently provided a range of additional information (2009) Geology. 37, 1123-1126
on 28 February 2012.
d) Consultations: 14 external reviewers consulted.
c) Additional literature consulted (selected list): Extensive consultations were conducted during the
Amthor, J. E. et al., (2003) Geology. 31, 431–434; IUCN field visit with a large number of key stakeholders
Brasier, M.D. et al., (1994) Multiple δ C excursions
13
including national and state legislative bodies and
spanning Cambrian Explosion to Botomian Crisis in government institutions, site management authorities,
Siberia. Geology 22, 455-458; Ford, D. and Williams, P., scientists and researchers, as well as site based staff,
(2007) Karst Hydrogeology and Geomorphology. community representatives and tourist guides.
Wiley, 562p.; Gunn, J., Ed., Encyclopidea of Caves
and Karst Science. Fetzroy Dearborn NY 537-538; e) Field Visit: Kyung Sik Woo and Sarangoo
World Heritage Caves and Karsts – A Thematic Radnaaragchaa, 22-31 August 2011.
Study (by P. Williams). IUCN 2008 34p.; Kouchinstky, A.
et al., (2001) Geological Magazine. 138, 387-396; f) Date of IUCN approval of this report: April 2012
Russian Federation, Republic of Sakha, Mid-term
Management plan of the Lena Pillars Nature Park
2008-2012 (in Russian); Russian Federation, Republic of 2. SUMMARY OF NATURAL VALUES
Sakha, Concept on the Development of Protected
Area System in the Republic of Sakha, Resolution of The nominated property, the Lena Pillars Nature Park
Government. 16 February 2011 (in Russian); Russian (LPNP) is located in the central part of the Sakha
Federation, Republic of Sakha, Law on Protected Republic (Yakutia) in the Russian Federation, around
Areas of Republic of Sakha. 1 March 2011 (in 200 km southwest from the provincial capital Yakutsk
Russian); Russian Federation, Republic of Sakha, which is the capital city. The total area of the property is
Strategy for tourism development and Concept on 1,272,150 ha.
the establishment of tourism and recreational zones
in the Reoublic of Sakha, Resolution of Government. LPNP extends along part of the Lena River and its
27 May 2009, (in Russian); Sandberg, P.A., (1983) Buotama tributary. It is located in an area with an
Nature. 305, 19-22; Spector V.B. and Spector V.V., extreme continental climate with an annual temperature
(2009) Karst processes and Phenomena in the range of almost 100º C, ranging from c.-60º C in winter
Perennially Frozen Carbonate Rocks of the Middle to c.+40º C in summer.
Lena River Basin, Permafrost and periglacial
IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012 29
Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park
The property is nominated in relation to criteria (vii) and thickness are traceable for dozens of kilometres. The
(viii), and its key natural values relate to its pillar relief itself provides excellent outcrops.
geomorphology and geology.
These strata cover the time interval which encompasses
The geomorphic environment of LPNP is dominated by the “Cambrian Explosion”, one of the major
cryogenic (ice-related) processes, and the ground is diversification events on the Earth where all the main
frozen to a depth of several hundred metres. Summer modern and fossil animal body plans appeared. The
thawing only penetrates a few metres. Consequently, Lena Pillars sections allow study of the early stages of
even though the area is underlain by hundreds of metres multicellular animal evolution and its diversity and
of carbonate rocks, karst development is embryonic. The dynamics. Among approximately 2,000 known early
nomination notes karst features such as dolines (caves, Cambrian genera, about 350 have been described from
vadose vertical solution pipes, karren surfaces, karst this region. These genera include the first archaeocyaths
lakes, dry valleys), and thermokarst features are (rigid aspiculate calcified sponges), radiocyaths,
abundant. The incision of the Lena and its tributaries has coralomorphs (skeletal primitive cnidarians),
induced a hydraulic gradient that has enabled brachiopods, and some other groups of animals with
groundwater to flow from the upland surface towards mineralized skeletons. Additionally, a number of
neighbouring valleys. complete and intact specimens with very high quality
preservation make up the so-called Sinsk Biota, which is
The celebrated pillars (up to c.100m in height) that line one element within the overall geological succession,
the banks of the Lena River are rocky buttresses and contains a number of unique records of fossil
isolated from each other by deep and steep gullies species including with phosphatised soft tissues and
developed by frost shattering directed along intervening cells as well as their embryos.
joints. The pillars form a discontinuous belt that extends
back from the river’s edge along the incised valley sides The most important geological values in the nominated
of some rivers in a zone about 150 m wide. The joints territory are fossil reefs. Good preservation, high
that isolate individual pillars may have sometimes been diversity, and multiple localities of reef fauna in the Lena
widened by dissolution of the carbonate rock. Pillars allow detailed palaeoecological and population
Penetration of water from the surface has facilitated dynamics’ studies of the earliest metazoan reef biota.
cryogenic processes (freeze-thaw action), which have The geology of the areas has also enabled detailed
widened gullies between pillars leading to their isolation. stratigraphic analysis to be achieved, including high
Fluvial processes are also critical to the pillars. This is precision statistical analyses of the distribution of
because cliff-foot ice-shattered debris (scree) slides different skeletal groups. This has also enabled the
downslope to the valley floor where it is transported distinction of the earliest currently recorded mass-
away by the river. Pillars are only found along those extinction events in the Earth history which are known as
stretches of valley sides where the river in flood can the Sinsk and Toyonian extinction events, both named
scour and undercut the banks. If it were not for this after the Lena Pillar’s area.
fluvial action the pillars would be buried in their own
cryogenic debris. A series of evolutionary stages in pillar In addition, whilst not the basis for the proposal for
formation can be observed from massive cogged walls inscription on the World Heritage List, the Quaternary
to separated individual pillars. Other complementary and sediments in LPNP bear rich skeletal remains of the
dramatic pillar landforms are known in the immediate mammoth fauna including bones that are well-preserved
region at Sinyaya outside the nominated property’s for a DNA analysis. It also protects nationally important
boundaries. biodiversity values, including the presence of Siberian
salamander and Siberian frog, 105 species of nesting
A further geomorphological feature emphasized in the birds, and 38 species of mammals. An introduction
nomination are the tukulans which are highly unusual programme of Wood Bison is also noted.
high-latitude sand dune areas formed in reworked sandy
terrace sediments on the top of Tertiary sediments along
the Lena River and its tributary Vilyui River. 3. COMPARISONS WITH OTHER AREAS
The nominated property and surrounding area also The consideration of the values of LPNP has been
contains geological values that are internationally noted greatly facilitated through the new nomination, as well as
and which are described in detail in the nomination, and the process of discussion and advisory activities that
in supplementary information provided by the State have taken place since the previous submission (see
Party. The Lena River and its tributaries provide within section 5).
the property and adjoining areas natural sections of the
uppermost Ediacaran (Precambrian) to middle Cambrian The previous IUCN evaluation (2008) pointed out that
strata of a total thickness from 980-1370m in thickness. impressive rock pillar landscapes are found in many
These strata were accumulated in platformal other parts of the world, and a number of such
environments and were not subsequently subject to landscapes are already recognised on the World
either strong tectonic or metamorphic alteration. As a Heritage List. These include Wulingyuan (China), Tsingy
result, sub-horizontal strata of a few centimetres de Bemaraha (Madagascar), South China Karst (Shilin,
30 IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012
Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park
China), the subsequently inscribed China Danxia (China) interesting, their expression is at a very small scale and
and other spectacular areas that are not on the World by no means unusual, and is not a feature of
Heritage List such as Arches National Park and Bryce Outstanding Universal Value.
Canyon National Park (both in USA) and Nambung
(Australia). In relation to Cambrian fossil values, the nomination
notes a range of comparator sites, including S.E.
Reviewers have noted that the phenomenon of the major Newfoundland (Canada), Morocco, China, South
pillars in LPNP should not be considered as primarily Australia and parts of Europe. There are prominent
karstic, but rather being formed by the combination of exposures of Cambrian rocks in other World Heritage
cryogenic erosion and the fluvial removal of the resulting properties such as the Grand Canyon (USA). More
debris. Any mechanically competent bedded and jointed significantly, the World Heritage List already includes the
rock, such as hard sandstone or quartzite, would also Burgess Shale fossil site (part of the the Canadian
form pillars in such an environment. The effectiveness of Rocky Mountain Parks World Heritage Site, Canada,
these combined processes is especially evident in the and originally inscribed as a single World Heritage Site),
previously nominated Sinyaya area, where pillars are which is widely known as an iconic global reference for
only developed on the outside bends of incised the Cambrian Explosion.
meanders where undercutting by the river is at its most
intense. The combination of cryogenic and fluvial Significant Cambrian reefs are known from locations
processes that has led to the formation of the Lena including in Morocco, South Australia, eastern Canada,
Pillars is unusual, as is the disposition of pillars for many western United States, some European countries (Spain,
kilometres in a narrow belt along the Lena and some France, Sardinia), and elsewhere. However, in all the
tributaries. relevant areas, the earliest Cambrian strata do not
contain reefs and mostly are barren. Some other areas
Although there are many examples of pillar and tower of the Siberian Platform also provide a rich record of
landforms in the world, most are in the tropical or skeletal fossils across entire lower Cambrian interval;
temperate realm, tend to be rounded or smoothly however, their fossil assemblages are poorer than those
sculpted, and owe little or nothing to cryogenic of the area in and around LPNP.
processes. The circumstances in Yakutia are thus a
special combination of lithology, fluvial incision and IUCN notes that the consideration of sites nominated to
continental cold climate processes. These factors have the World Heritage List in relation to fossil values has
acted in concert to produce a visually spectacular and been based on a consistent set of principles outlined in
geomorphologically very unusual landscape that the the established thematic study on fossil sites prepared in
majority or reviewers consider would be worthy of 1996. In this regard, IUCN considers there is not a
recognition as being of Outstanding Universal Value. compelling basis to consider the application of criterion
However some of the best examples of this (viii) in relation to the fossil values of the area alone.
phenomenon in the LPNP region, on the Sinyaya River,
are not included in the nomination, although they were IUCN notes the phenomenon of the Cambrian Explosion
part of the previous proposal. is already represented by the Burgess Shale, which is
one of the most significant fossil areas of the world and
IUCN, in its 2008 evaluation, noted that there are provides a wealth of data to aid in the classification of
significant gaps in the geographical distribution of karst enigmatic fossils. The most significant fossil organisms
World Heritage sites, representation being particularly there are soft bodied, hence largely absent from the rest
poor in areas such as North Asia. It also noted that there of the fossil record. Whilst the fossils of the LPNP region
are significant gaps in the natural environmental are an internationally significant record, they include
distribution of karst World Heritage sites, there being many species that are found in other sites, even if not in
relatively poor representation in arid, semi-arid, and the same concentrations or associations. The
periglacial environments. nomination emphasizes that the fossil values of the
Sinsk Biota are c.10 millon years older than those of the
Extensive outcrops of carbonate rocks with karst Burgess Shale.
features are found across permafrost areas of the
Russian Federation and Canada. Some of these areas A further key comparison is with the Chengjiang Fossil
were glaciated in the Pleistocene and others were not Site (CFS) in Yunnan Province, China, which is also
th
because conditions were too dry, even though they were nominated for consideration by the 36 Session of the
cold enough. The Lena Pillars region of Siberia and the World Heritage Committee. Like the Burgess Shale, CFS
Nahanni National Park World Heritage Property in is a site with exceptional soft body preservation, as well
Canada are examples of permafrost areas that were as preserving skeletal animals and is now considered to
unglaciated in the last major glaciation. Due to the be at least as important as the Burgess Shale. In this
embryonic development of karst, no features in the case CFS is slightly older than the Sinsk biota of LPNP
nominated property come close to the geomorphic (though younger than the oldest Cambrian strata in the
importance of the karst found in the Nahanni National present nomination). CFS is recognized as one of the
Park of Canada. Thus although the karst landforms richest Cambrian sites known and appears to IUCN to
described and illustrated in the nomination document are provide a much stronger claim for Outstanding Universal
IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012 31Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park
Value in relation to fossil values than LPNP, and also to 4. INTEGRITY, PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT
much better accord with the long established principles
for listing fossil sites as of Outstanding Universal Value 4.1 Protection
adopted by the World Heritage Committee.
LPNP was established by the Resolution of the
The present nomination and supplementary information Government of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) in 1995.
emphasises that the Burgess Shale and CFS do not The nominated property has the status of a Nature Park
provide significant skeletal fossil remains, and also of the Republic Sakha.
emphasises the special preservation of the Sinsk biota.
It notes the long time recorded in the strata of the LPNP The highest level of protection for the property would
region, and the continuous and fossil-rich carbonate correspond to a federally protected “zapovednik” or
record of the uppermost Ediacaran (Precambrian) to equivalent. The Lena Pillars property is not protected at
middle Cambrian strata of ca. 35 my interval, whilst the this level currently. Nevertheless, the Ministry of the
Chengjiang site and the Burgess Shale provide a more Natural Resources of the Russian Federation has
limited Cambrian record in terms of the total number of already included LPNP in the list of the Special
taxa and ecosystems, and time interval. However IUCN Protected Areas to be designated as State National
notes that, if the values noted in the nomination are Nature Park by 2015. Such designation will grant to
extended as a basis for comparison, sites such as the LPNP the Federal level of protection. As this level of
exceptional preservation of the early Ediacaran fauna in federal protection is not yet in place, there is a need to
Australia (and elsewhere), and the very earliest marine demonstrate that the State level of legal protection is
ecosystem in the late Precambrian noted from Mistaken sufficient to protect its values fully.
Point (on the tentative list of Canada) would also rate
more highly than the LPNP area in terms of the LPNP is owned by the Sakha Republic. There are some
representation of the earliest phase of the evolution of land parcels traditionally used by Evenki indigenous
complex life in the fossil record. people. The boundaries of the land are well known and
their validity is respected by the park administration.
IUCN notes that the World Heritage List is “not intended Limited traditional use of the land includes hay-making
to ensure the protection of all properties of great interest, and hunting. Co-existence of traditional rights and use,
importance or value, but only for a select list of the most and legal land ownership appears to be appropriately
outstanding of these from an international viewpoint” considered.
(Operational Guidelines, paragraph 52). IUCN concludes
that the fossil values of the LPNP area do not reach the LPNP possesses the status of a non-profit legal entity
threshold required to be regarded as being of and established in the form of state-operated nature
Outstanding Universal Value. As noted below, not all of conservation institution and financed by the state
the key fossil sites in the immediate region are included budgetary funds from the Sakha Republic. Legal
in the property, and the boundaries of the property also instruments for the protection of the property are
do not respond to the sites that are of geological determined by the regulations of the Nature Park
significance; thus superimposed on this judgement is a (referred as the “Statute of the State Enterprise Lena
question regarding integrity. Pillars Nature Park” 2006 in the Annex B5 of the
nomination document) confirmed by the Government of
To summarise, IUCN notes that the information available the Sakha Republic. The territory of the nature park is
to assess the nomination has been significantly zoned and includes areas termed reserved zone, sacred
enhanced in the present nomination, in relation to the places, restricted and active recreational zones,
earlier proposal. Nevertheless the application of the traditional nature management zone and zone of
natural criteria remains complex and finely balanced. breeding for rare and extinct animals.
IUCN has taken into account the Committee’s previous
application of criteria (vii) and (viii), including in the most IUCN considers the protection status of the nominated
recent inscriptions. On balance it does appear that the property could be strengthened, but appears to meet the
combination of internationally significant values for requirements set out in the Operational Guidelines.
geomorphology (the exceptional representation of
cryogenically generated pillars), which are supported by 4.2 Boundaries
the geological values (the important Cambrian record,
significantly complementing the most exceptional sites The boundaries of the nominated property are clearly
from that period) in the LPNP region provides the defined. The nominated property has been put forward
potential for a revised nomination to be considered without a formal buffer zone and aligns with the
under criterion (viii) and possibly criterion (vii). However, boundary of LPNP, but excluding a component of LPNP
as noted below, integrity considerations undermine the at Sinyaya, which was part of the previous nomination
present basis to consider inscription under either and which contains an important range of pillar
criterion. landforms.
IUCN has a range of concerns regarding the adopted
boundaries of the property. Firstly in relation to the pillars
32 IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park
on the Lena River, it is noted that the main values are environmental education and recreation. The document
located relatively close to the river and the majority of is adequately guiding the management of the nominated
the nominated property does not include these features. property.
Importantly the process that defines the pillars certainly
includes the Lena River. The integrity of the pillars The plan defines the sources of financing, which are
depends on maintaining active fluvial scour at their base, mainly from the regional budget with a minor contribution
active scree-producing cryogenic processes on slopes, from self-generated revenue. The total annual budget of
and availability of carbonate rock for incision on the the park (c. USD524,000) appears to be adequate to
plateau immediately behind the pillars. From the point of conduct nature conservation, patrolling and monitoring
view of the protection of the pillars, the existing National activities. However, it was noted during the IUCN
Park boundaries include a great deal of land behind the evaluation that the budget needs to be increased to
pillars, inland of the river, which is more than enough to manage tourism use and to improve associated tourism
conserve that element of the pillar process. However, it infrastructure. As noted below the tourism management
appears necessary to either include the key sections of framework of the property also is not yet adequate.
the Lena River in a buffer zone, or within the site itself, to
ensure that the key values of the pillars would be LPNP has a personnel of c.40 including state
protected and managed. More fundamentally IUCN environmental inspectors, education and tourism
recalls that from the first evaluation, and also in the view specialists, and a range of administration and support
of reviewers, some of the best pillar landforms of the staff. Detailed information on staffing was provided in
region are those of the Sinyaya area. Since these have supplementary information provided to IUCN. There is a
been excluded in the revised nomination, a major loss in specific need to provide suitably qualified and
the values put forward has resulted. The IUCN World experienced staff to manage the earth science values
Heritage Panel noted that whilst the science that are the basis for the nomination, and it is
underpinning the nomination has been both improved recommended a geomorphologist and geological
and much better presented since the previous specialist be appointed.
nomination, the values of the revised nomination are
significantly less than the original proposal, in terms of Local schools are actively involved in environmental
what is actually being nominated. education programs. A modern visitor centre has been
built in the territory of the park with financial assistance
Similarly in relation to the fossil sites, IUCN notes that from the Regional Investment Fund.
several of the key localities are on the left bank of the
Lena River outside of the property, and do not appear to Since LPNP has been nominated for its geological
have specific legislative or management protection. values it would be appropriate to develop geological
IUCN considers that they should be considered for monitoring indicators as currently all monitoring
inclusion in the property. indicators as described in the management plan are
focused on biodiversity.
In relation to aesthetic values and the overall
comprehension of the property, it is also noted that the IUCN considers the management of the nominated
key features of the Lena Pillars would primarily be property does not fully meet the requirements set out in
appreciated and comprehended from the river, and thus the Operational Guidelines, and requires strengthening
the river is an intrinsic part of these values of the in a number of areas.
property. This also argues strongly for the inclusion of
the adjoining river to the property within its boundary, or 4.4 Threats
the establishment of buffer arrangements.
Tourism
Finally IUCN notes that the nominated property includes Tourism in LPNP has been gradually increasing over the
large areas that neither display pillar landforms, nor key past five years. LPNP is widely advertised as a tourism
geological exposures, and these would not therefore brand of the Sakha Republic and the Government is
appear to be appropriate for inclusion in the property. promoting tourism. At present an upper limit of 23,000
person visits per year has been established for the
IUCN considers that the boundaries of the nominated nominated property based on its carrying capacity.
property do not meet the requirements set out in the LPNP is collaborating with local traditional communities
Operational Guidelines. in the organization of tourism activities. Local people are
working as tour guides and offering their service in
4.3 Management providing transportation for tourists, selling traditional
handicrafts and regional food products.
There is a management plan for the nominated property
covering the period of 2008-2012. This plan was However, a long-term strategy needs to be developed
developed in accordance with the Direction of the that would balance the increasing trend in tourism in one
Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation. hand whilst respecting the capacity of the area, and
It identifies primary goals of the park and proposes realizing benefits to local communities.
activities on protection, scientific research,
IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012 33Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park
The previous IUCN technical evaluation had peoples of the area. The property preserves
recommended that an ecotourism master plan be archaeological remains, and displays petroglyphs that
developed which “maintains low-key tourist operations”; testify to the long standing human association with the
provides direct and adequate financial contributions from property.
tourism to the conservation activities; and involves
relevant local authorities and other major stakeholders. 5.2 “Upstream process” regarding early advice
Furthermore, it is essential to develop tourism concepts on potential nominations
with participation of major stakeholders that include the
LPNP administration, tour operators, local communities IUCN engaged in providing advice and support to the
and others. State Party, at its request since the original nomination.
An expert advisory mission was undertaken by a
The State Party provided in its supplementary member of IUCN’s World Commission on Protected
information “The Program of Environmental Tourism Areas to the site, and a visit by elected officials and staff
Development in the Lena Pillars NP for the period 2012 of the Sakha Republic was hosted at IUCN
– 2016. Whilst outlining some useful principles, the Headquarters. IUCN considers that this process has
document is extremely brief and contains no operational enabled both a range of points to be addressed to
details including programme, staff or resources. Thus at strengthen the nomination, and a much better
the present time this aspect of the management appreciation of the values of the nominated area to be
framework does not appear to be adequate. obtained by IUCN leading to the recognition of potential
in this area to demonstrate Outstanding Universal Value
Agriculture and hunting following consideration by the IUCN World Heritage
Traditional use activities are carried out within the area Panel. Nevertheless there appear to have been a
of the Park and include licensed sable hunting, horse number of key requirements that have not yet been
breeding in the Buotama River mouth, deer farming and addressed, and thus the process undertaken has not yet
haymaking. 884,000 ha of land or about 60% of area of achieved the desired result of a nomination that can be
the Park are assigned to six Evenki ancestral farms that recommended for inscription. IUCN is keen to both
raise deers and horses and use the area for fishing and reflect with the State Party on lessons learned, and is
hunting. Such activities are carefully managed, and do also willing, on the basis of the present revised
not appear to create major environmental impacts. evaluation to work closely with the State Party to seek to
redefine a nomination that would meet the Operational
Fire management Guidelines.
LPNP cooperates with the Yakut Territorial Committee
for Environmental Protection and Special Poaching IUCN also notes that it took the step with the present
Inspection Unit in carrying out law enforcement nomination, on an experimental basis, to communicate
measures. During the summer time the Yakutia Aircraft its concerns on the viability of the nomination during the
Fire Extinguishing Brigade executes fire management evaluation process, and to invite the State Party to
activities according to the agreement between the two engage in early dialogue regarding the nomination
organizations. In addition, LPNP is working with the before the Committee takes place. This follows the
th
Khangalassky Forestry Unit on forest fire prevention. specific requests of the 35 Session of the World
The capacity of the park on fire control and suppression Heritage Committee to strengthen communication in the
needs to be further strengthened. evaluation process. The results of that process will be
th
reported at the 36 Session Committee, for discussion.
Pollution threats
There is a major oil pipeline that crosses the Lena River
800 km upstream of the property. There are some risks 6. APPLICATION OF CRITERIA
of oil spillage and cracking of pipes in the winter. There
is a need for the LPNP administration to regularly Lena Pillars Nature Park has been nominated under
monitor the impact that might be caused by the pipeline natural criteria (vii) and (viii).
operations.
Criterion (vii): Superlative natural phenomena or
In summary, IUCN considers the nominated property natural beauty and aesthetic importance
does not meet the conditions of integrity as outlined in The pillar landforms along the Lena River within the
the Operational Guidelines. nominated property are spectacular natural phenomena,
but there are equally spectacular pillar areas elsewhere
in the region of the property, notably at Sinyaya, and
5. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS also elsewhere in the world. Comparative analysis does
not yet provide a compelling argument for the application
5.1 Associated cultural values of this criterion to the features of the LPNP areas. The
property’s boundaries also do not encompass the areas
IUCN notes the long standing associated cultural values that allow the appreciation of the main pillar areas on the
and human use of the property as significant, and the Lena River. Large areas of the nominated property do
ongoing commitment to conservation from the traditional not include attributes relevant to the application of this
34 IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park
criterion. There may be potential for a revised the region, including any key areas not within the
nomination in the region to make this criterion, but this Lena Pillars National Park (LPNP), and to also
requires further evaluation. consider including the Sinyaya component of LPNP,
and relevant areas of the Lena River that are
IUCN considers that the nominated property does not necessary to assure integrity within the revised
meet this criterion, but a revised nomination in the nomination, and also to exclude from the nomination
region, that also met integrity requirements, might have areas of LPNP that do not contain attributes relevant
potential to do so. to criteria (vii) and (viii);
Criterion (viii): Earth’s history and geological b) establish appropriate buffer zones to the revised
features nominated property and wider protection measures
The region around LPNP displays two features of that will ensure the protection of the river
significant international interest in relation to the earth catchments, and the appropriate management of
sciences. The large cryogenically formed pillars in the activities on the Lena River;
region are the most notable pillar landscape of their kind
known, whilst the internationally renowned and important c) provide a clear demonstration that the legal
exposures of Cambrian rocks provide a second and regime supporting a revised property and buffer
important supporting set of value, although alone they zones is effective;
are not of Outstanding Universal Value. However the site
that has been nominated does not include all of the most d) specify a full and revised strategy, and an
important attributes in the region in relation to either of operational action plan, for the management of
these values, since it excludes the significant pillar sustainable tourism within the capacity of the
landscapes at Sinyaya, the river which is a key element property, and to secure appropriate benefits to local
of the pillar forming process, and a number of the people;
associated key fossil localities. Nor does the nominated
property have adequate buffer zone arrangements. e) provide a revised long-term management plan for
Conversely, large parts of the nominated property do not the revised nominated property which includes a
contain attributes that are strongly relevant to these strong programme of awareness devoted to the
internationally significant values. aesthetics, geomorphological and geological
features, and ensures the necessary scientific skills
IUCN considers that the nominated property does not required to protect and manage these values are in
meet this criterion, but a revised nomination in the place.
region, that would meet integrity requirements, has
potential to do so. 3. Takes note of the willingness of IUCN to provide direct
advice to the State Party regarding the preparation of a
revised nomination, to meet the identified potential for a
7. RECOMMENDATIONS substantially revised proposal in this region to meet the
requirements for inscription on the World Heritage List;
IUCN recommends the World Heritage Committee adopt
the following draft decision: 4. Expresses its appreciation to the State Party, and the
State Government of the Sakha Republic, and
The World Heritage Committee, stakeholders, regarding the work that has been done to
research, present and protect the values within the Lena
1. Having examined Documents WHC-12/36.COM/8B Pillars region;
and WHC-12/36.COM/INF.8B2;
5. Further welcomes the collaborative efforts of the State
2. Defers the nomination of the Lena Pillars National Party, stakeholders and IUCN during the evaluation of
Park (Russian Federation), taking note of the potential this nomination to increase dialogue and assess
for a substantially revised nomination to meet criteria practical options toward an improved nomination, and
(vii) and (viii), in order to allow the State Party to: requests that lessons learned are appropriately
considered in the reflection on the Future of the
a) revise the boundaries of the area to conform to Convention.
the key attributes that relate to the pillar landforms
and key geological features and exposures within
IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012 35Russian Federation – Lena Pillars Nature Park Map 1: Location in the Russian Federation Map 2: Nominated property and buffer zone 36 IUCN Evaluation Report – May 2012
EUROPE / AMÉRIQUE DU NORD PARC NATUREL DES COLONNES DE LA LENA FÉDÉRATION DE RUSSIE
Fédération de Russie – Parc naturel des colonnes de la Lena
CANDIDATURE AU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL – ÉVALUATION TECHNIQUE DE L’UICN
PARC NATUREL DES COLONNES DE LA LENA (Fédération de Russie) – ID No. 1299
RECOMMANDATION DE L’UICN AU COMITÉ DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL : Différer la proposition d’inscription
Principaux paragraphes des Orientations :
Paragraphe 77 : Une proposition révisée pourrait remplir au moins l’un des critères naturels du patrimoine mondial
Paragraphe 78 : Le bien tel qu’il est proposé ne remplit pas les conditions d’intégrité ou les obligations en matière de
protection et de gestion
e
Note : Le Parc naturel des colonnes de la Lena a déjà été proposé pour examen à la 32 session du Comité du
patrimoine mondial, avec une configuration différente comprenant deux éléments en série dont l’un avait une zone
tampon désignée. L’UICN a évalué la proposition et recommandé de ne pas inscrire le bien sur la Liste du patrimoine
e
mondial. L’État partie a retiré sa proposition avant la discussion de la 32 session du Comité du patrimoine mondial de
sorte que cette proposition n’a jamais été examinée par le Comité.
1. DOCUMENTATION Perennially Frozen Carbonate Rocks of the Middle
Lena River Basin, Permafrost and periglacial
a) Date de réception de la proposition par l'UICN : 11 processes. 20, 71-78; Trofimova, E.V., (2007)
mars 2011 Particularites du developpement recent du karst
calcaire de Siberie et d’Extreme-Orient (Russie).
b) Informations complémentaires officiellement Karst and Cryokarst Sosnowiec-Wroclaw 203-209;
demandées puis fournies par l'État partie : L’UICN a Wells, R (1996) Earth's geological history: a
envoyé une lettre à l’État partie le 3 février 2012, qui ne contextual framework for assessment of World
demandait pas d’informations complémentaires mais Heritage fossil site nominations. IUCN Gland
contenait un communiqué sur le processus d’évaluation Switzerland; Zhuravlev, A. and Wood, R.A., (2008)
en cours. Par la suite, l’État partie a fourni des Geology. 36, 923-926; Zhuravlev, A. and Wood, R.A.,
informations complémentaires, le 28 février 2012. (2009) Geology. 37, 1123-1126
c) Littérature consultée (liste choisie) : Amthor, J. E. d) Consultations : 14 évaluateurs indépendants ont été
et al., (2003) Geology. 31, 431–434; Brasier, M.D. et al., consultés. Des consultations approfondies ont eu lieu
(1994) Multiple δ C excursions spanning Cambrian
13
durant la visite de l’UICN sur les lieux avec un grand
Explosion to Botomian Crisis in Siberia. Geology 22, nombre d’acteurs clés, notamment des organes
455-458; Ford, D. and Williams, P., (2007) Karst législatifs nationaux et d’État et des institutions
Hydrogeology and Geomorphology. Wiley, 562p.; publiques, des organes de gestion du site, des
Gunn, J., Ed., Encyclopidea of Caves and Karst scientifiques et des chercheurs ainsi que du personnel
Science. Fetzroy Dearborn NY 537-538; World en place dans le site, des représentants de la
Heritage Caves and Karsts – A Thematic Study (by P. communauté et des guides touristiques.
Williams). IUCN 2008 34p.; Kouchinstky, A. et al., (2001)
Geological Magazine. 138, 387-396; Russian e) Visite du bien proposé : Kyung Sik Woo et
Federation, Republic of Sakha, Mid-term Management Sarangoo Radnaaragchaa, 22-31 août 2011.
plan of the Lena Pillars Nature Park 2008-2012 (in
Russian); Russian Federation, Republic of Sakha, f) Date à laquelle l’UICN a approuvé le rapport : avril
Concept on the Development of Protected Area 2012
System in the Republic of Sakha, Resolution of
Government. 16 February 2011 (in Russian); Russian
Federation, Republic of Sakha, Law on Protected 2. RÉSUMÉ DES CARACTÉRISTIQUES
Areas of Republic of Sakha. 1 March 2011 (in NATURELLES
Russian); Russian Federation, Republic of Sakha,
Strategy for tourism development and Concept on Le bien proposé, le Parc naturel des colonnes de la
the establishment of tourism and recreational zones Lena (PNCL), se trouve au centre de la République de
in the Reoublic of Sakha, Resolution of Government. Sakha (Yakoutie) en Fédération de Russie, environ à
27 May 2009, (in Russian); Sandberg, P.A., (1983) 200 km au sud-ouest de Iakoutsk, la plus grande ville et
Nature. 305, 19-22; Spector V.B. and Spector V.V., la capitale. Le bien couvre une superficie totale de
(2009) Karst processes and Phenomena in the 1'272’150 ha.
Rapport d’évaluation de l’UICN – Mai 2012 31Fédération de Russie – Parc naturel des colonnes de la Lena
Le PNCL longe une partie du fleuve Lena et de son Le bien proposé et la zone environnante contiennent
affluent la Buotama. Il se trouve dans une région au aussi des valeurs géologiques reconnues au plan
climat continental extrême où l’amplitude annuelle des international et décrites en détail dans la proposition
températures atteint presque 100º C, d’environ -60º C en ainsi que dans les informations complémentaires
hiver à environ +40º C en été. fournies par l’État partie. La Lena et ses affluents
fournissent, au sein du bien et des zones adjacentes,
Le bien est proposé au titre des critères (vii) et (viii) et des sections naturelles de strates de l’Édiacarien
ses principales valeurs naturelles ont trait à la supérieur (Précambrien) au Cambrien moyen, d’une
géomorphologie et à la géologie. épaisseur totale de 980 à 1’370 m. Ces strates se sont
accumulées dans des milieux de type plateforme et n’ont
Le milieu géomorphologique du PNCL est dominé par pas ultérieurement été soumises à une altération soit
des processus cryogéniques (relatifs à la glace) et le sol tectonique forte, soit métamorphique. En conséquence,
est gelé jusqu’à plusieurs centaines de mètres de on peut observer des strates subhorizontales de
profondeur. Le dégel d’été ne pénètre que de quelques quelques centimètres d’épaisseur sur des dizaines de
mètres. En conséquence, même si la région repose sur kilomètres. Le relief des colonnes lui-même constitue
des centaines de mètres de roches carbonatées, le d’excellents affleurements.
développement karstique est embryonnaire. Le dossier
de proposition note que les caractéristiques karstiques Ces strates couvrent l’intervalle de temps correspondant
telles que les dolines, les grottes, les conduites à l’« explosion du Cambrien », un des phénomènes de
verticales de dissolution vadoses, les lapiés, les lacs diversification majeurs de la Terre qui a vu l’apparition
karstiques, les vallées sèches et les caractéristiques des principales formes animales modernes et fossiles.
thermokarstiques sont abondantes. L’incision pratiquée Les sections des colonnes de la Lena permettent l’étude
par la Lena et ses affluents a induit un gradient des premières étapes de l’évolution, de la diversité et de
hydraulique qui permet à l’eau souterraine de couler de la dynamique d’animaux multicellulaires. Parmi les
la surface du plateau vers les vallées voisines. quelque 2'000 genres connus du Cambrien inférieur,
environ 350 ont été décrits dans cette région. Ces
Les célèbres colonnes (atteignant environ 100 m de genres comprennent les premiers archaeocyathes
haut) qui longent les rives de la Lena sont des (éponges rigides et calcifiées), radiocyathes,
contreforts rocheux isolés les uns des autres par des coralomorphes (cnidaires primitifs à squelette),
ravines profondes et abruptes issues de la gélifraction brachiopodes et certains autres groupes d’animaux à
dirigée le long des joints intermédiaires. Les colonnes squelette minéralisé. En outre, un certain nombre de
forment une ceinture discontinue qui s’étend depuis les spécimens complets et intacts extrêmement bien
bords du fleuve le long des pentes de la vallée incisée préservés composent ledit « biote de Sinsk », un
de certains cours d’eau sur environ 150 m de large. Les élément de la succession géologique globale qui
joints qui isolent les colonnes les unes des autres ont contient plusieurs archives uniques d’espèces fossiles,
parfois été élargis par la dissolution de la roche avec notamment des cellules et des tissus mous
carbonatée. La pénétration de l’eau depuis la surface a phosphatés ainsi que leurs embryons.
facilité les processus cryogéniques (action du gel-dégel)
qui ont élargi les ravines entre les colonnes, conduisant Les valeurs géologiques les plus importantes du bien
à l’isolement de celles-ci. Les processus fluviaux ont proposé sont les récifs fossiles. Grâce à l’excellente
aussi une importance critique pour les colonnes parce préservation, la diversité élevée et les localités multiples
que les débris gélives du pied des falaises (éboulis) de faune récifale dans les colonnes de la Lena, il est
glissent le long des pentes jusqu’au fond de la vallée où possible de mener des études précises de paléoécologie
ils sont emportés par le fleuve. On ne trouve de et de dynamique des populations du premier biote
colonnes que le long des portions des pentes des métazoaire récifal. La géologie des différentes zones a
vallées où la rivière en crue peut décaper et affouiller les également permis une analyse stratigraphique précise
berges. Sans cette action fluviale, les colonnes seraient comprenant des analyses statistiques de haute précision
enfouies sous leurs propres débris cryogéniques. On sur la distribution des différents groupes à squelette.
peut observer une série d’étapes évolutionnaires dans la Cela a également permis de distinguer les premiers
formation des colonnes : de murailles dentées massives phénomènes d’extinction de masse actuellement
à des colonnes individuelles et séparées. Il y a d’autres enregistrés dans l’histoire de la Terre, connus comme
colonnes spectaculaires et complémentaires dans la les phénomènes d’extinction de Sinsk et toyonien qui
région immédiate de la Sinyaya, en dehors des limites tiennent tous deux leur nom de la région des colonnes
du bien proposé. de la Lena.
Le dossier de proposition met en valeur une autre En outre, bien que cela ne soit pas un argument utilisé
caractéristique géomorphologique connue sous le nom dans la proposition pour inscrire le bien sur la Liste du
de « tukulans ». Les tukulans sont des zones de dunes patrimoine mondial, les sédiments du Quaternaire du
de sable de haute latitude extrêmement rares, formées PNCL contiennent de riches vestiges de squelettes de
dans des sédiments de terrasses sableuses retravaillés mammouth, y compris des os suffisamment bien
recouvrant des sédiments tertiaires, le long de la Lena et préservés pour une analyse ADN. Ils protègent
de son affluent, la Vilyui. également des valeurs importantes pour la biodiversité
32 Rapport d’évaluation de l’UICN – Mai 2012Fédération de Russie – Parc naturel des colonnes de la Lena
au plan national avec la présence, en particulier, de la inclus dans la proposition alors qu’ils faisaient partie de
salamandre de Sibérie et de la grenouille de Sibérie, de la proposition précédente.
105 espèces d’oiseaux nicheurs et de 38 espèces de
mammifères. Un programme d’introduction du bison est L’UICN, dans son évaluation de 2008, notait qu’il y a des
également mentionné. lacunes importantes dans la distribution géographique
des biens karstiques du patrimoine mondial, dont la
représentation est particulièrement faible dans des
3. COMPARAISONS AVEC D'AUTRES SITES régions comme l’Asie du Nord. Elle notait aussi qu’il y a
des lacunes importantes dans la distribution
L’examen des valeurs du PNCL a été grandement environnementale naturelle des biens karstiques du
facilité par cette nouvelle proposition ainsi que par les patrimoine mondial avec une représentation relativement
discussions et activités consultatives qui ont eu lieu faible des milieux arides, semi-arides et périglaciaires.
depuis la soumission précédente (voir section 5).
On trouve de vastes affleurements de roches
Dans son évaluation précédente (2008), l’UICN notait carbonatées présentant des caractéristiques karstiques
que l’on trouve des paysages de colonnes rocheuses dans les zones de permafrost de Fédération de Russie
impressionnants dans beaucoup d’autres régions du et du Canada. Certaines de ces régions étaient glacées
monde et que plusieurs d’entre eux figurent déjà sur la au Pléistocène et d’autres ne l’étaient pas car les
Liste du patrimoine mondial. On peut citer notamment conditions étaient trop sèches même s’il faisait
Wulingyuan (Chine), Tsingy de Bemaraha suffisamment froid. La région de Sibérie où se trouvent
(Madagascar), le Karst de Chine du Sud (Shilin, Chine), les colonnes de la Lena et le Bien du patrimoine mondial
Danxia de Chine (Chine) inscrit par la suite et d’autres du Parc national Nahanni, au Canada, sont des
régions spectaculaires qui ne sont pas sur la Liste du exemples de régions de permafrost qui n’ont pas été
partrimoine mondial comme le Parc national Arches et le glacées lors de la dernière grande glaciation. Compte
Parc national de Bryce Canyon (tous deux aux États- tenu du développement embryonnaire du karst, aucune
Unis d’Amérique), et Nambung (Australie). caractéristique du bien proposé ne peut prétendre à
l’importance géomorphologique du karst que l’on trouve
Les évaluateurs ont noté que le phénomène des dans le Parc national Nahanni au Canada. En
principales colonnes du PNCL ne doit pas être considéré conséquence, bien que les formes karstiques décrites et
comme principalement karstique mais plutôt comme illustrées dans le dossier de proposition soient
formé par l’association de l’érosion cryogénique et de intéressantes, leur expression est à très petite échelle et
l’action d’évacuation fluviale des débris résultants. Toute en aucun cas inhabituelle. Ce n’est donc pas une
roche jointée et litée, mécaniquement compétente, caractéristique de valeur universelle exceptionnelle.
comme par exemple les grès durs ou les quartzites,
formerait aussi des colonnes dans un tel environnement. Du point de vue des valeurs fossilifères du Cambrien, le
L’efficacité de ces processus agissant conjointement est dossier note une gamme de sites comparables,
particulièrement évidente dans la zone de la Sinyaya qui notamment au sud-est de Terre-Neuve (Canada), au
figurait dans la proposition d’origine, où les colonnes ne Maroc, en Chine, en Australie méridionale et dans
sont développées que sur la courbe extérieure des certaines régions d’Europe. Il y a des affleurements
méandres incisés où l’activité d’affouillement de la rivière majeurs de roches cambriennes dans d’autres biens du
est le plus intense. L’association des processus patrimoine mondial tels que Grand Canyon (États-Unis).
cryogéniques et fluviaux à l’origine de la formation des Mais surtout, il y a déjà sur la Liste du patrimoine
colonnes de la Lena est inhabituelle tout comme la mondial le site fossilifère des schistes de Burgess (qui
disposition des colonnes sur de nombreux kilomètres en fait partie du Bien du patrimoine mondial des Parcs des
une ceinture étroite, le long de la Lena et de quelques- montagnes Rocheuses canadiennes, au Canada, et qui
uns de ses affluents. avait été à l’origine inscrit en tant que Bien du patrimoine
mondial à part entière) qui est largement connu comme
Bien qu’il y ait de nombreux exemples de colonnes et de la référence mondiale emblématique de l’explosion du
tourelles dans le monde, la plupart se trouvent dans les Cambrien.
régions tropicales ou tempérées, tendent à être
arrondies ou sculptées régulièrement et ne doivent que On trouve d’importants récifs du Cambrien, notamment
peu de chose, voire rien, aux processus cryogéniques. au Maroc, en Australie méridionale, dans l’est du
En Yakoutie, les circonstances sont donc une Canada, dans l’ouest des États-Unis, dans certains pays
association spéciale de processus lithologiques, européens (Espagne, France, Sardaigne) et ailleurs.
d’incision fluviale et de climat froid continental. Ces Toutefois, dans toutes les zones pertinentes, les strates
facteurs ont agi de concert pour produire un paysage du Cambrien inférieur ne contiennent pas de récifs et
visuellement spectaculaire et géomorphologiquement sont essentiellement dénudées. D’autres régions de la
très inhabituel que la majorité des évaluateurs plateforme sibérienne fournissent aussi des archives
considèrent comme méritant d’être reconnu pour sa riches de squelettes fossilisés à travers tout l’intervalle
valeur universelle exceptionnelle. Toutefois, certains des du Cambrien inférieur mais leurs assemblages
meilleurs exemples de ce phénomène se trouvent dans fossilifères sont plus pauvres que ceux de la région du
la région du PNCL, sur la rivière Sinyaya, et ne sont pas PNCL et de ses alentours.
Rapport d’évaluation de l’UICN – Mai 2012 33Vous pouvez aussi lire
