Keoladeo National Park

• Decline in the population of Siberian cranes (issue resolved)
• Inadequate water supply and competition for water with neighbouring communities;
• Poor water (quality and quantity) management;
• Invasive species (Prosopis, Eichhornia, Paspalum)(already an issue in the past) 

Total amount provided to the property: USD 80,000 (Enhancing our Heritage project on management effectiveness assessment)

The report submitted by the State Party on 29 January 2008 was reviewed by the joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN mission that visited the property from 10 to 14 March 2008.  The full mission report can be consulted at: https://whc.unesco.org/archive/2008.  Current conservation issues include:

a) Threats to the water supply

The State Party advised the mission that the desirable annual inflow of water was 550 rather than 350 million cubic feet (MCft), as suggested during previous reports. The water availability in the property has worsened since 2005, due to the contrast between the good monsoon in 2005 which allowed adequate amounts of water to be released into the property, and the essential failure of the monsoons of 2006 and 2007 in the catchment areas that have historically fed the property.  As a result, there had been little or no supply of water to feed wetland habitats in the property during 2006 and 2007, resulting in low numbers of both breeding and wintering water birds; furthermore, these dry conditions were conducive for the continued invasion of the property by the thorny scrub Prosopis which covered 11,000 hectares (40% of the total surface area of the property) of wetland and grassland areas of the property by 2007, rendering extensive areas inaccessible for water birds and grazing mammals, and out-competing indigenous vegetation.

In a response to the drought, the Government of Rajasthan State has reportedly earmarked funds for a series of remedial measures, involving both rehabilitation of existing hydraulic structures and design of new structures which will provide new sources of water, and better protection against drought. The three main remedial measures include:

i) Chiksana Canal: The Chiksana drain (which carries floodwaters) channels water away from sensitive lands, and passes directly through the property without diverting any of the floodwaters into it, thus presenting an opportunity to provide waters to the property’s wetlands. Disabled hydraulic structures on the Chiksana drain were repaired, and a 3km side canal (Chiksana canal) extending into the property was built to channel that water directly into the property’s wetlands. The canal, along with sluice gates were built and completed in early 2008 – these are now fully operational and await the June-July monsoon to demonstrate their effectiveness. This structure would provide up to 100 MCft of suitable surface water (containing fish and rich in nutrients) to the property during a normal monsoon.

ii) Piping water from the Govardhan Drain to the property: The large Govardhan drain passes 15 km from the property and was built to divert the Yamuna river floodwaters away from populated areas. Its floodwaters are generated from rains falling in huge catchment area and thus less susceptible to irregular rainfall patterns affecting supply from the Chiksana Canal. A diversion of water from this Drain will provide up to 350 MCft to the property in a monsoon season with average rainfall. The mission team was informed that budgets had been earmarked, and contractors selected to begin the engineering work on the diversion soon after the mission.  These waters would also be rich in nutrients. According to statements by senior state government officials, the diversion was planned to become operational in time for the 2008 monsoon (end of June).

iii) The Dholpur-Bharatpur drinking water supply project: scheduled to be completed in 2009, this project will divert Chambal river water to Bharatpur for domestic purposes, with a proportion legally earmarked for diversion into the property (310 MCft for the first four years, then 62.5 MCft per annum). This water will not contain essential nutrients or aquatic organisms; however it could be mixed with other sources of water to provide suitable supplies for the property.

b) Invasive Species

The threat from invasive Prosopis scrub is being managed by funding local villagers, to remove trees and to use the timber for personal consumption (firewood and fence posts). The work involved is significant and is carefully supervised, ensuring that the entire root systems of the trees are also removed, preventing regeneration through coppicing. A regular flooding of the property in the 2008 monsoon season would guarantee the destruction of any seedlings and the seed-bank in the flooded area, as these do not tolerate water very well. However, a permanent control programme will be required to keep Prosopis from re-invading the property. The programme has also had the additional benefit of improving relations – often strained in the past - between the administration of the property and local villages. Some feral domestic cattle still graze in the property, but this issue is currently adequately managed.

In addition to Prosopis, Eichornia (a water hyacinth) is widespread in the property, and brought annually into the property by floodwaters. Water hyacinth impedes water flow, out competes native plants, and causes oxygen shortages and hence fish deaths. Anecdotal evidence points to water buffalo, previously permitted in the park, as being good control agents for this plant. There is currently no control programme in place to deal with the water hyacinth.

Lack of water and the invasive species have affected the original bird diversity. The flagship Siberian Crane, to which the property is closely identified, has not been reported since 2002, after several years of dwindling numbers. Despite several requests for bird monitoring data neither the mission team, nor the World Heritage Centre, has received information on the current bird biodiversity and abundance. Given the very poor conditions over recent years, and the lack of information on actual bird numbers and bird diversity, there is serious concern that the property’s outstanding universal value may have been compromised, raising the likelihood that the property may be a candidate for inscription onto the List of World Heritage in Danger.

In an effort to provide insurance against exclusive reliance of migratory birds on the property for the provision of nesting and wintering habitat, an effort has been made though the Enhancing our Heritage project (implemented through the World Heritage Centre, with the support of the University of Queensland, IUCN WCPA and the Wildlife Institute of India) to identify satellite wetlands within a radius of 30-40 km of the property. These wetlands have been inventoried, and plans to enhance their effectiveness as bird habitat are being developed. Providing a range of nesting and wintering sites for the birds will increase the overall resilience of their populations to temporary climatic or water regime fluctuations.

The mission considers that the two most urgent threats to the integrity of the property are the deficit in water supplies, and the problem of invasive plant species. Its principal recommendations therefore address these topics: the first recommendation emphasizes the importance of water supply, commends the State Party and the Rajasthan authorities for planning and funding the water supply projects and requests them to inform the World Heritage Committee of progress – particularly in time for these to be considered by the World Heritage Committee at its 32nd session; the second recommendation recognises the important effort in controlling Prosopis and calls on the relevant authorities to maintain this control in the future, and also to control invasive water plants such as Eichornia or Paspalum which may occur with the restoration of water supplies.

The mission welcomes the increasingly close relations between the KNP authorities and the local communities, as manifested by the establishment of ecodevelopment committees and by their participation in Prosopis control programmes. The mission also draws attention to the continuing influx of tourists and suggests that further investment on park infrastructure and tourism management is necessary, while suggesting a linkage in marketing between this natural World Heritage property and neighbouring cultural properties such as the Taj Mahal.

The mission team emphasises the critical on-going lack of quantitative information on the diversity and abundance of birdlife in this property inscribed onto the List of World Heritage precisely for this reason. The mission team recommends that this gap be urgently addressed.