This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS QUITO 001799 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV EAID ECON EFIS ETRD PGOV AORC EC UN
SUBJECT:  BOTH CONCERN AND INDIFFERENCE GREET UNESCO'S 
GALAPAGOS DECISION 
 
REF: QUITO 853 
 
¶1.  Summary.  Meeting in Durban, South Africa in July, 
UNESCO's World Heritage Committee addressed deteriorating 
conservation efforts in the Galapagos National Park and 
Marine Reserve.  Regretting the lack of attention given to 
the Galapagos by the GOE, the Committee called for United 
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 
(UNESCO) and the International Union for the Conservation of 
Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) to evaluate the Park and 
Marine Reserve for inclusion on the list of World Heritage 
sites in danger.  While the GOE appeared genuinely concerned 
that UNESCO was considering identifying the Galapagos as "in 
danger," indifference marked the response of islanders and 
members of the tourism, fishing, and scientific sectors. 
End summary. 
 
UNESCO Takes GOE to Task 
------------------------ 
 
¶2.  Reflecting UNESCO's growing concern regarding the 
environmental stability of the Galapagos, the World Heritage 
Committee addressed the status of the Galapagos Islands 
Heritage Site during its 29th session held July 11-17, in 
Durban, South Africa.  The review of the Galapagos at the 
meeting followed an April 2005 visit to the Galapagos by the 
Director of UNESCO's World Heritage Center, who at that time 
decided to recommend a technical assessment (reftel).  The 
main Committee decision in Durban was to send a joint 
mission of UNESCO and IUCN to examine the state of 
conservation in the Galapagos and to advise whether 
conditions in the Galapagos warrant their inclusion on the 
List of World Heritage in Danger.  The Committee had strong 
language for the GOE, formally noting its regret that the 
GOE had not submitted a report due February 1, 2005 that had 
been requested by the Committee at its 28th session last 
year.  This report, which was to outline the GOE's plan to 
manage migration to and illegal fishing in the islands, has 
now been tagged with a February 1, 2006 deadline. 
 
GOE Concerned - But Not the Islanders 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶3. In a meeting with econoff, Vice Minister of Environment 
Alfredo Carrasco appeared genuinely concerned about the 
outcome of the Durban meetings.  While he acknowledged that 
marine conservation was lacking in some areas, he expressed 
frustration that UNESCO did not focus on the success that 
has been achieved in terrestrial conservation, noting that 
the GOE would be more amenable to supporting a joint 
UNESCO/IUCN review of the site if it were to include a 
terrestrial review as well.  In a Galapagos Donors meeting 
chaired by Minister of Environment Anita Alban, the GOE re- 
emphasized their concern regarding the Galapagos, noting 
their commitment to conserving the Galapagos.  To show its 
commitment, the GOE pledged to complete the required report 
ahead of schedule, with a tentative date set for October 
¶2005. 
 
¶4.   However, in econoff's July 23-28 meetings with fishing 
cooperatives, women's groups, Park officials, scientists, 
non-governmental organizations, and tourism sector 
officials, no one mentioned the UNESCO decision as an issue 
of concern.  When econoff raised the issue, the tenor of 
their responses ranged from indifference to inquiries about 
what government officials in Quito were doing about the 
matter. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶5.  The contrast between GOE concern and local indifference 
helps to illustrate the Galapagos conservation conundrum. 
For the GOE, UNESCO's decision to press forward with the "in 
danger" issue is considered a sanction or black mark within 
the international community and a claim that the GOE lacks 
the responsibility to conserve the Galapagos, hence the 
GOE's concern.  Meanwhile, the islanders simply want to go 
about their business without caring much about how they are 
viewed by the world at large.  The strong reaction from 
UNESCO will help focus GOE attention on the Galapagos. 
However, much more will be needed beyond this reprimand to 
fully address the variety of competing interests and the 
lack of government leadership if we are to preserve this 
World Heritage site. 
 
Memmott