Gough and Inaccessible Islands
Country
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK)
Inscribed in
1995
Criteria
(vii)
(x)
The conservation outlook for this site has been assessed as "significant concern" in the latest assessment cycle. Explore the Conservation Outlook Assessment for the site below. You have the option to access the summary, or the detailed assessment.
The site, located in the south Atlantic, is one of the least-disrupted island and marine ecosystems in the cool temperate zone. The spectacular cliffs of Gough and Inaccessible Islands, towering above the ocean, are free of introduced mammals and home to one of the world’s largest colonies of sea birds. Gough Island is home to two endemic species of land birds, the gallinule and the Gough rowettie, as well as to 12 endemic species of plants, while Inaccessible Island boasts two birds, eight plants and at least 10 invertebrates endemic to the island. © UNESCO
Summary
2025 Conservation Outlook
Finalised on
11 أكتوبر 2025
Significant concern
Current state and trend of VALUES
High Concern
Overall THREATS
Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT
Full assessment
Description of values
Seabird populations
Criterion
(x)
The Tristan da Cunha islands, which encompass both Gough and Inaccessible Islands support breeding populations of 25 seabird species and two pinnipeds (Ryan, 2007). Gough Island has been described as perhaps the most important seabird colony in the world and a marine hotspot for several seabird species (Requena et al., 2020; Bourne, 1981). 50 seabird species have been recorded, including 22 breeding species numbering 8 million breeding pairs. Several of these are endemic to Gough or the Tristan group of islands (Ryan, 2007). These include two globally Critically Endangered species (Tristan Albatross (Diomedea dabbenena) and MacGillivray’s Prion (Pachyptila macgillivrayi)), four Endangered species (Northern Rockhopper Penguin (Eudyptes moseleyi), Sooty Albatross (Phoebetria fusca), Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross (Thalassarche chlororhynchos), and Atlantic Petrel (Pterodroma incerta)) (BirdLife International, 2012a; Ryan et al., 2014; McClelland et al., 2016). The Tristan albatross breeds almost exclusively on Gough Island (Oppel et al., 2022), as does the vast majority of the global population of MacGillivray's Prion (Jones et al., 2021). Inaccessible Island has 29 species of seabirds, 16 of which are breeding, including 1.5 – 2 million pairs of Great Shearwater (Ardenna gravis) and the endemic yet globally Vulnerable Spectacled Petrel (Procellaria conspicillata). Both Islands are Important Bird Areas and Key Biodiversity Areas, partly because of their seabird colonies and Gough Island is also an Alliance for Zero Extinction site (AZE, 2012).
Autochthonous terrestrial fauna
Criterion
(x)
Both islands have important endemic and globally threatened terrestrial avifauna and invertebrate fauna, while autochthonous terrestrial mammals, reptiles, or amphibians are absent (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Gough Island is home to the endemic and globally threatened Gough Moorhen (Gallinula comeri) and Gough Bunting (Rowettia goughensis). Inaccessible Island has the endemic Inaccessible Rail (Atlantisia rogersi) (Vulnerable) and the endemic Inaccessible Bunting (Neospiza acunhae) (Vulnerable). Both islands are Important Bird Areas and Key Biodiversity Areas, partly because of their land bird populations, (BirdLife International, 2012c). Gough Island is also an Alliance for Zero Extinction site (AZE, 2012). Both Islands also have a species-poor but endemism-rich invertebrate fauna, with about 100 species recorded from Gough and 22 of them endemic to the island or the Tristan archipelago. Inaccessible island has at least 10 endemic invertebrate species (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Autochthonous flora
Criterion
(x)
The autochthonous flora of the islands is species poor but rich in endemics. There are 26 species of flowering plants (21 endemic to the Tristan group) and 27 species of ferns (15 endemic to the Tristan group) on Gough Island, with an additional rich but poorly studied flora of mosses, and lichens. Inaccessible Island has 213 plant species in total, 10 being restricted to the island and 60 to the archipelago. Vegetation on both islands shows a marked altitudinal zonation (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). At least 130 species of moss have been recorded from the Tristan da Cunha archipelago, 59 of which are endemic (Ochyra and Plasek, 2020) including the globally Endangered Phylica arborea which is found only on the Tristan da Cunha islands and French Southern Territories of Amsterdam & St Paul Islands (Rivers et al., 2021). Another study summarised the bryophyte species on the archipelago as 305 species with 86 endemics (Costa and Sérgio, 2023).
Although the islands probably qualify as Important Plant Areas, they have not been assessed for IPA status yet (PlantLife, 2012).
Although the islands probably qualify as Important Plant Areas, they have not been assessed for IPA status yet (PlantLife, 2012).
Marine plants, mammals, fish and invertebrates
Criterion
(x)
There is a rich coastal marine fauna on and around the islands, including the world’s largest breeding population of Sub-Antarctic Fur Seal Arctocephalus tropicalis (300,000) and ca. 50-100 Southern Elephant Seal Mirounga leonina on Gough Island, as well as several cetacean species including Southern Right Whale Eubalaena australis, Dusky Dolphin Lagenorhynchus obscurus and Humpback Whales Megaptera novaeangliae in coastal waters around both islands (Bester et al., 2006). Most notable and frequently encountered cetaceans are the rare and little known Shepherds Beaked Whale which is resident within the deep canyons and shallow waters, depending on season around Inaccessible. Tristans waters including those around Inaccessible and Gough are also one of, if not the first, identified Blue Shark pupping areas in the Atlantic Ocean and the waters around this World Heritage site should be considered an important area for sharks due to the assemblage that occurs and its importance to this species (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
There is also a typical South Atlantic marine flora, ichthyofauna (ca. 20 species around Gough and 40 species around Inaccessible islands) and invertebrate fauna (ca. 80 species around Gough and 250 species around Inaccessible islands), including the economically important Tristan Rock Lobster Jasus tristani (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Dive surveys have indicated 104 shallow water invertebrate species around the northern island of the Tristan da Cunha archipelago and 131 species at Gough (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
There is also a typical South Atlantic marine flora, ichthyofauna (ca. 20 species around Gough and 40 species around Inaccessible islands) and invertebrate fauna (ca. 80 species around Gough and 250 species around Inaccessible islands), including the economically important Tristan Rock Lobster Jasus tristani (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Dive surveys have indicated 104 shallow water invertebrate species around the northern island of the Tristan da Cunha archipelago and 131 species at Gough (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
Island ecosystems of exceptional natural beauty
Criterion
(vii)
Gough and Inaccessible islands are among the least disrupted cool temperate island ecosystems in the world and comprise landscapes and natural phenomena (particularly seabird colonies) of superlative dimensions and exceptional natural beauty (IUCN, 1995; World Heritage Committee, 1995, 2004; UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Assessment information
The values of the site under World Heritage criterion x, and as a consequence also under World Heritage criterion vii, are currently acutely threatened by invasive species, particularly predatory house mice on Gough Island and scale insects on Inaccessible Island. In addition, there are threats from other invasive species, shipping pollution, and from fishing operations throughout the South Atlantic Ocean. Management measures are being implemented to reduce these threats, however, have only shown limited success, and the most recent mouse eradication programme on Gough Island regrettably failed and led to the collapse of an endemic native bird species (Gough moorhen). In addition, there is evidence that macro- and microplastic pollution is increasing with direct and indirect effects on the site's values. Pollution from shipping and poorly-managed long-line fishing represent additional important threats to the islands' ecosystem and fauna.
Fishing, Harvesting & Controlling Aquatic Species
(Unsustainable fisheries)
Outside site
Unlicensed fishing and illegal use of driftnets around the reserve has been reported (Pearce, 1999), but the threat originating from these practices is now not as serious as that of long-line fishing throughout the Southern Ocean (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Furthermore, with the expansion of the marine protection zone in the Tristan da Cunha EEZ, fishing areas have been greatly reduced and controls have been enhanced. Nevertheless, ocean wandering species that these sites are important for (e.g. Tristan Albatross) do not recognise the boundaries of MPA’s and continue to be caught as “by catch” on the South Atlantic Ocean due to inadequate mitigation measures and observer rates within off shore fleets. This pressure is growing as more fleets fish, both regulated and unregulated in the Southern Blue Fin Tuna fleet for example (IUCN Consultation, 2025), posing a high threat to seabird populations.
Fishing, Harvesting & Controlling Aquatic Species
(Long-line fishing)
Outside site
Mortality from accidental by-catch by long-line fishing is a major global threat for most albatross and many petrel species (Anderson et al., 2011), including for at least six of the species contributing to the values of the site (UNEP-WCMC, 2011; Wanless et al., 2009). This remains a high threat as long as available best practice mitigation devices and techniques are not enforced effectively (Anderson et al., 2011; Kroodsma et al. 2023), applied more widely and enhanced. Tracking data of seabirds revealed that they forage at seamounts in the Tristan da Cunha EEZ, the Patagonian Shelf and the waters off South Africa, which are also target areas for fisheries and therefore increase the risk of interaction (Requena et al., 2020; Dias et al., 2017; Bentley et al., 2024). As part of the licence conditions for longline fishing, several technical mitigation measures to reduce interactions during fishing operations, such as line weightings and night setting, are required while fishing within the EEZ (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021) - however, many species forage outside of the EEZ and are exposed to poorly regulated fisheries in the high seas (Dias et al., 2017). There is some indication that survival of albatrosses at sea may have improved slightly, but longer timeseries of mark-recapture data are required to understand how much juvenile survival at sea has changed since bycatch mitigation measures were implemented in key fisheries (Oppel et al., 2022; da Rocha et al., 2021).
Water-borne & other effluent Pollution, Air-borne Pollutants
(Oil, chemical and light pollution)
Inside site
, Extent of threat not known
Outside site
While the likelihood of trans-oceanic shipping collisions is not high, the associated pollution in the form of oil, fuel and cargo spillage has the potential to cause a significant impact on the site’s marine environment. The remoteness and meteorological conditions pose significant challenges to any response to any incidents and possible resulting pollution. The economic reliance of the local community on the fisheries and high environmental sensitivity means this is a high-risk region for hazards from international shipping (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). The MS Oliva shipping accident at Nightingale Island, approximately 20 km from Inaccessible Island and 395 km from Gough Island, in March 2011, resulted in significant damage to wildlife at Nightingale Island and probably some damage to the values of Inaccessible Island (Cuthbert, 2013; Ruoppolo et al., 2013), e.g. by oiling of Northern Rockhopper Penguins, and demonstrates the potential impacts of future accidents at the site.
In October 2020, the MV GeoSearcher (the certified rock lobster fishing vessel) sank off the NW coast of Gough Island, but due to the inaccessibility of the site, the consequences to wildlife and the site's values could not be ascertained.
Chronic pollution from a busy shipping line north of the islands remains a persistent threat. Other less visible pollution has manifested itself as an increase in the mercury content in seabird feathers at Gough Island over 25 years (Becker et al., 2016). Another potential impact on seabirds is light pollution from ships. For example, petrels have been found to become disoriented by artificial lights (Ryan et al., 2021).
In October 2020, the MV GeoSearcher (the certified rock lobster fishing vessel) sank off the NW coast of Gough Island, but due to the inaccessibility of the site, the consequences to wildlife and the site's values could not be ascertained.
Chronic pollution from a busy shipping line north of the islands remains a persistent threat. Other less visible pollution has manifested itself as an increase in the mercury content in seabird feathers at Gough Island over 25 years (Becker et al., 2016). Another potential impact on seabirds is light pollution from ships. For example, petrels have been found to become disoriented by artificial lights (Ryan et al., 2021).
Fishing, Harvesting & Controlling Aquatic Species
(Illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing)
Outside site
IUU fishing, including long-lines, gillnets, and trawls, have the potential to cause significant reductions in populations, but the extent to which these affect species on Gough and Inaccessible Islands is unknown (Cuthbert et al., 2005). Ongoing satellite surveillance has shown that risks of IUU fishing are negligible for most of the year, except for the March to April peak of squid jiggers transiting through the Tristan da Cunha EEZ on route to the Falkland Islands, and May through to July when the southern bluefin tuna fleet operate close to the southern boundaries of the EEZ (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). Illegal and legal fishing in the high seas poses one of the most significant threats to the birds at the site, therefore the threat remains high.
Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species
(Alien invasive species)
Invasive/problematic species
Sagina procumbens
Phormium tenax
Verbena bonariensis
Solanum tuberosum
Juncus effusus
Agrostis gigantea
Brassica rapa
Cynodon dactylon
Other invasive species names
Mus musculus
Inside site
, Throughout(>50%)
House Mice (Mus musculus): Egg and chick predation by predatory house mice, the only invasive rodent on Gough Island, threatens the populations of several terrestrial and seabirds including Tristan Albatross, Atlantic Petrel and MacGillivray's Prion (Cuthbert and Hilton, 2004; Wanless et al., 2012; Davies et al., 2015; Dilley et al., 2015; Jones et al., 2021; Oppel et al., 2022). Mice may have caused a major population decline of the endemic Gough Bunting (Ryan and Cuthbert; 2008; Jones et al., 2020b). Prior to 2021 mice predated roughly 1-3 million seabird eggs and chicks each year on Gough (Caravaggi et al., 2019). Oppel et al. (2022) estimate that the global Tristan albatross population has decreased by ~1% per year from 2004 to 2021 despite the apparent stability of the observed number of breeding pairs on its main breeding island in the South Atlantic Ocean due to the lack of recruitment caused by mouse predation of chicks. This will eventually catch up with the population once long lived adults start to be lost from the population and then the species will potentially decline rapidly (IUCN Consultation, 2025). Mice were also predating breeding adult Tristan and adult Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatrosses prior to the attempted mouse eradication in 2021 through the Gough Island Restoration Programme (Jones et al., 2019; Connan et al., 2023). The mouse eradication attempt was carried out in the austral winter of 2021, but the operation was not successful and invasive mice therefore remain on Gough Island (Samaniego et al., 2022), which significantly impacts the population of several species. The predatory behaviour of mice attacking seabird chicks has resumed within 2 years after the mouse population had recovered from the 2021 operation. Together with long-line fishing, this may lead to the extinction of MacGillivray's Prion (Jones et al. 2021) and the Tristan Albatross, one of the emblematic species of the site (Wanless et al., 2009). Mice also likely affect the invertebrate fauna of the island (Houghton et al., 2019), but research to investigate invertebrate community composition only started in 2018.
The attempt to eradicate invasive mice in 2021 inadvertently led to the collapse of the endemic Gough moorhen population. Despite a captive population being held to mitigate the mortality expected from rodent bait consumption by moorhens, the released population has not recovered following the operation and the Gough moorhen population on Gough was critically low (<20 birds) in 2025, with evidence for only a single reproductive pair. However, several thousand Gough moorhens likely exist on Tristan da Cunha, where the species was introduced in the 1950s.
Procumbent pearlwort (Sagina procumbens): accidentally introduced to Gough Island in the late 20th Century, and spread rapidly along 500m of coastline near to the Gough meteorological station (Visser et al., 2010). Continued eradication and control efforts, and monitoring for this and other invasives, including New Zealand flax (Phormium tenax) on Inaccessible, are needed to control this continuing threat (UNEP-WCMC, 2011; Ryan et al., 2012). However, the most recent SOC report states that the eradication of the procumbent pearlwort is no longer possible and a containment operation is instead being implemented (UNESCO, 2023).
Other invasive plant species: include Verbena bonariensis, Solanum tuberosum, Juncus effusus Agrostis gigantean, Brassica rapa, and Cynodon dactylon. Additionally, New Zealand flax (Phormium tenax) was introduced to Inaccessible Island in the 1930s and has invaded predominantly the northeastern region of the island (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2024). The Flax Eradication Project has been an ongoing effort facilitated by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and managed by the Tristan Conservation Department. The project is ongoing and will need further effort to be successful, although the current technique seems to be working (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Invertebrate species: The number of introduced invertebrate species (most of them having been introduced since 1950), now exceeds that of native species, at least on Gough Island (Jones et al., 2002). However, the exact extent and impact of these invasions needs to be studied further and this particular point is data deficient. On Inaccessible Island, introduced scale insects and associated sooty mould fungus have reduced Phylica fruit loads and killed trees. As a consequence of this food shortage, the population of Dunn’s Finches (N. acunhae dunnei) has declined by 50% in the last ten years (Ryan et al., 2014; Dilley et al., 2020). Visitation is minimal but strong biosecurity measures are needed. A Horizon Scanning Workshop documents the pathways and identified species that could impact the islands (Roy et al., 2019). Additionally, a biocontrol agent of the scale insect is potentially established on Inaccessible Island, as the establishment has been confirmed on the other 2 northern islands of similar conditions, however this needs to be confirmed (IUCN Consultation, 2024).
Fish species: On 7th June 2006, a decommissioned, semi-submersible petrochemical production platform was shown to be heavily fouled with species alien to Tristan. The alien silver porgy Diplodus argenteus (Sparidae), and a variable blenny (Parablennius pilicornis) have established themselves in great numbers at the Northern islands, although these have not reached Gough Island. This is a Very High Threat, as a decline in the local Klipfish (Bovichtus diacanthus) has already been reported (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
To address the threat posed by invasive species, the Conservation Department has biosecurity measures in place, along with methods to help control and remove invasive species. Additionally, information sheets have been issued to fishing vessels traveling north to south, advising them to discharge ballast water at least 100 miles from Tristan to reduce the risk of introducing invasive species such as the Porgy to Gough (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
The attempt to eradicate invasive mice in 2021 inadvertently led to the collapse of the endemic Gough moorhen population. Despite a captive population being held to mitigate the mortality expected from rodent bait consumption by moorhens, the released population has not recovered following the operation and the Gough moorhen population on Gough was critically low (<20 birds) in 2025, with evidence for only a single reproductive pair. However, several thousand Gough moorhens likely exist on Tristan da Cunha, where the species was introduced in the 1950s.
Procumbent pearlwort (Sagina procumbens): accidentally introduced to Gough Island in the late 20th Century, and spread rapidly along 500m of coastline near to the Gough meteorological station (Visser et al., 2010). Continued eradication and control efforts, and monitoring for this and other invasives, including New Zealand flax (Phormium tenax) on Inaccessible, are needed to control this continuing threat (UNEP-WCMC, 2011; Ryan et al., 2012). However, the most recent SOC report states that the eradication of the procumbent pearlwort is no longer possible and a containment operation is instead being implemented (UNESCO, 2023).
Other invasive plant species: include Verbena bonariensis, Solanum tuberosum, Juncus effusus Agrostis gigantean, Brassica rapa, and Cynodon dactylon. Additionally, New Zealand flax (Phormium tenax) was introduced to Inaccessible Island in the 1930s and has invaded predominantly the northeastern region of the island (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2024). The Flax Eradication Project has been an ongoing effort facilitated by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and managed by the Tristan Conservation Department. The project is ongoing and will need further effort to be successful, although the current technique seems to be working (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Invertebrate species: The number of introduced invertebrate species (most of them having been introduced since 1950), now exceeds that of native species, at least on Gough Island (Jones et al., 2002). However, the exact extent and impact of these invasions needs to be studied further and this particular point is data deficient. On Inaccessible Island, introduced scale insects and associated sooty mould fungus have reduced Phylica fruit loads and killed trees. As a consequence of this food shortage, the population of Dunn’s Finches (N. acunhae dunnei) has declined by 50% in the last ten years (Ryan et al., 2014; Dilley et al., 2020). Visitation is minimal but strong biosecurity measures are needed. A Horizon Scanning Workshop documents the pathways and identified species that could impact the islands (Roy et al., 2019). Additionally, a biocontrol agent of the scale insect is potentially established on Inaccessible Island, as the establishment has been confirmed on the other 2 northern islands of similar conditions, however this needs to be confirmed (IUCN Consultation, 2024).
Fish species: On 7th June 2006, a decommissioned, semi-submersible petrochemical production platform was shown to be heavily fouled with species alien to Tristan. The alien silver porgy Diplodus argenteus (Sparidae), and a variable blenny (Parablennius pilicornis) have established themselves in great numbers at the Northern islands, although these have not reached Gough Island. This is a Very High Threat, as a decline in the local Klipfish (Bovichtus diacanthus) has already been reported (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
To address the threat posed by invasive species, the Conservation Department has biosecurity measures in place, along with methods to help control and remove invasive species. Additionally, information sheets have been issued to fishing vessels traveling north to south, advising them to discharge ballast water at least 100 miles from Tristan to reduce the risk of introducing invasive species such as the Porgy to Gough (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Garbage & Solid Waste
(Macro- and microplastic pollution)
Inside site
, Extent of threat not known
Outside site
Macro- and microplastic pollution has become a threat to the marine and coastal environment of the site (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). Plastic items and particles washed up on beaches or present in water can trap, entangle, and be ingested by marine and terrestrial wildlife and cause harm or death. In 2017, a survey by National Geographic found microplastics in 15 out of 19 seawater samples taken from locations around Tristan top islands and Gough, with an average of between 0 to 2.3 pieces of microplastic found per litre (Caselle et al., 2018). Ryan et al. (2024) found that the arrival rate of plastic bottles on Inaccessible Island has doubled since 2018, though the incidence of plastic ingestion by seabirds on Inaccessible remained largely unchanged between 1989 and 2018 (Pérold et al., 2024). Plastic debris can also be a vector for the arrival of invasive species (Barnes et al., 2018). Impacts on individuals or populations, however, are not quantified, though it may impact other heritage values, as is known from other sites (e.g. Henderson Island). Recent work on Nightingale Island which will almost certainly be mirrored on Inaccessible Island showed that over 90% of all Great Shearwaters sampled had life threatening amounts of plastic within chicks and that most dead birds sampled showed that plastic was the most likely if not certain cause of death (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Several of the most serious threats that could affect the site are already a reality on Gough, but additional potential threats exist in that other, even more harmful species (e.g. rats, stoats, cats) could be accidentally introduced to Gough or Inaccessible islands. Climate change poses a potentially serious threat, but requires further study to understand potential consequences.
Changes in Physical & Chemical Regimes, Changes in Temperature Regimes
(Habitat shifting and alteration)
Inside site
, Throughout(>50%)
Outside site
Evidence of temperature increases on Gough Island since 1963, has been presented, and impacts on the distribution of species, habitats and ecosystems have been predicted (Jones et al., 2003; Caselle et al., 2018). Climate change has likely already affected southern elephant seals (Jones et al., 2020a), and could further affect fur seals (Oosthuizen et al., 2015), seabirds (Trathan et al., 2014), kelp beds (Valdez et al., 2003; Caselle et al., 2018), among other ecological communities. However, the exact extent and impact of climate change on the site needs further study.
Involvement of stakeholders and rightsholders, including indigenous peoples and local communities, in decision-making processes
There are no local populations on either island. One licensee is allowed to fish Tristan Rock Lobster in the seas around the site (UNEP-WCMC, 2011), and this fishery is MSC Certified (MSC, 2017). There are no issues with other people from Tristan da Cunha. The Tristan da Cunha Marine Management Plan was developed and in part led by the Tristanians who exercise stewardship over their environment and are dedicated to protecting the archipelago’s land and seascape. To make sure the Marine Management Plan fulfils its objectives, it will be reviewed every five years to evaluate progress and to bring in revised or new management measures where necessary. The review process will involve an Advisory Committee made up of management and governance staff from across Tristan da Cunha Government, as well as representatives from the community, relevant industries, associated stakeholders and relevant expertise. Decisions and approvals sit with the Tristan da Cunha Island Council, with the Advisory Committee providing advice, recommendations and support during the review process (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
Legal framework
Both Gough and Inaccessible Islands are designated as IUCN Category I Strict Nature Reserves, as confirmed in the Conservation of Native Organisms and Natural Habitats (Tristan da Cunha) 2006 (Government of St Helena, 2006). The legal protection is considered adequate but enforcement capacity is insufficient (particularly marine enforcement capacity) (State Party of the UK, 2006).
The Conservation of Native Organisms and Natural Habitats (Tristan da Cunha) Ordinance, 2006 gives statutory force to the general protection of the World Heritage site. In it, the Tristan Island Council declared the World Heritage site (along with all breeding colonies of the northern rockhopper penguin on the main island of Tristan da Cunha) a Nature Reserve. Strict protection is given to all native organisms, while a system of permits enables access and limited harvesting to take place by Tristan residents. The Ordinance makes it an offence to transport any native organisms between islands or to introduce any non-native organisms, but there is no capacity to enforce biosecurity. This is further supported by the Tristan da Cunha Biosecurity Ordinance 2021, which aims to remove or reduce the biosecurity threat presented by terrestrial and marine invasive non-native species, pests and diseases. The updated Biosecurity Ordinance is accompanied by the appointment of a biosecurity officer who should monitor and enforce strict biosecurity measures to inter island travel and work, along with a large investment from projects and RSPB into biosecurity infrastructure and training. This should now mean that every visit to the islands is assessed, monitored, searched and reported on and that the risk is now almost fully mitigated against as long as the checks are carried out. The Marine Protection Ordinance 2021 designated the Tristan da Cunha Marine Protection Zone and makes provisions for management and enforcement. The Tristan da Cunha Fisheries Limits Ordinance 1983 (as amended) makes provision for the control of commercial fishing activity within the Tristan da Cunha exclusive economic zone, up to 200 nm offshore from the islands.
The Conservation of Native Organisms and Natural Habitats (Tristan da Cunha) Ordinance, 2006 gives statutory force to the general protection of the World Heritage site. In it, the Tristan Island Council declared the World Heritage site (along with all breeding colonies of the northern rockhopper penguin on the main island of Tristan da Cunha) a Nature Reserve. Strict protection is given to all native organisms, while a system of permits enables access and limited harvesting to take place by Tristan residents. The Ordinance makes it an offence to transport any native organisms between islands or to introduce any non-native organisms, but there is no capacity to enforce biosecurity. This is further supported by the Tristan da Cunha Biosecurity Ordinance 2021, which aims to remove or reduce the biosecurity threat presented by terrestrial and marine invasive non-native species, pests and diseases. The updated Biosecurity Ordinance is accompanied by the appointment of a biosecurity officer who should monitor and enforce strict biosecurity measures to inter island travel and work, along with a large investment from projects and RSPB into biosecurity infrastructure and training. This should now mean that every visit to the islands is assessed, monitored, searched and reported on and that the risk is now almost fully mitigated against as long as the checks are carried out. The Marine Protection Ordinance 2021 designated the Tristan da Cunha Marine Protection Zone and makes provisions for management and enforcement. The Tristan da Cunha Fisheries Limits Ordinance 1983 (as amended) makes provision for the control of commercial fishing activity within the Tristan da Cunha exclusive economic zone, up to 200 nm offshore from the islands.
Governance arrangements
A small community of approximately 245 people resides on Tristan da Cunha. This small, remote community, led by its Island Council and local government, declared and have championed this vast MPA, having an outsized impact on marine conservation. Tristan da Cunha has received support from many partners, including the UK Blue Belt Programme, the UK Government, and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, among others. The Tristan da Cunha community and its partners are rising to this challenge by developing and implementing a programme of work focused on three core areas for MPA success: effective management, research and monitoring, and community stewardship. Alongside assistance in MPZ management from the UK Government Blue Belt Programme and the establishment of a conservation endowment fund, the RSPB, Blue Nature Alliance, and Tristan da Cunha Government are providing dedicated support for the community for the first years of the MPA. The partnership is supporting the establishment of monitoring programmes and citizen science initiatives, providing mentorship opportunities, facilitating global knowledge exchanges, strengthening the community’s cultural connection to its marine environment and enhancing the global identity of the Tristan da Cunha community as ‘Atlantic Guardians’. Providing support for the MPA that is adaptive, flexible and community led, beyond the moment of designation is essential for the longevity of the Tristan da Cunha Marine Protection Zone (Vye et al., 2024). Furthermore, the roles and responsibilities are clearly outlined in the Operational Plan for the Marine Management Plan of the Tristan da Cunha EEZ (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). Nevertheless, a legacy will have to be put in place for post Atlantic Guardians project to maintain momentum and development.
Integration into local, regional and national planning systems (including sea/landscape connectivity)
The UK Overseas Territories White Paper 2012 mentions the World Heritage Status of the site but does not demonstrate specific commitments to mainstream conservation of its values into overall government planning systems (UKOT Conservation Forum, 2011b; UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, 2012; McKie, 2012; Pierce, 1999).
Boundaries
The boundaries of the site include the 12 nm zone around the islands (World Heritage Committee, 2004) and are generally considered adequate, but marine enforcement capacity is missing (State Party of the UK, 2006) and some of the key bird species contributing to the values of the site forage far beyond the WH site's boundaries (UNEP-WCMC, 2011; Requena et al., 2020; Dias et al., 2017).
According to the current management plan, there is a single zoning strategy covering the whole WH site, with the following zones - Logistic, Tourist, Marine, Scientific Research, and Conservation (Tristan da Cunha Government and RSPB, 2016). Under the Marine Protection Strategy and in line with the Marine Management Plan, various zones have been established in the Tristan da Cunha EEZ (758,000 km2) including 91% as a Marine Protection Zone (687,000 km2), 8% as Inshore Fishing Zone (59,999 km2), 1% as Seamount Fishing Zone (11,000 km2) and 3% as Areas to be Avoided (22,000 km2) (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). These zones, if enforced sufficiently could reduce some of the threats to the OUV e.g. by reducing the impacts of international shipping (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
According to the current management plan, there is a single zoning strategy covering the whole WH site, with the following zones - Logistic, Tourist, Marine, Scientific Research, and Conservation (Tristan da Cunha Government and RSPB, 2016). Under the Marine Protection Strategy and in line with the Marine Management Plan, various zones have been established in the Tristan da Cunha EEZ (758,000 km2) including 91% as a Marine Protection Zone (687,000 km2), 8% as Inshore Fishing Zone (59,999 km2), 1% as Seamount Fishing Zone (11,000 km2) and 3% as Areas to be Avoided (22,000 km2) (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). These zones, if enforced sufficiently could reduce some of the threats to the OUV e.g. by reducing the impacts of international shipping (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
Overlapping international designations
As two Ramsar sites (No. 1868, 1869) fall within the boundaries of the World Heritage site, it is assumed that the protection of the World Heritage site applies to the Ramsar sites as well. The values being protected under both Conventions overlap and therefore the current management system is considered sufficient to also encompass the Ramsar designation. However, the degree to which the objectives of the Ramsar sites are integrated within the current management is unclear.
Implementation of World Heritage Committee decisions and recommendations
Decision 33 COM 7B.32 requested the State Party to continue invasive species eradication and monitoring activities at the site and to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2012, an updated report on the eradication programmes at the site (World Heritage Committee, 2009, UNESCO, 2009). This report was submitted in January 2012, and detailed the progress in eradication and monitoring activities to date. However, eradication efforts in response to Decision 33 COM 7B.32 appear to be insufficiently resourced (McKie, 2012). Decision 40 COM 7B.103 requested that the State Party allocate sufficient funds to eradicate house mice (Mus musculus), and provide an update to the WHC by December 2017 on the status of the procumbent pearlwort (Sagina procumbens) and house mouse eradication projects (UNESCO, 2016; World Heritage Committee, 2016). A feasibility study for the eradication of house mice from Gough Island has subsequently been conducted by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), which showed that eradication is feasible. The eradication programme was subsequently carried out in 2021.
The State Party has been further requested (Decisions 42 COM 7B.81 and 44 COM 7B.192) to 'keep the World Heritage Centre informed on the results of the mice eradication programme and on progress to avoid collateral impact on any non-target species', and 'submit the review of the effectiveness of the eradication programme for the invasive plant species, procumbent pearlwort to the World Heritage Centre' (World Heritage Committee, 2021; World Heritage Committee, 2018).
The most recent decision, 45 COM 7B.98 (World Heritage Committee, 2023), urges the State Party to carry out an independent review of the eradication programme’s failure and that this informs the development of a new phase of the programme for which funding is secured as soon as possible. The independent review was completed by 2023 (State Party of UK, 2022). Further the decision requests the State Party to conduct an analysis of the impacts of the procumbent pearlwort on endemic species of plants and associated invertebrates and to develop a long-term containment plan. The State Party has regularly submitted the requested information on the results of the mouse eradication programme and lessons learned are being communicated (e.g. Samaniego et al., 2023). For procumbent pearlwort, a containment programme is being implemented with on-land biosecurity measures in place and regular spraying with herbicide (State Party of UK, 2022).
The State Party has been further requested (Decisions 42 COM 7B.81 and 44 COM 7B.192) to 'keep the World Heritage Centre informed on the results of the mice eradication programme and on progress to avoid collateral impact on any non-target species', and 'submit the review of the effectiveness of the eradication programme for the invasive plant species, procumbent pearlwort to the World Heritage Centre' (World Heritage Committee, 2021; World Heritage Committee, 2018).
The most recent decision, 45 COM 7B.98 (World Heritage Committee, 2023), urges the State Party to carry out an independent review of the eradication programme’s failure and that this informs the development of a new phase of the programme for which funding is secured as soon as possible. The independent review was completed by 2023 (State Party of UK, 2022). Further the decision requests the State Party to conduct an analysis of the impacts of the procumbent pearlwort on endemic species of plants and associated invertebrates and to develop a long-term containment plan. The State Party has regularly submitted the requested information on the results of the mouse eradication programme and lessons learned are being communicated (e.g. Samaniego et al., 2023). For procumbent pearlwort, a containment programme is being implemented with on-land biosecurity measures in place and regular spraying with herbicide (State Party of UK, 2022).
Climate action
Although climate change related impacts are mentioned in management documents, there are no climate specific actions mentioned. Blue Belt has carried out preliminary studies on how rising sea temperatures could affect kelp forests, with the fisheries team also monitoring this with temperature loggers deployed both north and south of the archipelago (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Management plan and overall management system
Although both of the islands belonging to the site are geographically isolated and represent some of the least disturbed environments on earth (Tristan da Cunha Government and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, 2016) eradicating invasive species and limiting access and fishery resource use control represent significant management challenges. This is in part due to the isolated location and the logistical challenges (IUCN Consultation, 2024).
The 2006 Tristan da Cunha Conservation Ordinance makes provisions for the conservation of native organisms and natural habitats of Tristan da Cunha, which encompasses Gough and Inaccessible Islands (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2006). The Tristan da Cunha Fisheries Limits Ordinance 1982, as amended 1991 and 1992, limits fishing in the vicinity of the site.
A Gough and Inaccessible Islands World Heritage Site Management Plan 2015-2020 has been developed and is under implementation by the Tristan Island Council, Tristan Conservation Department and other stakeholders including NGOs, other organizations and individuals (Tristan da Cunha Government and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, 2016). No new plan has been developed so it is assumed that this management plan still guides ongoing management measures, especially to address land-based threats. In November 2020, the Tristan da Cunha Island Council announced a Marine Protection Strategy for its entire EEZ (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).The Marine Protection Strategy includes: a large-scale no-take Marine Protection Zone covering more than 90% of the EEZ; carefully managed Inshore Fishing Zones with strengthened fisheries management measures; and Recommended Areas To Be Avoided for transiting cargo vessels. The Marine Management Plan outlines how the Tristan da Cunha Government will manage its waters in line with the Marine Protection Strategy (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
The management regime appears viable overall as it comprehensively encompasses both islands and their marine environment within the existing management plans. Furthermore, there is a 25 year vision, which guides management action to maintain the pristine nature of the sites. However, there is neither capacity nor long-term funding to implement effective biosecurity at both islands, and the substantial risk of inadvertent non-native species introductions on both islands remains high.
The 2006 Tristan da Cunha Conservation Ordinance makes provisions for the conservation of native organisms and natural habitats of Tristan da Cunha, which encompasses Gough and Inaccessible Islands (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2006). The Tristan da Cunha Fisheries Limits Ordinance 1982, as amended 1991 and 1992, limits fishing in the vicinity of the site.
A Gough and Inaccessible Islands World Heritage Site Management Plan 2015-2020 has been developed and is under implementation by the Tristan Island Council, Tristan Conservation Department and other stakeholders including NGOs, other organizations and individuals (Tristan da Cunha Government and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, 2016). No new plan has been developed so it is assumed that this management plan still guides ongoing management measures, especially to address land-based threats. In November 2020, the Tristan da Cunha Island Council announced a Marine Protection Strategy for its entire EEZ (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).The Marine Protection Strategy includes: a large-scale no-take Marine Protection Zone covering more than 90% of the EEZ; carefully managed Inshore Fishing Zones with strengthened fisheries management measures; and Recommended Areas To Be Avoided for transiting cargo vessels. The Marine Management Plan outlines how the Tristan da Cunha Government will manage its waters in line with the Marine Protection Strategy (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
The management regime appears viable overall as it comprehensively encompasses both islands and their marine environment within the existing management plans. Furthermore, there is a 25 year vision, which guides management action to maintain the pristine nature of the sites. However, there is neither capacity nor long-term funding to implement effective biosecurity at both islands, and the substantial risk of inadvertent non-native species introductions on both islands remains high.
Law enforcement
Enforcement on-island is adequate given the very small number of visitors annually, and the permitting process in place. To prevent the introduction of invasive species on Gough and within the archipelago, the Conservation Department has biosecurity measures in place, along with methods to help control and remove invasive species. Additionally, information sheets have been issued to fishing vessels traveling north to south, advising them to discharge ballast water at least 100 miles from Tristan to reduce the risk of introducing invasive species such as the Porgy to Gough (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
There is limited capacity for enforcement of the marine portion of the site owing to the lack of a suitable vessel to travel between Tristan da Cunha and Gough, or to patrol around Inaccessible in poor weather. A small patrol vessel has been available since 2018, but does not range as far as Gough or important seamounts (Requena et al., 2020). In 2019, demersal trawling was prohibited throughout the Tristan da Cunha EEZ. The Marine Protection Zone also includes areas of seamount protected from all fishing activities which were chosen by looking at different area extent options requested by Tristan da Cunha Government, which were simple to enforce and contained the highest predicted area of VME habitat (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). Ongoing satellite surveillance has shown that risks of IUU fishing are negligible for most of the year, except for the March to April peak of squid jiggers transiting through the EEZ on route to the Falkland Islands, and May through to July when the southern bluefin tuna fleet operate close to the southern boundaries of the EEZ. Additional surveillance is conducted during these periods (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).The UK Maritime & Coastguard Agency (MCA) is addressing pollution control and response in the UK Overseas Territories to enhance their prevention, preparedness, and response capabilities in the event of a marine pollution incident. However, the focus of this MCA work has been on OTs with shipping registers, so while Tristan da Cunha has undertaken an initial MCA capacity assessment for pollution preparedness and response, there has been no further contingency planning to date. (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
With the assistance of the UK Blue Belt Programme, Tristan da Cunha Government has access to a range of new and innovative technologies that are helping daily surveillance of the Areas To Be Avoided (ATBAs) to identify any vessels that might be entering the zones, as well as information available through the Blue Belt Shared Intelligence Hub (BBSIH). The surveillance assistance provided to Tristan includes automatic identification system, radar to detect dark vessels, visible infrared imaging radiometer suite (Leech, 2021).
There is limited capacity for enforcement of the marine portion of the site owing to the lack of a suitable vessel to travel between Tristan da Cunha and Gough, or to patrol around Inaccessible in poor weather. A small patrol vessel has been available since 2018, but does not range as far as Gough or important seamounts (Requena et al., 2020). In 2019, demersal trawling was prohibited throughout the Tristan da Cunha EEZ. The Marine Protection Zone also includes areas of seamount protected from all fishing activities which were chosen by looking at different area extent options requested by Tristan da Cunha Government, which were simple to enforce and contained the highest predicted area of VME habitat (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). Ongoing satellite surveillance has shown that risks of IUU fishing are negligible for most of the year, except for the March to April peak of squid jiggers transiting through the EEZ on route to the Falkland Islands, and May through to July when the southern bluefin tuna fleet operate close to the southern boundaries of the EEZ. Additional surveillance is conducted during these periods (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).The UK Maritime & Coastguard Agency (MCA) is addressing pollution control and response in the UK Overseas Territories to enhance their prevention, preparedness, and response capabilities in the event of a marine pollution incident. However, the focus of this MCA work has been on OTs with shipping registers, so while Tristan da Cunha has undertaken an initial MCA capacity assessment for pollution preparedness and response, there has been no further contingency planning to date. (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
With the assistance of the UK Blue Belt Programme, Tristan da Cunha Government has access to a range of new and innovative technologies that are helping daily surveillance of the Areas To Be Avoided (ATBAs) to identify any vessels that might be entering the zones, as well as information available through the Blue Belt Shared Intelligence Hub (BBSIH). The surveillance assistance provided to Tristan includes automatic identification system, radar to detect dark vessels, visible infrared imaging radiometer suite (Leech, 2021).
Sustainable finance
The RSPB funded two conservation staff at Gough Island until September 2025, and the UK Government has supported specific projects focused on the islands. However, funding of eradication efforts appears to be insufficient in comparison to estimated needs (ca. £10 million, according to the operational plan), relying on external funds, and there is insufficient funding for ongoing monitoring and biosecurity efforts. Because of the urgency and cost of invasive species eradication measures and the lack of clarity about the sustainable financing of the management of the site, this area is assessed as of serious concern. While funding in the marine area seems more stable due to the support from the Blue Belt Programme, the mechanisms for funding on-island conservation staff following the conclusion of the RSPB’s mouse eradication programme (2025) are unclear.
Staff capacity, training and development
The RSPB-funded conservation staff at Gough appear to be sufficiently trained (RSPB, 2016), and there has been a considerable amount of training of Tristan conservation staff, especially regarding invasive species control and biosecurity measures e.g. as part of the biosecurity Darwin Plus project (IUCN Consultation, 2024). In the past vessels for use in fisheries inspection were considered insufficient (State Party of the UK, 2006). With the Marine Protection Strategy staff capacity and training needs to be a priority to implement and monitor the proposed measures in the Marine Management Plan (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). However, Tristan da Cunha Government have staffing, technical and logistical limitations that significantly affect capacity. Therefore, any monitoring or other activities will require considerable and ongoing external support. As such, intervals of activities like surveys may be beyond Tristan da Cunha Government’s direct control (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
The updated Tristan da Cunha Biosecurity Ordinance 2021 is accompanied by the appointment of a biosecurity officer who should monitor and enforce strict biosecurity measures to inter island travel and work, along with a large investment from projects and RSPB into biosecurity infrastructure and training. This should now mean that every visit to the islands is assessed, monitored, searched and reported on and that the risk is now almost fully mitigated against as long as the checks are carried out.
The updated Tristan da Cunha Biosecurity Ordinance 2021 is accompanied by the appointment of a biosecurity officer who should monitor and enforce strict biosecurity measures to inter island travel and work, along with a large investment from projects and RSPB into biosecurity infrastructure and training. This should now mean that every visit to the islands is assessed, monitored, searched and reported on and that the risk is now almost fully mitigated against as long as the checks are carried out.
Education and interpretation programmes
Some information about Gough Island is available through the Tristan da Cunha website (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2017), social media accounts, and some information is disseminated periodically by the UKOT Conservation Forum (e.g. UKOT Conservation Forum 2011a, b). The RSPB also maintains a webpage and social media channels for the island restoration programme (RSPB, 2020). The information and education section of the Inaccessible Island management plan deals mainly with informing visitors about the appropriate behaviour while visiting the island, and with ensuring that they follow these instructions (Tristan da Cunha Government and RSPB, 2016). Education and interpretation programmes appear limited in general.
Tourism and visitation management
Tourist numbers to both component islands of the site are very low, with ca. 40 visitors to Gough Island annually as part of the annual weather station relief voyage. Visits to Inaccessible are few, and usually restricted to researchers or conservation staff. Visits are by permission only and limited to small areas of the islands. It has been suggested that some interpretative signs be erected at the few landing sites of the site. There are no jetty or visitor facilities (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Nevertheless, a significant growth of expedition cruise vessels and increased consumer interest in Antarctica over the next decade is predicted. Whilst being in a remote location, there is growing interest in off-the-beaten track destinations (Millington et al., 2019) and it is important that site managers plan and adapt accordingly to protect the site’s OUV. Furthermore, the number of ships and landings at Inaccessible Island are perceived to have increased, however there is no data to support this (IUCN Consultation, 2024).
Sustainable use
Use of resources in the waters belonging to the site is limited to fishing of Tristan Rock Lobster, is certified as sustainable by the MSC (MSC 2017). There is however, limited capacity to control Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing in the WH site. Small-scale recreational fishing by staff at the South African weather station on Gough is permitted, but unlikely to affect the fish stocks around the island (Caselle et al, 2018). The Tristan da Cunha Government license the lobster fishery around all the islands of the Tristan da Cunha archipelago, under a concession agreement with Ovenstone Agencies (PTY) Ltd, who run an offshore fishing vessel and fish-processing factory on Tristan which employs Tristanian fishers. The fishing season is open between 1st July and 30th April for the local fleet, and 25th August to 30th April for the other lobster vessels (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021). Tristan da Cunha Government manages lobster fishing pressure through advice based on an annual stock assessment conducted by the Marine Resource Assessment and Modelling Group (MARAM) at the University of Cape Town. Evaluations by the MSC indicate that Tristan rock lobster catches are stable, practices are fully compliant with management measures, and the fishery has minimal impact on endangered, threatened or protected species. It was announced on the 27th May 2025 that following a competitive tendering process, Fortuna Ltd will be taking over the Tristan Lobster Concession from 2027.
Monitoring
The Tristan Conservation Department conducts annual monitoring visits to Gough Island, and visits to Inaccessible when weather permits. The RSPB, Tristan da Cunha Conservation Department, and university researchers conduct conservation management and monitoring on the island. Additional bird monitoring, and procumbent pearlwort control on Gough is being implemented by the RSPB (RSPB, 2020) although this will end in September 2025 (IUCN Consultation, 2024). The most recent SOC report refers to the practical challenges of establishing detailed population dynamics of the species that are part of the site’s OUV. Therefore, counts and estimates of breeding successes are being used for some species. However, the WH Centre recommends that monitoring is established that can provide further information on the current status of the OUV (UNESCO, 2023).
There are plans to conduct a year of bird monitoring every three years, to maintain efforts in light of the discontinuation of RSPB's long-term permanent monitoring programme on Gough Island. An increase in sustainable funding for monitoring efforts could further strengthen existing programmes.
There are plans to conduct a year of bird monitoring every three years, to maintain efforts in light of the discontinuation of RSPB's long-term permanent monitoring programme on Gough Island. An increase in sustainable funding for monitoring efforts could further strengthen existing programmes.
Research
An extensive programme of scientific research and survey work into a wide range of taxa is ongoing within the WH site, but due to insufficient long-term finance this work will be discontinued in September 2025 and replaced by occasional monitoring.
Gough Island has supported a wide range of scientific works, particularly in the fields of zoology, botany and ecology (Haenel, 2008). Noteworthy activities in the 20th century have included the Gough Island Scientific Survey 1955/56, and the research by the South African meteorological station, the FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology at the University of Cape Town, and the RSPB. A small team of scientists and technicians are placed on Gough Island every year to man the weather station and undertake research, primarily to record weather. South African research on Gough Island has a history of over 60 years and is approved and funded by the South African National Antarctic Programme (SANAP). The RSPB maintained a 2-3 person team between 2001 and 2025 to establish and conduct long-term bird monitoring and dedicated research programmes, but this research effort will be scaled back in 2025 to intermittent visits that aim at documenting the most profound changes in a selected suite of species.
Inaccessible Island has also been visited by several scientific expeditions (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Collectively, more than 250 peer-reviewed scientific publications have appeared in international journals. A more detailed scientific bibliography for 1869-1982 has been compiled by Watkins and Cooper (1983). Although there is no systematic research strategy for the site (State Party of the UK, 2006) some research priorities are listed in the site management plan (Tristan da Cunha Government and RSPB, 2016). A Data Portal collating all of Tristan da Cunha's research projects and outputs was created by the British Antarctic Survey in 2023 and is accessible at: https://tdc.data.bas.ac.uk/
Gough Island has supported a wide range of scientific works, particularly in the fields of zoology, botany and ecology (Haenel, 2008). Noteworthy activities in the 20th century have included the Gough Island Scientific Survey 1955/56, and the research by the South African meteorological station, the FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology at the University of Cape Town, and the RSPB. A small team of scientists and technicians are placed on Gough Island every year to man the weather station and undertake research, primarily to record weather. South African research on Gough Island has a history of over 60 years and is approved and funded by the South African National Antarctic Programme (SANAP). The RSPB maintained a 2-3 person team between 2001 and 2025 to establish and conduct long-term bird monitoring and dedicated research programmes, but this research effort will be scaled back in 2025 to intermittent visits that aim at documenting the most profound changes in a selected suite of species.
Inaccessible Island has also been visited by several scientific expeditions (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Collectively, more than 250 peer-reviewed scientific publications have appeared in international journals. A more detailed scientific bibliography for 1869-1982 has been compiled by Watkins and Cooper (1983). Although there is no systematic research strategy for the site (State Party of the UK, 2006) some research priorities are listed in the site management plan (Tristan da Cunha Government and RSPB, 2016). A Data Portal collating all of Tristan da Cunha's research projects and outputs was created by the British Antarctic Survey in 2023 and is accessible at: https://tdc.data.bas.ac.uk/
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats outside the site
The main threats to the site originating from the outside are the introduction of invasive alien species, decimation of seabirds by fishing (long-lines, IUU), shipping accidents/ pollution and climate change. Of these, only invasive species can be addressed through site based management, and appear to be addressed effectively through access restrictions. The remaining external threats are of some concern. Long-line fisheries across the Southern, South Indian and both the South and North Atlantic Oceans are having a serious effect on many species of seabirds nesting on Gough and Inaccessible. Climate change is also likely to lead to negative impacts on the islands’ natural resources. Predictions of the effects of climate change in the South Atlantic are scant. General warming, an indication of wetter winters and drier summers and increased storminess appear to be the likely outcomes. The effects of plastic and other non-biodegradable material pollution on the WH site is also of serious concern.
However, the Tristan da Cunha Marine Management Plan greatly enhances the ability of management measures to address threats beyond the WH site boundaries, the sphere of influence is limited to the EEZ.
However, the Tristan da Cunha Marine Management Plan greatly enhances the ability of management measures to address threats beyond the WH site boundaries, the sphere of influence is limited to the EEZ.
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats inside the site
No systematic management effectiveness assessment has been published for the site. Because of the considerable challenges of invasive species control/eradication and the enforcement of a management regime at such a distance from Tristan da Cunha (State Party of the UK, 2006), and without an appropriate sea-going fisheries patrol vessel, there is some concern regarding the management capacity of the site. Preparation and implementation of a comprehensive biosecurity plan is needed at both islands for all human movements and activities to minimize the risk of non-native species introductions, inter-island transfers and intra-island spreading (including in the marine environment). In 2021 the Tristan da Cunha Biosecurity Ordinance was released.
Despite the extensive preparation and implementation of the complex 2021 house mouse eradication programme on Gough Island being unsuccessful, the effort should be recognised. The resulting immediate improvement in reproductive success of five flagship seabird species, albeit temporary, demonstrates the utmost importance and urgency of finding a permanent solution to house mice eradication on Gough Island (UNESCO, 2023). Other eradications like the Flax Eradication Project on Inaccessible Island can be considered effective. With the completion of another two successful eradication seasons since 2022, the plant profile has changed from high dense areas of plants, found at Waterfall Ridge, to more singular and isolated plants towards the Salt Beach side ─ known as outlier plants due to active eradication efforts (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2024).
The project “Strengthening biosecurity for remote Territory communities and their World Heritage” 2019-2022 funded by Darwin Plus supported the Pitcairn and Tristan da Cunha Governments to collaboratively strengthen biosecurity capacity in their Territories and enhance the protection of their natural-resource dependent economies and World Heritage Sites from invasive alien species. The project focussed on; strengthening ‘pre-border’ biosecurity in the gateway ports to both Territories, developing and passing appropriate local biosecurity policies, and working with the key vessel operators to ensure biosecurity improvements are owned and embedded for the long-term.
Despite the extensive preparation and implementation of the complex 2021 house mouse eradication programme on Gough Island being unsuccessful, the effort should be recognised. The resulting immediate improvement in reproductive success of five flagship seabird species, albeit temporary, demonstrates the utmost importance and urgency of finding a permanent solution to house mice eradication on Gough Island (UNESCO, 2023). Other eradications like the Flax Eradication Project on Inaccessible Island can be considered effective. With the completion of another two successful eradication seasons since 2022, the plant profile has changed from high dense areas of plants, found at Waterfall Ridge, to more singular and isolated plants towards the Salt Beach side ─ known as outlier plants due to active eradication efforts (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2024).
The project “Strengthening biosecurity for remote Territory communities and their World Heritage” 2019-2022 funded by Darwin Plus supported the Pitcairn and Tristan da Cunha Governments to collaboratively strengthen biosecurity capacity in their Territories and enhance the protection of their natural-resource dependent economies and World Heritage Sites from invasive alien species. The project focussed on; strengthening ‘pre-border’ biosecurity in the gateway ports to both Territories, developing and passing appropriate local biosecurity policies, and working with the key vessel operators to ensure biosecurity improvements are owned and embedded for the long-term.
Although the legal framework, boundaries, monitoring and research of the site are all effective, some concerns remain about the overall effectiveness of the management system and the enforcement of the legal framework, which in turn may reflect limitations of funding and resourcing of management efforts at the site. However, the development of the Tristan da Cunha Marine Protection Zone and the Tristan da Cunha Marine Management Plan greatly improves the management of the WH site and the surrounding area. This will likely buffer threats from outside the site, including pollution from ships, while further limiting fishing activities with potentially negative impact on the site's OUV. The additional protection by the Tristan da Cunha Government for the EEZ is a welcome development. With these added protection measures and support from the UK Blue Belt Programme enforcement also seems to have improved. Nevertheless, due to the limited capacity of the Tristan da Cunha Government, there is a need to better resource marine enforcement and invasive species eradication and biosecurity, and to better coordinate the management of the two islands of the site. Funding of monitoring, biosecurity, and eradication efforts is insufficient in comparison to estimated needs. Because of the urgency and cost of invasive species biosecurity and eradication measures, this is of some concern.
Good practice examples
The British-South African-Tristanian Partnership in the monitoring and management of Gough Island is a good practice example of close international cooperation to maintain the integrity of natural World Heritage, which may be applicable in other remote sites, particularly those belonging to European overseas territories.
Seabird populations
High Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
At Gough Island, Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross Thalassarche chlororhynchos, Sooty Albatross Phoebetria fusca and southern Giant Petrel Macronectes giganteus breeding populations appear to be stable (RSPB, 2024; Cuthbert et al., 2014). The overall Tristan Albatross Diomedea dabbenena population has declined by ~1% per year from 2004 to 2021 despite the apparent stability of the observed number of breeding pairs due to low breeding success caused by mouse predation (Oppel et al., 2022; Wanless et al., 2009). Populations of Atlantic Petrel Pterodroma incerta, MacGillivray’s Prion Pachyptila macgillivrayi, and several other bird populations on Gough Island are also declining (IUCN, 2012; Wanless et al., 2012; Jones et al., 2021). Smaller species, which may be more affected by mice (Caravaggi et al., 2019), may be declining substantially, but no long-term monitoring data exist. There appeared to be an increasing tendency for invasive mice to prey on adult birds rather than just chicks (Jones et al., 2019), which could have major negative implications for populations of long-lived seabirds.
The eradication programme - despite being unsuccessful - temporarily reduced the population of house mice on Gough Island. The near absence of mice during the 2021 breeding season resulted in significantly improved breeding success for a variety of seabirds, which are a component of the site’s OUV (e.g. the 2021 Tristan Albatross breeding success increased from 32% to 75.5%; Macgillivray’s prion from 0% in 2020 to 82% in 2021; Atlantic petrel from less than 30% in 2020 to 62.7% in 2021) (State Party of UK, 2022). Nevertheless, this was a temporary positive trend, and mouse populations have recovered and the predation of seabird chicks had resumed in 2024.
At Inaccessible Island, Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross and Sooty Albatross populations are stable, while the Spectacled Petrel P. conspicillata population continues to increase (Ryan and Dilley, 2019).
The last island-wide censuses of Northern Rockhopper Penguin populations at Gough and Inaccessible were done in 2006 and 2009, and there are no robust island-wide population estimates and trends. However, the monitored sub-colonies on Gough indicate that the population has been stable or slightly increasing over the past decade.
The eradication programme - despite being unsuccessful - temporarily reduced the population of house mice on Gough Island. The near absence of mice during the 2021 breeding season resulted in significantly improved breeding success for a variety of seabirds, which are a component of the site’s OUV (e.g. the 2021 Tristan Albatross breeding success increased from 32% to 75.5%; Macgillivray’s prion from 0% in 2020 to 82% in 2021; Atlantic petrel from less than 30% in 2020 to 62.7% in 2021) (State Party of UK, 2022). Nevertheless, this was a temporary positive trend, and mouse populations have recovered and the predation of seabird chicks had resumed in 2024.
At Inaccessible Island, Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross and Sooty Albatross populations are stable, while the Spectacled Petrel P. conspicillata population continues to increase (Ryan and Dilley, 2019).
The last island-wide censuses of Northern Rockhopper Penguin populations at Gough and Inaccessible were done in 2006 and 2009, and there are no robust island-wide population estimates and trends. However, the monitored sub-colonies on Gough indicate that the population has been stable or slightly increasing over the past decade.
Autochthonous terrestrial fauna
High Concern
Trend
Stable
On Inaccessible, the population of small-billed Inaccessible Island Finch (Vulnerable) and Inaccessible Rail (Vulnerable) are stable (Dilley et al., 2021). The population of the endemic large-billed subspecies of the Inaccessible Island Finch (Nesospiza acunhae dunnei), which rely on Phylica fruit, has fallen by over 80% at the main monitoring site (Dilley et al., 2020). A significant increase in infestation of a scale insect and sooty mould occurs on Inaccessible, with the proportion of infected trees at monitored sites rising from 29% in 2011 to 85-100% in 2018. Most concerningly, many of the largest trees had died, and fruit loads fell. However, with the potential establishment of a biocontrol agent, the outlook may be improving.
On Gough, the population of Gough Finch (Critically Endangered) had declined and its range may have shrunk by 50% (Ryan and Cuthbert, 2008), but the remnant population in upland habitats has remained stable for the past 20 years (Jones et al., 2020b), and recovered from a minor impact caused by the mouse eradication programme in 2021. The total number of birds in 2020 was estimated at 1,917 individuals (95% CI: 1,550–2,500), derived from habitat specific density estimates from line transect distance sampling surveys around the island from 2018 to 2020 (Jones et al., 2020). Adults comprised 74.5 % of individuals observed in February and 81.2 % observed in September (Jones et al., 2020), hence the minimum population size is calculated at between 1,118 to 2,030 mature individuals. Jones et al. (2020b) also estimated 720 breeding pairs, and a value of 1,440 mature individuals is taken as a best single estimate. Ahead of the attempted mouse eradication in 2021, an insurance population of 100 Gough Island Finches was brought into captivity in case of adverse impacts on wild populations due to the deployment of poisoned bait (Chilvers and McClelland, 2023). After the completion of the bait application 103 birds were released back into the wild and follow-up surveys showed there was still a significant wild population of birds present (Chilvers and McClelland 2023). Continuing surveys recorded a c. 60% reduction in density in both 2021 and 2022 versus pre-eradication but densities recovered to levels similar to those pre-eradication in 2023 (A. Steinfurth, H. Marshall and S. Oppel in litt., 2024). Accordingly, the current population size is considered to be similar to that estimated in 2020 by Jones et al. (2020).
The Gough Moorhen (Gallinula comeri) became rare following the mouse eradication operation in 2021. Despite efforts to manage a captive population that was released back into the wild in late 2021, only a single reproductive pair of the moorhen had been recorded until 2024, with the total population likely <20 individuals. Nevertheless, since then there has been a significant population recovery. According to Marshall et al. (2025) Gough Moorhens are now found across the entire island wherever there is suitable habitat from sea level to above 900 m elevation. The total population is now approximately 41,500 birds (95% confidence interval 24,000–72,000). The density estimates (3–6 birds/ha) are similar to estimates for Gough Moorhens on Gough Island before the post-2021 population decline and are at the higher end of densities reported for oceanic island rallids, suggesting that the Tristan da Cunha population may be near carrying capacity.
On Gough, the population of Gough Finch (Critically Endangered) had declined and its range may have shrunk by 50% (Ryan and Cuthbert, 2008), but the remnant population in upland habitats has remained stable for the past 20 years (Jones et al., 2020b), and recovered from a minor impact caused by the mouse eradication programme in 2021. The total number of birds in 2020 was estimated at 1,917 individuals (95% CI: 1,550–2,500), derived from habitat specific density estimates from line transect distance sampling surveys around the island from 2018 to 2020 (Jones et al., 2020). Adults comprised 74.5 % of individuals observed in February and 81.2 % observed in September (Jones et al., 2020), hence the minimum population size is calculated at between 1,118 to 2,030 mature individuals. Jones et al. (2020b) also estimated 720 breeding pairs, and a value of 1,440 mature individuals is taken as a best single estimate. Ahead of the attempted mouse eradication in 2021, an insurance population of 100 Gough Island Finches was brought into captivity in case of adverse impacts on wild populations due to the deployment of poisoned bait (Chilvers and McClelland, 2023). After the completion of the bait application 103 birds were released back into the wild and follow-up surveys showed there was still a significant wild population of birds present (Chilvers and McClelland 2023). Continuing surveys recorded a c. 60% reduction in density in both 2021 and 2022 versus pre-eradication but densities recovered to levels similar to those pre-eradication in 2023 (A. Steinfurth, H. Marshall and S. Oppel in litt., 2024). Accordingly, the current population size is considered to be similar to that estimated in 2020 by Jones et al. (2020).
The Gough Moorhen (Gallinula comeri) became rare following the mouse eradication operation in 2021. Despite efforts to manage a captive population that was released back into the wild in late 2021, only a single reproductive pair of the moorhen had been recorded until 2024, with the total population likely <20 individuals. Nevertheless, since then there has been a significant population recovery. According to Marshall et al. (2025) Gough Moorhens are now found across the entire island wherever there is suitable habitat from sea level to above 900 m elevation. The total population is now approximately 41,500 birds (95% confidence interval 24,000–72,000). The density estimates (3–6 birds/ha) are similar to estimates for Gough Moorhens on Gough Island before the post-2021 population decline and are at the higher end of densities reported for oceanic island rallids, suggesting that the Tristan da Cunha population may be near carrying capacity.
Autochthonous flora
Data Deficient
Trend
Data Deficient
No detailed information about the current conservation status of the native flora at the site is available.
Marine plants, mammals, fish and invertebrates
Low Concern
Trend
Data Deficient
Large populations of Subantarctic fur seals A. tropicalis breed at Gough Island, while Antarctic fur seals A. gazella are rare vagrants to the island. The Subantarctic Fur Seal population appears stable at Gough at ca. 300, 000 individuals with an annual pup production of ca. 60,000 (80% of global total) after a marked increase over the last 40 years (Bester et al., 2006). A similar increase likely occurred on Inaccessible, where roughly 1000 pups are produced annually (Bester et al., 2019). The largest population of Subantarctic fur seals in the world occurs at Gough Island on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, but its current status is uncertain. The much smaller populations on the northern group of the Tristan da Cunha Islands (Tristan da Cunha, Inaccessible and Nightingale) have increased over the last 40 years (Bester and Somers, 2025).
Southern Elephant Seals ceased breeding at Inaccessible island sometime earlier in the 20th century, making Gough the northernmost breeding site with one breeding colony present there. However, a census count in 2019 indicates a 95% decline in elephant seal pup production at Gough in the last 40 years, suggesting this population is verging on local extinction (Jones et al., 2020a).
No further detailed information about the trends of other marine biota around the site is available, but marine surveys documented high abundance of some fish and invertebrate species around Gough and Inaccessible (Caselle et al., 2018).
Southern Elephant Seals ceased breeding at Inaccessible island sometime earlier in the 20th century, making Gough the northernmost breeding site with one breeding colony present there. However, a census count in 2019 indicates a 95% decline in elephant seal pup production at Gough in the last 40 years, suggesting this population is verging on local extinction (Jones et al., 2020a).
No further detailed information about the trends of other marine biota around the site is available, but marine surveys documented high abundance of some fish and invertebrate species around Gough and Inaccessible (Caselle et al., 2018).
Island ecosystems of exceptional natural beauty
High Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
The overall natural beauty of the site is intact and stable, but the values in relation to its superlative importance as a seabird breeding location are declining with the conservation status of key seabird populations as analysed above. Therefore, the current status of the values of the site under World Heritage criterion vii is of high concern, and deteriorating. In addition, the increasing pollution by plastic debris (Ryan et al., 2019) affects the natural beauty of both islands.
Assessment of the current state and trend of World Heritage values
Deteriorating
Due to the remoteness of both sites, the current state of the biodiversity values is often poorly understood, but on both islands some threatened species are decreasing and the biodiversity values are of high concern and deteriorating. On Inaccessible, biodiversity values indicate deterioration due to an invasive scale insect, however some species like the Gough Island Finch and Gough Moorhen have bounced back after declines following the mouse eradication operation in 2021. Several species of globally threatened seabirds are declining, with especially the smaller prions likely facing extinction. At Gough Island, Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross (Thalassarche chlororhynchos), Sooty Albatross (Phoebetria fusca) and southern Giant Petrel (Macronectes giganteus) breeding populations appear to be stable, while the overall Tristan Albatross (Diomedea dabbenena) population has declined by ~1% per year from 2004 to 2021. Populations of Atlantic Petrel (Pterodroma incerta), MacGillivray’s Prion (Pachyptila macgillivrayi), and several other bird populations on Gough Island are also declining. Smaller species, which may be more affected by mice may be declining substantially, but no long-term monitoring data exist. At Inaccessible Island, Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross and Sooty Albatross populations are stable, while the Spectacled Petrel (P. conspicillata) population continues to increase. The mouse eradication operation temporarily reduced the mouse population, and indicated that many seabird species could achieve much higher breeding success in the absence of mice, which demonstrates the significant potential for population recovery if a future eradication programme is successful. As a consequence of the precarious state of several of the biodiversity values at both sites, the exceptional natural beauty is also deteriorating and of high concern.
Additional information
Fishing areas and conservation of fish stocks
The licensed Tristan Rock Lobster and crayfish fisheries of the area, including in the waters around at least Inaccessible Island, are the major source of income for the Tristan da Cunha economy (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). The Tristan da Cunha population relies very heavily upon their marine environment for subsistence and economic opportunities. The inshore pot fishery for Tristan rock lobster typically represents over three-quarters of the island’s economic activity, with some additional revenue coming from fishing on offshore grounds (Tristan da Cunha Government, 2021).
The fishery is certified as sustainable (MSC, 2017), has 100% observer coverage, and zero bycatch (Glass and Ryan, 2013).
Collection of genetic material
The current use of genetic material from the site is unclear, but there may be considerable potential for using genetic materials from the many endemic plants and invertebrates on the island.
Factors negatively affecting provision of selected benefit are unknown.
Importance for research
The site has already contributed significantly to the overall scientific understanding of temperate island ecosystems (UNEP-WCMC, 2011) and seabird populations. Additionally, it has generated valuable knowledge about the factors that may affect the failure of well planned and executed invasive rodent eradications, and could serve as a critical site to monitor biological climate change impacts, if the required programmes were sufficiently ressourced and are developed.
Carbon sequestration
Tristan da Cunha archipelago Marine Protected Area contains carbon rich habitats which play an important role as a carbon sink. The 5.4 km2 of kelp stores ~60 tonnes of carbon (tC) and may export ~240 tC into surrounding depths. An estimated ~2.3 million tC are stored in benthic biodiversity of waters, with about 0.22 million tC of that having the potential to be sequestered. This small United Kingdom Overseas Territory’s reef systems represent approximately 0.8 Mt CO2 equivalent sequestered carbon; valued at >£24 Million GBP (at the UN shadow price of carbon). Annual productivity of this protected standing stock generates an estimated £3 million worth of sequestered carbon a year, making it an unrecognized and potentially major component of the economy of small island nations like Tristan da Cunha (Barnes et al., 2021).
Due to its remoteness, lack of population and need for meticulous conservation management and invasive alien species control, the site offers mainly conservation and scientific benefits. However, the waters around Gough and Inaccessible Islands are important fishing areas for Tristan Rock Lobster, and the many endemic species of the site may hold additional benefits related to genetic material. Furthermore, there is evidence that the Tristan da Cunha archipelago represents an important carbon sink due to its carbon rich habitats.
| № | Organization | Brief description of Active Projects | Website |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | South African National Antarctic Programme | Meteorological research/monitoring and some bird monitoring at Gough Island |
http://www.sanap.ac.za/sanap_gough/sanap_gough.html
|
| 2 | Tristan da Cunha Conservation Department | Monitoring of biodiversity at site (particularly Inaccessible Island) |
http://tristandc.com/wildordinance.php
|
| 3 | Royal Society for the Protection of Birds | Control of Sagina procumbens and planning for Mus musculus eradication on Gough Island, as well as population monitoring of several bird species and research into the design of invasive species eradication techniques. Note that the intensity of the project will be significantly reduced in September 2025. |
https://www.goughisland.com/the-project; https://tristandc.com/wildlife/goughrestoration.php
|
References
| № | References |
|---|---|
| 1 |
Alliance for Zero Extinction (2012). AZE site database. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 2 |
Anderson, O. R. J., Small, C. J., Croxall, J. P., et al. (2011). ‘Global seabird bycatch in longline fisheries’. Endangered Species Research 14(2): 91-106.
|
| 3 |
Barnes, D. K., Bell, J. B., Bridges, A. E., Ireland, L., Howell, K. L., Martin, S. M., ... & Morley, S. A. (2021). Climate mitigation through biological conservation: Extensive and valuable blue carbon natural capital in Tristan da Cunha’s Giant Marine Protected Zone. Biology, 10(12), 1339.
|
| 4 |
Barnes, D.K.A., Morley, S.A., Bell, J., Brewin,P., Brigden, K., Collins, M., Glass, T., Goodall-Copestake, W.P., Henry, L., Laptikhovsky, V., Piechaud, N., Richardson, A., Rose, P., Sands, C.J., Schofiled, A., Shreeve, R., Small, A., Stamford, T. and Taylor, B. (2018). Marine plastics threaten giant Atlantic Marine Protected Areas. Current Biology, 28, pp. R1121–R1142 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
|
| 5 |
Becker, P.H., Goutner, V., Ryan, P.G. and González-Solís, J. (2016). Feather mercury concentrations in Southern Ocean seabirds: Variation by species, site and time. Environmental Pollution, 216, pp.253-263.
|
| 6 |
Bentley, L. K., Phillips, R. A., Carpenter-Kling, T., Crawford, R. J. M., Cuthbert, R. J., Delord, K., Dilley, B. J., Makhado, A. B., Miller, P. I., Oppel, S., Pistorius, P. A., Ryan, P. G., Schoombie, S., Weimerskirch, H. and Manica, A. (2024). Habitat preferences of Phoebetria albatrosses in sympatry and allopatry. – Journal of Biogeography 51: 1986-1998.
|
| 7 |
Bester, M. N., & Somers, M. J. (2025). Monitoring of vagrant seals on mid-oceanic islands of the South Atlantic Ocean. Polar Biology, 48(3), 79.
|
| 8 |
Bester, M. N., Wilson, J. W., Burle, M.-H. and Hofmeyr, G. J. G. (2006). Population trend of Subantarctic fur seals at Gough Island. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 36: 191-194.
|
| 9 |
Bester, M.N., Wege, M. and Glass, T. (2019). Increase of sub-Antarctic fur seals at the Tristan da Cunha Islands. Polar Biology, 42.pp.231-235.
|
| 10 |
BirdLife International (2012a). ‘Datazone: Factsheet Gough Island Important Bird Area’. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 11 |
BirdLife International (2012c). ‘Datazone: Factsheet Tristan Islands Endemic Bird Area’. [Electronic reference] < http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/ebafactsheet.php?id=86>. Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 12 |
Bourne, W. (1981). ‘Fur seals return to Gough Island’. Oryx 16: 46-47.
|
| 13 |
Caravaggi, A., Cuthbert, R.J., Ryan, P.G., Cooper, J. and Bond, A.L. (2019). The impacts of introduced House Mice on the breeding success of nesting seabirds on Gough Island. Ibis, 161, pp.648-661.
|
| 14 |
Caselle, J., Hamilton, S., Davis, K., Thompson, C.D.H., Turchik, A., Jenkinson, R., Simpson, D. and Sala, E. (2018). First quantification of subtidal community structure at Tristan da Cunha Islands in the remote South Atlantic: from kelp forests to the deep sea. PLoS ONE 13(3) e0195167.
|
| 15 |
Chilvers, B.L. and McClelland, P.J. (2023). Lessons Learned for Pre-Emptive Capture Management as a Tool for Wildlife Conservation during Oil Spills and Eradication Events. Animals 13(5): 833.
|
| 16 |
Connan, M., Jones, C. W., Risi, M. M., Smyth, L. K., Oppel, S., Perold, V., Stevens, K. L., Daling, R., and Ryan, P. G. (2023). First evidence of mouse predation killing adult great albatrosses. Biological Invasions 26: 25-31.
|
| 17 |
Costa, D. P., & Sérgio, C. (2023). Tropical Atlantic Oceanic Islands and Archipelagos: Physical structures, plant diversity, and affinities of the bryofloras of northern and southern islands.
|
| 18 |
Cuthbert, R. J. 2013. Northern Rockhopper Penguin. Pages 131-143 in Penguins: natural history and conservation (P. G. Borboroglu, and P. D. Boersma, Eds.). University of Washington Press, Seattle.
|
| 19 |
Cuthbert, R. J. and Hilton, G. (2004). ‘Introduced house mice Mus musculus: a significant predator of threatened endemic birds on Gough Island, South Atlantic Ocean’. Biological Conservation 117(5): 483-489.
|
| 20 |
Cuthbert, R. J. and Sommer, E. (2004). ‘Population size and trends of four globally threatened seabirds at Gough Island, South Atlantic Ocean’. Marine Ornithology 32(1): 97-103.
|
| 21 |
Cuthbert, R. J., Cooper, J., Burle, M., Glass, C., Glass, J., Glass, S., Glass, T., Hilton, G.M., Sommer, E.S., Wanless, R.M. and Ryan, P.G. (2009). Population trends and conservation status of the Northern Rockhopper Penguin Eudyptes moseleyi at Tristan da Cunha and Gough Island. Bird Conservation International,19,pp.109–120.
|
| 22 |
Cuthbert, R. J., J. Cooper, and P. G. Ryan. 2014. Population trends and breeding success of albatrosses and giant petrels at Gough Island in the face of at-sea and on-land threats. Antarctic Science 26:163-171.
|
| 23 |
Cuthbert, R., G. Hilton, P. Ryan, and G. N. Tuck. 2005. At-sea distribution of breeding Tristan albatrosses Diomedea dabbenena and potential interactions with pelagic longline fishing in the South Atlantic Ocean. Biological Conservation 121:345-355.
|
| 24 |
Da Rocha, N., Oppel, S., Prince, S., Matjila, S., Shaanika, T. M., Naomab, C., Yates, O., Paterson, J. R. B., Shimooshili, K., Frans, E., Kashava, S. and Crawford, R. (2021). Reduction in seabird mortality in Namibian fisheries following the introduction of bycatch regulation. – Biological Conservation 253: 108915.
|
| 25 |
Davies, D., B. J. Dilley, A. L. Bond, R. J. Cuthbert, and P. G. Ryan. 2015. Trends and tactics of mouse predation on Tristan Albatross Diomedea dabbenena chicks at Gough Island, South Atlantic Ocean. Avian Conservation and Ecology 10:5.
|
| 26 |
Dias, M.P., Oppel, S., Bond, A.L., Carneiro, A.P.B., Cuthbert, R.J., González-Solís, J., Wanless, R.M., Glass, T., Lascelles, B., Small, C., Phillips, R.A. and Ryan, P.G. (2017). Using globally threatened pelagic birds to identify priority sites for marine conservation in the South Atlantic Ocean. Biological Conservation, 211, pp.76-84.
|
| 27 |
Dilley, B. J., D. Davies, A. L. Bond, and P. G. Ryan. 2015. Effects of mouse predation on burrowing petrel chicks at Gough Island. Antarctic Science 27:543-553.
|
| 28 |
Dilley, B. J., Davies, D., Glass, T., Bond, A. L. & Ryan, P. G. (2020). Severe impact of introduced scale insects on Island Trees threatens endemic finches at the Tristan da Cunha archipelago. Biological Conservation, 251: 108761.
|
| 29 |
Dilley, B. J., Swain, G., Repetto, J., & Ryan, P. G. (2021). Using playback to estimate the distribution and density of the world’s smallest flightless bird, the Inaccessible Island Rail Atlantisia rogersi. Bird Conservation International, 31(2), 286-292.
|
| 30 |
Glass, J. P., and P. G. Ryan. (2013). Reduced seabird night strikes and mortality in the Tristan rock lobster fishery. African Journal of Marine Science 35:589-592.
|
| 31 |
Government of St. Helena. 2006. Conservation of Native Organisms and Natural Habitats (Tristan da Cunha) Ordinance. St. Helena Government Gazette Extraordinary 44:TA1-TA13.
|
| 32 |
Haenel, C. (2008). ‘Gough Island 500 years after its discovery: a bibliography of scientific and popular literature 1505 to 2005’. South African Journal of Science 104(9-10): 329-332.
|
| 33 |
Houghton, M., Terauds, A., Merritt, D., Driessen, M. and Shaw, J. (2019). The impacts of non-native species on the invertebrates of Southern Ocean Islands. Journal of Insect Conservation, 23, pp.435-452.
|
| 34 |
IUCN (1995). ‘World Heritage Nomination – IUCN Technical Evaluation: Gough Island, United Kingdom‘. [online] Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/740/documents/ [Accessed 30 July 2012].
|
| 35 |
IUCN (2012). ‘The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species’. [Electronic reference] http://www.iucnredlist.org/. Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 36 |
IUCN Consultation (2024). IUCN World Heritage Confidential Consultation on the 2020 Outlook site assessment: Gough and Inaccessible Islands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
|
| 37 |
Jones, A. G., Chown, S. L. and Gaston, K. J. (2002). ‘Terrestrial vertebrates of Gough Island: an assemblage under threat?’ African Entomology 10(1): 83-91.
|
| 38 |
Jones, A. G., Chown, S. L., Ryan, P. G. et al. (2003). ‘A review of conservation threats on Gough Island: a case study for terrestrial conservation in the Southern Oceans’. Biological Conservation 113(1): 75-87.
|
| 39 |
Jones, C. W., Risi, M. M., Osborne, A. M., Ryan, P. G. and Oppel, S. (2021). Mouse eradication is required to prevent local extinction of an endangered seabird on an oceanic island. – Animal Conservation 24: 637-645.
|
| 40 |
Jones, C.W., Risi, M.M., Cleeland, J. and Ryan, P.G. (2019). First evidence of mouse attacks on adult albatrosses and petrels breeding on sub-Antarctic Marion and Gough Islands. Polar Biology, 42, pp.619–623.
|
| 41 |
Jones, C.W., Risi, M.M., Osborne, A.M., Parker, G.C., Rexer-Huber, K., le Bouard, F., Cleeland, J.B., Lawrence, K., Kinchin-Smith, D., Witcutt, E., Starnes, T., Bond, A.L., Ryan, P.G. and Oppel, S. (2020b). Abundance, distribution and breeding success of the endemic Gough Island Finch Rowettia goughensis between 2009 and 2018. Emu - Austral Ornithology 120: 230-238.
|
| 42 |
Jones, C.W., Risi, M.M., and Bester, M.N. (2020a). Local extinction predicted for southern elephant seals Mirounga leonina at their northernmost breeding site, Gough Island – South Atlantic Ocean. Polar Biology 43, 893–897.
|
| 43 |
Kroodsma, D., Turner, J., Luck, C., Hochberg, T., Miller, N., Augustyn, P., and Prince, S. (2023). Global prevalence of setting longlines at dawn highlights bycatch risk for threatened albatross. Biological Conservation 283: 110026.
|
| 44 |
Leech, K. (2021). How technology is assisting Tristan da Cunha to monitor compliance in its Areas to Be Avoided. Karen Leech, Blue Belt Programme. Gov.uk Blog Marine Developments. Published on 5 October 2021 [online]. Available at: https://marinedevelopments.blog.gov.uk/2021/10/05/how-techn…
|
| 45 |
Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) (2017). Tristan da Cunha Rock Lobster. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/tristan-da-cunha-roc…
|
| 46 |
Marshall, H. H., Moloney, C. L., Glass, T., Grundy, R., Schofield, A., & Ryan, P. G. (2025). The spread and status of the Gough Moorhen Gallinula comeri on Tristan da Cunha. Bird Conservation International, 35, e20.
|
| 47 |
McClelland, G. T. W., A. L. Bond, A. Sardana, and T. Glass. 2016. Rapid population estimate of a surface-nesting seabird on a remote island using a low-cost unmanned aerial vehicle. Marine Ornithology 44:215-220.
|
| 48 |
McKie, R. (2012). ‚Seabird species face extinction as invaders storm empire's last outcrops’. The Guardian, 18 March 2012. [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/mar/18/seabird… . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 49 |
Millington, K., Repetto, D., Smith, N. (2019). Tristan da Cunha Tourism Assessment. Final Report for the South Atlantic Overseas Territories Natural Capital Assessment. Available at: https://data.jncc.gov.uk/data/5e64738a-620a-43e2-861c-1ee0c…
|
| 50 |
Ochyra, R., & Plasek, V. (2020). The sinking of another Tristan da Cunha moss endemic and its phytogeographical consequences. Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae, 89(3).
|
| 51 |
Oosthuizen, W. C., P. J. N. de Bruyn, M. Wege, and M. N. Bester. 2015. Geographic variation in subantarctic fur seal pup growth: linkages with environmental variability and population density. Journal of Mammalogy 97:347-360.
|
| 52 |
Oppel, S., Clark, B. L., Risi, M. M., Horswill, C., Converse, S. J., Jones, C. W., ... & Ryan, P. G. (2022). Cryptic population decrease due to invasive species predation in a long‐lived seabird supports need for eradication. Journal of Applied Ecology, 59(8), 2059-2070.
|
| 53 |
Pearce, F. (1999). ‘On its own. The British Government is neglecting on of its three natural World Heritage sites, a wildlife heaven in the Southern Ocean’. New Scientist, 31 July 1999. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 54 |
Perold, V., Ronconi, R. A., Moloney, C. L., Dilley, B. J., Connan, M. & Ryan, P. G. (2024). Little change in plastic loads in South Atlantic seabirds since the 1980s. Sci Total Environ: 175343.
|
| 55 |
PlantLife (2012). IPA online database. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 56 |
RSPB (2017). Gough Island Restoration Programme. https://www.rspb.org.uk/our-work/conservation/conservation-…
|
| 57 |
RSPB (2020). Gough Island Restoration Programme. https://goughisland.com
|
| 58 |
Requena, S., Oppel, S., Bond, A.L., Hall, J., Cleeland, J., Crawford, R.J.M., Davies, D., Dilley, B.J., Glass, T., Makhado, A., Ratcliffe, N., Reid, T.A., Ronconi, R,.A., Schofield, A., Steinfurth, A., Wege, M., Bester, M. and Ryan, P.G. (2020). Marine hotspots of activity inform protection of a threatened community of pelagic species in a large oceanic jurisdiction. Animal Conservation 23: 585-596.
|
| 59 |
Risi, M. M., Jones, C. W., Osborne, A. M., Steinfurth, A., & Oppel, S. (2021). Southern giant petrels Macronectes giganteus depredating breeding Atlantic yellow-nosed albatrosses Thalassarche chlororhynchos on Gough Island. Polar Biology, 44(3), 593-599.
|
| 60 |
Rivers, M. C., A. L. Bond, and R. Lovell. (2021). Phylica arborea. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2021: e.T177192271A177192276.
|
| 61 |
Roy, H.E, Peyton, J.M., Prescott, O.L., and Rorke, S.L. (2019). Prioritising Invasive Non-Native Species through Horizon Scanning on the UK Overseas Territories Report Centre for Ecology & Hydrology.
|
| 62 |
Ruoppolo V, Woehler EJ, Morgan K, Clumpner CJ. (2013). Wildlife and oil in the Antarctic: a recipe for cold disaster. Polar Record. 2013;49(2):97-109. doi:10.1017/S0032247411000763
|
| 63 |
Ryan, P. (2007). Field guide to the animals and plants of Tristan da Cunha and Gough Island, Cape Town, South Africa, Pisces Publications.
|
| 64 |
Ryan, P. G., H. E. Ortmann, and K. Herian. (2014). Cascading effects of introduced scale insects on Nesospiza finches at the Tristan da Cunha archipelago. Biological Conservation 176:48-53.
|
| 65 |
Ryan, P. G., K. Bourgeois, S. Dromzée, and B. J. Dilley. (2014). The occurrence of two bill morphs of prions Pachyptila vittata on Gough Island. Polar Biology 37:727-735.
|
| 66 |
Ryan, P. G., Moloney, C. L., & Connan, M. (2024). Recent changes in plastic bottles washing ashore on Inaccessible Island, Tristan da Cunha. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 209, 117292.
|
| 67 |
Ryan, P. G., P. G. Glass, T. Glass, J. Barendse, and R. J. Cuthbert. (2012). Eradication of New Zealand flax Phormium tenax on Inaccessible and Nightingale Islands, Tristan da Cunha. Conservation Evidence 9:58-62.
|
| 68 |
Ryan, P. G., Ryan, E. M., & Glass, J. P. (2021). Dazzled by the light: the impact of light pollution from ships on seabirds at Tristan da Cunha. Ostrich, 92(3), 218-224.
|
| 69 |
Ryan, P.G. and Cuthbert, R. (2008). The biology and conservation status of the Gough Bunting Rowettia goughensis. Bulletin of the British Ornithological Club, 128, pp.242-253.
|
| 70 |
Ryan, P.G. and Dilley, B.J. (2019). Population trends of Spectacled Petrels Procellaria conspicillata and other seabirds at Inaccessible Island. Marine Ornithology, 47, pp.257-265.
|
| 71 |
Ryan, P.G., Dilley, B.J., Ronconi, R.A. and Connan, M. (2019). Rapid increase in Asian bottles in the South Atlantic Ocean indicates major debris inputs from ships. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, pp.20892-20897
|
| 72 |
Samaniego Araceli, Jolley Wes, McClelland Pete (2023) A lesson for planning rodent eradications: interference of invasive slugs during the Gough Island mouse eradication attempt in 2021. Wildlife Research 50, 344-355.
|
| 73 |
Samaniego, A., Stevens, K. L., Perold, V., Oppel, S., and McClelland, P. (2022). Detections of house mice on Gough Island approach zero within days of aerial baiting. Wildlife Research 50: 381-388.
|
| 74 |
State Party of UK (2022). Report of the State Party to the World Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of Gough and Inaccessible Islands (UK). [online] United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, pp.1-5. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/740/documents/
|
| 75 |
State Party of the UK. (2006). Periodic Report Second Cycle 1 Section II: Gough and Inaccessible Islands. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/740/documents/ . [Accessed 30 July 2012].
|
| 76 |
Trathan, P. N., P. García-Borboroglu, P. D. Boersma, C.-A. Bost, R. J. M. Crawford, G. T. Crossin, R. J. Cuthbert, P. Dann, L. S. Davis, S. de la Puente, U. Ellenberg, H. J. Lynch, T. Mattern, K. Pütz, P. J. Seddon, W. Trivelpiece, and B. Wienecke. 2014. Pollution, habitat loss, fishing, and climate change as critical threats to penguins. Conservation Biology 29:31-41.
|
| 77 |
Tristan da Cunha Government (2006). Conservation of Native Organisms and Natural Habitats (Tristan da Cunha) Ordinance 2006. Available at: https://www.tristandc.com/wildlife/2006%20Tristan%20da%20Cu…
|
| 78 |
Tristan da Cunha Government (2017). Wildlife and Conservation. http://tristandc.com/wildlife.php
|
| 79 |
Tristan da Cunha Government (2021). Tristan da Cunha Marine Management Plan 2021-2026. prepared for Tristan da Cunha Government by the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) within the UK Government’s Blue Belt Programme. Available at: https://www.tristandc.com/wildlife/TdC-MMP-web.pdf
|
| 80 |
Tristan da Cunha Government (2024). 2023-2024 Flax Removal from Inaccessible Island. Tristan da Cunha Wildlife and Conservation News. Tristan da Cunha Government and Tristan da Cunha Association. [online] Available at: https://www.tristandc.com/news-2024-04-02-inflaxremoval.php
|
| 81 |
Tristan da Cunha Government, and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. 2016. Gough and Inaccessible World Heritage Site Management Plan. April 2015-March 2020. Edinburgh of the Seven Seas, Tristan da Cunha
|
| 82 |
UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2012): ‘The Overseas Territories: Security, Success and Sustainability’. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 83 |
UK Overseas Territories Conservation Forum (2011a). ‘Annual Report April 2010 - March 2011’. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 84 |
UK Overseas Territories Conservation Forum (2011b). ‘Main points of UKOTCF’s submission to UK Government on its UKOT White Paper’. Forum News 39: 1-3. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 85 |
UNEP-WCMC (2011). ‘Gough and Inaccessible Islands, United Kingdom’. UNEP-WCMC World Heritage Information Sheets. [Electronic reference] < http://www.unep-wcmc.org/medialibrary/2011/06/23/b3b09e87/G…;. Accessed 30 July 2012.
|
| 86 |
UNESCO (2009). Report on the State of Conservation of Gough and Inaccessible Islands, UK. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/649 [Accessed 1 December 2020].
|
| 87 |
UNESCO (2016). Report on the State of Conservation of Gough and Inaccessible Islands, UK. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/3488 [Accessed 1 December 2020].
|
| 88 |
UNESCO (2023). Report on the State of Conservation of Gough and Inaccessible Islands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, pp.4. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/740/documents/
|
| 89 |
UNESCO. (2018). Report on the State of Conservation of Gough and Inaccessible Islands, UK. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/3669 [Accessed 1 December 2020].
|
| 90 |
Valdez, M.C., Zaragoza, E.S., Belda, D.L., Marcos, R. and Ramírez, R.A. (2003). Effect of climatic change on the harvest of the kelp Macrocystis pyrifera on the Mexican Pacific coast. Bulletin of Marine Science, 73, pp.545-556.
|
| 91 |
Visser, P., H. Louw, and R. J. Cuthbert. 2010. Strategies to eradicate the invasive plant procumbent pearlwort Sagina procumbens on Gough Island, Tristan da Cunha. Conservation Evidence 7:116-122.
|
| 92 |
Vye, S. R., Lavarello, J., Glass, T., Glass, J., Escobar-Porras, J., & Schofield, A. (2024). Adaptive, flexible and community-led: Management support for the largest fully protected marine area in the Atlantic. Marine Policy, 167, 106284.
|
| 93 |
Wanless, R. M., Ratcliffe, N., Angel, A., Bowie, B. C., Cita, K., Hilton, G. M., Kritzinger, P., Ryan, P.G. and Slabber, M. (2012). Predation of Atlantic Petrel chicks by house mice on Gough Island. Animal Conservation 15: 472-479.
|
| 94 |
Wanless, R. M., Ryan, P. G., Altwegg, R. (2009) ‘From both sides: Dire demographic consequences of carnivorous mice and longlining for the Critically Endangered Tristan albatross on Gough Island’. Biological Conservation 142(8):1710-1718.
|
| 95 |
Watkins, B. P. and Copper, J. (1983). ‘Scientific Research at Gough island, South Atlantic, 1869-1982: a bibliography’. South African Journal of Antarctic Research 13: 54-58.
|
| 96 |
World Heritage Committee (2021). Decision 44 COM 7B.192. Gough and Inaccessible Islands (UK). In: Report of decisions of the 44th session of the World Heritage Committee (Fuzhou/online, 2021). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/7908/
|
| 97 |
World Heritage Committee (2023). Decision 45 COM 7B.98. Gough and Inaccessible Islands (UK). In: Report of decisions of the 45th session of the World Heritage Committee (Fuzhou/online, 2021). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/8238/
|
| 98 |
World Heritage Committee. (1995). CONF 203 VIII.A.1 Inscription: Gough Island Wildlife Reserve (United Kingdom). In: Report of the 19th Session of the World Heritage Committee (Berlin, 4-9 December 1995). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/3071 [Accessed 30 July 2012].
|
| 99 |
World Heritage Committee. (2004). ‘Decision 28 COM 14B.17’ Extension of Properties Inscribed on the World Heritage List. Gough and Inaccessible Islands (UK). In: Report of decisions of the 28th session of the World Heritage Committee. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/100 [Accessed 30 July 2012].
|
| 100 |
World Heritage Committee. (2009). Decision 33 COM 7B.32. Gough and Inaccessible Islands (UK). In: Report of decisions of the 33rd session of the World Heritage Committee (Seville, 2009). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/1824 [Accessed 30 July 2012].
|
| 101 |
World Heritage Committee. (2016). Decision : 40 COM 7B.103. Gough and Inaccessible Islands (UK). In: Report of decisions of the 40th session of the World Heritage Committee (Istanbul, 2016). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/6766 [Accessed 1 December 2020].
|
| 102 |
World Heritage Committee. (2018). Decision 42 COM 7B.81. Gough and Inaccessible Islands (UK). In: Report of decisions of the 42nd session of the World Heritage Committee (Manama, 2018). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/7310 [Accessed 1 December 2020].
|